All Episodes
Previous Next
March 9, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:37
March 9, 2007, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
It's the Rush Lindbaugh Program, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
And it's Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
All right, I apologize.
I've an optimized entire first hour with rhetoric and residents, my own.
So I'm going to take more phone calls for this hour because Open Line Friday.
Remember, when we go to the phones on Friday, you own the show.
You can talk about whatever you want.
I mean, we're not going to relax standards.
We're not any of that.
We're not going to take calls that would bore you, but we'll take calls that'll bore me.
If I don't care about it, we'll still take the call.
It's not a requirement as it is Monday through Thursday.
It could be a question, it could be a comment, it could be, if you want to whine and moan about something, you got something on your chest, you want to get it off.
Here's the number, 800-282-2882, and the email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
Well, the Democrats are out there with their now 17th resolution on getting us out of Iraq with a date certain, and they are making an absolute joke of themselves.
Meanwhile, this is from the Associated Press.
George W. Bush's troop buildup in Baghdad apparently will be bigger and more costly, and perhaps will last longer than it seemed when he unveiled the plan in January as the centerpiece for a new Iraq strategery.
Bush plan, the original plan, called for sending 21,500 extra combat troops to Iraq, mainly to Baghdad, with the last of the five brigades arriving by June, the estimated price tag $5.6 billion.
Officials have refused to say exactly how long it'll last, but Robert Gates, the defense secretary, suggested it could be over by fall.
In recent days, though, a different picture has emerged.
The total number of troops required for the plan, still uncertain, is climbing.
What are these poor Democrats going to do?
What are their kooks going to do?
The kooks are coming out of the woodworker beside themselves.
They are starting to protest at Democrat offices and on Capitol Hill.
When Bush announced the boost to 21,500 combat troops, the Pentagon said still others would be required to go with them in support roles.
The initial estimate of 2,400 support troops has now doubled, and it may go higher still.
When asked about the duration of the buildup, the Defense Secretary noted that funds for this purpose are only budgeted through September, which marks the end of the government's budget year.
This week, however, it was disclosed that Lieutenant General Ray Odiarno, a top commander in Iraq, has recommended the build-up stretch into 2008.
I'm laughing only because the Democrats are just going to be pulling.
They can't stop it.
No matter what they do, no matter how much they caterwall and bellyache, they can't stop it.
On the Today Show, Jack Murthy, author of the Slow Bleed, he appeared with Meredith Vieira, who said, Congressman, General Petraeus also said that it's going to take months, not weeks, to see if the surge is working, which would fight against this notion that you can remove all the troops by 2008.
Months, months is two months away.
I believe we'll be able to tell if this surge is working within a couple months.
Everybody in Iraq says we ought to be out of there.
We've become occupiers.
Everybody in the periphery says we ought to be out of there.
The American public spoke at the last election.
Well, if they did, Congressman Murtha, why in the hell are you having so much trouble getting the Congress to go along with your 17 resolutions?
I think it's back.
That's 17 in the Senate.
Maybe it's combined, what have you.
But if that's what the election was about, and if the polling data that you think you have is so accurate, why are you having so much trouble?
Seems like the American people would be storming the gates in Washington themselves to get us out of Iraq if what you believe to be true is true.
Also, it is not accurate to say that everybody in Iraq says we ought to be out of there.
There are countless many in Iraq who want us nowhere but there.
Ditto, Afghanistan.
The mayor of the Vieira then said, well, look, the White House has already said that if this bill ever reaches the president's desk, he'll veto it.
So how is it different from the purely symbolic, non-binding resolution that was passed a few weeks ago?
It forces the president to certify that there's making their progress in Iraq.
Now, people say, well, he'll certify anyway.
That's not true.
He's not going to certify that troops are not trained and not equipped before they go into combat.
So this is a very tough bill.
And then we'll work our way through the committee.
We'll work it through the House.
And then we'll negotiate with the Senate for a bill that will reduce the cost of this war and reduce the war itself.
It's a pipe dream.
It's not going to happen.
The Senate is not going to go anywhere near this.
So at any rate, just great news here.
The troops buildup is going to be larger.
It's going to be longer than the Democrats can't do a thing to stop it, which is only going to drive them crazier.
You have to understand, in context here, the Democrats have all these resolutions.
They think they have this electoral mandate from last November.
And they're out there and they're huffing and puffing.
And they're going to get us out.
And they're going to paper this administration with resolution after resolution after resolution.
They're going to isolate George W. Bush.
And they're having no impact at all on the substance of all this.
They're getting nowhere near getting troops out of there.
They're getting nowhere near defunding or even partially funding, nowhere near it.
They've got defections in their own caucus.
The blue dog Democrats, the conservative Democrats are giving Pelosi fits on this.
They did have some Republicans that were peeled off to support them.
Then Murtha leaked the plans of his slow bleed, and a bunch of Democrats, Republicans, oh, we can't be part of that.
So they don't even have some of the Republican votes that they have.
All right.
Now, I'm going to go to the phones here for the remaining moments of our monologue segment because I monopolized all the time in the first hour.
Who are we starting with?
John in Tampa, Florida.
Thank you for waiting, sir, and welcome to the EIB network.
Well, Rush Limblaugh, God bless you, and it's good to talk to you for a first time.
Hey, something that has been on my mind for a while, and I think it kind of falls on the lap of both the puppet Congress of the Liberal Party that's in there and our own conservatives is that the oil prices, we keep hearing a lot of excuses for the gas prices being a result of oil prices going up or refineries just producing and converting to oil.
However, when I'm reading the Wall Street Journal and I'm watching Exxon, you know, quarter after quarter, ever since Katrina reporting record profits, I just don't understand, you know, is there anybody out there, you know, that you see, whether it's a Congress or any of our presidential candidates, that is actually going to come from the puppet springs of the oil company, maybe actually do something about this group.
Well, wait, Are you upset that the gasoline price is rising?
Oh, not at all.
As a matter of fact, I love supporting Exxon.
I don't understand the question.
Why do you want the government to do something about it?
Well, I think that's, you know, what's bothering me is that they're using the excuse that it's the war and it's everything else, you know, that's causing that when they're in the record, you know, they're reporting records.
I think this is a case of the Democrats not being able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Gasoline price is up 31 cents in the last month.
Under normal circumstances, they would be bellyaching and whining and moaning, and they would be demanding the heads of big oil company executives.
And they'd be doing story after story after story on the human toll and the terrible suffering that is taking place all across America because the gas price is now back over $3.
The only thing I've seen on it was yesterday, I was watching PMS NBC here on one of my many monitors, that little crawl at the bottom of the screen, which said, gas price back over $3 with a couple exclamation points.
They were excited about it because they thought it was going to be another avenue to attack Bush.
Then today, all I've seen is there's a reason, and that is that refineries are not operating at capacity.
And that's normal for this time of year.
Refineries, we haven't built a refinery since 1976.
And the refineries that we have are doing other things with the oil other than making most of it into gasoline and jet fuel and so forth.
And that'll happen.
That switchover, by the way, will change pretty soon because they will have to start refining more and more for the so-called summer driving season.
Yeah, it's boutique fuel time.
It's ethanol and all these other little happy-go-lucky, phony baloney, plastic banana, good time alternative fuel deals that have bush down there.
And where is he, Brazil or is he in Argentina?
He's in Brazil.
Well, they do produce some pretty good-looking models, but beyond that, and they're using ethanol down there.
They make it from sugar.
Well, it is the number one export is models.
Underweight, size zero models.
That's about it.
Argentina's got a pretty good social security reform program, but they're just messing around down there with ethanol and runway models.
At any rate, I just don't think the Democrats have it on their agenda.
They're so flummoxed trying to appease their stupid kooks about Fox covering the debate about the Iraq war.
And you've got the elite strike force of the Democrats in the Senate led by Kerry threatening Pakistan if they don't get up to speed quick and start preemptively taking out terrorists while at the same time we're abandoning the war on terrorists in Iraq.
They're telling Pakistan, you're not going to get these F-16s that you've bought and you're not going to get any repairs and the others that you've got.
You guys got to start fighting terrorism.
The Democrats tell them this while we're pulling out or why they want us to pull out of Iraq.
I just don't think they can walk and chew gum at the same time.
I think they're sitting there, okay, we got the gas price up.
How do we use this?
But they just, they're not, it'll happen.
Give them a week or so, and if the price stays up, they'll be back there.
There are always market reasons for this.
But there's an interesting thing here, folks.
And I don't want you to forget this, and I don't want you to overlook this.
The gasoline price is up 31 cents in the last month, right?
Have you seen anywhere any signs of outrage on the part of the American people over it?
I haven't.
I frankly didn't even know the price was up 31 cents in the past month.
But I'm sure you did, but there is no outrage over it.
So it takes the media for there to be the perception of outrage.
Since the media is not caterwalling and bellyaching about this, there doesn't appear to be any crisis, does there?
Nobody's really upset about this.
I mean, nobody's breaking down the walls in Washington and demanding we don't, there aren't protests.
It's a great illustration of how the media creates a bubble and leads you along with it.
If they were doing stories on this and doing in-depth explanations on how big oil is profiteering and so forth and so on, I guarantee you there would be public outrage, or their perception would be that there was public outrage, but there isn't any.
And this is a crucial point to remember.
Now, some of you individually may be upset about it, but it is not made national news because of the people being upset, even if they are.
The media hasn't picked up on this.
And by the way, the Democrats, you know, in Pelosi's first hundred hours, hey, we're going to have this windfall profits tax.
And then, of course, Jake Bingaman, the senator from New Mexico in the Senate sort of shut that down.
So it was on their agenda to do something about this, along with the minimum wage.
Where's that?
The minimum wage are still arguing about it in conference committee.
Democrats, all these promises, going to get all these things done.
They aren't accomplishing anything.
Back in a sec.
Open line Friday, Rush Limbaugh Talent on loan from God, Tucson, Arizona.
I've been there.
This is Brian.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.
Hey, Rush, A10 Warhawk Dittos to you.
Pleasure to speak to you.
Well, thank you, sir.
Focus of the so-called Walter Reed scandal is not that the military and the Bush administration are abusing our servicemen.
The way the libs are caterwalling, it's like they're pretending like it's Gitmo North up there.
The focus needs to be, and it should be.
And if you listen to the comments of the people that have been complaining, it's the bureaucratic hell that is everything that is government-run.
I've been on active duty for nine years, and every time I come out of appointment or dealing with anything with the medical service, it's through no fault of the people in there.
It's a bureaucratic, it's a bureaucratic nightmare every time.
Yeah, exactly right.
And this is an excellent point, which is why I made it in a morning update a couple of days ago.
If you want government-run health care and you want to see what it's going to be like, take a look at the mess that supposedly exists at Walter Reed and some of these other hospitals.
It's classic.
It's not necessary, though, to look at Walter Reed.
You can look at the Canadian system or the British system, and you can see the same thing.
What the left, however, what the Democrats are going to do, and it's funny, too, because they always point to the VA and related agencies as being great examples of how the thing should be run.
And, of course, talk to veterans who have to deal with the VA.
You'll get a different story.
What they're going to do, they're going to look at this and they're going to point to it, and they're going to say, this is why we need the government in charge, not the Army.
And, of course, doofuses around the country go, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's stupid army can't do anything, can't win in Iraq, can't be terrorist, hate your army, yeah, get the army out of it and put the government in it.
There are people, the left has done this, they've weaned people who think the government's the answer to everything, and so they're going to use this to try to promote Hillary's already made reference to this.
Use the squalid so-called conditions at Walter Reed as an example of why we need the government to step in when, in fact, this is the government.
Let's go to Surprise Arizona.
Line one, that is Surprise Arizona, which Kansas City Royals trained there, by the way, a couple of other Major League Baseball teams.
This is Robert.
Welcome to the EIB Network, sir.
Hello.
Mega Dittos, Rush.
I've been listening for 15 years.
Thank you.
Well, I appreciate that.
Thank you, sir.
I have a question.
In all the changes of administrations through the years, why does the Ninth Circuit remain so liberal?
Well, let me take a stab at this.
One of the reasons is that for the eight years of the Clinton administration, there were a couple, three vacancies there.
And of course, they got populated with Clinton appointees.
The left has a claim on the Ninth Circuit.
And if a Republican president tries to nominate a Republican there, a bunch of parliamentary maneuvers are utilized to stop it.
Senators could put holds on the nomination for any reason without having to announce why and without even having to identify who they are that's placing the hold.
What generally happens in the general back and forth and bargaining of Washington, this is not the total explanation.
One of the things generally happens is that the left, the libs, will say to the Republicans, look, we want our guy on the Ninth Circuit, and we'll back out of the way and let you have your guy on some other circuit.
And the reason the Ninth Circuit is huge, I mean, the fact that it encompasses all of California alone makes it huge.
But do you know that the vast majority of cases that the Supreme Court, now it's not the vast, let me get this right.
It's the George Will column, and I'm trying to recall it.
George Will wrote a piece.
He basically said, we need two Supreme Courts.
We need one Supreme Court to deal with appeals from the Ninth Circuit and another Supreme Court to deal with all the other cases because there are so many appeals that come from the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court overturns the vast majority of them.
So whatever they do out there ends up getting overturned, but it is the left just has a lock on it.
You could almost look at that and say, why does the left have a lock on academe, higher education?
There was a story in USA Today that was on the front page of USA Today a couple days ago.
And you know, Congress, the Democrats, Pelosi, and this crowd, they announced they're going to have the most ethical Congress in history, and they came up with a whole bunch of new regulations and rules that take away some of the privileges members of Congress have, such as from whom they can accept charter air flights, and from whom they can accept gifts, and from whom they can accept financial assistance and so forth.
And there are a lot of exemptions that are now in the law.
But guess what one of the what there were a lot of new restrictions.
There was one major exemption to these new ethical rules, and it is this: there are no restrictions on members of Congress from accepting travel offered by major universities.
Major universities can pay to have congressmen fly all over the country, all over the world, and speeches, lectures, come in and do whatever.
And there's a little symbiotic relationship.
You know, Congress comes, we're going to cut, we're going to increase the deduction that you get for tuition on your tax return.
And that, everybody goes, yay, tax cuts for tuition.
We love education.
Just allows major universities to raise tuition.
It's symbiotic, and the same thing is with the left and the Ninth Circus.
We'll be back.
Yes, sir, Rebob.
Here we are having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Here's the money quote for the George Will column on the Ninth Circus in relation to Supreme Court that I just referenced.
There should be two Supreme Courts, one to reverse the Ninth U.S. Circuit, the other to hear all the other cases.
Last term, more of the Supreme Court's caseload, 18 of 82 cases, 22%, came from the Ninth Circuit based in San Francisco than from any other circuit.
And the ninth was reversed in 15 of the 18.
The ninth's winning percentage at the Supreme Court, 167, is worse than that of the 1962 Mets, which was 250.
On Monday, in the first decision of this term, Supreme Court reversed the ninth's fretfulness on behalf of Fernando Belmontis.
So those are the details.
Speaking of courts.
A divided three-judge D.C. circuit panel has held that the District of Columbia's gun control laws violate individuals' Second Amendment rights.
According to the majority opinion, quote, the phrase the right of the people, when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual.
The majority opinion sums up his holding on this point as follows.
To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.
That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution.
It was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government or a threat from abroad.
In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve this citizen militia.
The civic purpose was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served in part to placate their anti-Federalist opponents.
Despite the importance of the Second Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia.
Now, this is huge.
The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it's not a state.
The majority opinion concludes Section 72507.02, like the bar on carrying a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns for self-defense.
As such, we hold it unconstitutional.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, not to be confused with the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals, has just held that D.C.'s gun control laws violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals.
Now, this case, obviously, they're going to try to get this to the Supreme Court.
Nothing at the Supreme Court says they have to take it.
They don't have to take any case they don't want to.
But this is so groundbreaking.
This is so profound that the Supreme Court might consider this a pretty rosy candidate.
Well, here's the next day.
What will happen next is that people will go to, they'll ask for the whole 9th, the whole 12th circus, which you call imbanc.
This is just a three-judge panel.
They'll ask for the whole 12th Circuit to perhaps overturn this.
And if it is upheld by the whole 12th, the whole D.C. Circuit in bank, 12 judges, then we're talking about it maybe going to the Supreme Court.
Profound ruling.
Individual rights to keep and bear arms is what the Second Amendment is all about.
D.C. gun control laws, unconstitutional.
Three-judge panel, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Are you ready, ladies and gentlemen, for hegelmania?
Do you know what hegel mania is?
Well, no, I'm not joking.
I'm actually asking if people are ready for Hegel mania.
Senator Chuck Hagel said yesterday that he's going to announce his political future on Monday.
Everybody thinks that he's going to announce for the presidency, but there's been no word on whether he will say he's running for president or for re-election.
The Omaha World Herald wrote that Hegel acts like he's already running.
For a guy who hasn't announced a presidential bid, Senator Chuck Hagel's schedule next week looks a lot like that of a candidate.
He's slated to appear with nine declared presidential hopefuls, including McCain, Giuliani, Mrs. Bill Clinton, and Barry Obama before a national firefighters group.
He's meeting with his political action committee steering committee scheduled to attend a Nebraska GOP fundraiser in Washington.
With his solid conservative credentials, opposition to the Iraq War, and disgust with President Bush, told Esquire Magazine, before this is over, you might see calls for impeachment.
Some observers believe that Hegel could surge to the lead.
Who is saying this?
Who in the world is saying this?
No, this is from the USA Today blog.
Who's telling the bloggers at USA Today that some observers believe he could surge to the lead?
You know, there's an old saying out there that every senator looks in the mirror and sees a president looking back.
And this just suggests how self-important they think they are as senators.
It's also why they're rarely elected president.
They've never governed.
They're not executives.
They're basically delegators.
They got all his staff to go do all the reading and all the writing and prepare the questions for the hearings and so forth.
And something tough comes up and they got to just give it to the staff.
I'm busy.
I'm in Vegas.
You understand, Savior?
And they move on.
And then they show up on the right time and make it look like they're all prepared and so forth.
But they just, the Senate doesn't prepare people for the rigors of executive governance, such as governorships do.
I don't know.
Just trying to maintain my composure here.
Seem to be doing this, trying to do more and more.
Chuck Hagel, perhaps announcing for the presidency on Monday.
Here is John in Virginia Beach, Virginia.
You're next, sir, on the program.
Yes, sir.
I just want to talk about it.
Have you noticed how breathless the media has been and trying to report all these anti-Bush protests every time he goes to another country?
Oh, yeah.
Like it's something new that it should be anti-American protests, but it's something new because it's President Bush.
I mean, it's been going on for 40-something years.
It's a favorite sport of the left all around the world.
Yeah, but it doesn't matter.
It fits the template that they have.
And they find all these Brazilian kids wearing Bush-Hitler t-shirts and things like that.
doesn't matter to bush and it doesn't matter to the president of brazil who just stood up there and said america is our number one trading partner and that's gonna isn't just the left being left They're miserable or unhappy.
They hate themselves.
They hate the world.
And, you know, it's another classic example.
You're right.
They've been protesting America all of these years, but why hate George Bush?
Of all the country.
What in the world has Bush done to Brazil?
Well, it doesn't anything.
Brazil, I don't think even has a contingent in Iraq.
This is purely media manufactured and leftist manufactured.
And when you start talking about why these people have such a personal hatred and disgust for somebody they don't even know and have never even met, who is not doing anything to them, you have to start digging deeper into their own psyche to try to find the answer.
These people are not normal.
There's a, you know, the order of french fries short of a full happy meal out there on the left.
And it's just, it's a sight to behold.
I don't feel sorry for them.
I just, you know, I'm wary of them, but I think they're nuts, think they're insane and loco.
They've got to be so much more to do in Brazil today than run around and make a fool of yourself.
Could also be a factor.
Everybody wants to be part of the story.
The cameras are out there, as in the Princess Da funeral bill in Poughkeepsie, New York.
Thank you for waiting.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, Rosh Ditto.
Thanks for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
You've had some calls lately asking you to do more and what can you do, et cetera.
I was thinking about that.
It seems to me that 2008 is going to be about one issue.
It's the identity of the American nation.
Who are we?
What are we?
How much control do we have over our own destiny?
The Europeans think we should have none of that.
I think the Republican candidate in 2008 is going to have to say, this is what America is.
This is what we stand for.
And we will make of ourselves what we want to be.
All right.
Now, you're confirming what I said yesterday.
We need leadership.
You know, it's exactly what Reagan talked about America, the greatness of America, the goodness of America, the destiny of America.
We have a rendezvous with destiny, he said.
And right now, and it may happen in this campaign.
Right now, what we're getting is candidates talking on policy.
Mrs. Clinton is just, in fact, even Dana Milbake at the Washington Post today writing a story about how trite Mrs. Clinton is being.
She's done, just go out there and make the right statement on the right issue to the right audience.
I don't, when I look at the Democrat list of candidates, I don't see them even being interested in the definition of the country and what they are.
They're more concerned about what other people think of what we are rather than defining who we are.
And when you're concerned about what other people think, you're letting them define you, folks.
Now, I got this big long monologue about leadership yesterday.
It was strictly a riff off the top of my head.
No advanced thought, no preparation, just utter, pure broadcast professionalism.
Lo and behold, I get up today and I'm going through the news in the show prep.
And a story here by our buddy Ron Fournier in the Associated Press.
Lies from the White House, incompetence in treating wounded veterans, irrelevance in Congress.
Can't anybody do anything right?
It's days like these that turn Americans sour on government, stoking a desire for leaders who actually lead.
Exhibit A, the perjury conviction of Scooter Libby, whose trial cast unflattering light on the Bush White House or the mainstream media.
Exhibit B, they get talking about Walter Reed and so forth.
Nearly three-quarters of Americans, the CNN poll, no wonder that 78% of Americans said in a CNN poll a few months ago that government's broken and the public's lack of faith in leadership doesn't stop with the government.
Nearly 75% of Americans think U.S. society faces a leadership crisis, according to a report by the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government late last year.
It tracked a loss of faith in the people who lead businesses, churches and screws, and the drive-bys, as well as federal, state, and local governments.
Could it be an economic populist like Democrat John Edwards who will lead the nation, talks of two Americas, self-styled maverick like McCain, who calls Americans to sacrifice and service?
Perhaps the agent of change is in the current field of 2008 presidential candidates, but nobody sees the mantle so far.
What did I tell you yesterday?
That the one thing we're not getting from anybody, any camp, I don't care where they are, is no sense of leadership.
And here's a quote even from Joe Trippi.
I actually think these people were listening to this program yesterday to put this story together.
Here's Joe Trippi.
You know, Howard Dean's miraculous campaign for the presidency in 2004.
It's clear there's a growing frustration with leadership in politics and everything.
It started in the 90s.
It's been growing with a fever pitch now with Olibby being found guilty, Walter Reed and other stuff.
Where the heck's leadership, any leadership?
Maybe the single most relevant question of the 2008 race.
Drive by Sama today.
I had it yesterday.
It's Open Line Friday, El Rushbow and the EIB Network.
Just checking the email.
Rush, Rush, Rush, when you guys start talking about Newt Gingrich.
What do they mean?
Newt's announcement that he had an affair?
Folks, I hate to tell you that it is not news.
Now, I know what Newt's doing with this.
I mean, Newt's taking ownership of it, and he's getting it out there early before any of the opponents.
If he decides to get in a race, any of the opponents bring it up.
But it's not news.
I mean, everybody's known that this happened.
What's interesting about it to me, he admitted it in an interview with James Dobson, a focus on the family.
And he admitted, you know, I've failed to meet my own expectations.
I failed to meet the expectations of God, standards of God, and so forth.
I don't know.
It piques my interest in the fact he may be considering running.
Get it out there now.
Why bring this up?
Nobody else has brought it up.
It's old news.
Everybody knew this.
I saw it yesterday.
I said, whoop-de-doo.
It's out there.
It's time for Clinton to announce another affair he had that we don't know about.
Or maybe admit again that he had sex with Ms. Lewinsky.
You know, keep the ball on a level playing field.
San Diego, this is Keith.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB network.
Hi.
I love your show, but I disagree with the fundamental premise you take that the conservative movement is advancing.
I just see the conservative principles in America as slowly dying.
And maybe we slow that down a little bit when Ronald Reagan takes over or something like that.
But the secular humanists just seem to be taking over the country little by little.
Well, the brakes have been put on that.
I know it's a challenge out there, but I just cannot accept the premise that conservatism is dying when I am thriving and I am conservatism.
Well, I think your medium is popular and there's a lot of conservatives still in America, but I just think conservatives need a major reformation around fundamental principles.
I think we need to rethink the whole enlightenment, the idea that you don't need God, you don't need, you know, that intellectualism is going to save us and all that.
And I just see that.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Why do you think there's been a fallback in that?
Well, in my lifetime.
Let me tell you something.
If there were no conservative movement, we would have already signed the Kyoto Accords.
You would have already lost a bunch of freedom and Earth would be your new God and you wouldn't be allowed to mention Jesus Christ.
Well, just because it's happened slower in America doesn't mean that the same pattern that happened in Europe isn't happening in America.
I think that we're slowly but surely following the same pattern as France and Germany and the UK, albeit we're a little behind them because we're so fundamental religiously.
Good point.
The number of quote-unquote leaders and self-admitted braggart intellectuals in Europe that say they believe in God is at an all-time high, say they don't believe in God is at an all-time high.
You know, we talk about leadership, and one thing that I think America's lost sight of with regard to political leadership is that in order to be a good leader, you need to say what you believe most fundamentally.
You can't just be a technician like Hillary is.
You need to be able to say, hey, here's what we believe.
And I think that's what conservatives need is some good leaders that will say, hey, look, we're opposed to.
I understand what you're saying.
And if I allowed myself to, I could be absorbed and immersed in all of the apparent failures, the Woods society, the pop culture interests that people have, how they're devoid of substance.
But that's always been the case with young people through any generation.
This is an ongoing battle, and it will always be.
It has always been.
There's never going to be a triumph, or the country is totally conservative.
It's always something we're going to have to battle the left on, and you've got to get used to it.
All right, listen up, folks.
No white man can understand the experience a woman has to go through to move ahead.
▲
Export Selection