All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 3, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:27
November 3, 2006, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings, my friends, and welcome.
You are where you need to be.
The Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies on Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's Open Line Friday.
Oh, it's goody-goody gumdrops.
Who knows what will lurk behind the blinking yellow lights of our state-of-the-art phone system?
Open Line Friday.
You may, when I go to the phones, the show is yours.
Meaning you can talk about whatever, whether I care about it or not.
That rule does not hold Monday through Thursday, but it does on Friday.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
And the email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
It's fascinating to look at the reactions of various people to the New York Times story today that everybody's talking about.
I mean, the people like us, conservative Americans, we read the New York Times story and we see a couple of salient points.
We see that the New York Times has put on the front page the fact that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program and was plotting to build an atomic bomb.
As early as the early 90s, we see this.
It's plain as day.
The New York Times confirms that in 2002, Saddam's scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb and that they were as little as a year away.
And if we hadn't eliminated that threat, they don't say this, but had we not eliminated that threat today, we might be facing a nuclear-armed Iraq.
I think it's also Bye-bye Joe Wilson time, even though that's not mentioned much in the story.
What would Iraq need to build a nuclear weapon, Yellow Cake?
And what did what's his face Wilson tell us that Iraq had never attempted to do, which was a total lie.
Now, the people on the left, liberals and Democrats look at this story and say the Bush administration is incompetent for posting this stuff on the internet.
That it helps Iran come up with a nuclear weapon.
People have forgotten something.
You remember Operation Merlin?
That was a Clinton administration attempt to fool the Iranians.
They had a Russian double agent, and this double agent gave supposed secrets building a nuclear bomb to the Iranians.
But the problem was that there were so many obvious errors in it that scientists, Russian scientists, would be able to catch them and fix them.
The program bombed royally.
But another thing about this that's somewhat quaint is you have the mantra, Bush is incompetent.
Bush put this on the...
And by the way, the real thrust of this story, if you haven't read it, the real thrust of the story is to blame congressional Republicans for this, because if you'll recall, all of these documents were being sifted through and all these...
and people were dying to know what was found in the search for weapons of mass destruction.
And a lot of us were very frustrated that the Bush administration didn't seem interested in disclosing what they had discovered or was just too easy to write off the fact that there weren't any weapons of mass destruction.
And so there were a couple of congressmen led by Pete Hookstra who demanded this stuff be released so people could see it.
And Negro Ponte was opposed to doing this.
He said, there's no smoking gun in here.
There's no point in doing it.
Bush finally ordered it done.
And now all of a sudden, and this was months ago when this happened.
I mean, back in the spring when this happened.
Now all of a sudden, the New York Times goes to the website and finds that there are instructions to a certain extent on how to build a nuclear bomb.
And the left is all concerned now about Bush's incompetence and posting this stuff on the internet.
They do not see, they do not see at all the unmistakable fact that Saddam was within a year of having perhaps an atomic bomb.
They don't see the correlation in going in and stopping this whatsoever.
They also do not see the irony, ladies and gentlemen.
Here's the New York Times upset about classified government documents showing up on the internet.
Now, the New York Times had put them in the newspaper.
That's a public right to know.
But now they turn around and they don't like these kinds of postings on the internet, I guess, because they didn't get it exclusively.
So the left is all talking about how the government's incompetent, can't keep secrets, posts this stuff on the internet.
By the way, the government's taking it down now.
The government has taken the website down.
It's an exercise in how people of different ideologies or persuasions see things.
But here's the bottom line, folks.
For those of you out on the left, you cannot hold two positions at the same time.
You can't run around out there and say that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction, didn't have WMD programs, and that he had, at the same time, advanced knowledge of nuclear weapons that would be of use to Iran.
You just can't do that.
And you also can't sit there and try to tell us that Iran has a peaceful nuclear program while at the same time being worried about the fact that they might have stolen the Saddam secrets on nuclear weapons from this website.
So the conflict here is really about people on the left.
And of course, the drive-by media: will this affect the outcome of the elections?
Will this have any impact?
We have a little montage here.
Matt, no, no, it's not.
Yeah, we do have Matt Lauer and Nora O'Donnell, Wolf Blitzer, Soledad O'Brien, and somebody else from CNN in a frenzy about this story and the story involving Reverend Haggard, who supposedly heads up the National Council of Evangelicals, and supposedly taking methamphetamine and having gay sex, and he's denying it all,
wondering why this has been leaked or reported or alleged at this late stage of the campaign.
And the media is just in a tizzy over this.
Four days before election day, and we're following two big stories that could impact voters.
Will it impact voters?
Will it have an impact on the election?
How much of an impact do you think that's actually going to have on this election?
Is it too early to gauge what kind of impact this will have?
Well, my question is, I thought the election was over.
But I thought the Democrats are going to win.
I thought the Democrats had won this.
Well, I just saw on PMS NBC that the brilliant Charlie Cook has now made his prediction official.
20 seats will be picked up by the Democrats next Tuesday.
They will win 20 seats in the House.
So they're in a frenzy on these two stories and what impact they'll have.
Why do they need late-breaking stories?
The election was in the bag.
By the way, one more thing on these New York Times docs, ladies and gentlemen.
The left, when these documents were put up there, And I think it was back in the spring when these documents were put up on this website.
A bunch of people started pouring over them.
And the Democrats and the left started doubting their authenticity right off the bat.
Their whole point was that, well, they poo-pooed.
They poo-pooed the release.
They said, these don't mean anything.
And how can we trust the translation, they said.
Now they put it up there as gospel.
But it's just, it's fascinating to go to these liberal websites and to see their reaction to this.
It's just, I guess everybody has their template.
I guess everybody has their lens that they see things through.
And there is so much, there's not even any reason on the left.
There's not even any logic.
It's just pure raw emotional hatred.
Before we go to the break of public service, ladies and gentlemen, this is Friday.
And of course, Friday is the first day of the weekend.
And many people get out there and party on the weekend, do things in the weekend that they don't do during the week because of time constraints.
And many of you like to go out to dinner on the weekends, leave the house, go out to dinner.
There's a story from Reuters Health that might interest all of you.
Women tend to eat more calories and more fat when dining out, regardless of what their usual eating habits are, according to new research.
The study, which included both binge eaters and dieters, found that both groups of women, the bingers and the dieters, ate out frequently and they downed between 200 and 300 extra calories a day in the process of dining out.
Moreover, women who were prone to binge eating problems often overindulged when eating out.
One-third of their binging episodes over the two-week study occurred in a restaurant, according to findings published in the Western Journal of Nursing Research.
Restaurants may present a high-risk environment for bingers and dieters, contributing to loss of control and excess consumption.
So guys, you now can do something for your women.
Don't take them to dinner.
We all know they're concerned about their weight.
They are very attuned to it because they want to keep you happy and they want to be happy themselves.
And if they want to go to dinner tonight or Saturday, they say, no, honey, I just read that it's unhealthy for you.
I love you so much.
I care and I love you so much.
I just, I can't let you do this.
I've read the research and I never doubt scientific health research, honey.
And the fact is, you're trying to control your weight.
You're trying to do everything right.
And if we go out to eat, you're just going to blow it.
Hi, we are back, America's real Anchor Man Open Line Friday at 800-282-2882.
I also have to wonder about the New York Times in this.
It is clear that by releasing this information, ladies and gentlemen, that they hope that what will dominate the discussion is the incompetence of the Bush administration, the way they dealt with this, by putting it up there and allowing these secrets about how to build a nuke to permeate the entire blogosphere and the internet.
And who knows, Kim Jong-hunga get it?
Oh, it's, and they want the whole discussion to center on how the Republicans in Congress forced this and how Bush went along with it, and Bush is incompetent.
What it actually does is it leads to a discussion of the substance of this stuff.
How can you miss this, even if you're the Times editors?
I guess you must seek, be so confident that you have destroyed any credibility that the Bush administration might have had on its claim that Saddam posed a grave threat, an imminent threat.
Well, this is an imminent threat.
They think the whole discussion goes, and there's no question, this is a November surprise.
This is trying to affect the outcome of the election.
They must not be confident of it either either.
They just so hate Bush.
I mean, this is probably a combination of the two.
But what the information in the story confirms is that there was a real reason for considering Saddam a huge threat and removing him.
We're crying out loud, if he was one year away and all of these documents indicate that, how can the Democrats continue to say that Bush lied?
That's another thing.
Now, they're going to continue to say they're not going to, that's my point.
They don't even see this part of it.
They just see the clumsiness they think and the incompetence and the way the whole thing was handled because of the way these things were put up there on this website.
And now they say, see, the government admits its mistake because they've taken down the website now.
But this is going to cause a discussion of the substance of this, not the handling of it.
And that's, I think, an interesting point to watch in terms of how it affects real people, not the media, but real people who glom onto this story or hear it discussed.
Now, Snerdley, during the commercial break, said to me, Rush, isn't it interesting that this whole campaign, the Democrats have sought advantage by outing gays?
And I said, what do you mean?
You remember the minister up there and Foley and all this sort of stuff?
And he said, yeah.
And they're making it look like gay sex is something pedophilia-like or that it's wrong.
And they're the ones that promote it.
Johnny Heather has two mommies.
We have books about gay sex in the schools.
Now it's wonderful and so forth.
The Democrats themselves are trying to make it look like it's something seething.
And I said, Snerdley, you still don't understand these people.
As far as the Democrats are concerned, it is okay.
They're trying to trash Republics.
The Democrats will look at every form of depravity and perversion out there, and they will embrace it and call it human imperfection.
And they'll assign many of those depraved and perverted types as victims.
So they think every human being is flawed.
They think every human being has big problems.
Liberals think human beings are basically klutzes, and they can't get by without liberals.
So they embrace all this stuff, all these imperfections.
Whereas they look at Republicans as being rigid, intolerant, and hypocritical on this.
The liberals don't look at themselves as being hypocritical at all.
They embrace every oddball trace of behavior you can find out there.
And they try to turn it into a voting constituency.
And so the Republicans don't.
So, yeah, they're totally trying to embarrass Republicans and to point out how the, I mean, even the Christian right, don't mistake this for what it is.
This is the purpose of this story is to keep Ma and Pa Kettle holed up in the shack on the roadsides in Tennessee and South Carolina and Georgia and Alabama and Mississippi on Tuesdays.
They don't go vote.
They want them questioning the worth and the value of everything they believe.
They want them to have doubts about every person and institution that they have invested all of their hope and faith in.
If their pastors and if their leaders are out doing all this stuff, taking methamphetamines and having gay sex, then who can they believe?
And they want them so fed up, and they want them so depressed that they don't go to the polls on Tuesday.
That's the whole purpose of this story.
We'll get the truth of it many, many moons from now.
In the meantime, Reverend Haggard has stepped aside.
I figure he says he can't minister to his flock during the period of time this investigation is going on.
But he says, I've never had gay sex.
I've been faithful to my wife, and I've never taken drugs.
Pretty, pretty, somebody's lying here.
That's a pretty cut-and-dried denial.
Excuse me, folks.
Let's see.
Linda in Farmington.
I don't want Linda.
Let me.
Yes, let me take Linda now.
I was going to go to the guy in Spencer, Massachusetts.
We've got a guy on the phone here that I met when I was.
No, no, not now.
We'll go to Linda.
But we've got a guy on the phone I want to talk to that I met when I was in Afghanistan nearly a couple of years ago.
Linda Farmington, Utah.
Well, is it Utah, Vermont?
Thanks, Russ.
Utah.
Good.
Thank you for calling.
Thank you.
I have a point to make about the whole Michael J. Fox controversy.
Oh, wonderful.
Yes, let's bring it on.
I appreciate you treating the handicapped and disabled as a normal person.
And I am blind and I am diabetic.
I suffer from two disabilities that would benefit from some of that research, although I am adamantly opposed to it at this point.
But the point I wanted to make is I disagree with the handicapped coming out and I take my handicap very seriously.
And whatever I say, I want people to take my opinion and either just respect it, respectfully disagree with it, but not just agree with it because I am handicapped.
And so I admire you.
Thank you.
I didn't mean to interrupt you when you were telling me you admired me.
I admire you for treating us like a normal person.
That's, after all, what we're out there fighting for as a handicapped person and trying to be integrated into our society.
You know what?
You know what?
You have just, you have helped me to sort of reframe this and make a point.
You're exactly right.
The people that have disabilities, handicapped, as you say, often don't want sympathy.
They want to be treated as normally as possible in human discourse, conversation, this sort of thing, job environments and so forth.
Yet the Democrats go out and find people to parade them as victims, sympathetic victims, to make them immune from any criticism.
But I'll tell you what this is.
And this is another one of these things, folks, that's going to take maybe years for me to be born outright.
But it will be, it'll be at some point in the future.
You'll all be looking back.
You know, once again, he knew what he was talking about.
This is one of those situations, the fox flap, where raw emotion trumps fact, where raw emotion gets in the way of pure logic.
And it takes a while for the emotion to subside.
The logic will eventually arise and show itself.
Hey, ladies and gentlemen, you know, we've had our amber alert out there for Nancy Pelosi all week long.
I see Drudge picked it up yesterday, wondering where she is.
Fox just did a story on it.
The reason, now some of you people, come on, Rush, what does it matter where Pelosi is?
I'll tell you why it matters, folks.
Well, I'm happy to provide the answers.
Never mind.
I'm happy to get the questions.
George W. Bush, SOB number two in America this week, because I am number one, Is out campaigning for his party.
The media is saying that George Bush is hurting his candidates.
The media is saying that his candidates don't want to be anywhere near George W. Bush.
George W. Bush is out working.
He is out telling people who he is.
He is out telling people who the Republicans are.
He is out telling people who care to listen what the consequences are after next Tuesday.
The Democrats don't dare put their leader anywhere because they are scared stiff to do it.
Once the woman starts opening her mouth and starts rattling about what she believes, they can't afford that.
They've got too many fraudulent candidates running as Democrat conservatives to muck that all up by having their liberal leaders come out.
The Washington Times has an editorial today that goes through her voting record.
She's against everything that is good for this country.
It's stunning.
I have it here.
I'll go through it at some point.
So that's why there's an amber alert out on Nancy Pelosi.
And we've got, you know, when we put an Amber alert out, I mean, we, our tentacles stretch and reach the width and the breadth and the depth of the fruited plant.
We haven't heard from one person.
There hasn't been one sighting of Nancy Pelosi.
The president's out there.
President's not afraid.
President's not afraid to tell people who he is, what he stands for, what he's doing.
The Democrat leadership has no guts.
They are just engaging in pure manipulation by going silent, confirming everything I have ever said about them.
They don't dare run the risk that anybody would know what they actually believe.
By the way, reaching back to the printer here, went back, what's updated this thing?
April 13th of this year, salon.com, Bush's bogus document dump.
The administration seeded its new public archive of Iraq documents with jihadist materials completely unrelated to Saddam.
Now, I know not a whole lot of people read salon.com, but liberals in the media do, and the net that knows those kook fringe bloggers on the left do.
And here comes the New York Times today.
Whoa, it's just the exact opposite.
Why, Saddam was very close to having nukes, and the New York Times is blaming the Bush administration for making this news available to everybody because it contains some how-to-do-it materials.
And yet, I just remember this.
I wanted to call your attention to it because when these documents came out, when they were first posted, the liberals, they're bogus.
There's nothing to it.
All they do is prove that Bush went to Iraq for no reason whatsoever.
There were no weapons of mass destruction.
All of a sudden, we learned Saddam's a year away from a nuke or an atomic bomb.
Hello, Joe Wilson.
Where are you, Joe?
But I hear Joe Wilson and his wife are leaving Washington.
They're moving to Santa Fe, New Mexico, Santa Fe or Taos.
I'm not sure where they're moving somewhere out there.
You know, the arts and croissant crowd.
They're fed up.
Their days of frolicking in the sunshine of public adulation apparently are over.
I want to go back.
What was that woman that called from Utah?
What was her name?
Yes, Linda from Farmington, Utah.
In case you missed it, she just called me to thank me for treating people with, she called it handicaps, disabilities or what have you, as normal people.
That's what they seek.
They don't want sympathy and so forth.
I wasn't going to mention this.
I really wasn't going to mention this.
But since she brought it up And she mentioned a specific that's in this story.
It's a Washington Post story.
And it makes her point.
Here's how this starts.
He's been called a faker by conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh, and he withstands the gazes of hundreds of people as his lips tremble, a hand shakes, or a foot jerks in a wild spasm.
But when Michael Fox recently discovered that stem cells is one of the most frequently searched terms on the internet, he said he knew entering the political fray was worth it.
Well, you can search all you want, but you're not going to find any success in embryonic stem cells.
At any rate, in this story, it talks about how, well, let me just read the story to you rather than summarize.
As for why he hasn't spoken more about Limbaugh's criticism, Fox said, What's the point, really?
When you grow up my size, you learn how to deal with bullies.
You don't engage them, you're not going to change their mind.
Fox is about 5'4.
But Fox 45 had gentler words for another critic, the sister of Ben Carden's Republican opponent, Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele.
Monica Turner, a Bethesda doctor who has multiple sclerosis, appeared in a TV ad for the lieutenant governor calling Cardin's ad featuring Fox tasteless and designed to frighten people.
Fox said he'd not seen her commercial but had read the transcript.
He said, I'm not going to get into an argument with a fellow patient.
She has a right to believe what she believes in and certainly has the right to express it.
Okay, so proving my point and proving her point.
He's not going to take on somebody because she also, what is I'm not going to get a fellow patient?
Well, hell, I'm a fellow patient.
I have to go to the doctor all the time for my hearing.
You know, I have a disability.
I don't whine and complain about it.
I'm deaf.
It just goes to show folks the truth of my message on this.
And I just want to tell you again that this is one of those situations where raw emotion and shock, I can't believe them, will eventually give way to the logic of all this.
And the logic of all this is that you enter the political arena and you are subject to analysis and criticism.
The days where you get away with outscrutiny because you have a disease, those days are over.
The Democrats are going to let them die hard.
But here, this will really make them mad.
Pioneers take the arrows.
We're leading the way once again.
That's why I say cutting-edge societal evolution, Spencer, Massachusetts.
This is Dan.
Dan, it's great to hear from you.
Good morning, sir.
How are you?
I'm great.
It's great to talk to you again.
Thanks for taking my call.
When you landed in Afghanistan, I had the privilege of going out and meeting you on the plane.
That was at Kandahar, right?
Kandahar, Afghanistan.
That's correct.
And, you know, I showed up for work, and one of the guys said, hey, Rush is on that plane.
And so I went out and I greeted you.
And, you know, I just wanted to tell the listeners, just, I mean, you were incredible to meet.
You didn't fly in any comfort beyond what a regular soldier traveled in.
You travel on a C-130 with the jump seats and with no extra creature comforts.
And when I went out to greet you on the plane, I just couldn't wait to meet you.
And I stepped on the plane, and you came towards me, and I said, Mr. Limbaugh, it's an honor to meet you.
And you said, no, it's an honor to meet you.
And you treated each and every one of us like we were the celebrity and that you came there to meet us and you were excited to meet each and every one of us.
And it was one of the most incredible experiences of my life.
And I just can't thank you enough for that.
Well, I'm speechless, and that doesn't happen to me much.
I can't tell you how I appreciate that.
I meant that.
Were you there when Mary Madeline and I delivered our little talks to the troops?
No, I had to continue working.
So my only chance to meet you was out in the flight line, and Mary Madeline took my picture of you, me and you together.
And that's one of my prized possessions.
And I emailed that home to my dad immediately.
And my dad is listening right now.
And he immediately emailed it all over town.
He went and he got pictures taken.
And within hours of that picture being taken, it was all over town.
And when I got home from Afghanistan, when was that?
Last summer.
I was there for 134 days on the ground.
It was just a four-month trip.
People, by the way, need to know that at the time I was there, it'll be two years ago, February.
The time I was there, Kandahar was still active combat outpost.
I mean, Kabul was what it was, but Kandahar still had some warlords in the area.
And there were, I remember a couple of, not warnings or so, but there were a couple of times that I was on the ground there, had dinner there that night that we had to take some cover because of some thoughts.
So it was, you know, you weren't in a piece of cake spot.
No, there was some things going on there.
I was there when the tank trucks got blown up.
I remember seeing that fire.
And when Al-Qaeda No. 2 got arrested and came through the base, I was on shift that night.
That was a good day.
I'll bet.
Well, you know, one of the things I just wanted to expand on something that you said I got off, I felt got off the airplane and treated you guys like celebrities.
I can't tell you how small I felt compared to all you guys, especially once I got there and saw the way you lived and what you had to go through to serve your country.
And I didn't hear one complaint.
I only heard people who had volunteered to go over there because they loved it and they meant it and they had a sense of duty.
I heard a lot of people talking about, hey, this is what the best thing I can do to protect my family right now.
Well, we had the talk.
It was an overflow crowd in there and went about an hour and a half, complete with QA.
And I told the people in that room, so one of the reasons I wanted to come on this trip was to tell you guys how in awe of you I am and how small I feel around all of you.
When I was 19, 20, I had a chance to join, but there was a draft then and the lottery system had a high number and I didn't.
Well, today is a different time than it was.
I certainly do.
You know, I understand the difference in military then to the difference in military now.
Yeah, but some of my biggest supporters are Vietnam vets because they were treated so poorly.
And I speak to them now, and all they want to do is give us a hug and treat us exactly opposite of the way they were treated.
And it's just, you know, it's created this one-service concept, and we just love each other, and we take care of each other.
And I'll never forget the people that I got to serve with, and I think about them every day.
And my units, can I mention my unit that I know?
Sure, by all means.
The 42nd Aerial Port Squadron out of Westover Reserve Base, Massachusetts.
And we now have other members deployed to another location.
I can't say where.
But members of my unit, as of now, nobody's been forced to go anywhere.
It's all volunteer.
Every person in my unit that's gone, and we've always had somebody since 9-11 somewhere, every person has volunteered to go on those trips.
And it's an incredible experience, the people that I get to work with.
Yeah, because you're working with some of the brightest and some of the most committed and some of the most passionate people.
I mean, passion is and desire are 80% of achievement.
And you're all over there on the mission.
And I was amazed.
I wanted to finish what I was saying.
I had a chance when I was 18 or 19 to sign up, and I didn't.
And as I've grown older, and I'm 55 now, and still with each passing day, year, whatever you want to say, I am more and more and more in awe of people like you who do what you've done.
And those of you who do what you did and have done are such a small percentage of the population.
That's what makes you special.
And that's a job.
Now, I know you see, that's the way you look at it, but the vast majority of people don't.
Everybody has a job, but not very many people's job requires or allows the pretty good possibility they're going to be shot at.
Law enforcement's this way, and people who go into drug smuggling business have to face this possibility.
But in terms of what you guys do, it's so rare.
And the fact that you don't think much of it is another reason I'm, or the reason you don't think of yourselves as special is another reason I'm in such awe of you.
Well, you made my day here with calling, and it was you're bringing back some fond memories.
Well, I can't thank you enough for coming and giving me a chance to meet you.
And the photo of me with you is one of my prized possessions, as it is my dad.
Well, you use a computer?
Yes.
Are you a member of my website?
I haven't got around to that yet.
Oh, you haven't got around to it.
Well, we'll get around to it right now.
I've got to run because I'm a little bit long, but I'm going to put you on hold, and a nice guy will come along.
And won't even need your serial number.
We'll just need some other things.
Let me get complimentary member of the website in the newsletter.
And by the way, let you pick out a couple things at the EIB store.
If you want some club Gitmo gear, feel free.
Thank you very much.
Don't hang up out there, Dan.
This guy will be right with you.
Thanks again so much.
I have tingles down the spine listening to that.
Compliments from those people are really meaningful, folks.
I can't tell you how much.
Back in just a second.
Stay with us.
Judgment Day looms for Saddam Hussein.
Three years after he gave up without firing a shot, he may be condemned to hang on Sunday if an Iraqi court finds him guilty of crimes against humanity.
The decision may come Sunday, ladies and gentlemen.
Well, I'm wondering myself, Mr. Snerdley, how will that impact the election?
If Saddam is found not guilty, or if Saddam is found guilty, I guarantee if he's found not guilty, it'll affect the election.
But we all know Bush is running that court, and Bush is running a timing on this.
And they wouldn't be announcing a not guilty verdict two days before the election.
The Bush at people are not that stupid.
Here's John in Springfield, Virginia.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
I was just calling in regards to Henry Ford down in Tennessee.
He's running all these things saying he's gun-loving.
Whoa, you mean Harold Ford, Harold Ford Jr. of the Ford dynasty in Tennessee?
Yes.
Well, if he wants to do all that, he's going to be to the right of Lieberman, who was pretty much forced out of the Democratic Party after serving four terms.
So he's going to have no power whatsoever in this.
No, no, no, no.
See, you're falling for it.
He's not what he is.
Years ago, he said he was pro-choice.
His other thing is pro-life is for tax cuts.
If he maintains those positions, he won't maintain those positions.
I mean, that's the bottom.
He's not going to maintain these positions.
As for Lieberman, they're already talking since Lament is falling by the wayside.
And the moveon.org types are just fit to be tied because Lament was their guy.
And they were going to show the Democratic Party, we're taking over the party, and Lament is our standard bearer.
Enlamant's down 10, 12 points, maybe more now, and the Democrats haven't put any money in there behind him.
Democrats are already going to Joe Lieberman and saying, hey, Joe, I think Dingy Harry has reached out to Lieberman and promised him some plum committee chairmanships.
I don't know what Lieberman's going to do based on the way he's been treated.
They threw Lieberman out, not because he was too conservative.
They threw Lieberman overboard because he wasn't right on the get out of Iraq plan, the cut and run from Iraq.
I'm not even sure Harold Ford wants to win this race, to be honest, ladies and gentlemen.
I wouldn't be surprised if Harold ended up making a lot of very charismatic guy making a lot of money on Wall Street.
Maybe he wants to win it, but I don't know.
He'll be upset, that upset if he loses it.
But regardless, if he does win and wins under this guy's.
Yeah, I know.
I've been waiting for the tone.
Go ahead and hit it.
We'll be back here in just a second.
Stay with me.
▲
Export Selection