All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 3, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:28
January 3, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, folks.
Happy to be back with you after an extended Christmas and New Year's break.
Rush Limbaugh behind the Golden EIB microphone here at the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I hoped to open the program amidst billowing clouds of fragrant aromatic first and second-hand cigar smoke, but the cigar I lit is flawed and hardly has any smoke at all.
In fact, I'm ditching it.
I missed the trash cans.
We now have ashes all over the carpet.
Well, the cleaning crew can get it later.
800-282.
No, it's not burning.
It's out.
Minor amount of ash.
800-282-2882 is the phone number.
If you want to be on the program, the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
I got to tell you, I walked out of the broadcast complex here of the studio, and I went back to Snurdley's little cubbyhole office.
And he always has C-SPAN on back there.
And I walked in, and of course, we know that Nancy Pelosi and her Democrats take over tomorrow, officially, but the way it's being reported on, it's happening today.
So that is the coverage of the news is the Democrats take over and Pelosi this, Pelosi that.
Here's David Broder, the columnist of the Washington Post.
On television, I looked at Sternley.
I said, what's he doing announcing a Democrat agenda?
It looked just like he was.
I don't know if any of you saw this today.
Of course, the Washington Post has this story that the Democrats are reneging on their promise of bipartisanship in the House of Representatives.
And they are planning to do this by using House rules to prevent Republicans from offering alternative measures to a number of measures in their first 100 hours.
House Democrats plan to assure the speedy passage of bills on a minimum wage hike, stem cell research.
Of course, they got polling data that shows the American people, great majorities, are very much in favor of the minimum wage hike.
Told you this before I left.
And embryonic stem cell research, both of which are totally understandable when you understand how selfish, not self-interested, but selfish a lot of people are.
I mean, the minimum wage, we've lost the argument on it.
I mean, there's no question that's going to happen.
But here's my point about my point about all of this is it was embarrassing.
On television this morning, Republican members of the leadership in the House one by one strode to the microphones and the cameras to lament this dirty double cross by the Democrats.
Well, I think they ought to be including us.
Oh, this is not fair.
We were expecting here to have a bipartisan.
Hey, a little message to the Republicans.
You lost the election.
You have no power.
It is unbecoming of you to start whining.
The way to fix this is to win the next election in 2008 and win back control of the House.
This was embarrassing to watch.
Who in the world thought the Democrats were going to end up being bipartisan?
They never have been when they've run the House.
Why should they start now?
I don't blame them.
They won.
They got their power back.
It's embarrassing to sit here and watch the Republicans demand fairness from the Democrats as though it were ever going to happen.
Here's the thing about this.
I'm going to give you a little legislative reality.
Pelosi, here's a good question for you.
How long will it be before Nancy Pelosi refuses to talk to Harry Reid?
How long will that take?
I'm getting looks from people on the other side of the glass.
What are you talking about?
Well, let's go through the legislative process.
Let's look at how it's going to take place under Nancy Pelosi, as George Soros would say.
She's going to have these pieces of legislation, a minimum wage, embryonic stem cell, whatever.
Maybe not these first bills because they're going to be symbolic more than anything else.
But what's going to happen when normalcy sets in is legislation is going to be introduced by somebody in the House for X.
I don't care what it is.
The Democrats are not unified.
They have all these wacky cauckey.
They have the progressive caucus.
They have the black caucus.
They have the Hispanic caucus.
They have, I don't know how many caucuses they've got.
Piece of legislation is introduced.
It's going to have to pass through all of those caucuses.
And every one of those caucuses is going to get their pound of flesh in it.
Well, for the black caucus to support this legislation, it's going to have to include X.
The Hispanic caucus to support this legislation is going to have to include Y. For the Progressive Caucus to include this, it's going to have to be this and that.
By the time the caucuses and the Democratic Party get finished with this legislation, it's not going to look like anything when it started.
It's not going to resemble the original form at all.
Then the Republicans are going to get their chance at it.
They lost and they don't have any majorities, but they're going to be able to bottle things up for a while, not quite like they can in the Senate, where you need 60 votes for everything, but that's the next phase.
Whatever ends up of this mythical original legislation then goes to the Senate where Dingy Harry has a one-seat majority.
By the way, Tim Johnson's still in critical condition.
You know, you can bet, there are people taking bets now in official bookrooms and so forth just when in the next two years Mitch McConnell will become the Senate majority leader because of the advancing age of several Democrat senators.
The two senators from Hawaii, Senator Inoue and Senator Akaka, are in their early 80s.
Sheetsbird is 89.
There are a number of others that are in advanced age.
So there's all kinds of things that are fluid.
The point is you need 60 votes to get anything passed in the Senate, and Dingy Harry is not going to be able to come up.
I mean, all Mitch McConnell needs is 41 votes to stop something.
Dingy Harry needs 60 votes, and he's got a 51-seat majority with a guy who is in the hospital.
So Nancy Pelosi can pass whatever legislation she wants in the House.
Then she's going to send it over to the Senate, and you know what happens to legislation in the Senate.
Already some Democrats, and they was it, Bingaman, already throwing cold water on the, one of the things they want to do, which is a windfall profits tax on big oil.
He says, wait a minute, this is, we don't really want to go this direction is Bingaman.
We don't really want to go in this direction.
So there's, you know, if Pelosi thinks the House is going to bend over and grab the ankles for her, the Senate is going to bend over and grab the ankles.
She's got another incoming.
So when Dingy Harry is unable to deliver this wonderful agenda that Pelosi puts together in the House, how long is it going to be before she stops talking to him and starts taking out her failures on him?
Oh, this is going to be a fun two years, ladies and gentlemen.
But in the midst of it, to sit here and watch the Republicans complain and whine and moan about it, it's just, it's unseemly.
And frankly, it's embarrassing.
You lost.
It's L-O-S-T.
And lost means lost.
And that means you have no power.
And to sit there and wait a minute, wait a minute.
I tell you, it's just, it's like the Republicans think they're going to get the same compassion from Democrats that Saddam Hussein's getting.
And it just isn't going to happen.
It's, I don't know.
It embarrassed me, folks.
I must be honest.
It embarrassed me.
By the way, AP, female Speaker Glance, a look at some milestones for women in U.S. politics, starting in 1916 all the way to Pelosi becoming the first female speaker of the House,
became the first woman to head her party, get Sander Day O'Connor in there, Geraldine Ferraro, Senator Hattie Wyatt Carraway, Democrat Arkansas, appointed to the Senate to succeed her deceased husband, Representative Ella Nolan, Republican California, first woman to chair a congressional committee, all these.
But there are a lot of women left out of this list.
There have been a lot of amazing accomplishments, noteworthy occurrences by women in government in Washington, and they're not on this list.
For example, Pat Schroeder, Patsy Schroeder, Colorado, decided back in the 80s she was going to run for president.
Well, she didn't decide.
She got close to deciding.
When she did decide that she wasn't going to run, she embarrassed the feminist movement worldwide.
She went up to the hills of Colorado, the foothills, to announce that she wasn't going to run, and the process broke down crying.
I mean, it was a ball.
It was tears.
It was flooding the caverns and the ravines out there.
I can't wait.
I'm not running.
And then, as if that weren't bad enough, buried her head on the shoulder of her husband, who prior to that, other than their children, there was no evidence he existed.
It was a bad moment for feminists.
I remember it was in Sacramento, and the feminists out there were embarrassed about it.
They're all over local TV.
How could she do this to us?
A major milestone among women in Washington, not mentioned in the AP story.
Hillary's Pretty and Pink, I'm Not a Crook press conference, not mentioned here.
Cynthia McKinney's assault on the Capitol police with a cell phone, not mentioned here.
Hillary Clinton's health care boondoggle, not mentioned here.
And of course, none of the Clinton women are mentioned.
Monica, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey.
The list goes.
Elizabeth who?
Grayson?
Yeah, that's right.
Elizabeth Grayson.
Eleanor Mondale.
Well, the list goes, Jennifer Flowers.
List goes on and on and on.
None of these women who've participated in milestone events in Washington are mentioned in the list.
And I didn't want them to be left out.
One more soundbite here before we go back to the phones.
This is about the Democrats in their first 100 hours in the House, Nancy Pelosi and their big agenda and so forth.
As you know, the Democrats, by the way, whined too and wanted a little bit of power sharing.
And the Republicans basically blew them off.
All these years, delaying the boys blew them off.
This is the way power works, folks.
The Democrats tried all those years to make the minority sound like the majority as they started talking about minority rights and all this.
The Republicans, that's how some of you think they did cave.
They caved in the sense that they didn't want to offend anybody, didn't want to offend the press, so they didn't go for the throat like the Democrats always do and will now.
But what's interesting about it, I want to go back to January 16th, almost a year ago, 2006, Martin Luther King Day.
This is Hillary Clinton speaking at the Canaan Baptist Church in Harlem.
The Democratic Party up until this is self-survey to say, until January of 2001, had at least some power in our government.
We either had the presidency, or when we had the presidency, we had one or both houses of Congress.
For the last five years, we've had no power at all.
And that makes a big difference.
Because when you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about.
Now, that's an interesting choice of words.
The Martin Luther King has been run like a plantation with the Democrats, of course, as the slaves.
Well, the Democrats, Pelosi, just announced she's going to reopen the plantation because the Republicans are going to have no power there, as they shouldn't, and they didn't win anything.
But they're going to reopen the plantation.
Only now it's the Republicans who will be slaves, and that's cool.
That's absolutely fine.
Nobody will be complaining about the way the House is being run this Martin Luther King Day when it's time for all the speechifying, even though it's going to be run the same way the Republicans ran it.
They'll not call it a plantation or anything of the sort.
Anyway, Jeff in Cleveland, I'm glad you waited, sir.
Appreciate your patience, and welcome to the program.
You know, truthfully, we need to win the peace.
Because if you don't win the peace, what's going to happen?
Many wars get fought.
Wait, Are we talking about the House of Representatives?
We're not talking about the big thing here.
You know, the doomsday clocks at seven minutes to midnight.
Really?
Yeah.
I forgot about that.
Well, it's on the thing.
You know, it's just a gauge.
But if you think about it, anywhere in history, we've got to win the peace.
Just the Native American Indians, the Shawnee, the Cherokee.
Yeah.
Well, how do you do that?
How do they do it?
No, no.
I don't want to look at it.
I wasn't around.
Shawnee is now a town in Kansas City.
I would suggest if you want to win the peace, the basic necessity of people need to be met.
If there's not a dialogue.
Now, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Those are fascinating points.
How do you meet the basic necessities of all people?
There are two ways of doing it.
No, Are you asking me a question?
Are you going to say a question and then just say the answer?
No, I'm going to clarify the question so you can answer it.
Okay.
There are basically two ways in human society, human civilization, we've sought to spread the necessities, the needs and wants of most people, capitalism and socialism.
One works and one doesn't.
What is your theory on how we satisfy every person's necessities?
You know, when I was a little kid, just down the mall, it was a big ethnic festival they used to have like once a year.
And all the people in Parma, Ohio would come from different generations and different nationalities and sell food.
Yeah.
Okay?
And everybody loved it.
Wait a minute.
Not everybody could afford to buy food in Paris.
Why didn't they give it a food?
Because it was handmade.
It was cheap.
It was cheap.
I mean, Brandon didn't take nothing to make some cookies and go over.
We can't, for example, we can't go to Africa.
We can't take your little gathering at the mall.
We need to feed people.
That's what I'm saying.
But if they can't buy it, then how do we do it?
We need to look at management at such countries like Japan and learn how they manage people and learn that we can't live as Americans in a vacuum.
This is a global problem.
And we need to win peace among people.
Iran and Iraq fought way too much.
And of course there's going to be truth.
Wait a minute.
You know, your platitudes, and that's all they've got to discuss this.
Okay, let's talk.
You can sit here and offer these platitudes.
We've got to win the peace.
That's sophistry.
It's baseless.
It's meaningless.
No, it's not.
It's totally different.
You can't even define how to do it.
You need to win peace with the guy down the office.
I need to win peace with a neighbor down the street.
Tell me how you've done it.
I'm sure you got some wackos in the neighborhood, and I'm sure you've got some wackos in the office.
How do you win peace with them?
By doing works of good works that help human society as a total, and you need to educate people.
Oprah Winfrey's doing a great thing in South Africa.
She needs to go farther north with those millions of dollars.
You know what?
Did you hear what Oprah said?
You know why she's going over to Africa to start schools?
Because she's got the money, and she's doing it because her dad inspired good virtue in her.
I don't blame her.
God bless her.
No, no, no, no.
That's not why she's doing it.
That may be partly, but I've got the story.
She says she got tired of going to inner-city urban schools in America, asking the kids what they need and hearing iPods and sneakers.
Well, she says the schools here are worthless.
They're not being taught right.
Her in her own neighborhoods among African Americans.
So she's over to South Africa to do it.
She said it.
You have to empower people, though, and they need to manage their little platitudes here and driving.
What ward zone is your building in New York City?
What?
What ward zone is your building in New York City?
Is there a ward?
Do you have a district representative there?
If you live in an inner-city school, you got people that need to stand up and run for those school board positions and voice their liberty.
That's why we need to do that.
We have liberty.
You're asking how to do it.
I'm telling you.
Jeff, how old are you?
What does it matter?
How old do you think I am?
Let's play that game.
Like I'm at Cedar Point.
Yeah.
How old are you is an accusation?
I'm thinking you're fairly young.
1962.
62, okay?
So you're roughly 45.
There you go.
So you're old enough to know better than all this.
You are vocalizing the idealism of a 10-year-old.
There's nothing wrong with peace.
We're supposed to act like children.
Look, you're forcing me into this.
You're forcing.
How do we get peace with Germany?
We didn't reach out and try to build bridges with Hitler.
How do we get peace with Japan?
You don't even know what Japan was before World War II.
The reason Japan's a democracy today is because we forced it on them.
You don't force democracy.
It was a gift from us.
They lost the war.
The Department of Defense, the U.S. military, and all of its branches, is where we get your precious peace.
That is where this country enjoys peace.
But left up to people like you, the military is going to become so paralyzed that we're not going to be able to defend ourselves when attacked, and we're going to lose our peace, all in the name of reaching out and feeding people.
As usual, ladies and gentlemen, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, Joe in Claremont, California.
I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the big program.
Rush, Major, kudos for always speaking your mind.
President Ford had made his comments about the war and President Bush, and in my opinion, was very cowardly that he did not want it public until after he was gone.
What is your opinion on that one?
Well, are you upset that Woodward didn't wait until the funeral after the funeral?
I think that, no, my opinion on it is that he should have, when he made those comments, he should have made them out public right as soon as he said them, not waiting until after he was his request was that they weren't made public until after he was gone, until after he was passed away.
I don't know what he thought about when he was going to die, but I would suspect, and this is just a wild guess.
You know, one of the things Gerald Ford taught us is how to be an ex-president.
And that is shut the hell up when commenting on successors.
Jimmy Carter has failed.
Bill Clinton has failed.
Most ex-presidents shut the hell up and do not try to make a second career out of criticizing current presidents.
And I think that Gerald Ford's wish, as expressed to Bob Woodward, to keep his comments until after his death, were oriented around the fact that he did not want to overstep the bounds and the line of propriety that he had defined himself as an ex-president.
Okay.
It just seemed kind of cowardly, though.
I mean, like, he didn't give anybody a chance to rebut him, to go deeper into why he thought that.
But I don't think he wanted to debate it.
I don't think he, look, if he was trying to influence Bush's policy, he would have made it public.
Don't discount what I'm saying here about Ford and his sense of maturity and propriety and appropriateness and class as an ex-president.
He has his opinions about these things, but he never told us once what they were as an ex-president, particularly on something as volatile as this.
I don't think he wanted to undercut President Bush.
By the way, in addition to this tape, and we have to also mention this, this is kind of ironic.
Journalists love that word.
While Woodward's got this tape blasting all over the place, Thomas DeFranc of the New York Daily News has an interview when Ford said just the opposite.
Said he doesn't have a tape.
Or if he does, he hasn't released the tape.
So we had competing Ford statements.
But Woodward had the tape, and the tape's out there now.
We have audio of the tape.
Let's play the tape.
This, I guess, was in 2004.
Bob Woodward interviewed former President Gerald Ford, and he said this, Ford did about the war in Iraq.
I think the understone and the president of the United States can justify going into the war in Iraq.
Don't put the emphasis on weapons of mass destruction.
I have never publicly said that I thought they made it to state, but I thought very strongly that there was an error in me how they should justify what they were going to do.
Well, the way I hear that, having listened to it again, he doesn't even really think that the war was wrong.
He thinks the way they justified it, weapons of mass destruction was wrong.
But he still said, I would never say this publicly.
You're chalking that up to cowardice.
I'm chalking it up to character as an ex-president.
Ford taught us a lot of things, and one of them is how to behave as an ex-president, and do not discount that.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, George, you're next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
What a throw.
Have you noticed that dead Republicans make or do the best interviews according to the drive-by?
Yeah, Bill Casey on his deathbed talking to, well, he's in a coma, talked to Bob Woodward.
Exactly.
But you know what?
It's like having a political cartoon.
You can make these characters say things that they would never say in real life.
And the interviewers go on the soft news programs and say, in my opinion, it is Churchill would have said this.
It's a good point.
If you're a Republican, you want media respect, die.
Oh, now they're going to write.
We're laughing about death on this, bro.
Okay.
George, appreciate the call.
Appreciate the input.
Doug, in Tallahassee, Florida, you're next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello.
Major kudos, sir.
Thank you, sir.
I was calling about when you were coming earlier about everybody getting all over the folks who were taunting Saddam.
And I was thinking back to a documentary that I had seen when he overtook power, sitting up on stage smoking a big fat cigar.
They had nothing wrong with that.
Yeah, exactly.
And laughing at each member one by one as the name was called out and was drug out the street and shot because they opposed him in the past.
And I just found it ironic that.
Well, but look, look, you have to understand the mindset of the new castrati.
Exactly.
The mindset of the new castrati is, Yetrath, Yefmither Limbaugh, he may have done all that, but we become him if we do it ourselves.
Well, we didn't do it.
The Iraqis did it.
It is who they are.
It wasn't the whole nation.
There has not been this massive unrest and total destruction that we were told was going to happen.
Just a few people got upset out there.
Most people were dancing and partying in the streets.
Everybody's like me wanted to see every inch of that video.
And, you know, they made an HD copy of it.
The official videographer for the prime minister went in there with an HD and a Sony high-definition camera.
That's the version I want to see.
Exactly.
Me too.
The hell with his cell phone stuff.
By the way, they've arrested that guy.
Yes, they have.
I just read that.
Yes, sir.
So they say.
Silly.
At any rate, you're exactly right.
Saddam, we forget.
Look, you know, when this was all happening, I was, I forget the days that all this was happening.
I guess it was Friday night.
Yeah, last Friday night.
Yeah, because that was the night that I had the people over to watch the first eight episodes of season six of 24.
And I had already seen the eight episodes.
I had to watch them to make sure that they were played.
They all played because I can't have all these people over and then have things not work.
So I watched all eight episodes.
I watched the first four the night we were flooded in here, by the way, folks.
And I got the next four later on.
So since I had seen them, I'd get each episode started after everybody had refueled after the previous episode.
I'd go in and watch the news and countdown to Saddam's trip to the gallows.
And it was going to happen around 10 p.m. on Friday night.
And I was watching Drudge.
By the way, folks, I must tell you this too.
I did not, and I tell you the solemn truth here, I did not watch one news channel.
I left here on the 22nd of December.
And from the 22nd of December until this morning, I did not watch MSNBC.
I did not watch Fox.
I did not watch CNN.
I didn't watch NBC, ABC, CBS.
I didn't watch one bit of television news.
And I didn't miss it.
And I kept up with things on the internet.
And I was watching the Saddam business on the Drudge Report.
And, you know, we are all human, most of us are.
And when a life is going to be taken in advance and you know it, you do get caught up.
It becomes a solemn moment and a, I guess, thoughtful, thoughtful time.
And then I started thinking, you know, this is going to be very tough for people to overcome.
And more people than not probably are going to end up feeling sorry for this guy.
Because after all, if you look at the encroachment in the media of pop culture today, Saddam was a daily figure.
Saddam was a cartoon character.
Saddam was the face of evil.
He was a number of things, but he was constantly in the media.
He was on television every day for a number of years, and I mean a number of years, decent number of years.
And all of a sudden, the world knew that a high-visibility pop culture figure was going to die and would not be around anymore.
And it was, you know, if you executed Paris Hilton, people would have the same reaction.
Oh, no.
Because it's somebody we know being blown away.
This is not some thug from the bowels of San Quentin being blown away.
So I knew that there were going to be some people that would have some sympathy and they're going to remorse.
Oh, we can't execute the famous.
Oh, knowing how serious the encroachment of pop culture has been into the mainstream of society and how definitive it is.
So I sat there and I was studying, examining my own emotions and thoughts, watching what others' reactions were.
And it quickly became apparent to me that I was dead on right.
That most people, when they looked at Saddam Hussein on Friday night and into the weekend, didn't see any of the atrocities, didn't picture them, didn't remember them.
They just saw a pop culture figure who was killed.
And then when it was learned that he was taunted and that they shouted, Moktada, Moktada, Moktada, why?
How could we dare be so mean?
See, his pop culture status, his media caricature accounted, I think, for a lot of the sympathy that he got.
But in the end, the real bottom line here for drive-by media types and leftists is that Saddam was a vessel.
Saddam became a mechanism, a way for them to promote elements of their agenda, such as anti-death penalty agenda, whatever else that they wanted to present about this.
The war in Iraq is no good.
Look, I mean, look what's happening here.
Look at the guns.
We went to war for these savages.
We're trying to democratize this bunch of louts.
Saddam served that purpose for leftists and the drive-by media and continues to as well with all these investigations into how this happened.
And the Iraqis are doing this, you know, just for the hell of it, I mean, because they're going to be dependent on media image, as almost everybody is these days, in part for the success of their future.
And whether they really are concerned about this is something I doubt.
This is who they are.
They're militant Islamists.
And it's quite understandable they would have this emotional reaction.
This is the guy that wiped out, well, their mass graves, 300,000 to a million, whatever the number is.
It's not inconsequential.
I've got to take a quick time out here.
We'll be back and continue in mere moments.
Look at, I just don't tell you people what I think.
I back it up when I am right, especially when I'm talking about the left.
Let's audio soundbite number nine out there, Mike.
This is last Friday, December 29th.
This is prior to the execution of Saddam Hussein.
The name of the show here is The Most.
I've never seen it.
The host is Allison Stewart.
I have no clue who that is.
But she was talking to the Reverend Jacks, him I know, via the telephone.
And she said, Reverend Jax, you say that the U.S. should not turn over Saddam Hussein to be hanged.
Making him spend the rest of his life in prison would be a better way to break the cycle of violence in Iraq.
Does that reflect your position?
Someone has to break the cycle of violence.
Saddam Hussein didn't attack us.
Bin Laden attacked us.
And to be consistent with his killing further weakens us or isolates us in the world community.
The late Gerald Ford in one of his last statements said we're on the wrong course.
The Iraqi commission said we're on the wrong course.
As we kill people and blow up a civilization to whom are we accountable, this is a fan-veiled U.S. move to execute them as a trophy.
So you say, Saddam for Jesse Jackson is merely a vessel to attack the United States of America.
Saddam provides him the opportunity to once again point the finger of blame at America.
There's nothing factual about what he said other than his reference to Gerald Ford.
We are not blowing up a civilization.
We are, if anything, restrained over there, which is one of the reasons this thing is dragging out the way it is.
But it looks like, as I predicted, when the Iraq surrender group report came out and nobody endorsed the thing, by the way, I think the thing over the Christmas break finally fell, the parachute never opened, and it just imploded when it landed.
And nobody's talking about it anymore, and we are going to get ⁇ in fact, did I read this right?
George Casey, the general in command, is out.
He's going to be replaced.
Read that this morning.
One of the blogs quoting a newspaper, New York Times or Washington Post, claiming that the president's going to replace Casey because the president's sick and tired of people who want to keep giving him strategies for getting out.
He wants to talk to people who give him strategies for winning.
Anyway, bottom line, it looks like we're going to ramp up the number of troops.
And we're going to have this big surge.
What?
Well, of course, yes, the Nancy Pelosi House of Representatives could defund the war.
Speaking of that, this is quite comical, too.
Washington Post has a story today.
I think this is, where is this?
That's not front page.
Darn it.
Wish it were.
Activists on the left applying pressure to Democratic leaders.
Liberals seek bolder approach to war and spying.
A cluster of protesters will greet the new congressional leaders, the Democrats on Capitol Hill tomorrow.
They will not be disgruntled conservatives wary of Democrat control, but liberals demanding a ban on torture, an end to warrantless domestic spying, and a restoration of curbed civil liberties.
The protests will be followed by an evening forum calling for the president's impeachment, led by the Center for Constitutional Rights, anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, and pro-impeachment group called The World Can't Wait.
Sounds like the title of a bombed movie.
Nowhere in the Democrats' consensus-driven agenda is there legislation revisiting last year's establishment of military tribunals and suspending legal rights for suspected terrorists, nor is there a revision of the civil liberties provisions of the USA Patriot Act.
To Democrat activists and some lawmakers, the agenda skirts the larger issues that damaged the president's approval ratings and torpedoed Republican control of Congress.
Deborah Sweet, National Director of World Can't Wait, said, we have been told for many years, 12 years now, wait until we get in power.
Then you'll see things change.
Well, we'll give them a couple months or a few weeks to see what they come up with.
But if they don't do something very decisive around the war and these other ifthios, I think there will be trouble.
New Castrati talked there.
So Democrats are going to face some protesters and the surge that the president is reported to be going to announce soon.
Democrats could try to cut funding for the war in the House of Representatives.
Joe Biden could do a number of things to try to stop it, as he's promised that he will.
Made the statement, by the way, outside a hair care for men's store in Wilmington, Delaware.
You see, Russ, the problem with you is that your humor always have a victim.
If it weren't for that, you would be funny, Mr. Limbaugh, but your humor always have a victim.
You are cold-hearted, cruel, and heartless.
Thank you.
Back in just a moment.
Now, one of these groups is going to show up tomorrow to try to remind Democrats to be liberal.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, they are leading the effort to impeach Bush.
One of the attorneys for the Center for Constitutional Rights is the granddaughter of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.
Her name is Rachel Mirapol.
The granddaughter of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg is a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights trying to impeach.
▲
Export Selection