All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 23, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:32
October 23, 2006, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hiya folks, welcome back.
Nice to have you.
Rush Limbo heading on toward what will no doubt be a very fun election night two weeks from tomorrow night.
There are no exit polls in house races, I read the other day.
Wish I could remember where, but I think it was ABC's The Note.
Not entirely sure, I think that uh no exit polls in house races.
So uh too many of them, maybe too expensive.
Uh in addition, there are stories out there now saying, you know what?
They just uh we're gonna we're running short of electronic voting machines out there.
May not be enough voting machines to handle all the people are gonna show up.
Uh really, doesn't that presume a massive Democrat turnout?
Uh ladies and gentlemen, isn't it the case that what the Democrats are trying to do is suppress Republican turnout in this race.
If they're trying to suppress Republican turnout, could it mean they're worried about their own?
Didn't they try for massive vote turnout in 2004?
And they didn't get it.
They didn't get what they thought they were going to get.
Now they're trying to suppress Republican turnout.
Anyway, it's going to be interesting because the Democrats have their lawyers all over the place.
Uh what's not being reported is so do the Republicans.
Uh there will be these close races will be recounted, there will be fraud allegations.
It's gonna be an exciting uh election night.
Now, I uh I must share this.
I have gotten uh a plethora of emails from people saying Michael J. Fox has uh admitted in interviews that he goes off his medication for Parkinson's disease when he appears before Congress or other groups uh in in a as a as a means of illustrating the ravages of the disease.
Uh so lest there be any misunderstanding, we talked about a half hour ago of the commercial that's running for Claire McCaskill featuring Michael J. Fox and now what appears to be when he's off his meds, uh, and he I and I'd never seen him this way.
I stated when I saw the ad was commenting to you about it that he's either off his medication or acting.
He is an actor, after all.
Uh and and uh uh started hearing from people that, oh no, this is uh I've seen him on TV this way.
This is this is this is how uh the disease has affected him when he's not on his medications.
Then the emails sort of coming in, he's admitted not to taking them uh in certain circumstances so as to illustrate how the disease affects people.
All of which I understand, and I'm not even critical of that.
Parkinson's disease is hideous.
Uh let me just stress uh once again, in what I said in closing this out, uh, that I I think this is exploitative uh in in a way that it's unbecoming either Claire McCaskill or Michael J. Fox,
because he in this in this commercial for Claire McCaskill, he's using his illness in a way to mislead voters that there's a cure for Parkinson's disease if only Claire McCaskill gets elected, and if only Jim Tallant is defeated, and of course it's all about stem cell research, which is a huge ballot initiative in Missouri anyway.
I'm sorry, Missouri.
He pronounced it Missouri.
Uh there are two ways to pronounce my home state, Missouri and Missouri.
And uh Missouri in certain sectors is the preferred pronunciation.
It is a way to relate to certain Missourians.
Well, you know, we never say Missourians, we say Missourians.
Uh but it's a way to if you know get to reach out to understand you, uh I know your state and so forth.
There's a lot of there's a lot of politics in the uh in the commercial.
But but Mr. Fox was allowing his illness to be used uh as a tactic to try to secure the election of a Democrat senator who is gonna somehow, her election is gonna lead to the cure for Parkinson's disease via stem cell research, because her opponent Jim Tallant opposes it, which is not true.
He may oppose embryonic stem cell research, does not oppose adult stem cell research or even uh cord blood, I don't believe, research.
Uh on biblical cord research.
The comparison is obvious, and that is to to uh the Brett girl, uh John Edwards, who did the same thing uh by by saying, Christopher Reeve will walk again if only John carries elect, because we will do the work that needs to be done.
And that kind of thing, I mean, when you start making false promises to people who suffer from diseases like this that are horrible and debilitating, when you start telling them that there's a cure right on the right around the corner if only somebody gets elected.
Uh, you are misleading them.
You are creating a false hope scenario.
And that is cruel, if you ask me.
That is cruel and it is mean uh to lead people to believe that we are much further along in research than we are.
There's nobody involved in the research who is saying we're anywhere near any kind of a cure for spinal disease, uh, paralysis, Parkinson's, uh, Alzheimer's.
Uh in fact, the closest we are to Alzheimer's is nicotine.
I mean, it's supposedly nicotine will limit or lessen the impact of Alzheimer's down the road.
And now they're also saying it about pot.
The uh the evil weed.
So let there be no misunderstanding about this.
I stand corrected, uh, did not know and had never seen Michael J. Fox in the way I saw him in this commercial for Claire McCaskill that people have and have seen him say in interviews that he doesn't take his medications.
Um, when he wants to make an impression to show people just how horrible the disease is.
And it's true that that after, you know, this is true of all Parkinson's patients.
At some point the medication will not work, and the uh the condition will become uh uh permanent.
And there's nothing pleasant about its it's it's it's one of the most frustrating uh diseases one can have.
Uh Pope had it.
Uh it was uh it's it's not pleasant in any way, shape, manner, or form, nor did I mean to implicate that one could easily act it out for the purposes of a commercial.
Interesting news from the San Francisco Chronicle.
And uh digging deep.
This is from October the 9th, ladies and gentlemen.
Admittedly, this is uh two weeks ago.
Many of the city, San Francisco, many of the city's Asian massage parlors, long an established part of the city's sexually permissive culture, have degenerated into something much more sinister, international sex slave shops, once limited to infamous locales such as Bombay and Bangkok, sex trafficking now an eight billion dollar international business with San Francisco among its largest commercial centers.
This would be part of the district of Nancy Pelosi, who the uh Democrats are already measuring the drapes for in the speaker's chambers at the House of Representatives.
By the way, did you um so Pelosi's district is uh leading the world in sex slave trade.
Well, I mean, it's it's true.
I mean, it's in the San Francisco Chronicle, uh, ladies and gentlemen.
It's true.
They said it.
It's her district.
What are we to conclude?
What are you saying?
Nothing.
I'm not saying anything.
I'm just saying her district, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle.
In fact, I'm just reporting what the chronicle says.
It's uh it's right behind Bangkok and uh and Bombay, sex trafficking, an eight billion dollar international business, San Francisco among its largest commercial centers, and that's Nancy Pelosi's district.
Part of her district would cover San Francisco, if not all of it.
I'm not sure I've not seen the lines.
Quick timeout, my friends, we'll be back.
We'll continue in mere moments with much more stunning information you won't hear anywhere else.
Right here on the EIB network.
Just got an email here, ladies and gentlemen, from a website called WWWstuff.co.nz.
That's I guess this is a New Zealand website.
Actually, it's a story of Datelight out of Washington, injecting human embryonic stem cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients may cause tumors to form.
U.S. researchers have reported.
Stephen Goldman and colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center in Nueva Ork said human stem cells injected into rat brains turned into cells that looked like early tumors.
Writing in the nurture uh or the journal Nature Medicine.
The researchers said the transplants clearly helped the rats, but some of the cells started growing in a way that could eventually lead to a tumor.
Various types of cell transplants are being tried to treat Parkinson's disease caused when dopamine releasing cells die in the brain.
Well, I mean, do we need a commercial about this in Missouri?
Be careful.
Scientists say that injecting stem cells into your brain may lead to tumors.
I mean, after all, need to present both sides.
And from UPI, senior U.S. government officials, military officers have suggested that Iraqi insurgents are trying to influence the U.S. midterm election.
Really?
Who told you this last week?
Who told you this in September?
A U.S. military spokesman in Iraq last week attributed the increase in violence at least partly to terrorists who want to influence the American vote.
Brigadier General William Colwell, a U.S. military spokesman in Oh, I can't leave out this paragraph.
The military spokesman's comments Thursday echoed those made by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney two days earlier on conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh's radio show, which is carried on the armed forces radio network in Iraq.
So Cheney was sending talking points to the military spokesman via this program, ladies and gentlemen.
Yes.
Now, folks, as I mentioned to you in September, and as I mentioned to you on Friday, the greatest block of undecided voters leading into this election, the terrorists, all around the world, predominantly in Iraq.
On whose side will they decide to come down on?
The terrorists have obviously made their choice.
The early voting is going on.
The terrorists are voting Democrat.
They are trying to create chaos.
They are trying to create as much lack of will among the American people as possible.
They are hoping that with all this increased violence that you say the Bush administration is blowing it, and you'll get rid of Republicans and get rid of Bush in 08, put Democrats in charge.
Now, I want to go through this again since UPI has brought this up.
You know, they tried this in Spain and it worked.
The terrorists tried this in Spain and it worked, and I and they tried it in Great Britain.
And it hasn't worked there yet, but you never know.
I just want to ask you a question.
I want to speak to you as a terrorist leader.
I am the leader of terrorists in Iraq.
Call me the leader of Al Qaeda.
Doesn't matter who I am.
I'm just the Al Qaeda leader in Iraq.
And as I listen to the campaign being waged in America, I hear the President of the United States saying, I'm never getting out.
I will not cut and run.
I don't care if my last two supporters are Laura Bush and my dog Barney.
I'm in it until we win.
On the other side, you have the Democrats who are saying, we can't win.
We need to get out now.
We have no hope of winning.
We need to redeploy.
We need to cut and run.
Bush is creating more terrorists.
Bush is causing the violence.
So I'm the leader in Iraq.
And I weigh these two sides.
Now I listen to what the Democrats are saying.
Democrats are saying Americans can't win.
The Democrats are trying to sabotage every effort, in fact, for the Americans to win with the spy program, foreign surveillance program, any number of things, Patriot Act.
Democrats doing their best to subvert victory.
And yet I listen to them as the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, and I hear them saying that Bush is causing us to lose, and that Bush is creating more terrorists for me.
Well, I want more terrorists.
Because I don't want to have to go kill myself to meet the 72 virgins.
I need more schlubs to join my cause, who are idiots who will go do that for me.
I need as many recruits as I can get, and I'm listening to the Democrats say that Bush is accomplishing that.
So I look around as the leader of Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
And I ask myself, have I got more recruits?
I got more people flowing into Iraq wanting to join my jihad?
Have I got more people willing to blow themselves up and everybody else in order to get to heaven for their 72 virgins or whatever it is.
If so, and if I'm if I'm winning this war with Bush in the office, I don't care what Bush says.
And Democrats say that America can't win, and that we're going to pull out of there, and we shouldn't have gone in there in the first place.
Why would I side with the Democrats?
If Bush is creating more terrorists for me, and if Bush is enabling my victory as the Al Qaeda leader, why do I vote Democrat?
Why do I cause all kinds of havoc that will put the Democrats in office?
When I don't want them in office, I want Bush to stay because with Bush in office, America loses, and I win, and I get more terrorists.
Why why why why why would I want to change what I ought to really be doing, if what the Democrats are saying is true, ought to be standing down.
I mean, I ought to cut back on the violence.
I ought to cut back on the chaos.
I ought to cut back on the car bombs.
I ought to make sure that why these next two weeks are as peaceful as they've ever been.
Because I want Republicans re-elected and I want Bush empowered because Bush is going to see to it that we in Iraq win the war.
And the Americans are going to lose it.
Yet I don't make that decision as the Al Qaeda leader.
I'm voting Democrat.
I'm creating hell on Earth in Iraq, at least as defined by the American media, because I want no one near this place led by Bush.
So what it tells me, ladies and gentlemen, is that the leaders of Al Qaeda in Iraq clearly fear Bush.
And it tells me that the leaders in Iraq clearly don't think they're winning.
And it tells me that the leaders in Iraq clearly are not happy with all these new terrorists being created.
Because if everything the Democrats were saying is true, and if Bush is guaranteeing my victory as Al Qaeda leader in Iraq and guaranteeing me more terrorists to join my ranks, I got to keep Bush there.
I gotta keep the Republicans there.
But what if I do?
Why I raise hell.
I'm trying to make sure that Bush is nowhere near this place and no Republicans near this place.
I want Democrats in charge.
Why?
Because they'll pull out.
They'll get out of here real fast and I will win.
So when you stop and think about this and and you just watch the Al Qaeda guys.
They'll tell you right now who they're voting for.
They're voting Democrat, and I just ask yourself if it doesn't outrage you just a bit that the current number one enemy of the United States of America is attempting to secure victory for the Democrat Party in these upcoming elections.
Moving on to the Middle East in another country.
Despite Western pressure to roll back its atomic program, said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad today.
He didn't elaborate, and the remarks appeared aimed primarily at rallying public support as the UN Security Council prepares to consider a draft resolution imposing limited sanctions on Iran because of its refusal to halt its uranium enrichment enrichment, and furthermore, from Vienna, Austria.
Iran is expanding its uranium enrichment program even as the UN Security Council focuses on possible sanctions for its defiance of a demand to give up the activity and ease fears that it seeks nuclear weapons.
So other diplomats are saying that Iran is expanding its enrichment.
Ahmadinejad says our nuke capability is increased tenfold.
All in anticipation of sanctions being placed on the uh country.
I don't know what Mahmood Ahmadinijad is trying to do in terms of affecting the outcome of elections.
Uh but uh none of this stuff is redounding well to Democrats and their diplomatic approach.
Here's Kevin in Idaho Falls, Idaho.
Hi, Kevin, I have about a minute.
I wanted to get to you before the break.
Yeah, conservative small business owner did those from the Rockies rush.
Thank you.
Hey, I was calling because I wanted to talk about another uncredible senator that's a Democrat, and I watching Hillary Clinton's debate against her opponent for a senatorial seat over there.
They talked about a lot of issues.
They talked about how her six years she hasn't really done very much, and therefore she's uncredible for anything but the Democratic agenda.
The only time I saw her excited about anything was when they questioned her three times about her potential run for president in two thousand eight.
She kept on saying that, you know, she's flattered by it.
She acted like she was flattered, but to me she looked more like what I look like when I have a successful seller, a successful business day.
I look I look happy, I look pleased.
Looks to me like she's definitely playing for, even though she won't admit it right now.
Oh, and there's Dobbby.
There's no question about this.
The more interesting aspect of this is Barack Obama.
And do the Democrats think she can't win, and that's why they're building up Obama.
And I think that there is a good reason to think that that is what's going on, rather than her be uh him being on her ticket.
All right, much as I don't want to do it, duty calls, stand by audio soundbite seven and go in order from there with Nancy Pelosi on 60 Minutes Last Night.
In the meantime, Patrick and Norman, Oklahoma, your next.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Thank you, Rush.
Uh I just wanted to bring up how uh in 2004 the they had all their uh their rock stars, their PDDs, post whatever you want to call them, and Green Day and everybody out saying go out and vote.
And now, since that didn't work, they're going to uh oh, you shouldn't even vote because your side lost.
So they couldn't they couldn't bring up their side enough with their celebrities.
Well, you know, this now I I this is interesting.
I agree with you.
Something I was saying mere moments ago, they're focusing on suppressing Republican turnout.
We got all these stories out there now about how their monoton might not be enough voting machines to go around.
I had a story last week in the New York Times.
It's gonna be ugly out there.
A lot of people think that these machines are not going to be accurate, there's no paper trail story about how all kinds of chaos could result from these elections.
The Democrats don't think this is in the bag, and they're out there trying to suppress Republican turnout.
Why would that be necessary if in fact their own turnout was going to set records?
It didn't happen in the primaries, uh 15% on average nationwide in Democrat primaries.
Um but uh you're right, in 2004, I mean there was P. Diddy at the Democrat convention with his t-shirt, voter die.
We had rock to vote, we had the League of Women Voters registering people to vote, and we're gonna set records, and young people were gonna come out, and they were gonna vote in numbers that we've never ever seen before.
And didn't happen.
Uh I I think it's a myth.
All of these pent-up Democrats are so angry and so ticked off that they can't wait for election day, get out there and vote.
Democrats aren't taking any chances.
They are doing what they can to suppress Republican turnout, which tells me that they're not that confident of their own turnout.
And why would the that's something you can't predict?
You can fool yourself.
You can tell yourself that everybody hates Bush as much as you do, and that they can't wait to get out there and vote, but until it happens, you don't know.
So rather than work to really get their turnout, in fact, their get out the vote efforts are running behind uh the Republican get out the vote effort.
And there's uh let me find this.
There's a an interesting uh set of polls.
This is from Gallup, uh Charlie Cook RT strategies, and even a survey taken by the RNC conducted by voter consumer research.
Question, are you motivated to get out?
Now the most recent that we have here is September 15th or the 17th.
That's a month ago.
Uh nope, take it back.
Uh yep, yep, yep, yep.
Uh September 15th or 17th of 06.
Before that, they asked this question June 23rd to 25th of 2006.
The question is, are you motivated to get out and vote?
Now, in in uh that period, September 15th through 17th, uh 70% of Republicans polled said, yep, they're motivated, sixty-seven percent uh Democrats said.
That's before foley.
And all that.
The Democrats have clearly been working to suppress turnout since foley.
The one thing I don't get, um, and I uh we've talked about this uh tremendous amount, but I just I don't understand the connection that that people on the left make.
Uh that just because we had Foley that value voters are gonna sit it out.
That the the that that that that that alone is gonna turn them off.
Uh it's wishful thinking more than it is, I think anything substantive.
And yet They're out there relying on it, uh believing that it's going to be the case.
And I just the people I know that uh and know of, I don't know them all, but the people I'm aware of in this uh in this whole question are motivated like crazy.
The last thing they want is Democrats running the show.
And I know there's some cut-and-run conservatives out there, but as I we demonstrated on Friday, I don't think their numbers are anywhere near as huge as we would be led and are being led to believe.
U.S. gasoline price nationally has dipped to $2.20 a gallon.
The uh Dow Jones industrial average for a period of time today was over 12,001.
Average cost of gasoline, United States fell in the past two weeks due to an oversupply of crude oil.
And in the near term, gasoline prices are expected to depend entirely on the price of crude, an industry analyst said on Sunday.
Well, that strike you strange that the um gasoline price expected to depend entirely on the price of crude.
What's odd about that?
Now, crude is not really dependent on just one thing like supply.
There are speculators that drive up the price, but that doesn't happen in gasoline.
Just oil.
Here's why we vote Republican folks, Arizona voters will have to present identification at the polls on November 7th, after all.
U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that Arizona can go ahead with requiring voters to present a photo ID starting with next month's general election as part of the Proposition 200 that voters passed in 2004.
The ruling overturns an October 5th decision by the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals, which put the voter ID rules on hold this election cycle.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday did not decide whether the new voter ID rules are constitutional.
That decision is still pending in federal district court.
Also, did you see this from the Cybercast News Service?
From last Friday, a letter that Ted Kennedy sent to Yuri Andropov, begging him to understand that the Democrats in the United States were committed to making sure Ronald Reagan didn't nuke them.
The antipathy that Congressional Democrats have today toward President Bush is reminiscent of their distrust of President Reagan during the Cold War.
A political science professor says, We see some of the same sentiments today in that some Democrats see the Republican president as being a threat and the true obstacle to peace instead of seeing our enemies as the true danger, said Paul Kinger, a political science professor, Grove City College, author of the new book, The Crusader Ronald Reagan and The Fall of Communism.
In his book, which came out last week, Kanger focuses on KGB letter written at the height of the Cold War that shows Senator Ted Kennedy offering to assist Soviet leaders in formulating a public relations strategy to counter Reagan's foreign policy and to complicate his re-election efforts.
The letter dated May 14th of 1983 was sent from the head of the KGB to Yuri Andropov, who was then the Secretary General of the Soviet Union's Communist Party.
In his letter, the KGB head Viktor Chabrikov offered Andropov his interpretation of Kennedy's offer.
Former U.S. Senator John Tunney, Democrat California, had traveled to Moscow on behalf of Kennedy to seek out a partnership with Andropov and other Soviet officials, according to Kember in his book, or Kenger.
At one point after President Reagan left office, Tunney acknowledged that he had played the role of intermediary, not only for Kennedy, but for other U.S. Senators.
Moreover, Tunney told a London Times that he had made 15 separate trips to Moscow.
There's a lot more to be found here, Kangar said.
This was a shocking revelation.
Specifically, Kennedy proposed that Andropov make a direct appeal to the American people in a series of television interviews that would be organized in August and September of 1983, according to his letter.
Tunney told his contacts that Kennedy was very troubled about the decline in U.S. Soviet relations under Reagan.
But Kennedy attributed this decline to Reagan, not to the Soviets.
And one of the most striking parts of this letter, Kennedy is said to be very impressed with Andropov and other Soviet leaders.
In Kennedy's view, the main reason for the antagonism between the United States and the Soviet Union in the 80s was Reagan's unwillingness to yield on plans to deploy middle range nuclear missiles in Western Europe.
And this was stated by the KGB chief in his letter to Andropov.
He was simply relaying the message from Kennedy to Andropov.
Kennedy was afraid that Reagan was leading the world into a nuclear war, and he hoped to counter Reagan's policies and by extension hurt his re-election prospects.
Kennedy wanted to set up TV appearances by the Soviet leader to the American people, offering messages of peace and hope if only President Reagan would realize that the Soviets meant them no harm, meant us no harm, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
In his appeal, Kennedy indicated that he would like to have Senator Mark Hatfield accompany him on a trip to meet Andropov.
The two senators had worked together on nuclear freeze proposals, but Kennedy's attempt to partner with high-level Soviet officials never materialized.
And Dropov died after a brief time in office and was succeeded by the savior, Mikhail Gorbachev.
In his attempt to reach out to the Soviets, Kennedy settled on a flawed receptacle for peace, Kangar said.
And Dropov was a much more belligerent and confrontational leader than the man who followed him.
And that would be Gorbachev.
Now, this is typical.
This happened with the Contras in uh in Nicaragua, uh, the Sandinistas and so forth.
So it shouldn't surprise anybody.
Here's Ted Kennedy in a newly discovered letter in a book out last week, offering to media, actually begging the Soviet leader Yuri Andropov to come on American TV and uh essentially defeat Reagan in the 84 elections by having Andropov appear as the mild-mannered, harmless grandfather type who only wanted world peace if not for Ronald Reagan.
That is who Democrats are today.
John Kerry and his global test.
We must constantly and consistently talk with our enemies.
They're not nearly as bad as George Bush says they are.
They are working to undermine the war effort in Iraq and the war on terror.
They're sabotaging victory over this enemy.
It's nothing new, folks.
It's today's American liberals.
They are who they are.
Be right back after this.
Okay, gotta do it.
Nancy Pelosi, you just have to hear this.
Uh this is uh just a couple of bites here from last night on 60 Minutes.
I've never seen Leslie Stall.
This is just fawning, just just that was sickening.
But I'll tell you this is just get ready for this.
Two more weeks of this uh blind puff pieces on all these Democrats, Leslie Stahl.
This is a portion of her report uh with uh little comment from Pelosi at the end of it.
If the Democrats win a majority of seats in the House of Representatives on November 7th, the next Speaker of the House will almost certainly be Nancy Pelosi.
She would be the first ever woman speaker, second in the line of succession, just two heartbeats away from the presidency.
She didn't run for Congress till she was 46.
And now at 66, as she's poised to go down in the history books, what Nancy Pelosi wants you to know is that when it comes to her real goal in life, she's just like any other woman her age.
It's great.
It's fabulous.
It was my goal in life, and now I've achieved it.
I'm a grandmother.
Oh, spare me.
Uh, would you like some more tea, Ms. uh Ms. Pelosi sitting around talking about the grandkids?
Don't hear about this much.
Uh hear about how Reagan and Bush were evil and Bush is creating terrorists and Bush's this and that.
Uh, and here's she she uh promises that Bush will not be impeached when she's uh when she's speaker.
Here's the exchange.
There's already been talk of multiple investigations and impeachment of the president.
Impeachment is off the table.
It is a waste of time.
Wouldn't they just love it if we came in and our record as Democrats coming forth in twelve years is to talk about George Bush and Dick Cheney?
This election is about them.
This is a referendum on them.
Making them lame ducks is good enough for me.
What do you mean?
Wouldn't they just love it if we came in and our record as Democrats coming forth in twelve years is talk about Bush and Cheney?
What else Are you talking about?
What else is it that you are talking about?
I don't know whether it'll be impeachment here or not.
John Conyer is going to be tough to hold back.
And Charlie Wrangle's going to be tough to hold back.
I mean, these guys, they're getting up there in years.
They don't have a lot left here.
Wrangles as much as admitted it.
You think you're going to listen to some speakers as nope, we're not raising taxes right now, Mr. Really?
You want to watch me?
I didn't come here to cave a self-strategy.
Stealth step strategy.
It's uh uh.
Well, I'm just gonna say I don't believe it.
I I do not believe that they will not they've not gonna be able to help themselves.
And of course, the drive-by media is out there.
I just want to prepare you for this.
The Republicans are out there warning if you want to see impeachment investigations uh run by John Conyers, and if you want to see your taxes go up at the ways and means committee from Charlie Wrangle, the Democrats in the drive-by media are saying that is racist.
It is racist, and they're trying to they're trying to drum up support among racists.
Fear of two black men being in power, Charlie Wrangle and John Conyers.
It is typical, it's also contemptible.
Let's go to the round table on this week with George Stephanopoulos, Sam Donaldson, Cookie Roberts, and George Will.
Stephanopoulos says Democrats do a person.
They've been unwilling to look at all about cutting off funding for this war.
What we'll see is subpoenas if they take control.
And these subpoenas will delve into every nook and cranny of the Republican administration.
Now you're doing the Republican talking points.
Because that is exactly what the administration is making people feel.
Why do you think I saying it's a bad thing?
Well, no, I'm saying that that is my good thing.
I just say that you think it's a good thing, but a lot of people don't think it's Nancy Pelosi doesn't want to hear talk like that.
So there's Pelosi.
No, we're not going to impeach.
We're not going to impeach.
Donaldson slips up and says if they take control and these subpoenas are going to delve into every nook and crammy.
Roberts says, no, Koki, shut up, Sam.
Shut up.
Shut up.
That's no, no.
That's not that the peep that's exactly it's exactly what the administration, that's their talking point.
And Donaldson says, Why?
I think it's going to be a good thing, all these subpoenas.
Understand you think so, but a lot of people don't think Stephanopoulos Pelosi doesn't want to hear talk like this.
Uh there's folks, there's no question.
I mean, uh, you if if you've ever ever doubted that there is a uh an association, a consortium, uh, a coordination.
Poor old Sam, uh, I don't know what happened.
He didn't get the talking points, or uh if I threw the talking points to the wind, I just wanted to tell people what he thought, because he can't wait for the subpoenas either.
He's just rubbing his hands.
Oh, I can't wait for the subpoenas.
And Pelosi probably called up, what was that?
I just got through saying there aren't going to be any impeachments.
And now you're talking about subpoenas.
Stephanopoulos says, Don't worry, I handle it.
I made sure.
I made sure that you don't uh that they know you don't want that.
So the anyway, Sandy in Pittsburgh is time dwindles.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Uh, these last two soundbikes were unbelievable.
It's an honor, sir.
Thank you.
Uh, I'm calling to give a wake-up call to my con uh cotton run conservative brethren and sisters.
Uh last Thursday I attended a uh legal conference called Contemporary Issues in Religion and Law, and it had a uh uh panel of trial lawyers there.
I'm a lawyer myself, and uh it was supposed to be a balanced presentation on the issues of law and polit uh law and uh uh religion.
As it turned out, uh it basically had uh the ACLU represented the Americans United for separation of church and state and a number of uh trial lawyers from large firms that do pro bono work with the ACLU, and basically they were practically dancing up to the podium,
so excited by the fact that it was a fate of compli that the Republicans will be out come November 7th, and that uh their arrogance in discussing all of the issues uh were it was unbelievable.
Uh judicial appointments will go their way uh after Oh, hey, look, you know what?
I can under I can understand these are the guys that are gonna adjudicate all the fraud charges after the election.
Exactly.
I mean these are the guys they've got their judge, yeah, they got their judges in place to side with the candidates they want.
That that that that's what the uh that's what the plaintiff's bar is all about these days.
I mean, th I I uh they're the these guys, it's it's well, I'm out of time.
I wish I had more time to elaborate on that, but but that's just another group of people.
It's it's in the bag, it's over with.
Uh and it's just too soon to say that, folks.
This is the kind of stuff's gonna come back, bite them bad.
We'll be back.
That's it, folks.
Election day, two weeks from tomorrow.
We will keep you primed and pumped.
See you tomorrow and look forward to it all revved up.
▲
Export Selection