All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 17, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:14
January 17, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ha, how are you?
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
We are having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, despite the fact that everything seems to be going to hell in a handbasket, even though there's a shortage of handbaskets.
Rush Limbaugh behind the golden EIB microphone.
Executing assigned host duties flawlessly here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
Some snartly cookie, I need to find something for me.
I was just told by an audience member of the top of the hour news that the president has uh said that some independent body will now decide on whether or not we have the.
If I understand this, uh an independent body will now decide whether we have the uh constitutional authority, the president has the constitutional authority to intercept phone calls from terrorists overseas to Americans in this country, and vice versa.
Terrorists here, maybe whoever's contacting terrorists, the you know, the NSA, the so-called domestic spying thing.
Now, I just got a brief blurb of this, where I'm gonna try to track down the story because I haven't seen it yet.
If, with a capital I and a capital F, if this is true, this is n this is inexplicable to me if some independent like blue ribbon think 9-11 Commission.
Think think independent blue ribbon commission is now going to decide whether or not there is the authority to do these intercepts.
Uh the president is participating in weakening his own authority to act as commander-in-chief and to take steps to protect the country from future attack.
Regardless if this is true or not, well no, if it's true, this this won't be good enough for the libs.
What do we keep what I should I should I should refrain from comment until I get the actual details of it?
Because I'm acting on very, very sketchy uh information.
I'll get the information to you, the details as soon as I can track it down.
Uh other news items uh out there.
Dozens of Duke University professors have posted an open oh, by the way, this is we've got an audio soundbite.
Let me find the audio soundbite because I'm gonna need it here.
Grab uh grab uh audio soundbite uh 14 and uh 15.
Because I'm gonna need those this uh here in just a second.
Dozens of Duke University professors have posted an open letter to the Duke community on the web explaining an ad last spring that has been widely criticized as a condemnation of lacrosse players.
The new letter signed by 87 faculty and posted at uh WWW.concerned Duke Faculty.org, refuses to apologize for the ad last year and reiterates concerns about issues of race and sexual violence on the Duke campus.
It says the so-called group of eighty-eight.
That ad published in the Chronicle last April has been grossly misinterpreted.
That ad has been a subject of heated debate on blogs, and its signers have received angry and sometimes racist email messages.
The letter said the ad has been read as comment on the alleged rape, the team party or the specific students accused.
Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case.
We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.
Right.
This is laughable.
The letter was signed by a concerned faculty, many of whom uh endorsed the original ad.
The ad entitled What Does a Social Disaster Sound Like included anonymous statements by students talking about racism and sexism on the campus.
The ad also thanked protesters making collective noise.
The letter this week has backed off that a bit, saying we do not endorse every demonstration that took place at the time.
William Chafe, a history professor who signed both the ad and the letter, said the blogger's interpretation of the ad has become the version people accepted, and that's wrong, he said.
We're we're we're trying to simply set the record straight and clarify we never claimed lacrosse players were guilty.
Well, no matter what happens with the lacrosse sexual assault case, the letter said issues of race and sexual violence still exist on campus and should be addressed.
Yeah, but you know, it seems to me the issue of race has more to do with the harassment of white men at Duke than it does with uh with anybody else.
The rhetoric has been heated on the Duke campus where President Richard Broadhead has called for a restoration of the fabric of mutual respect.
Yeah, yeah, for the mutual respect after the fact when you guys are taking a bunch of heat.
This place is not going to get itself back to normal until knife wong is gone, until broadheads go.
This this is this is this is remains to me one of the biggest utter disasters of the American American criminal justice system that I can recall.
And there are there are a few.
I mean, they're not that unique, but this to me is the PS the resistance.
At any rate, I remember this ad, this ad of eighty-eight, and one of the one of the women in that ad was this uh Kim, Kim, whatever last name is, just this utter whack of feminist visiting professor.
There's no question that these professors, these people that sign this thing, all bought into the template that all liberals buy into, that rich white guys rape and pillage and destroy and harm poor black people.
It's just it's it's it's good.
It's a great illustration of what liberalism is.
It's on display.
And now Paula Zahn last night devoted a half hour to this case on CNN.
By the way, did you hear?
I just saw this today.
CNN is going high definition in the spr in the fall.
And September, October this year, CNN is going HD.
Uh in fact, DirecTV launching a couple, this is a total aside.
Uh the uh DirecTV is gonna launch a couple satellites in the summer, and they're gonna be offering 100 HD channels uh starting sometime this fall.
You're gonna need a new dish, you're gonna need new receivers in order to um receive it.
What you have now will not be obsoleted, but if you want to get all these new HD channels, which of course I think HD is incomparable.
It really you know what I there was a story.
I have a I have a bunch of sites devoted to HD.
There are a bunch of geeks and nerds out there that are into it, and I have some of them bookmarked.
And they went out and they did a survey of HD geeks, like me.
I'm an HD geek.
And these HD geeks said they would prefer to watch the Super Bowl on television on their big screen HDs rather than go to the event.
When I read that, I can understand this.
It's like being there in terms of the way it looks without without all the hassle.
The only thing is that these networks that cover it show you a bunch of worthless crowd shots of drunken idiots in the stands that rather not have to look at, but there's a price to pay for everything.
Anyway, Paul is on last night CNN managed to find a feminist professor who still thinks the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case is the victim.
Out in the open, the Duke Assault case, a question of race, Zon interviewed Wheelock college professor Gail Dines, and she said, I've talked with a number of people today who think that it was the players who got a really raw deal here.
Gail, I know you don't agree with that perception at all.
Absolutely not.
I think this woman has been hung out to dry by the media.
I think questions about her morality, her emotional stability, her psychological stability, which is what happens to women in rape cases, and especially to women of color.
I think what this case is about is not only sexism but racism.
There's no question that all women by the media are basically hung out to dry when they they even call her the accuser instead of the so-called the victim.
So just the way that they've turned her into somehow a perpetrator against these males.
Wait a second.
I just thought we got through reading this big bunch of pebblum from the 87 Duke professors that they want to wait and not try the case in the media.
And they don't want to hear about uh whatever is the truth here until the courts decide that all of a sudden this woman's the victim.
The rape happened.
And this is one of these hoiti toily elitist erudite nose in the air libs, who's out there convenient, Even though the accuser has changed her story, gosh, how many times?
In really significant ways.
One thing that has been absent in this whole scenario is common sense.
And somehow common sense has no place in the law, at least at times, and that is an absolute shame.
Next question from Paul Azan.
When you hear all of the racial rhetoric that seems to be circulating surrounding the case, what does that make you think?
It's unfortunate.
Oh, wait a time.
Type out time out.
This is the accuser's cousin.
Requeue this.
I forgot this is this is not the Hoity Torty liberal professor.
This is now the accuser's cousin who's been asked what she thinks about all this racial connotations.
It's unfortunate that it's turned into race.
But it's always been there.
It sensationalizes the story.
You know, it's got class and it's got race in it.
And I think from day one, a lot of people felt that these were these were privileged young white boys who felt like they could treat these young women.
Strippers or not.
I think they had the mentality that they were superior to these young women.
And I think that's unfortunate.
And I think that that's just the world we live in.
Right.
See, so whether or not the rape happened, these guys are still guilty because they're white and they're supposedly privileged.
We don't even know that.
And they're superiorists.
And they hired the black stripper, doesn't even have to be a stripper.
Hire a black babe to come over just to make her feel like an insignificant piece of human debris.
Because that's who they are.
And whether the rape happened, see the nature of the evidence is irrelevant here.
This woman is telling us exactly how liberals look at this.
These guys are guilty just because they're just they're guilty.
They're on the lacrosse team.
They're white, they're privileged.
Stripper was guilty.
This is a microcosm for what's wrong with America.
America's guilty.
This is an outrage because these people control the judicial system in that county.
And these people control a you know a bunch of the opinion-making decision in that uh in Durham County.
Uh, and they're a bunch of flat-earthed, closed-minded bigots themselves who are trying to say to everybody else that's what you are.
These people define racists, they define sexism and they define bigotry and they define prejudice.
Back in just a second.
I think I've got the perfect way to describe Barack Obama and why.
There seems to be this mass adulation for Barack Obama, a veritable unknown.
The guy goes to Massachusetts and draws gazillions.
He is godlike to the godless.
Barack Obama, godlike to the godless.
Ladies and gentlemen, it's true.
The Justice Department, easing a Bush administration policy, said today that it has decided to give an independent body authority to monitor the government's controversial domestic spying program.
In a letter to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said this authority has been given to the FISA court.
Wonderful.
And that it already is approved one request for monitoring the communications of a person.
This is pathetic.
Pardon my anger.
Spent the whole year last year saying this wasn't necessary.
The administration said it wasn't necessary.
It isn't necessary.
Now all of a sudden, we're gonna do it.
This is weakening presidential authority, throwing all this the Pfizer court.
We know the are the Pfizer court's gonna delay all this.
There's about warrants, it's all about warrantless uh wire types of of known terrorists.
This this this is I can't tell you how frustrating this is.
Just cave to every damn thing the liberals want.
Let's just start, get done with it so we can start fresh.
Just throw everything to hell and start rebuilding from there.
Give them everything they want, Mr. President.
It still isn't gonna make them happy.
This isn't gonna make them happy.
This is blood in the water.
This is gonna only if all this is gonna do is embolden them.
This frosts me.
Emily in San Francisco, thanks, Emily, for calling.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Thank you for teaching us every day.
That's what President Truman said.
the press should be to teach the people.
And that's what you do with facts and honesty.
You know, you're not any uh rather Dan rather making up documents or uh New York Times having liars for for writers, you know.
I thank you.
But you know what I was going to ask you about the anti-war left uh foreign policy of the Democrats.
If you recall with President uh d uh FDR, we went into war, but we were allied with the communist uh Russia, so that the left said that was okay.
But Truman, he left town without anyone saying goodbye on the you know uh uh when he left town on the train.
So uh Kennedy was assassinated after he stopped the Russian nukes, and also uh Truman gave us the war, uh Vietnam war.
Uh Kennedy escalated the war, so he had to be let go.
He was assassinated by a communist Johnson.
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait.
How do we you you mean you Lee Harvey Oswald?
Yes, Lee Harry Oswald.
He came from Russia and okay.
I just yeah, I just I I just I thought maybe you had a new name, like maybe Khrushchev pulled a trigger or something.
Yeah, right.
Uh Johnson, of course, you know, he was forced out, and uh and then Nixon, they forced him out, as you know, and then and then they cut the funds and we cut cut and ran from Vietnam and they cut the funds for the poor South Vietnamese who were left to die and were slaughtered by the uh communists, and that was another nation that was left uh uh to communism.
Then we had Carter, he forced the Shah out of Iran, and then of course we now today have Akmina Ahmadinajad, who was given nuclear weapons by Bill Clinton uh because he said he was g he just wanted them to heat the heat the desert.
No, but that that that that was that was uh heat the desert.
That was uh North Korea, where uh Clinton gave uh the little uh potbelly dictator uh nuclear reactors with a promise he wouldn't turn them into weapons, ha ha.
Yes, and and what are you saying here, Emily?
What are you saying?
I mean, let's cut to the chase.
I'm saying is these anti-war leftists have stopped the foreign policy, the results of their foreign policy has damaged this country so that today we're facing Ahmadinejad in this hemisphere with uh Chavez and and the or Ortega, the Nicaraguan uh uh communist.
They're we're we're worse off today because of their foreign policy.
And whereas with Reagan, he brought down the Soviet Union and uh he he uh increased our military and made it strong, where Carter left it without even bullets uh for the for our uh soldiers.
And uh President Bush won the Persian Gulf War and uh within days and the w now then we became the world power, the sole world power.
Every time we get the Democrats back into power, this is what happens.
We become weaker and weaker, and if and this war, according to what the the uh people who know, they say it's gonna against the Islamists is gonna last a hundred years.
And it's not gonna go be overnight.
It's not President Bush's war, it's our war.
We've been attacked and hated.
And so I thank you for all the facts you've given us, Russia, and you know so much, and it's so hard to keep up, but I don't know how you do it.
Well, it takes brains, commitment, passion, concern, and caring.
Well, you're a wonderful man and we love you very much.
Thank you.
Emily, let me ask you.
I Sure.
You you have said uh I'm sure some people are interpreting what you're saying.
The Democrats have done everything they can to prop up communist regimes.
They have they have whether by accident or by design, they refuse to see communism as a problem.
Uh and in fact they strengthen it.
Today militant Islamism has replaced communism as um as as the big threat we face.
Is that your intent?
Yes, and and they have stopped us from winning any war.
They do not let us win wars.
They come in and they take away the money.
What about Kosovo?
What about Clinton and that that courageous victory from fifteen thousand feet?
Well, that was NATO fighting.
We we had very few forces there compared to NATO.
NATO was the one that was hiding that war.
But but Clinton ordered it.
Clinton got the credit.
He and he and uh Ashley Wilkes, you know, Wesley Clark was one of the generals in that in that conflict.
They're claiming great credit as great militarists.
Well it really I mean for uh I mean it's just like saying uh Obama is going to be a Reagan and is going to bring down a country like the the communists.
Emily, before I go, do you do you need security protection in San Francisco?
Oh, I sure do, but I just keep on because you know the truth has to win.
Yes, that's true.
And the truth does not need to be balanced.
Thank you, Emily.
That is a great short history lesson for people.
We'll be back and continue in a moment.
Okay, Coco at the website, the webmaster has just told me that the Heritage Foundation forum that I moderated on 24 last June is now posted the video, the audio, and a transcript.
And it's on the free side of the website so that Craig Crawford cannot accuse us of war profiteering as he has accused the 24 producers and the Fox Network.
Now, the reason we're reposting this, in case you're just joining us, or in case you missed Tisk Tisk Tisk, if so.
The first half hour of this program, the left and a drive-by media is in a tizzy over 24.
They're in an absolute t they think that this is propaganda by a television show.
The fact that I know these people, I'm sure, inspires them even more to think this cockamami kookery.
They think that this is propaganda designed to convince you that we really need to fear terrorists and support Bush.
And just to illustrate the level of hysteria that has been reached.
About a minute and a half.
It's from the Situation Room last night with Wolf Blitzer.
And the reporter is uh uh Carol Costello.
And you'll hear voices.
Uh one of the voices, Devin Gordon of Newsweek, and James Carafano of Heritage.
You also hear me in this.
One of the things they discuss is the 24 seminar that the Heritage Foundation sponsored.
I moderated.
Uh, and it had some cast members, it had the two creators, it had a lead writer, and it had two think tank guys, one from a liberal think tank and Carafano from the Heritage Foundation, discussing.
And all they would have to do, CNN is broadcast this, CNN sells a DVD of this.
War profiteering, by the way.
Uh all they'd have to do is watch it.
They are the producers, the writers have explained during the seminar what they do, how they go about it.
It's like that never happened.
No, we gotta sit here and make it up.
We gotta sit here and try to tell people that they are profiteering, that they are propagandizing, that they are trying to instill fear in the minds and hearts of the American people to support the Bush administration, then this is unconscionable.
Of course, it's fine to make idiotic movies like Al Gore and pollute the minds of little kids, skulls full of mush in grade school for crying out loud about the myth and lie of human-caused global warming.
It's okay for Hollywood to make war profiteer Steven Spielberg, Schindler's list anyone.
How about Clint Eastwood, Flags of Our Fathers, Envelopes of Our Fathers, Whatever the Hell?
How about uh how about what was uh the commander-in-chief for crying out loud?
ABC does a primetime television show that bombed, but it was all about Hillary Clinton as president.
That's fine.
We can condition the American people to accept Hillary or a woman as pres fine.
We can even give this actress Gina Davis awards as though she's president.
The UN actually did, but that's fine.
That's just entertainment.
How about this stupid environmental wacko movie the day after tomorrow when the whole world floods and astronauts are flying around?
Boy, you know the earth has never looked cleaner after the U.S. has been wiped out.
And the president, Dick Cheney look alike, has to relocate to Mexico, where our good friends, the Mexicans, give us life.
It's okay to make that garbage and to say that's just entertainment.
Well, everybody knows Hollywood's being used to try to influence hearts and minds, and by the way, that's one of the reasons a box office sucks.
That's not what people want out of their entertainment.
So anyway, now that you've done this this seminar is it's available.
It was broadcast on C-SPAN Live.
People could have watched it.
Of course, liberals can't can't be forced to do that, because that would force them to have to deal with reality rather than to make up all these scenarios.
Here's the report.
Is it as Newsweek magazine calls it, a neocon sex fantasy?
Twenty-four 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.
Stop the tape.
It's happened, Carol.
It's happening now.
We've blown them, we've we've blown up the rings.
Have you ever heard of the 19 hijackers of 911?
There are terrorist rings operating in this country, and they have.
Sending suicide bombers to subways and shopping malls, ordering up dirty bombs assembled right in California.
The tape.
What about the flight schools, Carol Babe?
Where they guys are going to school in Florida and Arizona, and they're telling the instructors we don't really care about how to land.
We just want to know how to fly these things.
Use our airplanes to blow up our buildings.
You think 24 so far?
Out of the realm of possibility.
Does everybody forget that 9-11 happened?
And how?
Now she's talking here about Jack Bauer.
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 Churtoff.
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.
Stop the tape.
Who cares, Carol?
Have I committed a crime?
The fact that I've posted a review of seats of them proves that I have taken over Hollywood.
Or at least, if not taken, I have infiltrated Hollywood.
This can't stand.
They own Hollywood.
It's enough they've lost radio.
And hey, and I'm telling you what, bring back the blacklist and put me on.
And it's and by the way, I wasn't invited to attend.
I moderated it.
Carol.
Justice Thomas is married to Jenny, who works at the Heritage Foundation.
He was in the audience watching.
The place was sold out.
It was full.
I don't know if it's cell tickets or not.
It was in the Reagan building.
Why don't you mention that?
An auditorium at the Reagan building.
That would really shake the rest of you up.
I'm 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.
So what?
And at any rate, uh the audio and video of this Heritage Foundation seminar, moderated and led and directed and steered by me, is now posted at my website.
It's up there, and it's on the free side, and I just want to warn you a little disclaimer here.
The Heritage Foundation video, which is what we've posted, wasn't the best.
And we eventually replaced it with the C-span version of the video, but we got the perfunctory C-span lawyer letters saying cease or desist or you die.
Uh because they sell a DVD of uh of the program, which their cameras also televised.
They're selling it for 2999, which according to Craig Crawford of Congressional Quarterly, it'd be war profiteering.
We had to take down the C-span video, but the bottom line is the video that's up there works.
It's not the best quality, but there is audio.
If you don't like the video and uh all else fails, there's a transcript up there.
Uh but we're I'm I despite these despite these uh disclaimers and warnings, I know I'm gonna get complaints about the video.
I know I'm gonna get complaints about the video.
It always happens.
And uh I'm just saying, go ahead and complain, but I'm not replying because I have warned you.
Um at any rate, uh, folks, it video is not that good as the Heritage Foundation did it.
And I don't know what went wrong or if anything did, but it's just not the best, and we're not presenting it as the best, but the audio is perfectly fine with it.
All right.
Craig in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Yeah.
Hey, ditto, Rush.
Yes, sir.
Uh I'll get right to the point.
Um regarding the clip between Matt uh Lauer and Hillary earlier.
I believe I heard Hillary say that she would threaten to cut off the personal protection for the Iraqi leaders if they didn't comply with our political timetable.
Yeah.
This struck me as very callous, and it seems to show a serious lack of judgment.
I mean, there's plenty of funding.
How does she expect to partner with these people if she places their very lies on the table?
Uh well, because that's it's just words.
This is not gonna be Hillary's campaigning.
The thing you've got to understand about all these Democrats, they're not talking about Iraq policy.
They are not enunciating things that they think are good for Iraq policy.
They are campaigning.
This is not about an idea for Iraq.
Hillary has a problem.
She voted for this war.
The anti-war fringe kook mainstream base of the Democratic Party is outraged at her.
They're embracing Obama.
Uh he is godlike to the godless.
And so she's got to do something, cut him off at the pass.
Iraq seems to be the big issue, so she's trying to come up with a variation that makes her ideas seem unique, and that is we cut off funds for the she can't dare talk about cutting off funds for the troops for Americans.
They can't do that.
They can talk about it, but it won't happen.
But she's calculating that the American people will sign on to not pay any Iraqis anymore.
See, and this is another mistake the administration's made, damn it.
This is about U.S. national security.
This whole business in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are not there to stabilize Iraq.
That may be the current phase of the battle, but that's not the objective.
We would never have gone to war to stabilize Iraq.
The American people wouldn't have supported that.
This is part of the war on terror.
And and and you know, we send out a mixed message here if all we're gonna say is that we gotta get this sectarian violence under wraps.
Of course that has to happen, but at the same time, the enemies of America are located there.
Al Qaeda and a bunch of different branches are there.
And how this has gotten left out of the rhetoric is uh is is beyond me.
But don't think that Hillary or anybody else on the Democrat side's coming up with a substantive idea to win this.
She's just she's just campaigning.
Back here in just a second.
Sorry about that, folks.
Printing problems.
That's why we have backups.
Rush Limbaugh back and the excellence in broadcasting network rolls on.
Mr. Snerdley has just reminded me of something.
How could we forget this?
Do you remember the Murphy Brown controversy with Dan Quayle?
Murphy Brown was a single mother working in some newsroom, TV newsroom, and she was parading around with uh she's an unwed mother.
And Quayle called CBS, this is this is this is not good for the morph.
And the left was livid.
The left was out.
How dare you quit a stock?
Why?
That's Candace Bergen.
How dare you, Quail?
Who the hell are you?
You're just the vice president.
Shut up.
You can't tell us what we can do in Hollywood.
You this is just entertainment.
You sh it wasn't long after that Candace Bergen actually agreed with what Quayle had said after the series ended, I think.
Uh she'd actually she actually agreed with it.
But the point is that they raged about that for months.
They raged about it for months.
Now here comes 24, and they just it's it's just typical.
These people, biggest hypocrites.
I I just, you know, one of my favorite shows is Boston Legal.
And that may surprise some of you because Boston Legal routinely mocks and makes fun of conservatives.
Denny Crane, my favorite character on this show, played by William Shatner, is the lone conservative on it, and he's the biggest buffoon on the face of the earth.
I would no more suggest that Boston legal shut down or change Denny Crane's care.
Because I laugh, I'm I I can laugh at Myself and I can laugh at conservatism.
And I taking all this stuff so seriously is just what amazes me.
But this is an industry to libs.
It's like education.
They own it.
And anybody tries to muscle in on them is going to be destroyed.
Now let me tell you what happened on Boston Legal last night.
Denny Crane, who is played by William Shatner, who's the law firm is uh Crane, Crane, Crane, whatever, Crane, Crane, I forget the crane, what is it?
I forget the name of the firm, but he's the head honcho.
He's old now, he's on the verge of uh mad cow disease, he says.
Uh thinks he's got Alzheimer's, but doesn't, but he's just uh he's just a racantur.
And he gets he's gonna go fly someplace.
He's found out he's placed on the no fly list by Homeland Security.
Alan Shore, who is uh his best friend and a lawyer, not a member of the firm, but a lawyer in this room, played by James Spader, and by the way, brilliantly so.
Uh asked Denny Crank.
Crane calls, I'm gonna no fly, I'm on a no-fly list.
And and and and uh Shore says, have you called for help?
And Denny Crane, the only conservative on the program says, Well, I can't get anybody.
I call Tom Delay's numbers disconnected, Foley's got his hands full.
Frist said don't take it personally.
I called Clarence Thomas, his office said he was indisposed.
And then Alan Shore says, How have you tried going right to the top?
And Denny Crane says, What, Cheney?
No, I'm reading this.
It's good writing.
It's funny as I know some people, I can't believe you are telling people this is liberals.
I don't care.
It's funny.
And the Shatner character, even though I know it makes conservatives look like look like absolute buffoons, it is still hilarious to me.
Uh this this causes Alan Shore to go to a homeland security guy, uh uh official.
He says, Look, there is nobody more red, white, and blue than this man here, Denny Crane.
He is for the death penalty, he's pro-life, he doesn't read newspapers, he's exercised every loophole to avoid paying taxes.
He's even donated to the Jack Abramov bail fund.
During his closing argument, Alan Shore discussed the cost of changing the technology of Homeland Security.
This can't be undoable, expensive maybe, but judging from recent spending patterns, we got billions to throw around.
Halliburton alone was profited uh over 10 billion from the war.
Maybe we can get them to kick in.
Anyway, it's this program routinely.
Takes shots at conservatives and portrays conservatives.
Sometimes they have uh clients, the you know, the the people of the shows about the people in trouble.
They portray conservatives as uh uh racists and uh white supremacists and so forth.
But I mean, uh it's just some of it does there's some episodes have ticked me off a little bit, but I still eagerly watch.
I think it's funny, I think it's brilliantly written.
David Kelly show.
Never met David Kelly, but it's brilliantly written.
These people that get so upset about something like 24 just need to chill.
But there's a reason for their fear, and I asked a question again.
What is it that so threatens the drive-by media and the American left with the thought that the American people might actually see Islamo fascists as our enemy?
What is so threatening about that?
All right, uh, you know, I did I blew my top here a moment ago when the news hit that the president was gonna turn over the intercepts, the wireless uh intercepts uh to the FISA court, thereby surrendering more presidential authority,
and it's not gonna make the libs happy, but I remembered my own theory that I posited mere days ago, and that is that the Bush administration might possibly just be clearing the decks of every major fight other than stem cells.
They're not fighting anything.
They're not fighting minimum wage, and not fighting anything.
Get this off the table too.
Except Iraq.
NSA decision and turning it over to Pfizer court, that's you know, the libs can stop bickering about it all won't stop them.
Just gonna be blood in the water.
But the president wants Iraq to be the only thing we're arguing about because he knows that that's a weak point for the uh for the Democrats.
At any rate, that's just a theory, it's a hopeful theory, it's grasping its draws, and it's probably all wet.
Have a great day, folks, and I'll see you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection