All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:31
October 3, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, they're turning this into a mockery now, ladies and gentlemen.
The post Katrina Media at it again.
Now the ever diligent Brian Ross at ABC News has just posted on their on their website instant messages between Foley and a page in which Foley appears to be engaging in internet sex with the page while in the midst of a congressional vote.
You tell me this is not a setup.
Greetings, welcome, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number if you want to be in the program is 800 282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
Has Bill Clinton yet written the letter that begins, Dear Bob, as in Iger at ABC, all is forgiven for the path to 9-11.
Thank you, Bill Clinton, our war room and the Democrat Party.
Because here is ABC, the media supposedly out to destroy the Clintons and the Democrats with their ace investigative reporter now dribbling out more instant messages, and it's become a mockery.
At some point, people are going to start asking questions.
Who saves these instant messages?
What kid save the instant message?
The parents, one kid didn't want this out.
Somebody knew about this.
How did this get from wherever it happened to ABC?
There have to be intermediaries here along the way.
The I and well, maybe the I look at maybe the kid did it himself.
I posited that possibility on Monday.
You know, I don't think anybody heard me.
I said, well, rush, why don't we kid do it himself?
Folks, you don't know the Democrats like I do.
Everybody is now coming out of the closet, if you will, saying they knew Foley was gay.
He's in a safe seat.
Somebody knew this was going on.
Go to one of the kids or go to a couple of pages and say, uh titillate the guy.
Why?
Why I don't want to get in trouble.
You won't get in trouble, you'll be a hero.
Nobody will ever know it's you, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
How do you get a kid to do this?
You threaten them or you pay them.
I don't know.
All I know is when I was asking yesterday about saving instant messages.
I know how it happens.
I've got a Mac, and uh we we Mac users use a program called iChat, and it has compatibility with uh uh AOL's aim, instant message program.
Uh and I can choose to save each uh conversation I have with somebody or not.
Uh as an individual, my my message is not on a server anywhere that I don't control.
You know, I am the company, so my but what about a kid?
What what what company server is a kid's home computer on?
Uh if if a kid is, you know, uh uh uh not part of a government pro I don't know.
I'm I'm I don't know, and that's why I'm asking these questions about how you save an instant message.
I got all kinds of answers saying, well, these companies, you know, they save they save everything that's on the servers, and they can go back and periodically check, they back all this stuff up.
What if it's just a bunch of pages, a bunch of kids and their individual little laptops uh uh sitting around uh at home, you know, wired up, uh, and and and the only existence, the only connection they have is to the server of the company they're using uh rather than a company that they uh that they work for.
Um, how do these pages get into the page program?
How does this happen?
One way is through political connections, political patronage.
So uh who are these pages and who sponsored these kids to become pages, and uh and and for for what reason?
Is there a political party that would stoop this low?
Yes, there is.
We know that there is a political party that would stoop this low to set somebody up this way.
Now I know you're saying what do you mean set him up?
Did it, Rush?
Um Yeah, I'm not again you you're missing my point if you're thinking in that regard.
I'm not saying that this didn't happen.
Uh what I'm suggesting here is that a lot of people uh knew of Foley's proclivities and arranged to uh uh uh uh amass evidence of it for this very reason, not the protection of the kids.
Look how long this is going on, and nobody did anything to protect the children.
Everybody's out there saying now, no, we love the children of this country.
We're gonna do everything we can to protect Page program.
Why everything is for the children.
Well, the people involved with this couldn't have cared less about the children.
They didn't find the behavior repugnant, but they thought Republican voters would.
And they knew that the uh uh their buddies and allies in the media uh uh would do why didn't ABC alert the authorities first?
Why is why doesn't ABC if we're getting crimes against kids going on here?
If they've had all this since August, did Brian Ross just get this latest batch of emails this morning?
Who look what just came out of my computer?
Why why Foley was having internet sex when the middle of uh votes on Capitol Hill?
Why, oh, we gotta get this out.
How long has he had this?
Is this part of a strategy to dribble and drab this stuff out on a daily basis?
That's the way the Democrats work.
In fact, let's listen to a soundbite here.
This world news tonight last night, Charlie Gibson.
Uh uh ABC anchor talking with Brian Ross about the Foley situation, and they have this exchange.
So far, Foley is the only member whose overt sexual approaches have been documented, Charlie.
The only one to be documented, but are there other shoes to drop?
We are hearing quite a bit from former pages.
Uh, they're sending us all sorts of messages about possible other members.
Oh, really?
Charlie, what inspired you to ask that question?
Is this sort of a scripted exchange?
Brian does his report, throws it back to you and says, Charlie, and Charlie's the only one to be documented.
But are there other shoes to drop?
Well, we're hearing quite a bit from former pages.
They're sending us all sorts of messages about possible other members.
Uh okay, so we kind of see uh where this is headed.
And I think it's all going to result uh on balance in a backlash.
People are gonna be look it.
They don't want to deal with this stuff every day.
Foley is gone.
People are gonna say, what the hell here?
Uh so they've to keep it alive, there better be other members.
And they obviously will be Republicans, folks, if you think there are Democrat other members uh that are gonna be in this list.
We might find out about that after the election.
But we're not gonna find out about it uh before the election.
I'll be stunned, shocked and amazed.
The only way that can happen is if it's a Democrat member from twenty years ago who's long gone.
Uh I even that, I don't think they'd run the risk.
This is this is so obviously a planned orchestrated release, timed release of uh of information that's designed to keep the story going.
I know how these people in the drive-by media work, I know how they coordinate with the Democrat Party.
They're all excited.
Here's Tim Russert.
This was on the Today Show today, Matt O'Hour.
Five weeks away from midterm elections, Tim.
Investigations take time.
Will this unfold in time to truly impact those elections?
It probably won't come to closure.
The Justice Department is investigating.
But as a Republican said to me yesterday, Matt, when it came to Iraq, we can say to our constituents, the Democrats don't have a plan either.
This one, he said, they get.
This is if it's perceived to be a cover-up to hold on to power, they will say, well, there is no alternative other than throw these guys out.
Congressman who went home this weekend, they say the first three questions they were asked about was Page scandal, Page scandal, page scandal.
Okay, so there you have.
So the line is cover up.
Uh Hastert and Bahner and only they're lying.
They knew a lot more.
They knew a lot more than what they're claiming to know.
And if there was a cover-up, well, we're gonna get to the bottom of it.
We don't need closure on the issue before the election.
We'll just get to the bottom of it.
And now here's uh Chris Matthews and Hardball last night with uh Howard Feynman.
Question Howard, this is amazing story completed now by the inevitable check-in to a drunk tank.
I mean, do they all end there blaming it on alcohol?
Well, they end uh with drunk tanks and uh FBI investigations, Chris.
I I think this is a uh a missile aimed straight at the heart of the Republican base.
The Republican Party has been built in the last 15 or 20 years on the notion that they are the party of family values.
What's been the Republicans who've been in charge of this Congress for the last ten years?
And the question has always been in this fall campaign, Chris, where the evangelical Christians, the Bible believing Christians are gonna turn out in big numbers to be the heart of the Republican machine.
That's very much at issue right now with this kind of story.
Well, see, from Valerie Plame to Dick Cheney's hunting accident to Bush's body language to the National Intelligence Estimate, the Libs think they have found it again.
Mark Foley is going to destroy the Republican base.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue after this.
Stay with us.
All right.
Now here's here here are the details.
ABC News has now obtained 52 separate instant messages exchanges, uh, which former pages say were sent by Foley using his screen name to two different boys under the age of 18, a print one message uh dated April 2003, approximately 7 p.m.
And uh it's internet sex uh congressional vote.
Now, could somebody, and I'm serious about it, could somebody explain to me what teenager saves 52 instant messages like this one?
I mean, especially if they're embarrassing and you don't want anybody to ever see them.
I mean, you gotta look at it this way, folks.
I don't I don't let let's be honest about some of how many adults in this country are having salacious exchanges over instant message and email.
Of one form or another, let me just put it, how many of you are having instant message conversations or emails that you hope nobody ever sees and you are destroying them or whatever or you don't record them what save them or what have you.
My point here is that apparently these pages either save this stuff on purpose, or they didn't know the stuff was being saved.
Somebody knew they were going on and got them off servers somewhere, but something about this just doesn't ring true with human nature.
If these are so embarrassing, even though uh the page's name isn't known.
Well, the page's screen name is known.
Kids are gonna have to rely on somebody to protect them.
Uh there's something about this that that's uh uh it doesn't it doesn't make any sense.
Now, again, I don't want anybody to misunderstand.
I'm not this is not a defense of Foley.
Uh and I don't know how easy it is to make these things up, manufacture them, create them, change them, alter them.
I have no clue.
This guy's now in a rehab center, can't respond to any of this, uh, and he won't be able to for whatever 30 days that he's in the uh in the center.
So it's it's just gonna sit out there and it's gonna be absorbed and accepted as uh as ABC is reporting it.
It just it just something about it, this if these pages were made, they remember they were warned about Foley, don't do this, this guy's gonna sicko, uh, don't get involved in this.
Okay, okay, yeah, yeah.
Uh he saved this stuff.
Uh you have to think if it's if it's an embarrassing and humiliating for Foley, don't you think it would be embarrassing and humiliating for the pages if this stuff got out?
It would be embarrassing and humiliating to anybody involved in this.
Am I right or wrong about this?
Maybe they're well, there's certain people, I guess, whose reputations could be enhanced if this kind of thing got out there, liberals and democrats and so forth, but uh, we're talking in just in normal circumstances.
And I also have have this question.
Where is Jocelyn Elders?
Um, during the Clinton administration, as you know, she was the uh uh surgeon general.
And when I had my television show, we had numerous uh video and audio examples of uh Jocelyn Elders urging masturbation be taught as safe sex.
Uh and and here safe sex is being practiced.
Uh uh masturbation apparently taking place here uh uh all over the internet out there, uh, but at at great distances.
Uh and so uh apparently the Jocelyn Elder's message got through uh to uh to someone.
Here's Gary in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Hi, Gary, welcome to the program.
Rush, I am more confused and more irate than ever.
Mark Foley has been a friend for a lot of years.
Mark Foley uh used to bust tables at a restaurant.
I I used to I I voted for Mark as a registered Democrat.
I spoke to Mark on the telephone six weeks ago about something uh dealing with an issue that I was hoping he would have brought up.
There's something very strange that nobody seems to want to talk about.
Mark left like a gentleman, no closing remarks, just left.
And everybody wants to throw this guy under the bus.
Denny said, you know, we got rid of the Foley issue.
Mark never had a trial.
Mark was never given an opportunity if in fact there's another side to this pancake.
And guess what?
Even a pancake has another side to it.
You can flip it.
And I want to know what the other side to this is, because Mark uh knowing how dedicated he was to this country, to what Mark stood for.
I'm not talking about in his private life.
I am talking about in his public life, and I believe somebody has set Mark up.
All right, now how wait, wait, uh uh, how would somebody have set him up?
Listen to what you're you're being given by Mr. Ross and other people of the news.
It just it it just speaks volumes of the.
Well, but when you s what but when you say that he was set up, he i well let let's accept the hypothetical.
Let's say that these instant messages are accurate and that the things he's being accused of doing he actually did, and a lot of people say he must have because he quit.
How then was he set up?
Well, number one, doesn't it speak volumes of somebody that if these things were true, he got out of Dodge so quickly rather than drag this thing on?
Doesn't it say that he may have been one heck of a real Republican?
That he may have made a mistake, but he got out so quickly rather than drag this thing through uh the halls of the Senate.
Yeah, I I know what you're saying.
We we made that point yesterday that uh back when uh Jerry Studs or Gary Studds and his page problem came up, he and the page had a joint press conference and wagged her finger at everybody and said, Look, it's our private business, shut up, stay out of it.
Uh got censured, went back, was re-elected by his um his district in uh in Massachusetts.
But but in that that wouldn't have been to do with him being set up here, the fact that he resigned uh uh quickly without uh any comment uh if he was set up.
I can't even remember last week's communications that were received via email.
I don't know how anybody Well, but but would you if you were in an email exchange such as these, would you remember those and would you hope to hell that nobody ever saw them?
I don't believe Mark would have put himself in that position, sir.
Uh-huh.
So now that's why you think he's set up.
I cannot believe as smart as I mean I can see that maybe one thing may have slipped by, maybe, maybe, maybe something of uh remember this person was over sixteen or over the age to receive communication uh in in Washington, D.C. He was an adult.
And two adults communicating regardless of what it is, I understand is not illegal.
But I cannot.
I think you're avoiding the question of a setup here.
Because there are a lot of people saying this.
Let me just help you out.
Some if If there's a setup, it could be that these pages, you know, how do they get to be pages?
Political connections.
It's been known, supposedly, everybody's saying, oh, yeah, we've known what Mark's sexual sexual orientation was for a long time.
Maybe he's been a target for a long time by the Democrats, and maybe these pages were instructed to uh uh uh engage in the conversations in these emails or at instant messages that would uh draw these kind of replies from him.
Either way, stupid thing for example.
That's perfect, but let me give you uh one even maybe a little bit better.
If there was one, just one, and yet you knew that Foley might have been of a gay uh the persuasion, and now you have a seat like Foley's that was.
Okay, Gary, hang on hang hang on, we I've got a I got a commercial break.
Hold your thought there.
Don't lose your train of thought.
Uh, we will continue with this right after this break.
Stay with us.
A man, a living legend, a way of life here on the EIB network.
Gary in West Palm Beach, Florida, a personal friend of Mark Foley.
What was the last point you were going to make?
Well, real fast if I might.
Yesterday I contacted our favorite local newspaper, and I asked him when he was running for office.
Did you not ask him about his persuasion?
You know, being was he gay point blank, and he chose not to answer when the question was answered in a private matter, and when it was asked in a questionnaire, it was not answered at all.
When Barney Frank came down a few years ago on a gay pride event in the town that he's from Lake Worth, Mark chose not to attend, nor even welcome a fellow member of Congress.
Mark stayed away from things.
Do you think he's going to permit some child to walk around with a published book on comments up and back?
Do you really believe somebody that tried to be as private as Mark would have oh, fifteen or twenty or thirty or forty or three.
Are you saying you are saying that these things have to have been created?
You're saying you don't believe he's stupid enough to have done this at all.
I'm saying that there's just too much there, and I don't buy it.
All right.
So because he wouldn't go and be with Barney Frank, he wasn't want anybody to know that he was gay.
There's just too much of you know Mark that he would not carry on all of this that's being alleged.
And I think I'll tell you what it does.
It goes it goes back to this.
It goes back, Denny Hastert is insisting they only knew about the emails, that they had no knowledge of these instant messages.
Somebody obviously has had knowledge of them.
And the 52, uh, one of the 52 that ABC is now you know having their own little orgasm over, uh, goes all the way back to what 2003.
Um over three years ago.
Now, somebody's had this stuff for three years.
All this time, if this is true, these pages, these children, uh are are being preyed upon by an adult engaging in potential sex crimes.
Somebody's known about this.
And of course, the children, uh, ladies and gentlemen, totally, totally innocent.
I mean highly victims here.
Children are I mean, this is uh children could not possibly be part of it.
Well, children powerful congressmen coming on.
If they don't play along, they lose their jobs, they want to be pages.
Okay, yeah.
Well, we'll just keep waiting.
I think this is uh being overplayed.
Uh the Dems don't know when to stop.
Well Stone Memorial, they didn't know when to stop.
And now Brian Ross is alluding to the fact that uh we're hearing from even more pages about even more members of Congress.
Mike in Indianapolis, I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Good afternoon, Rush and Omega Dittoes.
I've been listening to you since I was in junior high school, and it is a complete honor and privilege to get to talk to you today.
Thank you.
A rush baby on the phone here, uh, yes.
I remember watching your TV show when I was in junior high with my parents, and I've been with you ever since.
Thank you, sir.
Uh wanted to comment on the comments made on hardball uh last night.
Uh it struck me when you played those that I think that it's showing how the Democratic base is missing the point of the evangelical movement, and I'm calling as an evangelical Republican Rush, and as I listen to that, it doesn't resonate with me because they think this is going to be the undoing of the Republican Party,
but the statements that were made, the statements that were made clearly show that they're missing the point of the evangelical position, which is to say these are our standards, these are our morals, and we in no way advance that everybody will always be able to live up to them.
And so it's not that the message is wrong, it's that the people who may have uh fallen, the people who fail to keep them, uh, you know, we'll need to deal with them accordingly.
If he tries to run again, if he's made guilty on this, it's going it it's not going to gain support, but that doesn't change our morals, that doesn't change our standards.
And what that comment to me did was say the Democrats are ignoring all of the ethics, all of the standards, and the liberal base is saying it's a free-for-all.
And what resonates with the majority opinion, at least from the evangelicals in this country, uh, I believe, and I think the the data shows, is that the standard of morality and of ethics being put forward, even though we can't achieve them.
And I think that's why those comments are missing the point.
This will no way before.
Well, but see, they've got the Republican party.
No, I you're misunderstanding what they're saying.
They are saying that you do have such high standards that you are intolerant, and that you are going to not only blame Foley, but you're gonna sit home and you're not gonna vote for any Republican because of Mark Foley and his page program and this ugly, ugly internet sex and so forth that you people are so rigid that you are so intolerant,
that you are so demanding that you will not tolerate one slip, that you will not tolerate one fall from grace, and that you will take an entire party down with you on the basis of the failures of one man.
That's what they're saying about you.
Well, I think that that that's part of my point is part of the piece of that is is because they have thrown away any kind of ethic.
They don't properly understand what ethic and morality is.
That's why they expect us to do that.
Well, of course, because they they they they they say that their infallibility is based on the fact that they have no standards.
They can't be judgmental because there's they don't judge other people.
That's why they love it when this kind of stuff happens, because they can then claim hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy.
These are the people that embrace oddball behavior and coddle it imperfect behavior and and and then make those people who are oddballs or imperfect in their in their chosen behaviors, they are called victims, and the Democrats get all this compassion for defending them and protecting them against evil people like you.
Who would condemn them to hell tomorrow.
Well, that's how they look at you.
That's how they look at you.
Pardon?
The proper evangelical position should not do that.
Uh it's not about condemning, but it is about morality, and it is about dealing with failures, not just condemning the people who who struggle with.
I understand.
I'm just I'm just translating Howard Feynman for you so that you know exactly what he's saying.
He is I'm telling him, I'm trying to tell you what he thinks of you.
You have to understand people like liberal democrats are scared to death of people like you, Mike, because you have standards.
You are such a threat.
You and the evangelicals, the Christian right, anybody who didn't have to be evangelical or in the Christian right, anybody who makes a moral stand, anybody who talks of standards is a threat to the left.
They don't want any standards.
They don't want any judgment from anybody.
It's nobody's business to define right and wrong.
That's a personal choice.
Morality is a personal choice.
It's not your job or God's or the Bibles or or or Allah's or anybody else's to tell them what's right and wrong.
They're going to define it because they're smarter than everybody else.
So when a Republican, i.e., Mark Foley, engages in this kind of behavior, they revel in it, they throw a party and they love It because they think people like you are discredited because you have now been shown to be hypocrites because you uh and they at the same time they want you to take out your anger and revenge on pe on the whole party for being uh uh let down by Mark Foley.
So you all I'm I'm not commenting on you at all.
I'm just simply telling you how they look at you, how and why they fear you.
Uh they know if there is a judgment day, they got a problem.
Uh and and they've they've uh they're the ones that that coddle it's like I've been saying they don't find what Foley did repugnant.
They don't find the thrill for ABC publishing these uh these instant messages, it it's a thrill.
Believe me, it's a thrill and it's a thrill to see it circulate all over the internet and all over television, cable TV, all over the media.
It's a thrill because to them it is the mighty.
And the conservative right and all these judgmental simpletons who see everything in black and white, really having it handed to them.
Why they have no right to preach to us.
Look, one of them just engaged in this kind of behavior and so.
So they're thrilled, they're not concerned about the behavior being repugnant.
They don't find it repugnant.
They've coddled it in the past.
They have defended it in the past.
They simply look at this as a way to discredit the people they fear and f and then further to hopefully depress people like you into not voting in November because you are so fed up with the people you've put your trust in to defend your values in Congress, and look what they're doing, and they think you will, and they hope you will just throw them out, all the bums out, and give Democrats the power back.
Back in it.
Second, folks, stay with us.
Oh, by golly, uh, look at this.
At a pivotal time in the abortion debate, Ms. Magazine is releasing its fall issue next week with a cover story titled, We Had Abortions, accompanied by the names of thousands of women nationwide who signed a petition making that declaration.
The publication coincides with what abortion rights movement considers a watershed moment for its cause.
Abortion access in many states being curtailed, activists, activists are uncertain about the stance of the Supreme Court, South Dakotans vote November 7th on a measure that would ban virtually all abortions in their state, even in cases of rape and incest.
All this seems very dire, said Eleanor Squeal, the uh president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, which publishes Ms. We uh we have to get away from what the politicians are saying, get women's lives back in the picture.
Women's lives back in the picture with a cover story on we had abortions, thousands of women admitting it.
That's going to be really persuasive.
Uh look, I I've been mentioning I'm gonna have a couple comments in the Woodward book, and I want to do that because I don't want you to think that I forgot or misled you.
Uh Rich Lowry today has a great piece at National Review Online called Woodward's Real Revelation.
He said the most important aspect of Woodward's book isn't the news that that uh uh Bush is uh not recognizing the truth of the dismal nature of Iraq, but the insight the book gives into how the U.S. government has arrived at such a middling, uninspired campaign, just enough not to win, just enough not to lose.
As State Department advisor Philip Zellico thought after a visit to Iraq in 2005, in Woodward's words, there was too much barely coping, just getting by and making incremental improvements.
We have been barely coping because we've never made a decision to go all out, partly due to the restraining influence of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, but oddly, given the way he has become a hate figure for Democrats, it's Rumsfeld who is perhaps closest to the Democrats' preferred Iraq strategy as any other major figure in the administration.
Rumsfeld is not interested in trying to win the war outright, so much as handing the effort over to the Iraqis.
According to Woodward, Rumsfeld said strongly and repeatedly, the Iraqis need to be given the chance to fail and fall on their faces, and only then would they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and come up with the solutions.
He's tried to head off anything more robust than letting the Iraqis fend for themselves.
In October 2005, Secretary of State Rice began to describe the U.S. approach in Iraq as the classic counterinsurgency operation of clear, hold, and build, Referring to the clearing of Iraqi insurgents from a territory, then it's securing and rebuilding.
Rumsfeld was outraged.
Woodward writes that Rumsfeld believed, quote, it's wrong to say that the United States political military strategy was all about what the U.S. would do and not about what the Iraqis would do.
So, you know, the the tension between Rice and Rumsfeld was she wanted to do more, he wanted to do less.
They clashed over a number of things.
Uh, but uh uh he was he was upset uh when when it was said that uh you know you gotta clear, you gotta hold into the look clear, we can do that.
Militant, we can clear the place out.
But it's not our job to hold, and it's not our job to build.
That's the Iraqis.
And now we can disagree with this.
I mean, some people think that we are uh going about this in much too restrained a fashion than if we'd have gone in there with genimate uh legitimate shock and awe from the outset uh and and leveled whatever is necessary, PAMO.
Uh uh we'd have a far different situation today.
But Rumsfeld, and that's not the point.
We're trying to build a democracy, these people have to learn to defend it.
They can only do that by failing and dusting themselves off.
Uh and and so the the irony here that Lowry points out is that that is what the Democrats are saying.
Get out of there and let the Iraqis have this.
Yet they hate him.
Their hate is irrational.
It's not based on substance and strategy.
I've so looking at the Woodward book, I have I have a strategy, folks.
I I think there's two things we can do in Iraq.
Let me run them by you and see what you think.
The first thing is that we pull back out of Baghdad, and we position along the Syrian, Jordan, and Iranian borders.
And and we say to the Iraqis, we're gonna stop anybody coming across these borders.
No more help from Iran, no more from Syria, no more from Jordan, no whatever.
Nobody's getting into this country.
If we have to, we'll go 20 miles inland in each of these countries to make sure nobody gets through.
But this is on you.
We will make sure nobody else gets in.
Now you go in there, the Iraqis, and you clear out Baghdad, you do it once and for all, and then we're out.
The second strategy is, you don't want to go for that.
We say to the Iraqis, all right, here's what we're going to do.
We're going to take everybody we got, and we're going to bring them into Baghdad.
And we're going to do search and destroy, and we're going to take out anything that looks like an insurgent.
And we're going to take out anything that looks like a sympathizer, a terrorist, or whatever.
We're going to clean this place out.
And then it's up to you.
Thank you.
I mean, those are two things that that that well, I mean, they're think pieces.
I'm just thinking about this.
Uh, but uh they both center on the fact that the Iraqis are gonna have to at some point uh take care of all this.
Uh, we'll either take care of it in Baghdad for them, and we'll clear the place out and then leave it up to them, or we'll go back to the borders and we'll make sure nobody's getting in there, and you clear out who's there.
And we'll go to the board.
Well, Turkey will go whatever we have to go to keep people from getting in.
Uh but uh you guys, it's uh it's up to you to wipe out the given given those two options.
Um either in either example, it is uh shock and awe of uh of one form or another.
Uh Brenda in New York City, I got one minute.
Can you say it in one minute?
Yes.
Hi, Rice.
I wanted to give you my own characterization of those uh instant messages.
And um it goes back and forth.
Obviously, the page is very open to the Congressman's approaches.
And it goes on and on repeatedly.
So we're not talking about an innocent, unknowing child here.
We're talking about, unfortunately, a fairly sexualized teenager.
And so I don't think that it would be fair to characterize Mark Foley's um instant messaging as like the pursuer and hot pursuit of, you know, some young victim.
It does go back and forth.
I think it's important to understand that.
Okay.
Uh well, yeah, there are two ways.
Uh yeah, it takes one to have the other, but you uh be prepared if you say this in public.
The reaction you're gonna get from outraged liberals is he was a man of Congress, member of Congress with immense power over a teenage page that Paige was scared to death.
If he didn't play along, fully might fire him.
See, too, and he never works again in his life.
They'll use the the power disparity and and the uh and the fear card.
But uh to say the teenagers are not overly sexed is to be very blind.
Back in just another exciting, busy broadcast in the can on the way to the museum housing artifacts of the future Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.
Back tomorrow.
Do it all over again.
Don't miss it.
▲
Export Selection