All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 8, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:19
November 8, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Oh, I just heard Nancy Pelosi say, her press conference is going on right now.
We're rolling tape.
I'm not going to jip it, ladies and gentlemen, but she just said that her ascension to the speakership means more civility in Washington.
Is that an admission that they have been over the top?
Anyway, greetings, my friends, and welcome.
It is Broadcast Excellence and Rush Limbaugh from the prestigious and distinguished Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882, the email address rush at EIBnet.com.
I know a lot of you are going to want to vent today, so start lining up again, 800-282-2882.
Anything you want to ask, any question you've got, any comment you want to make, feel free.
I asked Brian if he wanted to do the show today.
He said, no.
I asked Snerdley if he wanted to do the show today.
I said, Dawn, you want to do the show?
I asked all kinds of people if they wanted to do the radio show today.
Oh, no, no, no.
You can handle it.
So, by the way, the president has a press conference scheduled for 1 o'clock, and everybody's saying he's going to have a, what, significant announcement at his 1 o'clock press conference.
And I don't know indication of what that is.
A lot of people are speculating he's going to announce Rumsfeld's resignation.
So we'll see.
But I want to take you back, ladies and gentlemen.
It's a reminder.
Oftentimes on this program, when discussing the problems that Democrats have had over the last 12 years, electoral problems, one of my observations has always been until they start examining what's wrong with themselves, they're never going to fix their problem.
And as such, that's exactly what we're going to do today.
When things go wrong, you must first look inward.
You must ask, what did we do wrong?
What could we have done better?
What mistakes did we make?
It would be foolish at this stage to start assigning blame either to the media or to liberals or Democrats or the voters or the American people.
I'm not going to fall into the trap that the liberals and Democrats fall into every time they lose an election and start blaming everybody else.
Republicans lost last night, but conservatism did not.
And that is, to me, one of the fundamental elements of last night's results.
Conservatism did not lose.
Republicans lost last night.
In fact, Republicanism, being a political party first rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night.
The Democrats beat something last night with nothing.
They advanced no agenda other than their usual anti-war position.
They had no contract.
They really did not get specific.
Their message was one of vote for us.
The other guys have been in power too long or what have you.
There was no dominating conservative theory nationally, and these were nationalized elections.
There was no dominating conservative message that came from the top and filtered down throughout in this campaign.
It was nowhere to be found.
Oh, I take that back.
There was conservatism yesterday in the election, and it was to be found on the Democratic side of the aisle.
There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives in a couple conservative Senate races won by Democrats yesterday, Jim Webb being one.
Heath Schuller, of course, is one of many.
Harold Ford ran as a conservative, although he came up a little bit short.
But conservatism won when it was tried yesterday.
Conservatism won fairly big when it was tried.
And I've heard people say, well, you know, this is going to present problems for Ms. Pelosi because she's gone out there and she recruited candidates.
By the way, she's being credited with this strategy, by the way, and that's why there's no question that she will be the Speaker.
She's been credited with putting together the strategery of recruiting moderate and conservative candidates and then getting the leadership of the House and the Democrats out of the way.
No Harry Reid, no Nancy Pelosi to muck it up.
Let these guys run in the South and in the Midwest as conservatives and let them win.
Now people are saying, what kind of mess is this going to cause Nancy Pelosi once they get control of the House in January?
Folks, you're missing the point about that.
Nancy Pelosi contributed to all of these people's campaigns.
I think she gave $4,500 to Heath Schuler.
And you know what happens?
Thomas Sowell put this very well.
He said, the latest example of election fraud is actually what the Democrats did.
They nominated a bunch of moderate and conservative Democrats for the express purpose of electing a far-left Democrat leadership.
The Democrats, if you're looking for good signs, Democrats could not win this election being liberals.
They could not have won the House being liberals, maybe in some parts of the country.
But I mean, all the Democrats flexing their muscles and feeling good about this have to admit here that liberalism didn't win anything yesterday.
Republicanism lost.
Conservatism was nowhere to be found other than on the Democrat side of the aisle.
Now, there are a number of theories that are running out there on what caused all this to happen.
Political environment was terrible.
The public deeply unhappy with the fact that the Republican Congress got too comfortable in power and that the conservativeism that was known to exist in the House of Republicans just vanished.
Many cases died.
Public unhappy with the war, but they're unhappy because they don't see the progress or the result that they want.
There wasn't any big move toward liberalism on national security issues.
There wasn't any big move on liberalism when it comes to gay marriage or affirmative action.
Affirmative action lost in Michigan.
A bunch of gay marriage amendments passed around the country.
And if you look at Connecticut, Lieberman and Lamont.
Lamont, the chosen candidate of the far-left wing of the Democratic Party, went down in flames.
Some people say, well, there was too much scandal and there were too many investigations in the House of Representatives, Mark Foley, a number of other people.
Corruption supposedly a big issue with the public.
Maybe so, but Democrats have their own scandal problems.
It didn't affect them.
William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, has a scandal problem.
He's in a runoff.
Alan Hevesley in New York, he has a scandal problem.
It didn't affect him.
I think, ladies and gentlemen, that the facts are these.
Our side, you and I, hunger for ideological leadership, and we're not getting it from the top.
Conservatism, conservative ideology was nowhere to be found in this campaign from the top.
The Democrats beat something with nothing.
They didn't have to take a stand on anything other than their usual anti-war position.
They had no clear agenda, and believe me, they didn't dare offer one.
Liberalism will still lose every time it's offered.
And they nationalize these campaigns.
And if they really believed liberalism was their answer, then they wouldn't have nominated and had so many conservative Democrats and moderates running for House and Senate seats.
We allowed ourselves to be defined.
Without elected conservative leadership from the top, Republicans in the House and Senate are free to freelance and say to hell with party unity.
They can go and do whatever they, so you come up with rhinos, Republicans in name only, if they're not held to some sort of party discipline from the top.
I know a lot of people are critical of House members, and believe me, I'm not trying to defend anybody here.
I'm simply saying that some of these people in the House of Representatives were in a no-win situation on issues like immigration and spending and education and entitlements because they could not logically and easily buck their own president and have the party survive.
So they bought the dust.
The Democratic Party is the party of entitlements.
Yet the Republicans come up with this Medicare, the prescription drug entitlement, that polls said the recipients didn't want and weren't interested in.
I don't care what the details of the issue are, that is not conservatism.
Conservatives do not grow the government and offer entitlements as a means of buying votes.
But that's what the Republicans in the Congress had to support in order to stay in line with the party from the top.
It presented numerous problems.
The answer to this is going to be unfolding over the course of the next few months.
But hopefully the message is going to get clear.
Look, folks, it's silly to blame the media.
It is silly to blame the Democrats.
It is silly to go out and try to find all these excuses.
We have proven we can beat them.
We've proven we can beat Democrats.
We can proven we can withstand whatever we get from the drive-by media.
Conservatism does that.
Conservatism, properly applied proudly, eagerly, with vigor and honesty, will triumph that nine times out of ten in this current political environment and social environment in this country.
It just wasn't utilized in this campaign.
And there are many reasons for it, but the primary reason is fear of criticism from those in the so-called establishment.
And nobody wants to be criticized, and nobody wants to go through life in fear.
So a lot of people go out of their way to make our opponents think, I'm not that bad a guy.
I'm not really one of those extreme cooks.
I'm reasonable.
And so the whole ideology of conservatism gets watered down within the threat of fear and the desire to be liked and all of this.
I mean, the Democrats now get to tell themselves, however, whatever they want to tell themselves, why they won.
That'll be interesting for me to watch, too.
Do they think they won because they're liberals?
Will they be honest with themselves and tell themselves they won because they had the opportunity to run against nothing?
Anything can beat nothing, and it happened yesterday.
Back after this, stay with us.
We have an interesting board of calls running the gambit.
We'll get to your phone calls sooner than usual today because I have an opportunity, I think, looking at the list here to bounce off of some of your comments rather well, informatively, maybe even inspiringly and humorously.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, where are the mad dogs and fire hoses?
No talk of voter suppression today because the liberals won.
No images of fire hoses and mad dogs kicking people away from the polls.
There were no hanging chads and no dirty tricks, no stolen elections.
Imagine that.
Such a contrast.
When the liberals lose, it has to be fixed.
It has to be rigged and so forth.
We lose.
We understand it.
We take our medicine and hopefully set about correcting our mistakes rather than continuing to live under illusions that, hey, we really won this.
We got screwed.
I'm not trying to be overly optimistic, ladies and gentlemen.
And I'm even getting some emails from people.
I can't handle your optimism anymore.
Oh, fine.
I am not going to sit here and sound all doom and gloom and down in the dumps just to make some people feel better because it doesn't reflect how I feel.
You want me to, Snerdley wants me to fake it.
Snerdley wants, all right, maybe for an, maybe for a short time today, when you are not expecting it, when you are least aware of it, I will appear to give up.
And you tell me how you like it.
All right?
First, I want to give you some benchmarks.
You really want me to go negative.
You really... You...
I'm not happy, but I just...
What do you call the first 15 minutes?
I just explained to you why we lost.
Do you think conservatism is beat up and finished forever?
You remember back in 1976 when we thought all was lost?
Gerald Ford, Reagan was going to come back.
Ford gets creamed by Jimmy Carter.
Bill Clinton's election in 1992.
This is, I don't know, I can't be what I'm not, but I will fake it.
At some point when you people least expect it, I will become totally defeatist and basically say there's no reason to go on.
I'm checking out.
You should all cancel your newsletter subscriptions because there's no point in reading any of it.
Well, I mean, that's what you want me to say?
That's what it's going to be interpreted as.
And by the way, you may as well just stop subscribing to the website because there's nothing going to be on there that you're going to like to hear.
But I want to give you some benchmarks here.
Let's remember this.
As we get to January and the Democrat majority is sworn in, there has not been a terrorist attack in this country since 9-11.
By the way, you think the militant Islamists and terrorists are happy today?
I mean, it's an interesting question to ask.
Think they are?
Think they're...
Of course they are.
Think they're...
Think they're looking at their own future with promise.
Brighter days, sun never setting.
Gasoline price, $2.08 a gallon.
Everybody has increased take-home pay.
The economy is doing well and tax cuts, which will be probably allowed to sunset, and that means you're going to get a tax increase, but that hasn't happened yet.
Unemployment is at an all-time 4.4% low.
Now, if you just keep those numbers in mind, that's what was rejected yesterday by the American voter.
Or was it?
No terrorist attacks since 9-11-01.
Gas price at $2.08 a gallon, national average.
Many people with much more take-home pay.
Unemployment rate at an all-time low.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average at an all-time high.
We can throw that in there.
If any one of these numbers go south, if any one of them goes south, we will know who to hold responsible.
And also, I was driving home.
I voted late in the afternoon yesterday.
I went and played golf.
Got 10 holes in before the sunset.
Would have gotten more in, but except the guy I was playing with kept wanting to talk about the election.
So funny, I get in the car after voting, and I'm driving home listening to Fox on the radio.
And these guys are, they're leaking the exit poll data without actually reporting it.
I'm saying, oh, man, this sounds horrible.
And then they said six out of 10 Americans hate Bush, disapprove of Bush, and hate the war in Iraq.
And something like six out of 10 Americans think the country's headed in the wrong direction.
This was the ABC exit poll leak, I guess, that happened at 5 o'clock.
6 out of 10 Americans don't like the direction, think that their kids are not going to do better than they have done themselves.
The days of economic prosperity and economic growth in America are over, according to people in these exit polls.
So I want you to just keep these numbers in mind.
No tariffs attacks since 9-11-01.
Gas price, 208 a gallon, increased take-home pay.
Wages and productivity are up.
Unemployment, all-time low, 4.4%.
Dow Jones industrial average at an all-time high.
I want you to be prepared to see the end of negative reporting on the country's future and even on the war in Iraq.
They may not wait until January.
I just want to prepare you for it.
It isn't going to be long before we start seeing stories that Americans are newly optimistic on the aspects of this country's future and their children's future.
Nobody was happy.
I mean, I drove into work.
I didn't see, you know, when General Dinkins was elected mayor of New York, all over the media, even the homeless were nice.
The panhandlers were begging in a more polite way.
The sun seemed brighter.
The air seemed cleaner, and the birds chirping seemed happier.
I had people on the lookout for this in New York walking to work today, taking the PATH train in from New Jersey, and I didn't detect any of this new happiness that might, but it'll be reported.
I just want to prepare you that all of this dire and doom and gloom economic news is going to have to change now with Democrats in charge.
You know, they've got a stake in the game now.
The Democrats just can't sit back on the sidelines and start throwing spitballs and have all this criticism because they're in the game.
They're running the House.
They're probably going to end up running the Senate.
And so the, and they're not going to be turned on by the drive-by media.
Drive-by media is not going to treat them the way they have treated Republicans.
And I'm not making excuses, just preparing you for what's going to come because it's going to frustrate you.
And you're going to, wow, I mean, my gosh, just six months ago, the economy was going to hell in a handbasket.
Some of these numbers are obviously going to change for the worst.
The gas price is probably going to go up.
And we'll see this as healthy.
By the way, if that happens, it'll be reported as healthy on the sense that it'll help conservation and the effort to find alternative fuels.
Okay, Jim Tester just declared victory in Montana over Conrad Burns.
And not too many votes separating that race, but he claims that Burns can't catch up no matter what happens out there.
So Tester, the Democrat, claiming that seat.
So now it's just George Allen and Jim Webb.
And that's, I don't know, I don't know how they're going to make up 8,000 votes in a recount in Virginia, but a little bit much.
Okay, your phone calls are coming next after this, folks.
Sit tight, don't go away.
Yes, exactly what happens on this program.
El Rushbo, your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, despair, wipeouts, overwhelming defeats, and even the good times here in the EIB network.
I'm going to say something that's going to make some of you mad.
Lady, I've just had to bleep myself.
But we did it successfully.
I'm going to say something might make some of you mad.
I've said it before, but you may not want to be reminded of it today.
But in the past, even during times of victory in elections, certainly during times of defeat, I have admonished you, I've asked you, I have begged you not to allow who wins elections to affect your life.
Not snerdily saying nobody wants to hear this today, and I'm going to explain to you why I'm going to say it.
I wrote a chapter in my book, My Success is Not Determined by Who Wins Elections.
Now, granted, we all want an identity for the country, and we all want a representative of ourselves as the leader at the top.
We have a hope and a desire for our children and grandchildren to have a better life than we have and that we will be secure.
We have all these things, and we know that having leadership in the right places and with the right people is fundamental in that regard.
At the same time, nobody is going to win every game they get into.
No baseball team will, no football team will, no political party will, no candidate will, other than Ted Kennedy.
There are always exceptions.
But the fact of the matter is your life goes on today, and your life will go on tomorrow.
It could be a tough balance, but my whole point is this, or in saying this, is don't turn over your life to government, whether you're a conservative or liberal.
Don't expect that only good things can happen to you or only if you can only succeed if the right things are happening with government.
That is not true.
There is no reason to put your arms up in despair and think your life is over or your future is bleak simply because we've been here too many times.
Conservatism came out of the primordial mist, if you will, many, many decades ago.
Okay, AP is called Montana Tester is now the winner out there, making that official.
So I don't want to dwell on this because I know some of you don't want to hear what you think is phony optimism today, but it isn't phony because I've said this every month or so since I've been on the air on this program now into our 19th year.
I'm not saying forget what happens, get out of the game.
Some of you probably want to do that.
But there are too many defeats in life and there are too many losses in life that are outside your own life to let them have an effect on you, a profound effect for a long time.
Sure of this disappointment and feel it.
Go ahead and experience it.
It'll motivate you to not want to go through it again and to see what you can do.
All these things have the opportunity for good in them, and they all have opportunity for learning.
Steele's conceding in his race against Ben Carton.
All right, here we go.
Oh, a quick email first.
Rush.
Rick Santorum ran as a conservative.
He stayed true to his conservative values and he lost.
This is from Marilyn Austin at Woodstock, Georgia.
And she's taking issue with me that conservatism wins every time it's tried on a national.
Remember, these were nationalized elections.
And I think in the case of Santorum, two things.
I read the other day that the second oldest population in the country is in Pennsylvania.
If you measure it by state, the elderly population, the state with the second largest elderly population is Pennsylvania.
So you factor some of this into that, and you would come out maybe with a conclusion like this.
What did Santorum stand for?
Santorum stood for things that were visionary 20 years down the road, making sure that the war in Iraq and the war on terror was prosecuted properly and that we didn't cave and give up.
He was interested in social security reform.
Santorum did stay true to his conservative principles, which are visionary, not just worried about today and tomorrow, but what will what we do today and tomorrow mean 10, 15 years down the road.
And if you have an elderly population, which doesn't care about 10 to 15 years down the road, if you have an elderly population that spends all day watching MSDNC, CNN, and one of the rubber cable networks out there, ABC, CBS, NBC at night, they're going to have a very doomy and gloomy view of tomorrow without being concerned about 15 or 20 years down the road.
And if these people happen to think, And I, of course, am just speculating here, but if these people in Pennsylvania happen to think that the war in Iraq is wrong primarily because it's money that could be coming to them in increased benefits, then who are they going to blame?
They're going to blame that young whippersnapper Santorum who doesn't care about them.
But when you get into a liberal northeastern state with two rust belt type cities, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, populated with elderly people and liberal Democrats and union types who are not looking down the road 10 or 20 years, then you throw up an opponent who has huge name ID, Bob Casey, former popular governor, who doesn't take a position on anything and then who thereby doesn't offend anybody.
This is why I said yesterday the whole thing, I'm disappointed by what happened to Santorum, but there's certain mitigating circumstances in every situation.
So when I say conservatism works every time it's tried, of course, that's not as true as saying abstinence works every time it's tried.
But I'll tell you something, the Republican Party had better learn something real fast.
It does far better when it is proudly conservative than when it is what it was yesterday.
The Republican Party is going to do far better when it is openly proud and willing to define in every speech it makes what conservatism is, leading people to that movement, making them feel like there's a future, making them feel proud of themselves, making them happy to be Americans, rather than this hodgepodge, rhino-Republican over there, moderate Republican here, invisible Republican over there, frightened conservative Republican over here.
And what this adds up to is a bunch of Republicans afraid to be who they are for fear of being criticized by the dreaded media and the social culture in Washington.
So they go out of their way trying to get approval of their enemies and their opponents to show that they're not mean people, to show that they're not extremists or whatever.
And you get what you got yesterday.
Just that simple.
Conservatism may not win every time it's tried, but the Republican Party has no prayer when it runs as a bunch of squishy, moderate, simple Republicans.
When the Republican Party presents itself as the image the left has always presented of it, blue blood, country club, corporate type rich people, it is going to lose every time it advances itself that way and puts itself forward that way.
And that is what it presented itself as nothing.
It allowed itself to be defined by Mark Foley and a number of other scandals rather than all of the good.
And I just, we all know that there's very positive things happening out there, but it was not trumpeted by the people who should have been shouting it from the rooftops because they were proud of it.
They should have been shouting it from the rooftops.
Look what we've done.
Look how America can improve.
Look how your future is brighter.
Even the Iraq war could be better explained.
Instead of allowing the template to be set by its critics and then respond in a defensive way to that, you have a defensive, gee I'm afraid of my shadow, Republican Party, Rockefeller-type Republican Party, you're going to get this result.
More often than not, you go pedal to the metal conservative, and the evidence is clear.
It beats liberalism, particularly a liberalism afraid, to be honest about what it is.
All right, Connie in Blue Springs, Missouri, you're first.
I'm glad you waited, and welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
I am devastated in Missouri.
I'm not just Connie from Blue Springs.
I am just, if you can find a way to make me feel better about this embryonic stem cell, I am certainly open to it.
But Claire McCaskill has credited you with her win today.
Yeah, I saw that.
I saw that.
She is so liberal.
She's promised everything to everybody.
And I don't know how Missouri is going to come out of this.
I don't know how our country will come out after this embryonic, after we have set the stage for it.
I don't know.
Well, that is a very disappointing thing.
But, you know, I'm going to give you some numbers on this.
Let me have to print them out again.
I've got so many things here in so many different stacks.
But let me go to a St. Louis Post-Dispatch story today that mentions me without mentioning my name.
It's by Matt Frank.
A Missouri ballot measure to protect embryonic stem cell research won slim voter approval Tuesday, narrowly surviving an opposition campaign that for weeks had eroded the measure's popularity, according to the Associated Press, which called the measure shortly before 2:30 a.m.
Don Rubin of the Coalition for Life-Saving Cures said, quote, we've known for a long time that a large majority of Missourians support stem cell research.
Unfortunately, the issue was clouded to a great extent in the last few weeks.
I think that's why the margin of victory was as narrow as it was.
Can I translate this for you?
Certainly.
Don Rubin of the Coalition for Lifesaving Cures is saying, a month ago, two months ago, we were going to cream on this.
We were going to mop up.
We were going to win with two-thirds of the votes.
But this issue got clouded when Limbaugh entered the scene in the last few weeks, and that's why we didn't win as big as we thought we would.
So Claire McCaskill may want to, and by the way, I appreciate the recognition.
If Claire McCaskill is going to credit me for her victory and her fundraising, which she did, then she's also, by same token, acknowledging me as a kingmaker.
Well, I got to say, too, you know, Jim Talent was only our senator for two years, and only because of Mrs. Carnahan and Mel Carnahan and that whole story.
But, you know, he has been a great senator, and the things that she said about him was always twisted.
And when they talked about stem cell, they never, never said it as embryonic stem cell.
I know.
Look at that whole, I'm going to have to, I've got to take a break here, but I've got to go find these numbers because there's somewhat interesting on this.
If you compare the stem cell vote to Claire McCaskill's vote and Talent's vote, but she can mention me all she wants, and the more the better.
But I'll tell you, she ran against Bush.
Make no mistake.
All these people were running against George W. Bush.
They just can't get me off their mind.
So they're throwing me in the mix as though I were a candidate on the ballot.
Now, Connie, this is devastating news.
I don't know what we're going to do either.
You just sit.
I got to take a break.
Thank you for listening to me, Rush.
Have a great day.
Stick with us here, Connie, okay?
I mean, I'm going to hang up, but I mean, keep the radio on.
Don't cash in the chips.
Brief timeout.
We'll be right back after this.
Don't go away.
Okay, just a couple quick things here on the stem cell constitutional amendment in Missouri.
The one thing to remember about why the thing passed, the only reason Amendment 2 passed is because the people who put it out deceived in its presentation.
It purported to be anti-cloning, and it was precisely the opposite.
It was typical the way the left operates.
It was deceptive from the get-go, designed as compassionate and futuristic and caring and concerned, but it was deceptive.
It was presented as something that it's not.
Even given that, here are the vote numbers on Amendment 2.
Amendment 2 got 10,000 more votes than did Jim Talent in Missouri.
The Amendment 2 opposition, the losing side, got only 4,000 less votes than Claire McCaskill got.
The pro-Amendment 2 people outspent the opponents 10 to 1.
I thought that's what it was.
GOP official says that Rumsfeld is resigning, and that's the big announcement the president's going to have at his 1 o'clock press conference.
Well, if he's going to resign today, why didn't he have to resign last week?
What's the...
Don't get me started on this yet.
We're going to stay...
Stay in mode here.
The Amendment 2 won all over the state.
It was defeated all over the state, but they lost in the big cities due to the very high Democrat turnout.
It was deception.
So it was not that.
This St. Louis Post-Dispatch story, without mentioning my name, on two different occasions in this story, states flat out that had I not been involved and gotten, called people's attention to this, it would have been a runaway landslide victory.
Let me just read this to you again.
Don Rubin of the Coalition for Life-Saving Cures said, we've known for a long time that a large majority of Missourians support stem cell research.
Unfortunately, the issue was clouded to a great extent in the last few weeks.
I think that's why the margin of victory was as narrow as it was.
The translation is, we were chugging along just fine until Limbaugh got involved, and Limbaugh told people what was going on here, and our margin of victory is far more narrow than we thought it would be.
Next reference.
But passage wasn't nearly as easy as some may have predicted earlier this year when polls suggested nearly two-thirds of Missourians supported the measure.
It squeaked by.
And then this, Don Rubin, who was the Coalition for Lifesaving Cures pro-Amendment 2, told other supporters late Tuesday they too had a strong grassroots coalition with clergy, patients, and scientists united to pass the measure.
He said the race was competitive only because opponents waged an effective campaign that sought to create confusion among voters.
There wasn't any confusion.
We talked specifics.
It got rid of the confusion, and that's why it was so close.
The stem cell measure had attracted national attention, with many looking toward Missouri for signs.
Don't say Limbaugh in this story.
Whatever you do, because this story actually ends up crediting me.
So you can't put my name in there.
They even have to refer to my hometown.
The election results suggest the measure was particularly unpopular in rural parts of the state.
In Cape Girardo, the measure fell by nearly two to one March.
But don't mention Limbaugh's name.
Quick timeout.
Going to get all your calls in today, I promise you.
And we've got the presidential press conference, and we'll take it.
We'll dip it.
It's coming up at 1.
He may get started before we start our next hour, but alerting our broadcast affiliates here that we will open the second hour.
If the president has begun, we will jip his press conference at that time.
The leaking news is that Rumsfeld is gone.
He will step down.
We'll talk about this in a minute.
Presidential press conference starting sometime in the next minute or two to five minutes.
We'll carry it live whenever it starts, or we'll jip it if it starts before our next hour begins.
Ladies and gentlemen, with the announcement that Rumsfeld is being thrown under the bus, I just want to tell you something.
It is going to get much worse before it gets better.
If you want to hear negativism, you want to hear some pessimism, I have it for you when next we speak after the president's remarks.
▲
Export Selection