All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 17, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:30
January 17, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
You know, this is hilarious.
It's unbelievable.
There is full-fledged panic out there at PMS NBC and CNN over 24.
There's literal fear.
These people fear this program.
I have two of the most incredible soundbites last night on CNN on the Wolf Blitzer show.
They did a whole feature on this as a sop to the Bush administration.
It's part of their campaign of fear.
I think what it is, CNN's just jealous.
They want to be the only network to show mushroom clouds.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
It's Rush Limbaugh.
This is Hump Day, middle of the week.
For those of you who work the traditional five-day week, get this day behind you over the hump.
I am here serving humanity's house simply by showing up here behind the golden EIB microphone in the prestigious Attila the Hun chair endowed by me here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program today, email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
How about Hillary Clinton and this frantic media blitz?
My gosh, I was expecting to get a call from her office today and have them offer her to me.
That's how frantic this appears over this Obamagasm that is happening throughout the Drive-By Media.
I mean, it's all over the place.
That's not even the best of it.
Sternly just said Obama's like Lincoln.
Susan Page, USA Today, said, do you realize how Obama reminds you of Reagan?
I kid you not.
Obama reminds her of Ronald Reagan.
Anyway, the doomsday clock, this is some, who does this?
The doomsday clocks, the union of some stupid scientist group.
It's the bulletin of the atomic scientists.
They're out of Chicago.
And they're going to update the doomsday clock.
It goes back to 1947.
Doomsday clock counts the hours down to when we're all going to be destroyed by nuclear detonation.
They're going to add global warming and the genetic engineering of diseases and other threats to global survival.
So I guess we could do our own headline here.
Global warming and all that is irrelevant.
Doomsday clock moves nearer midnight as we near Hillary's decision on 08.
That would be our perspective of it if we were in charge of the doomsday clock.
What else?
Oh, you know, yesterday we were talking about the 100 hours, the first 100 hours of the Pelosi House and how nobody seems to care about it.
And we're not even counting down the hour.
I don't even know what hour we're at.
Sorry, never end a sentence with a preposition.
We don't know at what hour we are.
And yet there are two big deals coming.
One is their student loan interest rate cut.
That's set for a vote in the House today.
And their attempt to destroy big oil with the ending of tax breaks and so forth.
And even the Washington Post is not excited about any of this.
This 100-hour juggernaut to get student loan rate cut, the vote is today.
And the coverage through, I don't care, San Francisco Chronicle, I don't care where you look.
The coverage is unenthusiastic.
And maybe this is why there hasn't been any buzz about it.
I want to tell you about this student loan cut business.
Two things that are going on here.
And as is always the case, it's what's not mentioned that is the key.
If you cut student loan rates and if you increase the deduction, the tax deduction for tuition, what do you end up doing?
You allow universities to raise tuition.
If loans are going to be cheaper, and if you can take a larger tax break for tuition, then you allow universities to continue to raise tuition to balance it all out.
I think this is all a sop from one batch of liberals to their buddies in academe.
And it's all disguised as helping the little guy out there, Joe Sixpack, whose dream is still to have a member of his family go to college.
despite how much it costs.
And nobody, you know, we always hear about the price of oil, the price of gasoline, and all these horror.
We never, ever hear any criticism of what it costs to go to college, do we never, ever do?
And that's outrageous.
And the percentage increases every year for college tuition are stunning.
What else do we have on the program today?
Dennis Kucinich.
We have audio soundbites.
I'm getting a lot of panicked email from people about this.
He wants to reinstitute the fairness doctrine, popularly known not just by me, but by a lot of people as the Hush Rush Bill.
Now, the interesting thing about this, and I've talked about this over the years a number of times because it's an effort that the Democrats have threatened when they were out of power to do when they regained their power.
Now Kucinich is leading the charge here.
And let me just tell you how the fairness doctrine is, it goes back to the ancient days of super heterodyne receivers, back to the 1930s and the 1940s, when the media landscape was entirely different than it is today.
The fairness doctrine is largely aimed at radio today.
And that's the medium that the Democrats still fear more than any other.
They control lots of television, particularly news.
They control print, obviously.
They're the majority in both of those media.
But in radio, they haven't been able to crack the nut.
They haven't been able to make inroads.
They've tried everybody they can think of, but they just haven't been able to figure it out.
And as is typical with liberals, and in some instances, you'd have to say that Kucinich is acting Stalinist in this.
They have given it their best shot to try to have an open-minded, open-ended debate in radio.
They can't get coverage.
They can't draw an audience.
They can't draw an audience in the commercial field at any rate.
And so what do they do?
They attempt to silence the opposition.
And that is a, you know, this is an assault on the First Amendment disguised under that word fairness.
The application of the fairness doctrine worked this way.
It basically made it so difficult for local radio stations to put on controversial programming that they put none on.
And so what you're going to get if they do reinstate this is highlighted programming such as the favorite holiday recipes for Christmastime, sewage problems for the next decade in your local community, and other such things.
Because the application of the fairness doctrine would be very, very tough to police.
But the point of it was to balance opinions and to be fair.
And if one point of view was expressed, the other had to be expressed as well.
Otherwise, no opinion could be expressed.
And there was also a provision that personal attacks would be, people victimized by those would have the chance to reply and respond and so forth.
Now, the fairness doctrine was dispatched by Reagan, Ronaldus Magnus, in 1987.
And the practical result of the fairness doctrine was there was no controversial programming.
The thing that libs miss out, well, they understand.
They understand all of this.
They just can't deal with losing, and they think that talk radio is the biggest thorn in their side.
And so they want to silence it rather than try to beat it because they can't.
They've demonstrated they can't even get close to even getting noticed, much less be competitive on radio.
So the reintroduction of Fairness Doctor is not going to happen with Bush in the White House, but after 08, you never know.
I think it's a long shot anyway, but it's something worth remaining vigilant to because there's no question if they had a chance, they would do it.
Although, the media landscape has changed so much.
Look at the multiple channels you have.
Now, satellite radio, which probably is not governed by the FCC.
Well, I know it's not because it's not over the air.
It's not using the public airwaves, quote unquote.
Look at all the different channels you have on television.
To single out radio for this would be quite obvious as to the intent and the purpose.
And making things fair would not be the objective.
Silencing conservatives on radio would be the objective.
What the liberals don't understand is that the market takes care of this.
Yeah, talk radio is predominantly conservative.
We can have the, you know, discuss reasons why, but it's irrelevant to this discussion.
But the market balances things out.
You know, I came along in 1988, started this program.
It was the only program of its kind nationally.
And the liberals immediately started to show, well, you need to balance your show.
It's all conservative.
Well, no, no, I am the balance.
I am just a little attempt here at equal time.
You guys have the rest of the media.
And to this day, you add up the liberal dominance in most media.
And it still dwarfs what talk radio is in terms of reach.
But still, they can't deal with even one element of the media not being controlled by them.
So I'll let you hear what Kucinich says.
We've got these 24 soundbites coming up.
Lots of other things, plus your phone calls as well.
So sit tight to EIB Network and El Rushboat.
Roll on right after this.
The most listened to radio talk show in America, Rush Limbaugh, the one and only EIB network.
As usual, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
I can't believe this again.
Today, there is yet another story about the Barbara Boxer Condoleezza Rice dust up.
And all over this story is the reference to my quote that Boxer hit Rice below the ovaries.
What I actually said, if you're going to quote me, do the whole thing.
What I said was, here you have this rich white chick from San Francisco.
And this happened last week.
This happened Thursday last week.
For a week, this has been going on.
Here you have this rich white chick lynching this African-American woman, this rich right chick with a huge big mouth, essentially lynching this African-American woman by hitting below the ovaries a day or two before Martin Luther King Day.
That quote is still in all of these stories.
And you know why?
Because I was talking with the, I did this NPR interview the other day, and a guy wanted to know, as they always do, what about this term feminazi?
Hillary Clinton's a feminine.
I said, no, Hillary Clinton is not one of the original feminazis.
I've never called her a feminazi.
For 18 years, I've been defining feminine.
Don't you think the term's offensive?
Well, you know, it might well be, but as Shakespeare said, brevity is the soul of wit.
The fewer words you can use to make a point, the more impact and power the point will have.
Ergo hitting below the ovaries, to me, was the best way to express the way I thought this thing panned out.
Anyway, let's go to the audio soundbites.
It's unbelievable.
There is fear and panic at CNN and also at PMS NBC over the show 24.
Now, this first bite is from the Situation Room Wolf Blitzer last night.
The report is produced here by their infobabe, Carol Costello.
And you'll also hear in the soundbite, Devin Gordon from Newsweek and James Carafano from the Heritage Foundation.
And should I share it?
We did the 24 seminar with a couple of cast members, a couple producers and writers, and some think tank specialists on terrorism last June at the Heritage Foundation.
This has these people all knotted up in a WAD.
They refer to that in the report.
I didn't just attend.
They refer to me here as attending it.
I didn't just attend it.
I moderated it.
I led it.
I was responsible for what was discussed on this program.
If these people ever figure that out, they'll really be tied up in knots.
Is it, as Newsweek magazine calls it, a neocon sex fantasy?
24 is just your worst nightmares realized.
If 24 is true, then everything the neoconservatives have been saying all along is true.
As in a terrorist network working inside the United States, sending suicide bombers to subways and shopping malls, ordering up dirty bombs assembled right in California, and a hero, Jack Bauer, who is decent like John Wayne, yet often ignores international law, torturing terrorists to get vital information.
Jack Bauer is kind of a metaphor for all the great people that we have out there every day.
Really are, you know, working hard to make us safe.
The Conservative Heritage Foundation so admires 24's plots, his group sponsored a forum in June called 24, an America's Image in Fighting Terrorism, Fact, Fiction, or Does It Matter?
On the panel, terrorism experts, including Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, also invited Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who so loves 24, he's posted a review of this season on his website.
So what?
Literally in awe of the creativity of the brains behind the program.
Feeling the neocon love of the program, possible presidential candidate John McCain made a guest appearance on 24 last season.
The Heritage Foundation wants to make it clear it believes 24 is in the end just a TV show, but it's hero Jack Bauer does for the 9-11 generation what James Bond did for the Cold War generation.
The 9-11 generation, you people at CNN have done your best to pretend there wasn't a 9-11.
Otherwise, how could they even do this report?
24 is now a show by and for neocons.
And did you notice the disdain with which she pronounced my name the first time she mentioned it?
Rush Limbaugh, who so loves 24?
He posted a review of this season on the website.
So what?
That must be a transgression of some kind.
You had to hear this to believe it, folks.
If I would just try to have described this to you, you wouldn't have gotten the impact.
They think this is all a fantasy.
They think all of this is a fantasy, and 9-11 never happened.
And they say that McCain became a fan to pander to neocons.
I know a little bit about that, and I can just tell you without, that's the furthest thing from the truth there can be.
He's a genuine fan of the program.
He called and wanted to go out there for a set visit, and they gave him a cameo.
This is nothing to do.
People just missed the whole point of this.
Well, why is the left so afraid of this?
Other than CNN's obvious jealousy, they want to be the only network to show mushroom clouds.
But how in the world can you find disdain with this show?
These people are looking at it as an attempt, as propaganda, to poison the minds of a bunch of you people that they consider to be mind-numbed robots.
Okay, so this season of 24 has all that she described, a terrorist network inside the U.S. We've had that, including suicide bombers to subways and shopping malls.
Haven't had that, but we've had bombers attempting to blow up LAX.
They were caught.
Who knows what else has been stopped that we haven't been told?
We're not going to stop or tell everybody everything we've stopped, give away our techniques for doing so.
Who knows what we've stopped out there?
We can't brag about it.
Anti-terrorist specialists cannot brag about their successes.
They live in a lonely world.
Dirty bombs assembled right in California.
You know, we had a bunch of terrorists attending flight schools telling instructors they had no desire to learn how to land.
They were still taught to fly the airplanes, and what did they do with them?
A variation of the scenario has happened.
And yet these people find 24 to be nothing more than propaganda and an outrageous attempt to generate fear among the Americans.
As though 9-11 shouldn't have caused any fear, shouldn't have caused anybody to get concerned and vigilant.
These people are so concerned about this.
Why were they about 24?
These are the same people that blew a gasket when the Dubai ports deal was announced.
I mean, what the hell was wrong with the Dubai Ports deal?
The Dubai Ports deal, apparently, to these people, just as bad as the TV show 24.
Now, gets better.
This is yesterday on PMS NBC.
The Infobabe anchor Contessa Brewer was talking to PMS NBC analyst Craig Crawford about how the show 24 may affect the public's perception of Bush administration.
Sure, but I do have always thought this show was a fascinating dovetail into the Bush administration agenda on the war on terror, which is to keep people afraid.
I mean, if Franklin Roosevelt say when he said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself, this administration says, give in to your fear and let us protect you.
I think the show is very entertaining, but I do think, whatever their motives, I doubt they actually have a political agenda at this show, but they are, in a sense, war profiteering.
Okay, well, let me ask you about wars have profiteering, and I think they are playing to popular notions that the Constitution just gets in the way of catching the bad eye.
Come on, war profiteering?
Ever heard of Steven Spielberg and Schindler's List?
You ever heard of Michael Moore and that genuine propaganda film of his?
Clint Eastwood, is he war profiteering with his Iwo Jima movie, Craig?
What a ditzy thing to say.
These people are scared to death.
You know what they're really frightened about?
If these four episodes that have already aired had aired in October, they think that the Democrats would not have won the election.
That's how frightened they are and insecure.
All of this indicates that they know they're on the wrong side of the war on terror, and so they have to do what they do with everybody that threatens them, and that's destroy their credibility and try to destroy them personally rather than argue the substance of issues.
This is funny as it can be.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
You know, I was just sitting here thinking, if these leftists, if these liberals who are all in a panic about 24 and how it might form a political opinion in your mind, or how it might scare you, this group of people who lives off of fear, they create crisis after crisis after crisis, global warming, you name it, in order to affect political outcomes rather than debate substantively.
Now, here comes a show that they think's interceding on their turf by doing the same thing.
They've got to discredit the show.
They've got to do everything they can to discredit its audience and the people who like it.
Somebody asked Coco if we still have the streaming video of the Heritage Foundation seminar that we did.
We put it up on the website so people could watch it.
It's about an hour, 45 minutes that it went on.
Michael Cherdoff was the first 15 or 20 minutes.
Then I took it over and brought life to the whole thing.
And all these people would have to do is watch it, but all they tried to do is, look at who is at this thing.
Why, no wonder it's a neocon propaganda plot.
Well, watch it.
We'll see if we still see.
We got, okay, so when we update the website later this afternoon to reflect the contents of today's program, we will repost the streaming video.
We have streaming video and audio, I think, of this thing.
That was last June in Washington at the Heritage Foundation.
By the way, speaking of the left, it's such a joke for these people to come out and start being concerned about the attempts of a television show to try to influence the public.
What the hell was the West Wing?
How about what was that show with the Commander-in-Chief with Gina Davis?
I mean, everybody knows what that was.
That was an attempt to pave the way for Mrs. Clinton.
That was supposed to condition the American people for the fact that a female president could serve with credibility, distinction, and honor.
What's the difference between, let's say, a commander-in-chief in the West Wing in 24?
Well, Commander-in-Chief in the West Wing are off the air.
And they didn't, well, West Wing made it.
Commander-in-Chief bombed royally, and she still got awards from the United Nations as though she was the first female president.
When liberals watched the West Wing, I'm convinced that they believe Martin Sheen was actually the president.
I think it was so distorted and so distraught, Rex, when they tune into the West Wing to pretend that was the country.
How about the movie the day after tomorrow?
Which showed the whole Northern Hemisphere flooding and a vice president character looking like Cheney having to decamp to Mexico.
Our friends in Mexico took us all in.
You think Al Gore's idiotic movie, Inconvenient Truth, or a lie, nothing more than propaganda.
So these little scenarios these people are doing just don't cut it with me.
And they illustrate they're just scared.
They have done their best to try to wipe the whole concept of terrorism in this country as a major threat off the public map as part of their technique and desire to totally discredit the Bush administration and his foreign policy.
To the phones, we'll start in Austin, Texas.
Griffin, thank you for calling, sir.
You are up first.
Thanks.
I'm thinking maybe we should bring back the fairness doctrine and give equal time for liberals on shows like your own.
And the reason would be that, you know, a lot of people tune into opinion shows like yours and they feel that they're getting a whole balance right there that, you know, it's fair and balanced as is.
But, you know, a lot of these shows, they do have a right-wing bias or something.
Take Fox Network.
It used to call itself fair and balanced.
And now Tony Snow is working for a conservative party.
Oh, come on.
Come.
Griffin, you know, I would love to talk with you seriously about this.
But how about Chris Matthews, who used to work for Tip O'Neill?
George Stephanopoulos worked for Clinton.
Chris Cuomo is a Cuomo.
All these people are at ABC and NBC.
Chris, let's see, Tim Russert, I think, was somewhere with Moynihan.
I mean, the drive-by media today is a veritable satellite office of the Democrat National Committee.
Well, shouldn't we kind of more frankly admit our bias in every case?
We do on this program.
They don't.
Well, I'll they insist that they are not liberal when that charge is leveled at them.
But, you know, Griffin, what you have to understand here is that you're being sucked in here by the notion of fairness.
You're actually advocating the suppression of free speech.
You say this show needs to be balanced.
Within itself.
No, it doesn't.
This show is in the free market.
If people don't like this show, it won't get an audience, and you don't have to worry about it.
If they do, it does.
And it will get an audience, and it'll survive.
I'm under no requirement to balance this show.
I consider myself to be just a little speck of balance against all the other media that's out there.
You have to look at the whole marketplace, not individual shows.
Your theory, I mean, you wouldn't call NBC or CBS.
Look at the elements that you singled out.
You singled out Fox News, you singled out me as items needing to be balanced, but you don't think ABC or CBS or CNN needs to be balanced.
I didn't hear you say that.
Well, I think they are balanced within themselves fairly well.
You do?
Yes, I do.
Name for me the conservative commentators at CNN.
Well, I'm honestly.
So name for me the employee, the anchors, the reporters at CNN who are conservative.
I would see none of them as liberal and none of them as particularly conservative.
I would see them all as mostly moderate.
The fact of the matter is, what you've just told me is that you are a liberal.
And as a liberal, you don't think of yourself as an ideologue.
You are just it.
You are what normal is.
And people like me are the monsters and the clowns and the fringe and the kooks.
And somehow, when you hear us say what we say, you don't like it.
And rather than just turn the radio off and let the market determine these things, you want to participate in an effort to shut me up.
You are an arrogant, conceited, condescending person who is not half as smart nor as whirly and fair and open and honest as you think you are.
You are close to being a Stalinist.
You want to shut down people who say things you don't like.
Or you want to go along with a program to ostensibly balance them, which would end programs like this.
You think my audience wants to hear me, half of this program devoted to some bunch of liberals responding to what I said?
Now and then we do it for the fun of it.
Because it's always fun to listen to them bomb out.
But we put liberals on this program like you.
You're an example here.
I got a bunch of people on hold.
You're not the first to call today, but you're first in line.
We put liberals up whenever they call here.
We don't keep them off the air.
We're not suppressing them.
We're not oppressing them.
And by the way, there is nobody on my side of the aisle who is advocating that they be silenced.
Only that kind of thing comes from people like you.
I don't know one conservative who wants CNN taken off the air or the government managing what CNN broadcasts or NBC or CBS.
You know how we deal with it, Griffin?
We deal with it by informing our audience so that they can watch all these things and listen to all these things with a new understanding, standing, and education so that they can make up their own minds about what they're watching and hearing and reading.
We seek to make them more informed than ever.
We seek to make them engaged in the political arena of ideas that you fear.
You want people who disagree with you silenced and shut up and maybe, for all I know, sent to the gulags along with Dick Durbin and our interrogators at Club Gitmo and Ed Mu Grab or Abu Grab.
You don't hear people like me advocating anybody be silenced.
You don't hear anybody like me advocating that there be balance.
You don't hear me saying, hey, CBS, get rid of Katie Couric and hire me.
Although that'd be a brilliant move on their part.
But you don't hear me advocate.
You don't hear me or anybody on my side.
Nobody's suggesting that Tim Russard give up half of Meat the Press to me in order to balance.
Now you call here and suggest I should do this?
You arrogant, condescending snob.
I know you don't think of yourself that way, but you are.
Come to grips with it, man.
Knowing our faults and weaknesses is the first step towards correcting them.
All right.
I just spoke with Coco, and we have the audio, and we have the video, and we have the transcript of the Heritage Seminar on 24 from last June.
And we're going to put it up on the free side at rushlinblog.com so everybody can see it so that Craig Crawford cannot accuse me of war profiteering.
So it'll be up there as, and I don't know, we'll do it at the end of the program today as we update the rest of the program and the rest of the website to reflect the contents of today's show.
Craig in Sacramento, you're next on the EIB network.
Nice to have you, sir.
Hey, Sacramento, hot Sacramento dittos to you, Rush.
1984.
Started listening to you, so it's been a long time.
Oh, you've been there from the get-go, as they say.
From the get-go.
I remember the first day.
I looked at my dad.
Rush, who's Rush?
But anyway, do you recall you did a counter-point counterpoint show in Sacramento?
It was on one of the local news stations.
I just remember I was a big mustachioed liberal, and it was a lot of fun watching you have that guy for lunch.
Yeah, that was on Channel 13.
At the time, the ABC affiliate, and that was the then mayor of Davis, Dave Rosenberg, I think was his first time.
It was Rosenberg.
I think it was Dave Rosenberg.
Yeah, but that's got nothing to do with the fairness doc.
That was like a two-minute bit.
I know.
It wasn't really your point.
I just always wondered if you'd ever run across him again or anything, because I remember he just.
I haven't.
He was a nice guy.
I mean, he was sort of at a disadvantage.
I mean, here he is, a mayor.
You know, I'm a highly trained broadcast specialist, understanding the medium.
And it was, it was, plus he's representing a liberal position.
You know, folks, all of you people out there, the supporters of the fairness doctrine, you think this show needs to be balanced and so forth.
Let me tell you something.
Learn this.
The truth does not need balance.
And the truth is what we do on this program.
The truth is what we seek on this program.
And as such, it doesn't need balance.
Well, one last thing, Rush, is it wasn't balanced because he was way outclassed, as most liberals would be.
I know, but it's a long-ago show.
And as I say, he was at a disadvantage just in terms of being in the business.
But the thing I remember most about that little feature, and I think it lasted 13 weeks.
For that period of time, 1980, I guess it was 85 in Sacramento when that started.
It was controversial.
Oh, yeah, it was.
Yeah, it didn't happen.
It was in the 5 o'clock news hour out there.
And the subject one day was feminism.
I don't know what Rosenberg said, but he inspired one of my great undeniable truth lines of all time.
And that is, no, Dave, I love the feminist movement, especially when walking behind it.
And he just didn't know what to do because he was dead serious about whatever the topic was.
And here I was just having fun with it.
But nevertheless, I'm glad you remember that.
That was a little nostalgia for you, Rush.
It was great talking to you.
Thank you, Craig.
I appreciate it.
Adopted hometown of Sacramento, where radio stations are now killing their audience.
Something that have you heard about the morning program out there?
The lady in the water poisoning?
They fired 10 people from that station.
I'll tell you, when I leave a market, well, it might be overreaction, but what do you expect?
If these people say they're sorry, they'll be back.
Say they apologize and so, but why in the world would you run a contest saying, okay, go out and drink as much as you can and don't pee?
And the longer you can do that, the you know, I leave a market and the market falls apart.
The standards, the broadcast standards just plunder.
Oh, well, Matt in Clarksville, Tennessee, nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, how are you doing?
Fine, sir.
Really, they're killing the audience out.
I never did anything to kill an audience member.
Okay.
Hey, I was listening to NPR this morning, and surprise, surprise, Hillary Clinton was on.
And the interviewer asked her, so what is your plan to get out of Iraq?
You keep saying, get out, get out, but what is your plan?
And she said, well, we should have a phased withdrawal if certain requirements and events are met by the Iraqis.
And to me, that sort of sounds exactly like what President Bush has been saying.
Well, she's got a problem here.
She's got it because she voted for this.
Obama didn't.
She has a little bit of a problem.
But as long as she says something that can be interpreted as, we've got to get out of there and we've got to get out of there now.
And as long as she opposes the reinforcements, she'll be okay on the Democrats.
She's not going to get tied up in knots over this.
She's got bigger problems down the road with Obama.
Because let me tell you something.
A lot of people, I have gotten a lot of email from you people who think that I'm getting caught up in the conventional wisdom and media bubble about Obama because you think the media is going to throw him overboard at some point in favor of Hillary.
Folks, I want you to think about something very, very carefully here.
Throwing Barack Obama overboard or sabotaging Obama by the drive-by media is something they cannot do.
He's black.
Even though the civil rights leadership has not formed a bond with Obama, and even though they don't consider him to be one of them, you're just not going to have these drive-by media types savage this guy after all this big buildup like they would any other candidate they wanted to get out of the way.
Again, the fact that he's being built up to the degree he is and that Edwards is in the face of this veritable entitlement that Hillary Clinton seemed to have to this office is the nomination is the real interesting thing here.
We have a Hillary soundbite here from the Today Show today.
Matt Wauer asked her this.
The U.N. reports that last year, 34,000 Iraqis lost their lives.
If we don't suppress this sectarian violence in the insurgency, aren't we just going to see more of the same?
I propose putting conditions on the funding that we provide to the Iraqis.
I don't think we should continue to fund the protection for the Iraqi government leaders or for the training and equipping of their army unless they meet certain conditions, including making the political compromises that have been called for now for more than two years.
And then Lauer said, look, Senator Obama has announced he's opening an exploratory committee.
Is he qualified?
He's been in the Senate two years.
Is he completely qualified to be commander-in-chief, in your opinion?
The voters will make these decisions.
That's what's so great.
I mean, he's a fellow Democrat.
Would you be comfortable with him in the White House?
I'm going to let all of those decisions be sorted out by voters.
Meaning, wait till we get through destroying this guy ourselves and make it look like the Republicans did, did it?
I'm not worried about Obama, she is saying.
The real question from Matt Lauer should have been, what are your qualifications, Mrs. Clinton, to be commander-in-chief?
And we're back.
Serving humanity, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have here on the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Baby Noah.
Everybody's getting all warm and fuzzy about Baby Noah, who was born via in vitro following, well, it was an embryo, frozen embryo out there.
And the real story is that Democrats in the House ought to be mad as hell that a research tool has been stolen from them.
Now, if that seems like a disconnect to you, sit tight.
I'll explain that as the program unfolds in the next hour.
For you people on the Ditto Cam, I'm going to go to bars here for the break at the top of the arc because some stuff's going to go on in here that you nor anybody else will be allowed to see.
Take a brief time out here.
We'll be back and continue right after.
▲
Export Selection