All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 30, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:20
October 30, 2006, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Come on, where is it?
I know I put it in here.
There we go.
There we go.
All right.
Ready to go again, Rush Limbo, the EIB Network.
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
The fastest three hours in media.
I am America's real anchorman, America's truth detector, and America's Doctor of Democracy all combined as one harmless, lovable little fuzzball.
By the way, the name of Lynn Cheney's book, I don't know that she, I don't recall if the name of the book got out on the CNN interview or not.
It's called The 50 States, and it's a children's book about everything that's right with this country.
That's what she was booked to talk about on CNN when they sandbagged her with her husband's comments, ostensibly waterboarding in the Jim Webb book.
It's called The 50 States, and it's a kid's book, children's book about everything that's right with this country.
All right, drive-by media, ladies and gentlemen, is really hitting this figure that 100 soldiers, people, whatever, killed in Iraq this month.
Yeah, the 100 dead soldiers in Iraq this month, and their big push on this today.
Do you know how many people in the United States have been murdered this month?
1,225 based on average yearly statistics from the FBI.
But we don't see drumbeats or photo spreads or repeated references, ad nauseum, about the murder rate in this country or how many were killed in this city or what have you.
And there is an interesting piece today from Victor Davis Hansen, the American Enterprise Online.
Actually, it ran yesterday, and it's along the same lines.
War-torn Iraq has about 26 million residents.
A peaceful California perhaps now has 35 million.
Iraq is a violent and impoverished landscape.
California said to be paradise on earth.
But how you envision Eater Place to some degree depends on the eye of the beholder and is predicated on what the daily media appear to make of each.
As a fifth-generation Californian, I deeply love this state, but still imagine what the reaction would be if the world awoke every morning to be told that once again there were six more murders, 27 rapes, 38 arsons, 180 robberies, and 360 instances of assault in California yesterday, today, tomorrow, and every day.
Imagine what the reaction would be.
I wonder if the headlines would scream about nearly 200 poor Californians butchered again this month.
How about a monthly media dose of 600 women raped in February alone?
Or try over 600 violent robberies and assaults in March with no end in sight?
Imagine those headlines in California papers.
Those do not even make up all of the state's yearly 200,000 violent acts that law enforcement knows about.
Now, Iraq's judicial system seems a mess.
On the eve of the war, Saddam let out 100,000 inmates from his vast prison.
He himself still sits in the duck months after his trial began.
But imagine in Iraq with a penal system like California's with 170,000 criminals, an inmate population larger than those of Germany, France, Netherlands, and Singapore combined.
Just to house such a shadow population costs California nearly $7 billion a year or about the same price of keeping 40,000 Army personnel per year in Iraq.
What would be the image of our golden state of California if we were reminded every morning, quote, another 20 million spent today on housing our criminals?
Some of California's most recent prison scandals would be easy to sensationalize.
Try this.
Guards watch as inmates are raped, or correction officer accused of having sex with underage detainee.
And apropos of Saddam's sluggish trial, remember that our home state, multiple murderer Tookie Williams, was finally executed in December 2005, 26 years after he was originally sentenced.
Much is made of the inability to patrol Iraq's borders with Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Turkey.
But California has only a single border with a foreign nation, not six.
Yet over 3 million foreigners who sneaked in illegally now live in California.
Worse, there are about 15,000 convicted alien felons incarcerated in California's penal system.
That costs about $500 million a year.
Imagine the potential tabloid headlines there.
Illegal aliens in state comprise population larger than San Francisco, or drugs, criminals, and smugglers given free pass into California.
Every year, over 4,000 Californians die in car crashes, nearly twice the number of Americans lost so far in three years of combat operations in Iraq.
In some sense, then, our badly maintained roads and often poorly trained and sometimes intoxicated drivers are even more lethal than improvised explosive devices.
Perhaps tomorrow's headline might scream out at us: 300 Californians to perish this month on state highways.
Hundreds more will be maimed and crippled.
In 2001, California had 32 days of power outages, despite paying nearly the highest rates for electricity in the United States.
Before complaining about the smoke in Baghdad rising from private generators, think back to the run on generators in California when they were contemplated as a future part of every household's line of defense.
We're told that Iraq's finances are a mess.
Yet, until recently, so were California's.
Two years ago, Governor Schwarzenegger inherited a $38 billion annual budget shortfall.
That could have made for strong morning newscast teasers.
Another $100 million borrowed today, $3 billion more in red ink to pile up by month's end.
So is California comparable to Iraq?
Hardly.
Yet it could easily be sketched by a reporter intent on doing so as a bankrupt, crime-ridden den with murderous highways, tens of thousands of inmates with wide open borders.
I myself recently returned home to California without incident from a visit to Iraq's notorious Sunni Triangle.
While I was gone, a drug-addicted criminal with a long list of convictions broke into our kitchen at 4 a.m., was surprised by my wife and daughter, fled with our credit cards, cash, keys, and cell phones.
Sometimes I wonder who really was safer that week, me in Iraq or my family in their home in California.
Now, these are some interesting statistics, and it is a brilliant point that Victor Davis Hansen makes here.
We'll link to this at rushlimbaugh.com this afternoon.
We revise content to reflect the content of today's program.
But as he illustrates, you can make a case that there's far more chaos in the state of California every day than there is in Iraq.
And I just mention this because the media just go and berserk again with this 100 dead soldiers in Iraq this month.
And our annual or our monthly average compiled annually by the FBI is about 1,225 people, 1,225 people murdered monthly in the United States, with hardly any of the corresponding media coverage that we get in Iraq.
And we all know why.
This is the big push, folks.
Iraq is the big issue for the American left.
That's the big issue to get them to turn out.
And as they have been doing for the past two and a half years, or maybe even three now, the efforts of the Democratic Party and their allies, their willing accomplices in the drive-by media is to gin up so much anti-war support against President Bush that the people will vote en masse against anybody of the same party.
Speaking of the American judicial system, this is just outrageous.
The district attorney prosecuting three Duke lacrosse players accused of raping a woman at a team party said during a court hearing on Friday he still hasn't interviewed the accuser about the facts of the case.
I've had conversations with the accuser about how she's doing.
I've had conversations with the accuser about her seeing her kids, Mike Nyphong said, but I haven't talked with her about the facts of that night.
We're not at that stage yet.
Nyphong made the statement in response to a defense request for any statements the woman has made about the case.
In the meantime, her friend, the accuser's friend, continues to run around and blow up this woman's case.
Yeah, she wanted to leave with marks on her.
She asked me to make some marks on her.
So it looked like she had been roughed up.
And you've got these three defendants who are sitting in the dock until their trial next spring.
Their lives ruined purposefully by a hack prosecutor who simply wanted to get reelected and needed to get his primary victory in check during the period of time where the so-called investigation of this so-called crime was taking place.
Brief timeout.
Yesterday on Meet the Press, Michael Steele walked away with it.
It was a debate between himself and his opponent, Ben Carden.
And Michael Steele wiped the floor with Ben Carden, so much so that the Washington Post has a fascinating headline on this story about how, let's see, is this it?
Yes, debate puts Steele on defense.
It did no such thing.
By the way, Michael Steele has secured for Maryland some really powerful endorsements that just help you about that.
And we'll get to the soundbites of the debate right after this timeout.
Stay with us.
Okay, moving on to the audio soundbites from yesterday's Meet the Press.
Michael Steele wiping the floor with Ben Carden, his Democrat opponent.
Before we get to that, for Maryland, this is a big deal.
Former Prince George's County executive Wayne K. Curry, backed by five black members of the Prince George's County Council, today endorsed Republican Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele's campaign for the U.S. Senate.
Wayne Curry, a Democrat who became the first black Prince George's County executive in 1994, served two terms, is said to be influential in Prince George's, the county that's the state's second largest county, has about 846,000 residents, according to the Census Bureau.
Mr. Curry also made a dramatic last-minute endorsement in this year's Democratic primary for Prince George's County executive one week before the primary.
Mr. Curry endorsed the challenger Russian Baker, who drew even-in polls with incumbent Jack Johnson from 10 to 15 points out.
Johnson still won the primary by a narrow margin.
So Wayne Curry does move voters.
I know Wayne Curry is a huge big shot in Prince George's County.
This is a newspaper endorsements don't matter much.
This could have some profound effect on the race in Maryland between Michael Steele and Benjamin Cardinal.
Let's go to the audio sound bites of the debate yesterday.
Tim Russert says to Ben Cardin, do you stand by your comment you would consider cutting off funding for the war in Iraq?
There's a lot of different options that Congress can consider, including contingencies of funds.
There's options that we can consider.
And if the Democrats get back control of the United States Senate, then the amendments can be presented in a way that can be constructive in getting the president to submit a new plan.
But you would consider cutting off funding for the war.
I would consider using the appropriation process.
Now, I want you to hear this answer because Steele called Cardin on this.
Cardin had nowhere to hide.
This is priceless.
Russert says, I'm going to allow each of you to talk about this more, but go ahead, Michael Steele.
It is absolutely amazing to me to have a member of the United States Congress sit here and say that he would vote for, if his party gets control of the Congress, that you would vote for cutting off funding for our troops in Iraq.
Men and women who are putting it on the line every single day, your own words.
Your own words.
Secondly, to sit here and say you want the Bush administration to put together a plan.
Sir, you have been in Congress for over 20 years.
You have been a member of Congress from the beginning of this war to this very point.
The only plan I've heard you put on the table is we need a plan.
This is not how you go about dealing with complicated, frustrating, at times, foreign policy issues.
Correction, Lieutenant Governor Steele.
It is precisely how Democrats go about it.
It is exactly the way they do it.
They do not put forth a plan.
Their plan is a mystery in terms of, well, we know what the plan is, but they don't say what the plan.
They've got a cut and run plan, and they don't like the word cut and run.
So what they're going to do is redeploy.
They're going to pull the troops out, but they'll put them somewhere else like Okinawa in case they're needed again in case of emergency or so forth.
But they're not taking positions on anything because they want to remain flexible.
They want to have the flexibility to adapt day to day.
They want to be able to say today their plan is X. Tomorrow, if something happens in the news, they want to have the ability to say their plan is Y.
And the same thing on Wednesday, if something happens, they want to be able to say their plan is Z.
They know their buddies in the drive-by media will go along for it, not pinning them down on anything, not requiring them to have a plan.
The plan is basically, we got to get out of Iraq.
We've got to get rid of Bush.
We've got to get rid of Republicans.
Michael Steele wiped the floor with Cardin on this answer.
Beauty to behold.
Next, Russert says, well, where would you redeploy the troops, Mr. Cardin?
I bring them home.
I want the troops basically home.
I want more flexibility.
I want to focus on the war against terror.
We have serious challenges today, and America's influence internationally is being compromised because of our commitment in Iraq.
Russert says to Steele, your sister said that the Michael J. Fox ad was deceptive and tasteless.
Why?
Well, because it said that I don't support stem cell research, and I do support stem cell research.
Where I've drawn the line is federal funding for research that destroys the embryo.
And I've been very much an advocate and supporter of advancing research that will allow us to do what we need to do without destroying that embryo.
There's only one person at this table who's voted against stem cell research, and that's Ben Cardin.
When there was a bill presented that passed 100 to 1, 100 to 0 in the United States Senate, both Maryland Democrat senators voted for this bill that would allow for stem cell research that did not destroy the embryo.
So we had Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski support that.
He voted against it in the House.
And yet he's the beneficiary of the ad.
Would you like to hear something else about this stem cell business?
Do you know who first voted against it or not voted?
Do you know who first refused to allow it to happen at the federal level?
I'll give you the year.
Try 1996 or 1997.
Now, who was president then?
Bill Clinton was president, and the whole concept of embryonic stem cell research died with Bill Clinton.
It was George W. Bush who authorized embryonic stem cells at research on a limited line of already available embryos.
And yet, we have commercials still running all over this country today claiming it is Republicans who oppose it.
And it is not.
Republicans are in favor of the promising adult stem cell research, cord blood stem cell research.
It is taking place in Maryland.
It is taking place in Missouri.
And yet the ads continue to run that say Republicans oppose this.
This was a buffo performance by Mr. Steele yesterday on Meet the Press.
Russert, we don't have the bite of this, but Russert pressed Steele on whether he was a Bush Republican.
And Michael Steele told him he was a Lincoln Republican.
Game set match.
You know, this is really no contest what impact it's going to have.
Don't know.
But the Wayne Curry endorsement, coupled with the appearance on Meet the Press yesterday, makes it clear to those in Maryland paying attention who the more qualified is here.
This is Mac in Brownsville, Texas.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
How's it going, guys?
No, my comment is, you know, you said that that piece comparing California to Iraq was brilliant.
It was brilliant and it was a sleight of hand.
You know, there's 100 troops that was killed this month in Iraq, but, you know, the thousands of people that were murdered in the U.S., those weren't soldiers.
There wasn't 100 soldiers killed in California.
And how many people were killed in Iraq this month?
Civilians.
But nobody's talking about that.
You're trying to fudge this yourself.
You know, the point is, no, the people bringing up this notion of death focus only on U.S. soldiers.
They are in a war zone.
This makes this even more outrageous.
Everybody knows what happens in war.
People die.
The objective of war is to kill people and break things.
That is why it's so astounding that there are so many people in this country who seem to revel in the American soldier death statistics, as though they're concerned about death.
The point is, where is all this concern about death when the mayhem and the murder and the violent crime in California dwarf what's going on in the nation of Iraq?
Now, there are 9 million more people in California than the nation of Iraq.
And that was a spot-on comparison.
There's no question that it was.
Brief timeout.
We'll be back and continue.
Stay with us.
And we're back on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
Rush Lindboy, your highly trained broadcast specialist at 800-282-2882.
All right.
A couple of global warming stories here.
First from the UK Sun.
Hardworking families face crippling new bills as the government fights global warming with a raft of stinging taxes.
But critics accused ministers of forcing the public to pay for their failure to react earlier to the crisis.
Shadow Environment Secretary Peter Ainsworth said last night, we don't need a program of green taxes.
We need a green program, full stop.
This is just a list of taxes when what we need is a system of mutually reinforcing carrots and sticks.
What it was speaking, he was speaking after it was revealed that Environment Secretary David Miliband had already drawn up sweeping green tax plans, which he has put to Gordon Brown.
He wrote to the Chancellor, as our understanding of climate change increases, it is clear more needs to be done.
Typical families with two children could have to pay up to 1,300 pounds more every year just in green taxes.
According to estimates, the move came on the eve of the publication of a major study on climate change, which some experts blame on harmful man-made emissions.
Tony Blair described the report, which is drawn up by former World Bank Chief Sir Nicholas Stern as the most important he has seen since becoming prime minister.
It is set to fuel the row, the row actually over the introduction of green taxes.
And they get pictures of London as a baked, cracking desert and so forth.
And you just know this is exactly what the whole global warming movement is about.
In a nutshell, it is about raising taxes on people throughout the world for some global purpose.
It is all about establishing giant global governments.
It is about making sure that the well-off Western societies get fleeced even more, all on the premise of man-made global warming.
The vanity of such a charge is amazing.
And I tell you that the rapidity with which people who don't even think about it have just glommed onto it and accepted it is stunning to me.
Supposedly intellectual people, supposedly smart people just buy into it because the elites are the ones saying that all this is happening.
And these elite governments have elite people in them.
And anything that increases the importance and the role of government in people's lives, why that has to be supported.
And fear tactics and crisis-oriented thinking is behind all this.
It erupted nearly came to blows in Boulder, Colorado recently.
The planet may be warming, but what started out as a polite discussion about hurricane trends turned hot last Wednesday in Boulder.
What was at issue was the role, if any, that global warming plays in fueling big hurricanes.
But illustrating the volatile nature of the debate, the scientific conference descended into name-calling.
Colorado State University's William Gray, one of the nation's preeminent hurricane forecasters, called noted Boulder climate researcher Kevin Trendberth an opportunist and a Svengali who sold his soul to the devil to get global warming research funding.
Trendberth counted it Bill Gray is not a credible scientist.
Not anymore.
He was at one time, but he's not anymore, Trendberth said of Gray, one of the handful of prominent U.S. scientists who question whether humans play a significant role in warming the planet.
He's one of the contrarians, some of whom get money to spread lies about global warming, Trendberth said during a break following his presentation at the 31st Annual Climate Diagnostics and Prediction Workshop.
About 150 scientists from more than 10 countries are attending the week-long meeting.
This was last week in Boulder, Colorado.
Trendberth said that Bill Gray and Gray traded barbs during Trendberth's presentation to the group, but the harshest comments were made during interviews with a reporter afterward.
Trendberth noted Wednesday that the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season spawned the greatest number of named tropical storms and the most hurricanes on record.
It was the only year with three Category 5 hurricanes and produced the most costly storm on record, Hurricane Katrina.
Trendberth and his colleagues say that there's little doubt that warming is due in part to the buildup of heat-trapping greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
But Gray said there's no evidence that hurricanes are intensifying.
Everything that Trendsberth has shown can be refuted, he said.
And Gray wasn't the only audience member to question some of Trendberth's assertions.
And it went on and on, but it really descended.
And it's all about funding.
It's the same thing with this embryonic stem cell research.
What's the proper word here?
It's bogus.
It is bogus.
Follow the market, ladies and gentlemen.
Follow the market.
Take the concept of embryonic stem cell research.
If there was anything promising in it, you have to know that private sector money would be flowing into research.
There are venture capitalists all over the place who would be seeking to make profits out of the research that would lead to something important involving embryonic stem cells.
But guess what?
There's no private sector money flowing into embryonic stem cells.
Zilch zero nada.
The issue is federal funding.
Why?
Because there's no other source for the money.
Why do they want the money?
If the research is going to lead nowhere, it doesn't matter.
They want the money.
Everybody needs a living.
Hey, if you could live off the federal government with grants instead of working, would you do that?
Why don't these researchers go out if they're so brainy and they're so why don't they borrow the money if it's so promising?
Do what everybody else does.
Go borrow.
But no, there's this assumption the government must pay for this.
Why this is health?
Why this is medicine?
The government must pay for this.
Well, no, the government shouldn't, especially if it's a black hole.
Same thing here with global warming.
It's all about funding.
And the people who want funding from the governments that believe this thing will write reports saying human beings are the sole cause, the primary cause, whatever, of global warming.
There are others who, on the basis of their own research, say, no, you can't prove it yet.
And so the clowns that are running around trying to get government money from all over the world then turn what they're doing around.
They say, oh, these people are being funded by big oil.
These people being funded by people that pollute and want to keep polluting so that they don't have to be held accountable for the global warming.
The bottom line is there's no consensus in science on this, and there's nothing in science that says embryonic stem cells show promise.
So what we have here is the politicization of medicine.
This is the sad and shocking thing.
We used to approach the cure for diseases in a truly bipartisan way, but now we don't.
Now we've got Democrats and their allies with commercials all over saying certain Republicans are against curing this disease that you have or your friends have or other Americans have.
They don't want people to get better.
And so what we have, Democrats lying to sick people in this country, creating false hope, which is truly cruel, that this line of research will lead to something substantive when it won't.
And even the people who say it might say we need 15 to 20 years.
Where have I heard that?
1984.
I heard we need 20 years to prove global warming, but we can't afford to wait because if we're wrong, it'll be too late to stop it.
Well, it's 20 years, and they still say we need more time.
We can't afford to wait.
Others are saying it's too late.
They're all over the ballpark.
Others are saying we can't fix global warming.
Well, if we can't fix it, how the hell could we have caused it?
It's just simple logic.
If we're the reasons for it and it's happening, then we ought to be able to stop what we're doing.
But no, no, no.
The problem's gone so far.
The earth is now more powerful than we are.
It wasn't 20 years ago.
We had the power to totally destroy the climate of this planet, but we don't anymore because it's gotten so bad, we've so destroyed it, there's nothing we can do to fix it.
That's what some of them say.
They're all over the ballpark.
But this is all about funding.
Now, they've already politicized science.
And let there be no mistake.
We've talked about this.
There's a presumption, just like there is with law enforcement.
They never lie.
They never falsely accuse.
They never go after the wrong guy.
Why would they?
They're the good guys.
They're the guys in the white hats.
They're trying to spare us and save us from all the evil that's out there.
Science?
These are these guys in the white coats and the lab coats.
And they're out there trying to cure disease and so forth.
No, they wouldn't lie.
Yes, they will.
They will buy for money.
They will mislead for money.
They've politicized the arts.
They've politicized the English language.
The liberals have politicized everything.
And I just have to laugh when I listen to the liberals talk about how partisan conservatives are and how divisive Republicans and conservatives are.
How the hell more divisive can you be than to run ads on television accusing Republicans of not wanting to cure people who have terminal diseases?
How much more divisive when it's a flat-out lie?
And when their spokesman hasn't even read the constitutional amendment in Missouri about which these commercials are based, or on which they're based, how in the world are you supposed to trust anything?
That amendment, in fact, everybody gets caught up talking about it as a stem cell amendment because they very cleverly titled it stem cell research and whatever it is.
It is a pro-cloning amendment.
And the embryonic stem cell people, they're not killing embryos to get there.
We're cloning them.
We're cloning embryos.
And we're not going to kill any embryos.
This is not an abortion issue.
They're doing everything they can to obfuscate what they really want to do, but it's nothing more than your typical liberal money grab.
All money is theirs as long as they can get somebody to get into your back pocket and take it out of your back pocket and hand it over to them.
And that's what global warming is all about.
That's what embryonic stem cell research is all about.
And we see this massive new green tax increases being proposed for the UK.
Sit tight, folks.
With the right people in Washington, it'll happen here.
Back in just a second.
Stay with me.
All right, I want to go back to the audio sound bites.
Yesterday, Fox News Sunday.
I'm sorry, it's this week with George Stephanopoulos interviewing the actor Michael J. Fox.
Stephanopoulos' question.
In the ad now running in Missouri, Jim Coviesel speaks in Aramaic.
He says, you betray me with a kiss.
And his point is that actually, even though down in Missouri they say the initiative is against cloning, it's actually going to allow human cloning.
Well, I don't think that's true.
You know, I campaigned for Claire McCaskill.
And so I just have to qualify by saying I'm not qualified to speak in the page-to-page content of the initiative.
Although I'm quite sure that I'll agree with it in spirit, I don't know.
Full disclosure, I haven't read it.
Okay.
So there you have it.
Michael J. Fox told the world yesterday he's not even read Amendment 2.
That's the amendment on which the commercial running for Claire McCaskill is based.
Amendment 2 is pro-cloning.
It contains the scientific term for what cloning is and permits it.
We've been through all of this, all of last week.
There's no question it's a cloning issue, and it's not even right to say it'll legalize cloning.
It'll go further than that.
It will make it constitutional in the state of Missouri.
And the whole thing is being obfuscated by this stem cell campaign because the title of the amendment, Amendment 2, even references stem cell research and whatever it is.
I've got it in the stack.
I haven't got it right in front of me.
But he didn't even read it.
He's just going on.
I know he's busy.
He's got a lot going on.
So he's relying on the spirit of what's in it.
And he campaigned for Claire McCaskill.
And so he has to qualify that he's saying he's not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative.
So he's not.
Well, some people might say, details, details, Rush, details.
No, he's doing a commercial on something he doesn't admittedly have any knowledge of.
Sort of like a lot of people believed in the spirit of campaign finance reform.
Yeah, we got to get the money out of politics.
Yeah, there's too much money in pod.
Money is corrupting politics.
We got to get it out of there.
Yeah, we didn't get any money out of politics, and anybody who thought that campaign finance reform or anything else is going to get money out of politics is a fool.
All they did is shift the money, created these 527s, and look what that became.
So we now have experts running around doing commercials on subject matter they admit they have little, if any, knowledge of.
And they are, of course, heroes.
Ladies and gentlemen, victims can't challenge them.
Intentions.
You have to look at their intentions, and their intentions are what count.
Doesn't matter if they're wrong.
Doesn't matter if they're uninformed.
It's their intent.
They care.
At least they care.
And of course, the assumption is that nobody else does.
And that was the point of the commercial.
And that's what's so sad about it, to say that there are certain people, because they're Republicans, that don't care about curing disease.
MSNBC has a week-long telethon designed to cure a country of the disease known as the Republican majority.
And there is an action line for this telethon.
And that action line is Democrats are pulling away.
Here's a soundbite as an example from this morning, the anchorette infobabe Chris Jansing talking to political analyst Joe Watkins.
She says, Joe, are you surprised by this growing Democrat momentum?
Are you skeptical of it?
Well, I don't think that there really is any Democratic momentum.
Oh, come on.
Well, what you've got really, Chris.
Take a look at the polls.
Every single poll by every single pollster.
This is not a year where you can play polls off of each other.
No, what this is, this is a year where, this is a year where we've been looking at national polls, and all the national polls are saying that there's all this dissatisfaction with the Republican Party and so on and so forth.
But at the end of the day, what you have are 435 individual House races, and you have 33 individual Senate races.
Well, you see, the action line is that the Democrats are pulling away.
Oh, come on, Joe, what are you saying?
You don't see any moment.
Come on, Joe, what are you talking about?
The exchange continued.
Early on, though, you could have made that argument because a lot of these individual races weren't being polled, but they are now.
And if you look at the individual polls on individual races, not just the overall national polls, which can be misleading, the Democrats are pulling ahead.
Well, clearly, there are a number of Democrats who are in play here for next week in the elections.
But there are a lot of seats that are yet to be decided, and Republicans are very, very strong when it comes to getting out the vote.
Remember, Chris, that we're talking about polls, but at the end of the day, and I'll say that word again, the end of the day, you have to look at the voter turnout.
You know what amazes me about this is the first bite, the question, Joe, are you surprised by this growing Democrat momentum or are you skeptical of it?
So he says, well, I don't think that there really is any momentum.
And she starts arguing with him.
Why ask the question?
You give the guy the option to say, nope, I'm skeptical of the momentum.
And then he says, I don't see any momentum.
And the argument begins.
It's an argument.
She's an anchor.
She is an info.
She's a journalist, ladies and gentlemen.
There is an action line this week on PMS NBC, their telethon to cure the country of the disease known as the Republican majority.
Democrats are pulling away.
They continue to spike the ball on the 10-yard line.
There haven't been any votes counted yet, folks.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Okay, gang.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence.
Takes a 21-hour timeout.
We'll be back revved up, ready to go tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection