All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 4, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:38
December 4, 2006, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
How was your weekend, ladies and gentlemen?
I trust it was fine.
Mine was peachy.
But I've been eagerly awaiting since yesterday to get back at the Golden EIB microphone.
And as usual, what I want, I get.
My wishes are usually granted.
And so are yours since I'm here.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, at 800-282-2882.
If you want to call in, be on the program today.
The email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
John Bolton's gone.
John Golton has resigned.
Ladies and gentlemen, there's something about this here that you need to know.
There were ways of keeping Bolton at the United Nations, even though he might not have won Senate confirmation.
There's a real simple way to do it.
You simply, you know, the recess appointment expires.
By the way, thanks to Lincoln Chafee on this and a number of other recalcitant Republicans who made this possible.
The man is great.
John Bolton is a brilliant man.
I met him in September, had dinner with him at a friend's house.
It's one of us, folks.
He's just a tough guy and a great guy and did a tremendous job up there.
But I guess he's just had it.
The way that he could have stayed, and I think this was an option.
He just decided not to avail himself of it.
He just wants out of there for who knows whatever reasons.
They're personal.
I'm sure professional, personal, but he could have just been sent back to the UN under another title, one that did not require any kind of Senate confirmation.
He could have stayed there, could have continued to work there, but not as the UN ambassador per se by title.
There were many, many ways around this if the president wanted to keep him there.
President vowed to fight for him.
Bolton said, nah, I'm done.
Now, Time Magazine, I'm Time Magazine reporter, I forget the name, is telling us that there's an interesting guy on the short list of names to replace John Bolton, and that name is George Mitchell.
That's intriguing.
I don't know what kind of truth there is to this, and it could be a leak.
I mean, the president could be leaking this to show how he's reaching out.
It could be true.
George Mitchell, what's he done?
He's been the Senate majority leader for the Democrats back in the 80s and the early 90s.
And trust me when I tell you, as I have before, he was the most partisan Democrat in Washington when he ran the Senate.
He was never portrayed that way because he's one of these soft-spoken, barely audible kind of guys in the vein of the puster, Tom Daschell.
But Dashel's partisanship nevertheless came through.
Mitchell's was a quiet partisanship.
He executed it behind the scenes.
And something interesting, Bush's father, President Bush 41, did not like George Mitchell.
He liked Foley.
I could never understand that.
He liked Tom Foley, the former Speaker of the House, but he didn't like George Mitchell at all.
So I saw Mitchell's name on the short list as a woo.
I mean, there's all kinds of possibilities here.
It might not be true.
Could be on the list but not have a chance.
Could make it.
Who knows?
We'll wait to see if it is George Mitchell.
He's running Disney right now.
He's conducting the steroid probe into baseball.
He's running these.
He's a board chairman at Disney.
Big-time former Democrat, Big Lib, now being suggested, at least leaked, his name's on the short list for ambassador to the United Nations from the United States.
Interesting point.
At any rate, It's sad to lose somebody like John Bolton.
And, you know, a lot of people talked to over the weekend, emails this morning, saw this.
What is President Bush doing?
You know, we got a story about immigration here about how it's on a front burner all of a sudden in the House.
And it will, this story says in the Washington Times says that we're not just talking amnesty, we're talking blanket citizenship for illegals currently in the country.
We'll have details on this as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears today.
By the way, in a shocking bit of news, speaking of Tom Daschell, the puffster, he has announced that he's pulling out of the presidential sweepstakes.
Now, we couldn't believe it when he announced he was considering it, but he's decided to pull out because standing next to Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or even Evan Bay or even Al Gore or even John Kerry, you wouldn't see Puff Dashle.
You just wouldn't see him.
The idea that he was even dreaming about this is an interesting psychological discussion.
But the puffster has pulled out, and the aura around Barack Obama just continues to grow.
Supposedly, Hillary, everybody wondering where she was the last two weeks, she was spotted having lunch in a New York restaurant last week with a couple of heavy hitters in the Democratic Party.
Supposedly, she's stepping up, speeding up her decision-making whether or not to go for it because of the rising energy and fascination with Barack Hussein Obama.
And by the way, that is his middle name.
And you know, there's a controversy that has now sprung up.
The Democrats do not like to be called the Democrat Party.
Barack Obama, after 9-11, say, oh, no, there go my political fortunes.
My name sounds too much like Osama.
Now somebody's found out his middle name, and they're reporting it as Barack Hussein Obama.
Do you know that Hillary has three names?
Actually, four.
Hillary Diane.
No, it's three names.
Hillary Diane Rodham.
It's Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton.
Not that it matters, people if they don't use their middle names.
My name is middle name is Hudson, for example.
But the idea that his middle name is Hussein makes me think that a lot of people are going to continue to use that as we ratchet up the election season for the presidential race in 2008.
Interesting couple of names he has.
Hussein Obama and his quest for president of the United States.
Do you see where Tiger Woods is going to open his first golf course?
Have you heard that, Brian?
You haven't.
Mr. Snerdley, have you seen where Tiger Woods is going to, he has chosen Dubai as his first location for a first golf course project.
Tiger Woods said yesterday he will develop his first golf course in Dubai, an oil-rich city that runs a lot of ports around the world.
It also hosts two European tour events, seen a recent rise in golf course construction.
The Tiger Woods Dubai will feature a 77-yard, that's a behemoth, a par 72 course, a 60,000-square-foot clubhouse, a golf academy, 320 exclusive villas, and a boutique hotel with 80 suites.
Tiger said, I look at this project not only as an opportunity, but also as a great responsibility.
Now, there are a lot of golf courses already over there in Dubai, eight of them.
One of them is the Emirates Golf Club that hosts the Dubai Desert Classic that Woods goes to every year.
He's paid $2 million in an appearance fee to go over there.
And he's won the tournament.
He won it earlier this year to play off with Ernie Els.
He lost in Dubai five years ago to play off to Thomas Bjorn.
Wood said, I have been amazed by the progress of Dubai.
From the time I first came here in 2000, I wanted to be a part of this amazing vision.
He said he chose Dubai for his first golf course because he was excited about the challenge of transforming a desert terrain into a world-class golf course.
The development scheduled to be finished in late 2009 at Dubai Land, Dubai Land, the region's largest tourism and leisure project.
Saeed Al-Muntafiq, the CEO of Tatwir, said that he is confident that Wood's Dubai golf course will be a success.
We never looked at anyone beyond Tiger for this project because we believe in only working with the very best.
So the very best that American golf has to offer opens his first course in a country whose port operations the American people refuse to allow for fear of connections to the war on terror.
Quick time out.
Women having a tough, tough time coming home from Iraq.
Women in combat.
I have this story right here.
It's an AP story.
Women face emotional wounds of war.
Predicted this 14, 15, 16 years ago, whenever the whole women in combat issue came up.
And even when I predicted it, as a man of solutions, not merely a critic, I proposed a way that women in combat could work.
My idea was not accepted.
I'll review it for you.
But we don't see these stories much about men, male soldiers, coming home from combat.
It's a long one.
We'll share the excerpts with it with you and my suggestion from 14, 15, whatever, 16 years ago, right after this.
Hi, welcome back, folks.
Nice to have you.
Rushlin Baugh, America's real anchor man.
Excellent role model for the youths of America.
Just a harmless, lovable little fuzzball serving humanity by showing up here on the EIB network.
Well, another leak, another classified leak of a Rumsfeld memo.
This one, we discussed last week.
I think this thing was written to be leaked.
But if it wasn't, there is a, well, you know what's interesting?
The Washington Post, in reporting on this leak, which occurred in the New York Times, the Washington Post has done a 180.
Now Rumsfeld has gone from goat and idiot and incompetent to masterful advisor.
They look at his memo of suggestions, say, well, this thing was written, I guess, the day before the election.
And it's quite interesting.
It actually shows the thing about it that I found fascinating is that Rumsfeld remains one of the few people actually talking about how to win this.
I can't tell you how frustrating it's getting that the drive-by media is invested in our defeat so that they can demonstrate to themselves their power to influence worldwide and national events.
And that's exactly what's going on.
We got the Gates confirmation hearings tomorrow.
Start tomorrow.
Robert Gates to head up the Pentagon to be a replacement for Rumsfeld.
And Democrats, it'll be interesting to watch.
I don't know how hard it'll go after Gates is passed.
Instead, focusing on what we have to do to lose and get out in Iraq.
The president has already said, in anticipation of the release of the Baker document, the Iraq Study Group, what's that coming on Wednesday?
The White House is putting it out there.
The president's totally opposed to any kind of phased withdrawal.
No reason the president has to accept whatever is in this document.
And we're going to wait until it actually comes out before commenting on it.
There's so many leaks.
It's impossible to know what's true and what isn't.
So we'll just be patient and we'll just wait.
Andy McCarthy, National Review Online, a great thought regarding the Rumsfeld memo.
He says, if high officials in wartime, no less, figure that they better not give their best and their most candid advice on sensitive, publicly charged issues, because opposing policy factions are going to leak each other's memos to the press, the initiative and the creativity of the smart people we want in government is stifled and the leaks will be used to portray an administration as disintegrating into rancorous chaos, which avalanche feeds on itself.
It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
There is no question that there's a shadow government somewhere and it's got the cooperation of the drive-by media defeating the United States in the war in Iraq, the war on terror, is clearly at the top of the agenda.
Yesterday on Meet the Press, Stephen Hadley was on with Tim Russert and Russert just kept badgering him.
When are you guys going to admit it was a mistake to invade?
When are you going to admit it?
It's an obsession that the drive-by media now has, and they're not going to give up on it until they can make it happen.
And it just, despite all the stories coming out from drive-by media buddies, the New York Times has run two of them.
Pulling out now?
Why, that would be a flat-out mistake.
I've got a story here from newsbusters.
Jerry Kelly, the professional golfer, he's in Wisconsin.
Some other PGA Tour members are on a USO tour of Iraq.
They went over there and they talked to the soldiers.
And Jerry Kelly, and I've never met Jerry Kelly, but I know a lot of guys in the PGA tour.
And they're entrepreneurs.
They're individualists.
It's the nature of their business.
But Jerry Kelly said, after talking to the troops, seeing what they do, seeing the reaction of Iraqi citizens to this, I can't believe what a total misrepresentation of fact the mainstream media has been the past two years reporting on Iraq.
And even Jerry Kelly started to talk, well, if we get out of there, it is going to be the biggest mistake in the world.
We're making progress.
Now, people are going to say, well, he was only shown the good things.
Fine.
If he was shown the good things, then the drive-by media has seen them as well, and they choose to ignore them.
Folks, it frosts me.
It just frosts me that, well, at the same time, people are demanding we send troops into Darfur and other places around the world, like Bosnia, where we have no stated national interest, no goal.
We had 3,000 Americans murdered in 9-11.
He says, though, it never happened.
Like, we're the problem.
We caused it.
And we have got to get out of there, and we've got to do it in a way that's humiliating.
That seems to be the push, humiliated defeat.
And I think that that's exactly what's on the agenda.
And I think one of the reasons for it is to make sure to do everything they can, the left in the world, the left in this country, to see to it that whoever is in charge next time something like this comes up, the deployment of U.S. forces abroad in defense of U.S. vital interests will not be taken.
I can't conclude anything else.
This goes beyond Bush hatred.
And Lord knows there's plenty of that.
But there's something institutional about this, too.
That is the hatred by many people in this country for this country.
They hatred, or should I say, of this country, the hatred by many people in this country of the U.S. military and the hell with the consequences of their actions.
They're the smart people.
They're the elitists.
And it's a frustrating thing to see.
And this cacophony of a drumbeat of continued defeat and humiliation increases each and every day.
Mirtha is, I'm going to have two hearings a day on this, on this, this, this, this disaster.
I'm going to have two hearings a day.
I told you, Democrats are not going to be able to help themselves.
Now, we'll find out just how many Americans actually want to lose wars.
How many Americans just actually want their country humiliated.
As to the story on women in the military, headline, women face emotional wounds of war, the nightmares didn't start until months after Alicia Flores returned home.
The images were stark and disturbing.
In one dream, a dying Iraqi man desperately grabbed her arm.
In another, she was lost in a blinding sandstorm.
I'm fine with what I did over there, she says.
In my eyes, I did a good thing.
It really doesn't bother me.
The only thing that bothers me is I just want to sleep more.
Floria says she's not alarmed by her diagnosis of post-traumatic stress.
She's getting help for her sleeping problems.
Wasn't about the war, but the adjustment to the civilian world that she found difficult.
Anxiety, along with depression, irritability, and feelings of isolation, are common symptoms with post-traumatic stress, but some mental health experts believe there are distinct pressures for women veterans.
Some come from military service itself, where some women feel they need to prove themselves, while others come from the transition from vigilant soldier to caring wife or mother.
Women are pulled in different directions, says Dara Westrup, lead psychologist Veterans Affairs Women's Trauma Recovery Program in Menlo Park, California.
They want to be a good partner.
They want to be a good mother.
They want to be a good soldier.
Returning home can be especially stressful for women who may find themselves running a household, taking care of the children, going to work and dealing with insomnia or other war-related problems, says Diane Shirid, women veterans program manager at the Heinz VA Hospital in Chicago.
They get frustrated with themselves not being able to manage like they did before.
They have to run the kids to school.
They have to take them to different functions.
Can you imagine what that's like with just two or three hours' sleep?
You're wondering, am I going to leave or be forced to live like this forever?
The story goes on and on.
I was trying to get back into being a wife and mother, said Darcy Gruel, a VA nurse in Milwaukee, spent nearly a year at the 452nd Combat Support Hospital in Afghanistan.
But it was, wow, they survived without me.
I really didn't know where my place was.
I had to be really careful when I came back home.
I didn't want my husband to think I was not appreciative of what he did.
I didn't want to come back and say, it's all going to be my way.
Emotional trauma and distress among returning female GIs, ladies and gentlemen, much more pronounced, according to this story, than post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms of male soldiers returning.
Now, was this necessary?
The whole argument about women in combat, people said that there are many reasons why this should not happen.
I proposed a solution, a compromise, and I will remind you of that right after this timeout.
All right, we're back.
Here we are, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have at the distinguished and prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
All right, what is the purpose?
What is the purpose of the military?
The purpose of the military is to kill people and to break things.
It is not a social experimentation laboratory.
And yet that's what it has been turned into, not just by the Clinton administration, but there are plenty of leftist influences in the Pentagon.
You can see the offshoot of this when you look at the preferred deployments of these people, Darfur, Somalia, When it was just a feed people mission, Bosnia and this sort of, but don't send them anywhere where there are actual U.S. interests at stake.
Then along came this whole, well, we got to be fair, women in combat.
You know, women want to go to combat, they're qualified, they're capable, and they want to serve their country.
The argument began: well, you know, this is not what a civilized society does to its female population.
It just doesn't do that.
There were many, many arguments on this.
I realized that the women in combat issue was going to lose, meaning that women would be going to combat.
They would be flying jets off of aircraft carriers.
They'd be flying combat aircraft.
They'd be in foxholes and all these places.
So I wanted to come up with a way to make it actually effective, given what the purpose of the military is.
And again, that is to kill people and break things.
It's bad enough that we have men coming home in buddy bags.
We don't need to subject women to that, the torture that they would endure.
Of course, our troops don't get tortured.
Everybody knows we're the only ones who torture.
Have you seen this latest photo of Jose Padilla or Dia?
He can't stand trial, ladies and gentlemen.
No, he's not suitable.
He's not fit.
He's not competent.
He's standing trial.
And they've got a picture, a video of Jose Padilla being walked along in chains.
And the graphic on television is picture of torture with a question mark after it, picture of torture.
And so the effort continues even after the Democrats have won the midterm elections.
The effort continues to impugn, to debase the American military and to secure it and this nation's defeat in Iraq and the war on terror.
As I say, this is very frustrating.
It's just a little aside.
All right, since I recognize we're going to have women in combat, there's a way to do it and make it work.
I called it the All-American First Cavalry Amazon Battalion.
And this is how it would have worked.
We know that there is this dread event that occurs in the lives of many women.
PMS.
Don't deny it.
We all know that it happens.
And when certain women experience PMS to the extreme, you don't want to be around them.
Now, Dawn, don't start rolling your eyes like this because you know this is true.
Everybody, this is, if you can't admit this, and you can't admit anything, it's just, this is not a sexist comment.
This is true.
Women, when suffering PMS to the extreme, can turn into vicious, unpredictable, hellacious human beings who behave without any rational rhyme or reason.
Nothing can stop them from what they are intending to do.
And it upsets them too.
I mean, it's one of these things.
There's medicine for it.
But if you had the all-American 1st Cavalry Amazon Battalion, you wouldn't want to give the medicine.
What you would want, I mean, folks, I have done the stories on this program.
There have been women who have murdered on PMS, and they have been acquitted on the basis that they weren't themselves when this happened.
You know it.
I know it to be true.
We're talking in the context of women in combat.
My idea was very simple.
What we need is 52 Amazon divisions or battalions, women trained to be the bloodiest, deadliest killers possible.
That's what the military does.
Because with 52 of them, we could be guaranteed that on a moment's notice, some of them would be at that time suffering PMS.
And I will never forget when we had, what was his name?
Grapefruit Face.
What was his name?
Yes, yes, Manuel Noriega.
He was holed up down in some house in Panama.
And I always thought we were playing rock music to try to get him out of there.
But can you imagine if we had had an all-American First Cavalry Amazon battalion back then led by the late Molly Yard?
She was always shouting, I am outraged by it.
Outraged.
Can you imagine Molly Yard leading a screaming battalion of Amazons and the All-American First Cavalry Amazon Battalion while on PMS, feminist to boot, anybody would give up right then and there to avoid what would happen next?
This was my idea for compromise.
Of course, it was rejected, and now we're forced to see these sad, sad stories of the emotional duress that female soldiers are encountering when they come home from the battlefield.
Just another one of those examples.
Had I been listened to, this probably wouldn't be the story today, nor would it be the case.
Charleston, West Virginia, this is Todd.
Todd, nice to have you on the program, sir.
So, Rush, it's an honor to speak to you.
Greetings from the Great Mountain State.
Thank you.
Listen, sir, I just wanted to ask you a quick question and get a couple of comments on it.
I'm a political science major at West Virginia State University.
I'm currently taking a course in war, peace, and morality.
And what we're currently talking about is the concept of war and whether or not it's becoming obsolete in America.
Meaning, is the American public now so turned off by the thought of war that it's very unlikely we'll go to war in the future, especially within the next 10 years?
Well, that's interesting.
Well, we're at war now.
What does your professor say about that?
He absolutely does not like the war now.
But I mean, of course, I agreed with the reason why we went into a war in Iraq initially, but of course.
Forget the individual war in Iraq.
This guy's advancing the notion that war is or will become an obsolete concept for the American people.
Exactly.
What do you think about that?
Do you agree with your professor on this?
You're not getting a grade here, so tell me the truth.
Well, I personally believe that, yes, I mean, some to somewhat in the approval ratings and if the approval of wars is going downhill, which actually scares me because I'm afraid that somebody will actually read into this and think that because the American public disagrees with the war in Iraq, that wars are bad in general and that we'll no longer go to defense of freedom.
Here's the thing about this, Todd, and your professors engage in wishful thinking here by posing this whole concept and getting you people to think about it.
I think it's his way of advancing the thought.
And you are, you're 18.
I mean, in a lot of.
I'm 22, sir.
22?
Sorry.
I misread the line up there on the call screen monitor.
Okay.
All right, 22.
Well, you're still essentially compared to what you're going to be 20 or 30 years from now.
You are a skull full of mush.
I don't know how much history you have learned, but you don't have to know a lot to know that it was just four years ago that the people of this country couldn't wait to go somewhere to get revenge for people who they thought had taken out 3,000 Americans at the Pentagon and the World Trade Center to ditto Iraq.
That was the result of two things: the actual attack and leadership.
The American people will respond to leadership.
They did when the president was leading everybody in the response to the war on terror.
And the Democrats, by the way, were too chicken to not go along with it.
So they signed up in record numbers as well.
It's only after it went south and went bad that Democrats are now trying to pretend like they were lied to and skunked and wanted no part of it in the first place.
They're the ones that can't be counted on.
They're the ones that I don't think have deserved to win the position of power that they have to defend this country's national security.
Let me tell you something, sir.
There's an undeniable truth of life.
I wrote it.
It is true.
War, it will never be obsolete because this is a world governed by the aggressive use of force.
Exactly.
I believe that it has become obsolete to liberals, but I don't believe that liberals speak for the majority of America.
They want it to become obsolete.
That's what your professor is trying to get.
Don't fall for it.
They want it to become obsolete.
They want it to be not because they want this country torn down a couple of sizes, if not greater.
They want this country to be weakened.
They look at the U.S. military as the focus of evil in the modern world.
American leftists, worldwide leftists do.
And that's what this is all about.
Exactly.
That's what he preaches every day.
Yeah, well, then, see, I know these people, man.
I know these people like every square inch of my glorious naked body.
Not just the back of my hand.
I applaud you for resisting this.
Okay, thank you, sir.
God bless you.
One question before you go.
Yes, sir, absolutely.
Were you tempted?
Was it a seductive proposition when you first heard it?
War is obsolete.
Oh, absolutely.
I mean, absolutely, sir.
And why?
Because we're in the midst of a supposedly unpopular war that's not going well.
The reason why is because it has been beaten to my head.
I'm a third-year political science major here at West Virginia State University, and it has been beaten to my head ever since we went into Iraq that Iraq is a bad and unjust war, and it's been beaten, beaten, beat, and beat.
And at first, nobody believed it.
And then it starts to catch on, and it starts to catch on.
It gets a snowball effect.
And now you've got the American public strongly disagreeing with the war in Iraq, thus George W. Bush, and in turn, Republicans in general.
And it is absolutely, I mean, I go into class every day, you know, trying to combat this.
And it's like, you know, I've got this PhD in political science who, you know, he just didn't think that I have an opinion.
And so basically what I wanted was some fighting words to go in there today whenever I go into class and some ammunition.
Okay, well, I'll tell you what, if that's what you're looking for, and if you, if, you know, and I would encourage you, I know grades are important, but they're not.
Here's what I would do, were I you?
You can decide for yourself.
I'd stand up for myself no matter where I am and no matter what the consequences.
My principles are my principles, and I'm not going to be bullied or cowed by anybody into changing my core beliefs.
So what I would do, if I were you going into your class discussing this proposition that war has become obsolete, I would say, sir, dude, I not only disagree that war is obsolete, it is how this country came into being.
It is how this country grew to be the most prosperous country in the history of human civilization, because we are not an aggressor.
We defend ourselves.
We have liberated millions and millions and millions of people around the world.
And instead of asking this class to ask and consider the proposition that maybe war is obsolete, which all you want is for us to agree so that the American people will stand down and the nation won't defend itself, can we, sir, can we, sir, discuss history in a political sense and talk about how the American country used to win wars?
Can we look at perhaps what Abraham Lincoln did during the Civil War, which was a far worse circumstance for public opinion and loss of life than this war in Iraq is?
Abraham Lincoln kept firing his generals until he found one that got it right.
His name was Ulysses S. Grant.
Sherman marched through Atlanta.
He preserved the Union.
War is a necessity brought on by evil.
Tell your professor that if he can't understand that the United States of America is the good guys, that he is going to be poisoning the minds of the people in his class.
We are not the bad guys.
And the conversation in his class ought to be focused on what needs to be done to win this war, the result of which was an attack on American soil on September 11th.
Ask your professor if he remembers that.
And then if he does, ask him if he's among the cabal that blames Bush and Cheney and Halliburton for it.
All right, let's check the email.
Dear Rush, as a vet and the son of World War II vets, I've long opposed women in combat and many other military specialties.
Your Amazon Army rent is, however, over the top, unnecessary, and less than what I expect from you.
You know, some of you people that are new to the program, I'm going to need to help you along in understanding this show.
There's a thing we do here.
We started.
We invented it.
Practice it regularly.
It's called illustrating absurdity by being absurd.
That was the motivating philosophy behind my agreeing with Harry Reid last week that I think babies should die so that I can hear.
Some of you who are new to the program thought that I had gone over the edge and selfishness had robbed me of my principles.
All of a sudden, I was going to next come out and become pro-choice and pro-abortion.
It was a way to illustrate what the embryonic stem cell debate is.
And the All-American First Cavalry Amazon Battalion is an illustration of absurdity by being absurd.
Some of you people, you need to lighten up.
Let me try this.
Let me try to make it easier for you in this All-American First Cavalry Amazon Battalion.
It's quite possible we wouldn't actually need 52 such battalions or divisions.
We all know, this has been scientifically established.
Everybody who is old enough to know these things knows this, that when you group women together, their menstrual cycles tend to synchronize.
And so you could be guaranteed of having a combat-ready division at all times if you had enough to rotate.
All you'd need is enough battalions to rotate every, you know, have one ready one week per month.
Five days a month.
You just wouldn't maybe need 52.
Does this help it?
Belrose, New York.
Benny, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Merry Christmas, great one.
Listen, Barack Obama is an empty suit in the Senate, but he just happens to be black, and that's all the mainstream media needs to push him into an otherwise, what I think, lackluster Democratic presidential field in 2008.
To the mainstream media, and you pointed this out, Obama is cerebral, unjudgmental, broad-minded, and I'd like to add one more.
He is untainted.
He is being groomed for the VP slot, period, the end.
Okay, for namely any candidate to Demspic, not just Hillary or John Kerry.
And ironically, the way I see it, we all remember how Dick Cheney was brought in in 2000, and let's say it all together now, for gravitas for an otherwise unknowledgeable George Bush.
But Obama, in my opinion, is being brought in for the same thing, only a different type of gravitas, and that is he carries no baggage with him.
He had his coming-out party in Boston in 2004.
He was pushed, pushed, pushed.
He's a backbencher.
He's done nothing in the Senate.
He's done nothing now.
He is being groomed for the VP slot.
He will never announce for the presidency.
Really?
Yes.
Well, I have to share with you a column by Kevin McCullough.
I do not know who Kevin McCullough is, but he writes a column at townhall.com.
In his opening paragraph in his piece that ran yesterday, barring several series of near-seizure-like corrections, Barack Obama will take the presidential oath of office in January of 2009.
It'll be a cold January morning.
His beautiful wife and daughters will be by his side.
They'll shiver as he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.
His presidency that will follow, if reflective of anything at all of his legislative record, will then seek to dismantle that same Constitution.
I have a long track record of predictions on Obama.
All of them have come true.
I have no reason to believe that this one will conclude any differently.
You keep the radio on out there, Benny, and I'll go through some of this guy's reasons why Barack Obama is destined to be our next president.
Got to go.
Back with more right after this.
Yeah, war is worthless except for ending slavery, Nazism, fascism, and communism.
Other than that, war is pointless.
We'll be back, ladies and gentlemen.
Sit tight.
year.
▲
Export Selection