All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 29, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:14
November 29, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Thank you, Johnny Donovan.
What a pleasure and a privilege it is to be in this chair once again.
Well, this is actually the Midwest chair.
They ship them around the country.
Roger had his chair yesterday.
I have it today, but the man will be in the big chair tomorrow.
And I I don't know how much he can tell you, but being a part now of the Limbaugh family, I do know where Rush is, and I am incredibly jealous and happy for him.
Don't we kind of live vicariously through all the different things that he gets to do?
Well, he's doing a doozy uh now, and uh we're sworn to secrecy.
I and I honestly don't know how much he'll be able to share.
I can tell you, as he has said, he is uh involved in a what uh could be a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
And uh well, I'll let him tell you as much as he can when he's back here tomorrow on the EIB network on this your favorite radio station.
H.R. is there, Kit Carson, our executive producer, Mike Maimon, the engineer, pressing all the right buttons.
Is that Kenny Tucker in the room here from the uh Golden Tower of the Fisher Building?
I am Paul W. Smith, fellow student of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, where there is never a final exam, but we are tested every day, and boy, have we been tested since last we were together as I come to you from the Midwest campus of the Limbaugh Institute in Detroit, Michigan, the motor city, home of Motown, the growing life sciences corridor, and more good things than you might know.
But since we last visited, the Republicans outsourced their jobs to the Democrats.
Actually, the Republicans first stopped doing their jobs, then outsourced them.
Newt Gingrich's contract with America, spelling out uh key issues and promises to bring those issues to a vote in Congress back in 1994, devolved into the Republicans' sounds of silence over the past few years, social security, tax reform, immigration reform, song titles with no lyrics, dancing to their own music right up to the moment their dance floor was rolled up right beneath their feet and taken away.
Now it's the Democrats' turn to lead, and so we shall see.
The long-forgotten contract with America, now the Democrats a new direction for America.
Six for oh six, they say.
The Dem's legislative priorities in the uh next Congress for a new direction, one real security at home and overseas, two, better American jobs better pay, three, college access for all, four energy independence, lower gas prices, five, affordable health care, life-saving science, six, retirement security and dignity, seven, a check for one million dollars for every man, woman, and child living in America legally or illegally.
So there you have it.
They all sound pretty good.
What's that?
No, that is that is seven, and they're only supposed to be six, so I'm not sure which one isn't right.
I am uh I'm told by my friends uh it's that Midwestern thing I'm naive uh for believing uh soon-to-be Speaker Representative Nancy Pelosi, who told me on my radio program here in Detroit that the next two years will not be about tying the president and the government up with investigation, subpoenas, hearings, document requests, scandals, etc., etc.
We shall see.
I always take someone at their word until they prove I should not.
Newt Gingrich will be joining us today.
He may have a thought or two in this area as we reminisce about the contract with America, also New York Post's Ryan Sager on the economic and religious conservatives and their clashes and uh why this cost the Republicans Congress in this past election.
Arthur Brooks will be here, author of Who Really Cares, to discuss the differences in charitable giving between conservatives and liberals, and interestingly enough, there will be a 2020 special on tonight on ABC with John Stasel called Cheap in America.
John Stasel reports on charity, who gives, who doesn't.
And he goes on to say why we all should be more generous.
So an interesting little tie-in, and in fact, our guest, Arthur Brooks will be uh will be a part of that program this evening.
Mike Evans is going to check in, New York Times bestselling author, award-winning journalist, uh recent books uh showdown with nuclear Iraq.
He'll be commenting, obviously, on the news of the day.
Speaking of uh the news of the day, uh Democratic leader, uh incoming House Speaker, we just spoke about Nancy Pelosi saying she will not appoint Representative Alcy Hastings.
Uh I mean, after all, he was impeached as a federal judge.
That didn't seem to much matter to the Democrats, but it did matter in this case, and uh he will not be the next chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and it sounds like a pretty intelligent decision.
With the Mertha mess multiplying every decision she will now make from this point on.
Uh, some good news.
October saw the biggest drop in new home sales in three months.
That's not the good news.
The sales figures fell more than three percent from September, but people believe there's a handle on this now, but there's argument about that.
No argument about the fact that the GDP growth in the third quarter revised up to two point two percent.
That's the gross domestic product measuring total economic activity within the U.S. borders, expanded at a two point two percent annual rate during the third quarter, higher than the one point six percent gain first estimated, and above Wall Street expectations for a one point eight percent gain.
Consumer spending up by two point nine percent, third quarter, commercial construction grew at a brisk rate of sixteen point seven percent.
For the life of me, I don't know why that wasn't made a bigger deal of by those seeking office in the midterm elections, but it was kind of lost along the way.
As the President said, usually the economy does matter in those circumstances and situations.
More news of the day, the headlines in the New York Times, Bush advisors memo cites doubts about Iraqi leader.
Okay, another secret memo leaked and on the front page of the New York Times.
Always a Republican, always a Bush administration memo.
How come that that Democratic memo, that one that's uh sitting there that nobody has picked up on?
You know, the one that says, hey, they were better off when he was there, tanned, rested, and ready, bring back Saddam.
That's one of those uh memos from the Democratic Party.
I'm sure it's in there somewhere in the stack, it just never makes the front page of the New York Times.
Meanwhile, uh President Bush's national security advisor has reportedly expressed serious doubts about whether Iraq's prime minister can control the sectarian bloodshed rocking his country.
New York Times on that front page uh story about a memo from about three weeks ago, prepared by Stephen Hadley and his top advisors.
The document says the continuing violence suggests the Iraqi Prime Minister is, quote, either ignorant of what's going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action.
Doesn't say anything about replacing Maliki, but it does come the day that the President is in fact on his way to have his meeting in Jordan with Maliki.
Now, that memo also, among other things, suggests there aren't enough troops to provide security in Baghdad, maybe more needed.
Well, we're going to go right to Iraq and speak with Major General William B. Caldwell IV, Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Effects, Multinational Forces, Operation Iraqi Freedom, live in Iraq in just a moment, and ask him.
Does he have enough soldiers?
Is it a civil war?
Like NBC has said, and now CNN is saying Colin Powell has said.
We'll ask him about that, and a little later too, we might check in with Tom Casey, State Department's deputy spokesman, deputy assistant secretary for public affairs on that issue and more.
Because we've got a lot going on here, and we want you to be a part of it.
You can go to Rush Limbaugh.com or 1-800-282-2882.
That's 1-800-282-2882.
And we're going to break early so we have as much time as we can with the Major General on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
Paul W. Smith in for Rush Limbaugh.
Rush Limbaugh, thankfully, is back.
Roger Hedgecock yesterday and I, today, we we love doing this.
But we too love listening to Rush, just as you do.
He's back.
And I I hope he can tell you everything that he's uh been involved with and experiencing in these couple of days off.
I hope he can.
Hope he can.
Uh meanwhile, to the news of the day and the arguments, it started with the Brian Williams on the NBC Nightly News started saying the civil war in Iraq, a big decision there, rather than sectarian conflict, insurgent violence, things like that.
Uh i it's reminiscent of when Walter Cronkett, when the news people really had strength and power because there was like one of them, Uncle Walter, when he gave his commentary, February nineteen sixty-eight, declaring that the situation in Vietnam was mired and stalemate, and uh, you know, I think the president at that time said the President Johnson said something like, Well, if we lost Walter, we've lost the American people, etc., etc.
Well, uh th that it doesn't have the same weight.
On the other hand, because there are so many news outlets screaming for news, this has been broadcast everywhere now, and it's become the big uh conversation.
Uh not to be uh concerned, obviously our troops caught in a crossfire between Sunnis and Shiites aren't wondering whether they're in uh danger from a civil war or sectarian violence or whatever you want to call it.
Let's go to our men and women there.
Major General William B. Caldwell the Fourth is Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Effects, Multinational Force, Operation Iraqi Freedom Iraq live with us now.
Uh Major General, this is Paul W. Smith in for Rush Limbaugh.
Thank you so much for joining us.
Well, Paul, thanks for getting this opportunity to be here.
Well, we want to hear directly from you on the ground there in Iraq, because it's all rhetoric back here.
It's all politics, it's all uh news media mishmash.
And uh just want to know, first of all, uh, because we always like to get an update because it's always so different from what we hear from other people when we go right directly to Iraq and to the people fighting the war there.
How's it going, Major General?
Well, Paul, I right now overall, you know, we've we've got a tough situation here in the Baghdad area that we're front confronted with with the casualty figures that have been up here over the last two weeks.
But uh outside of the Baghdad area, when you get thirty miles outside the radius of Baghdad, what you find is really uh uh relatively calm and uh secure area out there in this country.
I mean, most of those people live in relatively secure areas and go on with their normal day-to-day business.
But right here in the heart of the center of the country, around three mile race of Baghdad is where you find about eighty percent of the daily attacks that occur in this country.
I have concern given that the Democrats now have very openly said that they want to get our troops out of there, and at the very least, if they don't go with a date certain that they want to start bringing people home.
And my concern is, and now backed by apparently Stephen Hadley's memo that's supposed to be a secret that's in the New York Times today, suggesting there aren't enough troops to provide security in Baghdad, and that more troops might be needed.
And so if if our soldiers are are getting in harm's way with as many that are there now, and the Democrats want to pull more out at a same at the same time when others are saying we need more soldiers there, it gets uh a bit uh problematic for those of us pulling for our soldiers to uh to be as successful as they can be.
And I'm wondering uh very simply, do you believe you have enough soldiers?
Do you feel you need more soldiers?
Do you feel you could handle having soldiers brought home right now?
Well, that's a great question.
We ask ourselves that every day as we look at the situation here.
But what I'll tell you is here's how we look at it.
If in fact uh we bring in more U.S. forces, that there's no question it would have a short-term effect here in the Baghdad area.
It absolutely will.
But it's not the long-term solution.
The long-term solution is to the Iraqi forces and it's to the Iraqi political process.
And and that's where we need to put our effort and our energy.
Prime Minister announced a couple weeks ago he's gonna increase his armed forces by about thirty thousand more soldiers.
That's exactly what they need to do.
And what we need to do is take a large portion of those that'll be trained over the next few months and bring them into the Baghdad area and continue to pull back more U.S. forces and let them continue taking on more of this uh fight that's occurring here in their own country.
So the sure the answer is no, we we do not need more U.S. forces.
Would it would it create it uh a long-term effect?
No, it created a short-term effect and not a long-term solution.
So General Casey knows if he needs more, he can ask for them.
The President has always given him what he's asked for, and he has not made that request and has no intention to right at the moment.
But at this moment, Major General William B. Caldwell IV with us live in Iraq.
If we have perceived, if not very real through this memo, lack of confidence in the prime minister by this administration, maybe we should check with you on the line there, on the front line, if you will, although there is no front line, unfortunately, in Iraq.
You're surrounded at all times by what's happening.
Would you say you have confidence in the soldiers, in their abilities as as you've trained them?
We absolutely do.
And I'll tell you, people really, unfortunately, only hear about a small minority sometimes of the Iraqi security force over here.
The Iraqi army is absolutely coming along great.
The thing is they're only three years old.
They're an infant organization.
They haven't had time to develop their leadership, their logistics.
But the the soldiers, the Iraqi soldiers are dying and getting wounded at three times the rate that the American soldiers are.
I mean, they are decisively engaged, committing themselves out there each and every day, and working very, very hard at becoming a better professionalized force every day of the week.
polling data that we do over here shows that the Iraqi people believe that too.
Their confidence in their level of the Iraqi army continues to grow at a nice steady pace, not dramatic pace, but a nice steady pace month by month as we watch this.
Now, the Iraqi police, we've had some challenges.
There's no question.
And we've recently had to pull an entire brigade of them, that's over a thousand of them, off the line.
About three hundred and fifty were dismissed.
Uh they've gone through now one month of intense train retraining, they're going through another month, and then we'll put them back out there again, but this time with a lot of U.S. military police training teams embedded with them to continue professionalizing them.
So we've got some challenges, but it's moving along forward, and when we find the the difficulties, we deal with it.
What are your thoughts when when you when you see the involvement, for example, in some of the ammunition, some of the bombs uh that Iran clearly has had a hand in.
What do you think when you hear from people who are saying that uh that that we should be seeking help from Iran and Syria for the Iraqi situation?
What is your gut feeling or reaction to that?
Well, we we would like to get some help from them.
We'd like the Iranians to stop letting arms and shipments come across their borders.
We'd like them to stop allowing the training of extremist elements from Iraq inside of Iran.
We'd like the Syrians to stop the flow of the uh foreign fighters that continue to flow through their country into Iraq Iraq every month at the levels of forty to sixty.
But but isn't that like sure we would love all that, Major General, but isn't that like asking the Iraqi terrorists, and that's what they are, we don't we call them insurgents, but the Iraqi terror it'd be like asking them to help out.
Well, what uh our message to the uh governor of Iraq and to the to both uh Iran and Syria is if you want to be helpful, if your rhetoric is true to your word, then you can you can demonstrate that by stopping the shipment of weapons and arms out of Iran and stop the flow of foreign fighters coming out of Syria.
They have that capability and they can do it, and they can demonstrate to the world community that they're serious about helping this young democratic nation here get on his feet and get moving forward uh by assisting him in that endeavor.
Major General William B. Caldwell the Fourth live in Iraq.
Any uh uh thoughts uh you say we have enough uh soldiers there, Representative Charles Rangel wants to bring back the draft.
I don't think he'll be able to do that.
Uh any thoughts on the draft in military since you're uh uh a lifetime military man.
Well, yeah, I I I w I came in the military and uh when the draft had just uh finished, and so the young troops that I initially led as a brand new second lieutenant were all mostly draft these, most of them Vietnam vets, and uh the quality of the soldier we have today is so far superior and so better than anything I've ever seen in my thirty years of service.
I mean, we just got men and women out there that just are truly devoted and committed to our nation.
It seems to make sense that these are people it seems to be These are people who choose to be there, not that we're forced to be there.
It seems like that would be best.
And before we let you go and run out of time, uh I don't mean to throw you a curveball, but had a woman on my uh Detroit show the other day named Elaine Donnelly, who claims that the military, the armed forces, have been weakened by policies that undermine its strength, that is allowing women in combat.
And she says women in Iraq are allowed in combat, and that's in fact against the law.
What's your take on that?
Well, i i it it's kind of like you said, Paul, I you could you could have captured better.
There is no front line, unfortunately.
And in previous wars there was normally front line, so you could clearly establish.
We do not have women serving as infantry soldiers or tank commanders or Bradley fighting vehicle commanders.
They're not allowed in any of those traditional truly combat roles.
All right.
Well, that's in the and that's all the time we have.
I I just wanted a clarification, and we got it from you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Thanks, Johnny Donovan.
Pleasure to be with you.
1800-282-2882, our phone number, Rush Limbaugh.com, a great way to stay in touch, as we also uh try to bring you some of the experts, some of the people uh who have strong opinions and uh facts and figures to back them up along the way,
whether it's Major General William B. Caldwell, the fourth there in Iraq live, uh, or it could be our next guest, Michael D. Evans, a New York Times bestselling author, award-winning journalist, and the author of the current Amazon.com best seller, showdown with nuclear Iran.
And uh Michael, it's nice to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul.
Thank you, Paul.
Uh quick uh note here, and I don't know if you could hear our conversation with the major general.
I I brought up this last time I spoke with James Baker, it's pretty clear that they are going to suggest a dialogue with Iran and Syria.
And when I mentioned that to the major general, that's like asking the terrorists uh for their help in solving the terrorist issue or problem.
Uh he he I guess he gave the answer he had to.
They you know, they'd like all the help they can get, and they'd like Iran to stop feeding the terrorists and uh supplying them and all of that same from Syria.
But you have an even stronger feeling about uh if this if this commission suggests uh some sort of a direct dialogue with Iran and Syria.
Tell our Rush Limbaugh listeners exactly how you feel about that.
Well, it's it's weapons of mass deception.
These spineless self-righteous secular humanist humanists are out for one thing.
They're going for legacy.
Listen, Baker's getting old.
I confronted Baker as a journalist in ninety ninety one of the Madrid Peace Conference, and this is the same same Baker that said F the Jews.
James Baker is wanting to go down the history books as doing something great.
And by the way, if he plays this card with Iran, the quid pro quo is Iran's gonna say we want two things.
We want the bomb, we want a nuclear bomb for being good and not killing your your troops in a r in Iraq and saving the presidency, and secondly, we want the Jews.
We want some of their land.
So Baker was gonna have to cut that deal with I'm I'm on Diddy Jod.
It's quite it's plain and simple.
Well, you feel very strongly about this.
I know that our listeners do as well, and we're going to let them join in the conversation with Mike Evans at 1-800-282-2882.
1-800-282-2882.
You actually have said uh that this is a an invitation, a guaranteed invite to have these kinds of direct negotiations and dialogue with Iran and Syria, a guaranteed invite for suicide bombing attacks on U.S. soil.
It is indeed.
Listen, in 1979, there was an Islamic revolution going on thanks to an ideological nut case by the name of Jimmy Carter.
In his ideological appeasement of policies caused the revolution in Iran.
Now the revolution in Iran is an Islamic revolution.
It is spread into Iraq.
It's not this is the not a civil war.
This is an Islamic Iranian revolution that's spreading into Iraq and trying to move its way through Lebanon and moving moving its way through the PA.
We've got to stand up to these people because here's the game they're gonna play.
Ahmad Dinijod has already told us that he would send fifty-two thousand suicide bombers into America.
It was on sixty minutes.
Now, this nutcade says says I'll wipe out the state of Israel.
He feels it's a divine mission for him, is it not?
It's a divine mission because he goes to a well to to consult with the twelfth Mahdi, it's well to send it a Mohammed, and he thinks he's gonna resurrect him through uh a mushroom cloud.
He actually believes it.
James Willy told me it.
Hugh Sheldon showed me it, chief of staff of nine one, he actually believes it.
Hard to uh imagine and hard to imagine having a dialogue and asking for their help in this situation and circumstance, but you can you cannot uh obviously ignore Syria and Iran.
What do you suggest?
You must.
You mu listen, you cannot, you cannot negotiate with evil.
You can't, it would be like negotiating with Hitler and saying, listen, listen, can we work a deal out?
I know we can smell the smoke.
We realize uh there's you're killing Jews, but is there any way we can work around the situation?
You've taken half of Europe and it's about 15 million dead, but it's something we can work out.
Listen, Baker wants appeasement, and and they they did the stupid thing.
Robert Gates came right out of the chute saying, I want to talk with Iran and Syria.
Listen, I want to do something to Iran and Syria, and it's not talk.
Uh General Moishi Yalad, chief of staff of Israel, uh from uh I think 201 through 206 told me, and by the way, it's in my book.
He said eighty-five percent of all the troops killed in Iraq are being killed by Iran, IEDs, improvised explosive devices.
This is like negotiating with Charles Manson and saying, come we cut a deal here.
Let's work something out so everybody can live in peace in California.
Well, uh that's exactly what I was thinking of the IEDs with Iran's initials on them uh that are there all over Iraq and uh yet now asking for their help in solving the issues and the problems that they're causing.
Well, uh Michael Evans in the book he mentions is Showdown with Nuclear Iran, a bestseller out there for him right now, and you probably want to speak with him.
1-800-282-288-2.
1-800-282-2882.
And first up is Paul, who's checking in from Delaware.
Paul, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh Show.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
Thank you.
Sure.
My my comment is that if uh we want a nuclear-free Middle East, why isn't Israel more forthright in their disclosure of their nuclear weapons, come to the table, use that as a bargaining tool, have them dismantle their nukes, and that would be a good negotiating tool, as I said, for uh for the Paul Paul, Paul, Paul, how dumb can you be and still breathe?
That's like telling the Japanese who are fixing the bombs in Pearl Harbor, you know what we need to do?
We need to dismantle our military, and maybe you'll be nice to us.
Listen, the state of Israel has done nothing.
They've done nothing to Iran.
Let me tell you what's going to happen here.
If Iran goes nuclear, Iran is a Persian country.
They're a Shia Persian country.
If they go nuclear, all the Gulf states, which are Arab Sunnis, will go nuclear, and you'll have a nuclear arms race like the world has never seen.
And the Russians will make a ton off of it.
This is a serious game we're playing.
All right, Paul, thank you for your thoughts.
Eric is in uh Anderson, South Carolina, and on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Paul W. Smith, along with our guest Michael Evans.
Go ahead, Eric.
Good afternoon, Paul.
How are you doing, sir?
I'm doing well.
I hope you have your seat built on.
Matter of fact, I do.
Two points I'd like to make and ask questions on and how uh the gentleman would think that that should be how we could look at handling this problem.
The first point is on the situation with the Baker Commission, with us sitting down and talking to Iran and Syria is putting this in a situation, in my opinion, that if we do this, there's the purpose of them doing it is in order to us to turn and not be able to go and do anything to Iran.
Because if we negotiate with them, how can we go in and stop their nuclear program?
That's one.
B, the second point is uh how the media is coming out and relating that Iraq is no different.
Uh we've been there a lot longer than World War II.
If I remember correctly, FDR, if we're looking at three years, uh FDA started it, Truman finished it.
He asked his military generals after about three years into it, he sat back and said, How long is this we're gonna be in here?
He goes, maybe five, six years, how many people are we gonna lose?
And he said, close to a hundred thousand Americans.
He made a hard choice, no different than what Bush is making.
And I'm not advocating this, but it's almost the point of saying, pull our people back, sit down and say, look, either you turn around and do this, or we're dropping the bomb.
Go in, clean it out like we did before, we win it.
Granted, it is wise are going to be lost, but we're looking at the situation that we go in and straighten up the problem.
At the same time, when that happens, we talk to Iran saying, look, you stop the nuclear Africans.
They're gonna say, absolutely not, and simultaneously, right after Iraq, we do Tehran.
And at that point, you can say Russia, China, all of them want to come involved, they're gonna say, wait a second, do what you gotta do.
But every war that uh that the United States has been in, we've gone in and rebuilt, and it's been won decisively, except for Vietnam.
We cannot be in an appease in the fight situation when we make our decisions.
War is war.
Innocents get killed.
Yeah, listen, uh, on point one.
Uh the the the principle of point one is called the Bush doctrine.
If you aid, you support, you harbor a terrorist, you're an enemy of the United States.
Here's the problem.
Here's the problem.
If we get in bed under the sheets with Iran and Syria, then we've just taken the Bush doctrine and shot it to hell.
We've just told every American family, twenty-two thousand of them.
By the way, Iran wants to talk to somebody, let them talk to every American family that has a wounded son or daughter from Iraq.
Let us let him talk to every American family that's lost a child in Iraq, or every Jew that's lost a child because of Hezbollah, their subcontractors.
It's the book's doctrine, the doctrine of the war on terrorism that's at jeopardy if we make this mistake.
We can't play this game.
Secondly, on the media.
He sent him a letter and he said to him.
He said fifty percent of the terror battle is a media battle.
Half of the battle on terrorism is a media battle battle.
The truth is he who defines the terms controls the debate.
That's why, by the way, Paul, this show is so important.
Because the secular media is dumbing down the American people.
They're the the hysterical liberal left uh wolves are howling with joy because it's true.
Kerry's joke was no joke.
He does not believe in war.
It's not about Iraq, it's about no war ever anywhere.
They want to say tolerance.
Michael, I just want to say, uh, just so you know, I don't want you to feel like you have to sugarcoat things.
Should just go ahead and tell it like you feel it is.
I'm I'm trying to.
I'm trying to.
Michael, you are you are.
And uh and I'm sure that our listeners are appreciating that, and they want to continue to talk.
Uh, and uh, and that's what you'll do here on the Rush Limbaugh program at 1800-282-2882.
I'm Paul W. In for Russia.
Staying on top of the news as it's happening on this your favorite radio station, keeping you on top of what's happening every hour of every day, including these three hours of broadcast excellence with L. Rushbo back in the chair tomorrow.
My name's Paul W. Smith in for Rush, and we're taking your calls at 1800-282-2882.
Uh, and we're speaking right now, and you have the chance to speak uh right now with Michael D. Evans.
He's written at least eighteen books.
The latest is Showdown with Nuclear Iran, and uh he has strong feelings that he is sharing and speaking directly with you.
Henry in Rockville, Maryland, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Henry?
Yes, Paul, how are you?
And I'm good, thanks.
Listen, the minute that we give up our support for the state of Israel will be when it's over.
And these callers who call in and say that we need to uh Israel needs to negotiate, giving up nukes is absolutely lost our mind.
That would be total chaos to to no end in the Middle East.
And as far as the media, uh me the media cannot dumb down a true believer.
And it's just unreal.
These people from the first Bush administration who are trying to get your hands in the pile here, they're Jew haters.
And it's basically what what it what's what it's coming down to.
Well, it's interesting because you you've kind of summed up one of the uh the titles on one of Michael Evans' pieces, which is Don't Trade Israel for Iraq.
Michael?
Well, it's true.
Listen, what have what's going on with my friend Ehud Omar, the Prime Minister of Israel?
Right now, Ehud Omar's being pressured to do three things.
Number one, to release prisoners.
Terrorists, get them, let them out of jail.
Secondly, to begin accepting Hamas, which we won't, they're a terrorist organization as a partner in peace, and third, to start talking about land concessions.
Wait a second.
Uh King Abdullah comes on the TV and says, the w the Middle East is on the brink of civil wars in three countries, and the core problem is Israel.
I have a serious problem with this.
Serious problem with this.
This is in fact Jew hatred.
It's blaming the Jews.
It's going back to the Arafat card, where Afad always blamed the Jews every time.
He denounced terrorism, then he blew them up, then he blamed them, and he denounced them.
He was in the blockbuster business.
He sold he sold uh block uh videos of terrorists blowing people up and made billions off of it.
It's very serious, and Israel is being pressured right now to pay the appeasement bill.
By the way, Michael Evans, you won't be surprised, but you should be interested in knowing.
Dateline Tehran as we speak, the Associated Press reporting that the uh president of Iran has written a five-page letter directly to the American people.
Uh he is reaching out to Americans over the head of their government to uh try to explain his uh side of the his side of the story.
And I bet you I can figure out what it says.
He wrote an 18-page later on May 23rd to President Bush trying to convert him to Islam in the letter, which I have a copy of, it says, I hear the towers falling of your liberal democracy.
Excuse me.
When when you want a fatwa to blow people up in his 12 or death cult, what you have to do is you have to attempt to convert your adversary and secondly warn him.
This nut case threatened the uh the United States of America and our president, and the Liberal State Department gives him a visa to come over here and put a spin on the American people.
Something's wrong with this picture.
Michael D. Evans on the line, and we're going to Gina.
It's your turn there in California on the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Paul W. Smith.
Hello, Gina.
Hi guys, thanks for taking my call.
Sure.
Um my comment is just that, you know, the Baker Commission has been set up like the savior of all.
So when they come out and say, hey, we should talk to Iran and Syria.
If we say no, that's a stupid idea, which it is, um, Bush looks like, you know, the bad guy again.
It's set up like they are they're all above everything that they're right no matter what they say.
And so it's like we're stuck.
I don't know why Bush would put together something that they're gonna say something that makes no sense whatsoever.
Well, that's a very good point, Gina.
And the truth is, I believe there was a quid pro quo.
I believe this deal was already caught be between dad and some of the old the old guard.
And uh unfortunately, the there is a way that this can be changed, and that's with these listeners, because moral clarity does rule the day.
He who defines the terms controls the debate.
Uh, we found that out in the midterm elections.
The liberal left tried to define the terms by giving us a legal dose of false guilt, blaming America for all the problems in the world.
And a lot of people bought that nonsense.
But uh we can change this thing, but the truth is I I believe he knows already, Bush knows already what the Baker by the way, Hamilton, interesting name, Hamilton.
Why why does that seem to jolt my memory?
It seems to me that Mr. Hamilton was involved in Jimmy Carter's uh uh administration, and he had something to do with Iran.
That Hamilton, uh that I I recall that man.
He's been around for a while.
He's not really that conservative.
In fact, is he's not conservative at all.
Michael D. Evans with us.
Back to your final calls at 1800-282-2882 in just a moment.
On the Rush Limbaugh program, I'm Paul W. Smith.
Time has been uh zipping by our time with uh Michael D. Evans, New York Times bestselling author, award-winning journalist, and the author of the current Amazon.com bestseller, showdown with nuclear Iran.
Very timely, Michael, and unfortunately not a time not enough time to do justice to any of our callers.
So I want to wrap up with you with uh just your take on the president, the prime minister, and the king at dinner tonight.
Well, the president is it has a decision to make that's gonna determine the destiny of his presidency.
And that and the decision he's going to have to make is are we going to fight a war on terror with Iraq being the central front?
The reality is this the liberals are screaming and yelling that it's chaos, it's not stable, it's not a democracy.
Well, hello.
We invited all the GS of the world to come there, all the suicide bombers of the world to come there and fight us.
It's a war.
He's gonna have to make a decision, no matter what the left says, he's gonna have to fight this war and fight it in Iraq.
It's the central front.
Uh the king Abdullah is gonna have to be he's gonna have to stand up to the wrap it up here, Michael.
We're running out of time.
Um You the what was the third one?
You said nothing.
There is no third one, that's all there is.
That's all the time we have.
There isn't any more.
Thank you, Michael, very much.
▲
Export Selection