All Episodes
Previous Next
March 27, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:17
March 27, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ha, how are you?
Great to have you here on the EIB network at Rush Limbaugh behind a golden EIB microphone, executing assigned host duties flawlessly.
Zero mistakes, and there will not be any mistakes because the program is me.
Whatever I do, and since I am not a mistake, there will not be any mistakes unless engineering screws up.
Telephone number 800-282-2882, email address rush at EIBnet.com.
Now, Snerdley reports getting a lot of phone calls from people who remember that they thought the president was going to veto the campaign finance bill and didn't.
And he sent it up Supreme Court, let the Supreme Court fix it, and the Supreme Court authorized it.
And we got saddled with it.
And as I pointed out yesterday in a brilliant morning update, all that campaign reform did was get Republicans out of office.
Excuse me.
Don't know why I laugh at that.
It's not funny.
Nevertheless, the president has been forceful on this, and people are upset here that the Senate's going to go ahead and pass the House bill almost intact.
Now, interestingly, though, McCain said he's going to leave the campaign trail to go back to the Senate and vote against it.
Now, that's interesting because here's the Senate plan.
The Senate plan, Republican plan, is to just go ahead and vote for everything those idiots in the House voted for and get it done so that the conference committee between the House and the Senate can get to work and send a bill up to the president, which would be pretty much what the House bill was, and so we can veto it.
And veto it in a very public ceremony that will contain a lot of education and information, the American people, what the hell is in this bill and why he's vetoing it.
It's a great opportunity here.
A lot of people are scared to death.
Oh, no, what if the president goes back to his word and doesn't veto it?
I understand why you feel that way.
Now, McCain, he's going to go back, leave the campaign.
I think I read he's got an appearance in Florida.
He's going to go back and vote for it.
I might not be Florida.
I don't know where he is.
But now that's interesting because that gives you a little insight on what presidential candidates think they have to do.
If he votes for the bill, he's very much worried that these guys who are not in the Senate, like Romney and Giuliani, can make a campaign commercial out of the fact that McCain voted for $24 million of pork and force McCain.
No, no, no, what I was doing, I supported your president.
It's a blasphemy.
And of course, you know how people are.
I mean, they pay attention to the first charge and never hear the explanation of it.
So McCain may be forced to vote against this when the Senate colleagues are voting for it.
Anyway, Helen Thomas, the White House press briefing today with Dana Perino sitting in for Tony Snow, asked, how does the president feel about the Senate Republicans leaving him holding the bag on a veto on the Iraq pullout?
I read the reporting this morning that indicated that somehow the Senate Republicans were defying the president.
Actually, that's not the case.
In fact, last week when the president met with the Senate Republican leadership, they talked about needing to go ahead and get this vote over with and get the bill to the president's desk so he could veto it so that they could go on and get to the business of presenting the president a clean bill.
It was a plan.
Yeah, if you looked at the president's remarks on Friday, he indicated that.
Helen Thomas thinks it's a conspiracy now.
It's a conspiracy, folks, because Bush met with the Senate Republicans and they planned something.
And they did it in secret, and now the White House press secretary has made it known.
It was a plan?
Really?
Well, who can we subpoena on that?
Who can we bring up and make them take the fifth on that?
So I offer this soundbite here as just a little reassurance for you people out there worried that the president would not veto it.
I think he clearly wants to.
I think you'd like to veto it today to tell you the truth.
As I said, you might not have.
Oh, oh, one reminder here, folks.
We started this yesterday.
This is way cool.
Yesterday marked the first edition of the Rush in a Hurry email show notes.
You go up there and you sign up.
You don't have to be a member.
You don't have to do anything.
Well, you have to sign up, but it's easy.
You just go to a little red box halfway down on the right side of rushlimbaugh.com and sign up, and you'll receive by 4 o'clock every afternoon an email of highlights of the program that you will see in full detail when the site is updated later on in the afternoon.
So about 4 o'clock Eastern, an hour after each show, your email box will receive the Rush in a Hurry email show notes.
It's free.
Zip Zero Nada is what it'll cost you.
You just click the Rush in a Hurry red box in the middle of the right side of the homepage at rushlimbaugh.com.
A little extra incentive for giving away eight 80-gig iPods, one a week, for the next eight weeks, and they are engraved with a perfect reproduction of Ma signature.
And these people that win these will be randomly selected.
No science to it.
So everybody has an equal chance of winning.
I don't even get one, folks.
I mean, we've got eight, and I don't even have one.
Well, I've signed up.
I did.
I signed up.
What do you mean I can sign my own iPod?
Yes, I could do it, but you would think that this is like the Rush for Peace coffee mugs, which are soon to be coming off the production line, by the way.
I, like you, I'm getting a little impatient with this.
I want my Rush for Peace coffee mug.
You know, this Nobel Peace Prize nomination sort of fading into the ether out there.
I got to keep that alive, along with the thriving club Gitmo business.
We've got t-shirts out there for the Rush Nobel Peace Prize nomination that memorialize that.
But the Rush Peace mugs are big, and they're free to anybody that orders a new subscription to the website in a limbo letter.
Well, usually I get advanced versions of these things.
I've not gotten an 80-gig iPod with my own engraved signature.
So the fact I could go out and get one of my own, yes, but why when we're giving them away, why should I pay for one?
I'm paying for all eight.
So why don't I just steal one?
At any rate, folks, it's a cool little service.
It gives you a heads up about what's coming on the website.
And about that, you know, we've got this, we've got the new format of the website.
And normally we were able to update the website between 5.30 and 6 Eastern time each day.
It's taking sometimes to 6.30 or 7 because it's a little bit more complicated interface on the back end.
And it does take a little bit more time to activate it to clear out all the caches at our massive server farm.
But we're working on this and it will get back to normal in terms of update time as quickly as possible.
Now, good news out there, boys, in case you managed to miss this.
Right before the end of the hour, a drunken woman, this is news from the UK, a drunken woman can still consent to sex, according to the UK Court of Appeal.
I'm starting to really dig the evolution here of feminism.
First, this German judge says it's okay for an Islamic guy to beat the hell out of his wife because it's in the Koran, even though Sharia law and Islamic law is not the cultural norm of Germany.
This guy can still beat the crap out of his wife and get away with it because it's his religion.
You think of the possibilities here.
Now, in the UK, three senior judges have consented to clear the way for a clear a 25-year-old man of raping a student who was 19 after both had been drinking heavily.
Sir Igor Judge, sitting with Lady Justice Hallett and Mrs. Justice Gloucester, said sex would amount to rape if the complainant had lost her capacity to choose as a result of drink.
However, where the complainant has voluntarily consumed even substantial quantities of adult beverages, but nevertheless remains capable of choosing whether or not to have intercourse and in drink.
While consuming adult beverages agrees to do so, this would not be rape.
The judges could not set a level of alcohol consumption that would negate consent, they explained.
Otherwise, provisions intended to protect women from sexual assaults might very well be conflated into a system which would provide patronizing interference with the right of autonomous adults to make personal decisions for themselves.
What these judges are saying is: hey, you're adults, 19 and on up, you're adults.
You're out there consuming adult beverages with some guy.
And if you consent, and even though you've been consuming adult beverage, if you consent, then that can't come around later and say you were raped or taken advantage of.
You got to accept responsibility for what you're doing, including swallowing the adult beverages.
That's what they're saying.
Benjamin Bree, a university-educated computer software engineer from Southampton of excellent previous character, quote unquote, was told after an appeal hearing earlier this month that his rape conviction would be quashed.
He had served nearly five months of a five-year sentence.
Criticizing the way that Judge Jarvis had summed up the case, the Court of Appeal said the jury's verdict would not be regarded as safe.
So yesterday the court decided not to order a retrial.
Mr. Bree, who was in tears after the ruling, was advised by his lawyers not to talk to the drive-by media.
He was convicted at the Bournemouth Crown Court last October for raping a university student who shared a flat with his brother, also a student at the same school.
Michael Bree and his girlfriend Holly spent an evening in February last year consuming adult beverages with Mr. Bree, and the complainant identified as M.
She drank two pints of cider.
And over the evening, between four and six, vodkas, Mr. Bree, who had been drinking earlier in the day, drank two pints of lager.
Then he too moved on to vodka and Red Bull.
The girls walked back to her flat, letting themselves in, but both girls were badly affected by drink.
Holly was sick in the kitchen.
M was sick in the shower.
Mr. Bree helped her wash her hair.
M's next memory, she said, was finding herself on the bed.
Mr. Bree was having sex with her.
She told the jury she had not consented.
After Mr. Bree was arrested, he appeared shocked and upset.
His case was that although M may have become less inhibited because she was drunk, she was lucid enough to consent to sex and that she had done so.
Mr. Bree told the cops that she seemed keen on sex.
And the Court of Appeal found in his favor, yesterday, overturning a previous verdict.
Some total drunk women can consent to sex.
In England, yes, this is in England.
Yes, this is in England.
But the way I read it, what these judges are saying, hey, if you're going to be responsible to take the first drink, you've got to hold you responsible for that too.
I mean, there are consequences to actions.
Very odd.
This is, you know, this is taking away the victim status of a woman.
And that's profound.
Because I don't care where you go in American culture today, women are victims of everything.
I mean, they're victims of having been born, should have been aborted.
So after they have to undergo the humility and the degradation of being born, then they grow up a second class.
They're victims of everything.
Predatory males, motherhood, you name it.
Glass ceiling, it's all over the place out there that they're victims.
Now, this Court of Appeal in the UK is trying to bring some alternate thinking to this.
Anyway, a little long here in this segment.
A brief timeout.
We'll be back and continue in a moment.
Sense why you're fit to be tied in smoking today.
A call from the ex.
You should change the number.
Welcome back, 800-282-2882 and the email address, RussianEIBNet.com.
This is Redding, California.
Matt, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Hello, I got a comment regarding, it seems to be making a lot of waves that the lady isn't willing to testify on the investigation regarding the U.S. attorneys.
And I seem to think that that's going to be a coming trend as the Democrats reap what they sow after the Scooter-Libby deal.
Yeah, you know, this is interesting.
The New York Times has this story.
Aide de Gonzalez won't testify about dismissals.
What is this woman's name?
Monica Goodling, the Justice Department's White House liaison, who helped coordinate the dismissals, asserted her Fifth Amendment protection against compelled self-incrimination in a letter that her lawyers sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
In the letter, her lawyer, John Dowd, questioned the fairness of the panel and cited the possibility she might be a witness in a criminal inquiry, although there's currently no known criminal investigation into the dismissals.
And of course, what he's saying is, well, they might try to make her the criminal.
Yeah, I mean, these things, these hearings these days, you're right.
You're right on the money out there, Matt.
It's a perjury trap.
A lot of this stuff is just being set up for perjury traps.
That's why they want Rove and Harriet Myers under oath on this whole issue.
So, you know, the lawyer says that the obvious lack of impartiality of the Senate and conclusions already reached make anybody, especially Monica Goodling's testimony, perilous here.
And he's wise to have her plead the fifth.
Now, what do you think about this, though, Matt?
You know, the Fifth Amendment's what it is.
It's certainly constitutional right.
But you know what most people think, aha, ha ha, Fifth Amendment, aha, aha, guilty, afraid to go up and show it, afraid to admit it.
You know that's how people react to people who take the fifth.
I would think so, but given what happened with Scooter Libby, I think it might be an upcoming trend as these investigations proceed.
Well, there's a way around this.
Not for her.
There's a way around this for the Democrats.
They can grant her immunity.
True.
They can grant her immunity up there, and that almost forces her to come testify.
I don't know if it forces her, but it would take away her reason to plead the fifth.
This is interesting.
Graham Soundbites four and five.
Last night on the NBC Nightly News, by the way, NBC Nightly News went HD last night.
NBC Nightly News went HD last night.
I tuned to my local NBC affiliate.
I have the ability to get local affiliates here in HD.
So I eagerly tuned in to see it in HD.
I watch anything in HD.
By the way, speaking of that, you know, we've got American TVs have to be all digital in two years.
And there's something like 15% of the country that still has these old analog, the ASCII tuners.
And so the government's going to give vouchers or money away to people to go out and actually go out and get a converter box to turn their old-fashioned, worthless TV set into one that will receive digital signals.
Now, digital is not HD.
It's just a step toward it, but technically it's not HD, not even close to it.
Like, DirecTV, that's digital, and that comes to you digitally.
They're worried up there, in Washington, that they're not going to be enough people to understand what's happening.
On the Gopher Broke Day, where everybody's got to be digital, some of these people don't want to even have a computer or the internet in the house.
And they're not going to believe the fact that it's Oprah.
And so we're going to give people vouchers, $30 to $50 vouchers to go out and buy these boxes if they don't get new television.
But anyway, I turned into my local NBC affiliate's Channel 5, where I live, and sure enough, it was HD, but they forgot to do the 16 by 9 picture.
It was a standard 4x3 proportion television picture, not the widescreen.
It was in HD, but they forgot at the local station to switch over to the.
And they do that down.
You know, like 24 was on last night, and Prison Break was on the prison break comes on at 8 o'clock.
And they announced the lottery numbers down here, right, as the open to prison break.
And they show it on their 4x3 non-direct or non-HD signal because they haven't got the graphics for the lottery winners in HD yet.
And then sometimes they remember to switch to HD after the lottery numbers, or sometimes you've got to go 10 minutes for it, they remember over there to switch it to HD.
So I think I didn't watch the whole thing.
I don't know if they eventually went to 16 by 9 last night on my local NBC affiliate.
But anyway, they still got some of their electronic news gathering stuff that's standard definition, but all their studio stuff.
The interview with Gonzales last night was in HD.
And it was with Brian Williams, or Pete Williams.
Pete Williams, he said, Mr. Attorney General, what is it that you would like people to know about this controversy?
These attacks on my credibility, which really have pained me and my family.
You know, I have grown up, I grew up with nothing but my integrity.
And someday, when I leave this office, I'm confident that I will leave with my integrity.
This is the first Hispanic American Attorney General still fighting for his reputation and his integrity.
He says these attacks and his credibility have pained him and his family.
That'll sit well with the American people.
American people love people who are in pain.
American people love people who are suffering and who are willing to talk about it because everybody thinks they're in pain and suffering too, so it forms a bond of relatability.
Then there was this faux pas with Pete Williams finishing his report on the Attorney General with this.
Congress could try to force Monica Lewinsky, or Monica Goodling rather, to testify by giving her immunity.
What's still on their mind out there?
Monica Lewinsky, Monica Goodling.
Anyway, it's a perjury trap.
They've all seen what happened to Scooter Libby.
You know what I think needs to happen?
Hire anybody that's going to work with anybody that liaisons with the White House in the White House or any other cabinet-level post.
You're going to have to not only pay them their salary, but guarantee them lawyers if they're Republicans.
Republican administration aides are going to need legal fees built into their compensation.
Back after this.
Just got a new Harris poll here, ladies and gentlemen.
Not good for the campaign of Mrs. Bill Clinton.
It's in the Hill newspaper today.
Half of that would be 50%.
Well, no, you probably do understand half in Rio India.
Never mind.
Half of voting age Americans say they would not vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton if she became the Democrat nominee for president in 2008.
This is the Harris Interactive poll that was released today.
More than one in five Democrats, 20% of them that participated in the survey, said they would not vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton.
Overall, 36% say they would vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton.
11% are unsure.
48% of independent voters also said they would choose another candidate over Mrs. Bill Clinton.
And this poll, by the way, surveyed 2,223 potential voters.
56% of men said that they would not vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton, while 45% of women said they would not vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton.
In addition, 69% of those who were 62 and older said they would not vote for Mrs. Bill Clinton.
I wonder what that group has against her.
69% of those 62 and older.
I wonder what they would have against her.
Well, she's about that age, 60, something like that.
She's about that age.
I'm sure it's the ex-wife reminder factor.
Nearly half of the respondents said that they dislike Mrs. Bill Clinton's political opinions and they dislike, nearly half of them dislike Mrs. Bill Clinton as a person.
52% of people also said that Mrs. Bill Clinton does not appear to connect with people on a personal level.
Now, I don't know if they actually said that, or if that was one of these multiple choice things you got in a poll.
I don't know how many people run around talking about people that don't connect with people on a personal level.
I mean, we in broadcasting do because that's the objective.
Go out there, connect with the audience.
But I don't know how many average ordinary Americans out there run around and start assessing that about people.
It's just another way of saying she's phony or that she's plastic.
Mark in Chicago, you're up next, sir.
I appreciate your patience and welcome.
Meghadittos, Rush, thank you for taking my call.
Yes, sir, you bet.
Hey, Rush, real quick, I have a 17-year-old son who's a senior in high school, and he just enlisted in the Marines, and he's heading off to Camp Pendleton this July.
And he's raised some concerns and questions to me about the politics of the funding of the war.
Wait a second.
I hate to be ignorant about this, but is he going to turn 18 before he's deployed?
Yes.
We had to sign for him.
He'll be 18 in June, and he leaves in July.
Okay.
But, Rush, here's my direct question for you.
I'd like to know your take on the signal that these Democrats are sending to these new recruits.
Oh, I think the signal that they're sending to the new recruits is the same signal that they're sending to the current fighting force and is the same signal that they are sending to our enemies overseas, that they can be counted on to secure defeat if given the chance.
They own defeat, Mark.
They're all about, look, it's worse than that.
They can't permit victory politically.
They simply cannot.
They are so far out now over the edge that even if there is victory, they can't even lay any claim to it or even say that they had a role and played any assistance in it.
It's not that they're wedded to it now.
For their political future, we must lose.
They must bring that about.
I'll tell you what, your son is very perceptive.
I mean, all you need to do is see this smiling picture of Nancy Pelosi announcing this vote victory last Friday in the House of Representatives.
And the main thrust of that bill is to quit and give up and lose by March 31st of 2008.
And there she is just smiling like she's never been happier.
Well, Rush, it's even come home to my wife and I knowing what he's up against, but we've encouraged him.
And he's had a lifelong dream of being a Marine.
And we've told him every day, hey, we're proud of you.
You have a lot of family members that are proud of you.
The nation's proud of you in Rush.
Probably all the listeners out there right now on this program are proud of all these people going in.
There's no question about it.
Is your son – now, I know some people that are stationed in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and they admit that they're affected by it.
Sometimes their morale is down, but it doesn't affect the way they do their jobs.
Your son is to be admired here.
I mean, 17, and this is his dream, and he wants to do it.
Here's another thing to consider.
These people are not just against victory.
They are against the military.
The worst thing that can happen for them is military success.
Your son obviously picks up on that, but it hadn't changed his mind, has he?
They haven't convinced him to give it up.
Rush, he wants to serve his country like there's no tomorrow.
Again, it's amazing his mind at 17 years old, and we're proud of him.
But, Rush, hey, it's always great to talk to you.
If I could just give you one more closing comment, if you don't mind, I know the call screener said there's a time lot here.
Well, go ahead.
The call screener is second in power to me.
Hey, Rush, there have been two people in my life who have been a great influence, herself and President Reagan.
And I'm on business, and I had to stop in a small town in Illinois called Eureka, Illinois.
I don't know if you know the significance of Eureka.
Yeah, certainly I do.
I'm hosting.
Yes.
I understand these things.
That's right.
The alma mater of President Ronald Reagan.
So to be in that town and talk to you is just a great day, and I appreciate your comments.
And God bless you, man.
Thanks so much.
Now, Wayne, before you go, I'm going to ask some questions.
Sure.
Your son's 17.
I also want, I'm sure you've heard this, and it may be painful for me to bring it up, but I want to bring it up, get your answers.
The Democrats and their allies in the media have said that people like your son don't really, really want to join the Army or the Air Force, the Marines, the Navy.
They just have no future.
The economy in the country is pretty bad.
They come from broken down and poor families, and the only hope they've got for having a future is to get out of the squalor in which they live and go put their lives on the line.
And it's just not fair that the sons and daughters of the rich aren't there.
And yet all we get is hayseeds and hicks.
And I just want to know how you feel, your son's so gung-ho, when you hear that kind of thing that these people say.
You know, Rush, to answer that question honestly, and again, after listening to you for about 18 years, and again, I've been grounded very well on being a sales guy.
You know, you have to have thick skin.
He overlooks that.
Again, I go back and say, I mean, I got two kids, but my younger one has an incredible maturity to him, and he just finds his way.
Well, what I've told him, Rush, when you go to boot camp, okay, that's going to be a really, really tough stint for those 13 weeks, and then going back, I said, you're going to have to find your Rush Limbaugh to get through that.
Like I've communicated to him.
So, you know, Rush, you hear that, and it's like you've trained me for all these years.
You get over it, you overcome it, and you do the best you can every day.
And when I go to bed every night, I can lay in my pillow, my head on the pillow, and fall asleep and not worry about any of the surroundings.
And he's on that same track maturity-wise.
Well, you know, I'm happy to hear that.
That's a great attitude to have.
When it's not true, let it bounce off.
You got it.
But one thing about boot camp, I may be, I mean, I appreciate that when you say, go get your Rush Limbaugh and get through it.
But I have to tell you, I hate exercise.
There is not a time in my life.
Well, maybe when I was 18, but I couldn't get through boot camp now.
Nobody my age could, or very few.
People don't know what the people have no experience, have no clue.
They've seen movies about it.
It's about all they know.
Rush, we had a dinner this past week in Elgin, Illinois for all the recruits, and they brought a drill instructor in, and they gave me.
Wait, wait, wait.
Who could afford that?
You people are so poor and so forth.
Yeah.
Well, we've been able to get through it.
And again, Rush, I've had some excellent successes in my life, and I've always taken the attitude that you've portrayed on a daily basis of be the best you can be.
And that has come true for me.
And I still have some other things I'm trying to accomplish, and you have been very instrumental in those as I venture out and try to create what you call those silent millionaires that are trying to do what this country great country has given us.
A culture of the pursuit of excellence that I'm telling you, it's rubbed off on your son, obviously, and probably many more people than you even know.
It's inspirational.
Some people get jealous of it, but you've probably positively affected more people than you'll ever know.
I appreciate that, Rush, and I think you're probably number one in that category.
Well, yeah, I agree.
Okay.
I'm trying to get better at taking compass.
Thank you for saying that, sir.
I appreciate that.
Okay, Rush, I appreciate it.
All right, you bet, Mark.
Have a good day.
We'll be back and continue here in just a second.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have the beloved, admired, and respected Rushland Bois serving humanity here on the EIB network and the Kinner, Louisiana.
This is Jim.
Jim, thank you for calling.
You're up next, sir.
Hello, Rush.
Mega Dittos.
Thanks.
I was just calling by the, I was referencing this last gentleman who was on the phone.
I can't remember his name right now.
But I also have a son who is now in the Marine Corps, who is now stationed, well, he's actually in Mojave Viper learning desert training.
He's out of Camp Lejeune, and they're scheduled to be deployed on April the 26th.
Is he part of the surge or is he going somewhere else?
No, he's going to Ramadi.
We already know where he's going.
Going to Ramadi, okay.
Right.
And how he was, the last gentleman was saying how the question was, how is the Marine, the Ashley Marines feeling about how Congress is treating them without giving them the money and all that.
Uh uh how the Democrats in Congress.
Excuse me.
I'm sorry, Democrats.
You're right.
And I was privileged to have to meet the group that my son is going to overseas with.
And all of them, to a T, are saying that they are not happy, that they're not getting what they need to do the job.
If they would just let them go in and do the job, give them what they need, this could be over with our country.
You know, I totally understand this.
If I'm somebody, how old is your son?
He's 19.
Hey, your son's 19.
I'm 18, 19, 17.
I've volunteered for this.
I'm joining the Marines.
I want to be on the front lines.
I want to be the first group in.
I want to go to Iraq despite everything that's been said about this mission in the media, despite four years of the drumbeat of defeat, that we can't win, that it's impossible for us to win.
We still have young men like your son signing up for this all over the country.
I have to believe that when they see what the Democrats in the House are doing and how they're smiling and gloating over securing what they think is defeat, I have to totally understand how they would be angered about this and fit to be tied.
But the bottom line, even after that, they still go.
And I'll bet you they go even more fired up than otherwise.
The group that he's with, they're engineers.
And they are like, most of them have been already once or twice.
And he's one of the newbies in the group.
And he is like, he's fired up.
He's ready to go.
He's actually training to do this.
Matter of fact, I spoke to him yesterday, and he's just waiting for his turn to go.
Yeah, it's unique.
It's admirable.
That's why people like your son are a different breed.
They're a special breed.
I mean, you're aware of the Infinitesimal percentage of the people in this country volunteer to do what your son's doing.
And then, when they do it, to have to listen to one political party in this country talk about how they can't wait for them to lose.
It's got to be mind-numbing, but still they go and still they try to prove these people wrong because of whatever it is, their motivation.
And you're right, everybody in this country, the vast majority of people, respect it, honor it, and appreciate it.
Well, thank you, Rush.
You bet.
Thank you for the call.
It's not a thing.
You know, we react to this stuff in normal human way.
But imagine these people, these young men that sign up and watch this debate and listen to all the things the Democrats say.
They have it gleefully broadcast all over the media.
And then the message is, we can't win.
We're not good enough.
We don't have what it takes.
We don't deserve to win.
Who are they talking about?
They think they're talking about Bush.
They're talking about enlisted personnel.
They're talking about people that wear the uniform.
They are insulting them all the while, trying to present this notion that they are supporting the troops and they're trying to save the troops and they're trying to protect the troops and they're trying to deploy them and redeploy them and make them safer and so forth.
And they're not buying this.
So people sign up for this duty are not looking for safety by definition.
Can't we speak bluntly?
I mean, you don't sign up for the front lines and expect somebody to guarantee your safety.
It's not why you do it.
The Democrats try to camouflage what they're doing under that umbrella, but nobody in the know buys any of that.
It has to affect them, but yet they still go.
And I wouldn't be surprised if it provides some sort of external or additional motivation for them.
Look, I just, I'm telling you, folks, it's going to happen at some point.
The Democrats are sowing the seeds of another landslide defeat somewhere down the road.
I don't know if it will be 2008, but they are following in the footsteps of the 60s anti-war crowd that nominated McGovern in a lost, in a huge landslide to Nixon.
And they look back on that as one of their greatest periods in Democrat Party history, a landslide defeat, because they judge it in different ways.
They got the country out of war, and they got rid of Nixon and Watergate and so forth.
They're just using the same old playbook pages that are 50 and 30 years old and so forth.
But it's really, it's almost pornographic and obscene to watch these people after they succeed in this vote, how happy and gleeful they are.
And if you could put yourself in the position of people who wear the uniform hearing all this, yeah, the only previous time it happened is Vietnam.
And look at the roiling that took place then.
They're trying to differentiate one aspect of Vietnam in this, this constant lie about supporting the troops.
And they actually send out notes to their fringe in the kook world out there.
Don't spit on soldiers in the airports.
They actually do this, folks.
Make sure you don't spit on them when they come back.
Don't do it.
They can't control some of them, but they're trying that.
Look, I don't have time for this next call.
Now, Ron is in Port Huron, Michigan, and his subject line says his professor, quote, I would have Bush killed, unquote.
Well, I don't have enough time to talk to him now.
So ask him if he can hold on.
And we'll get to him in due course.
We'll come back and close out the hour right after this obscene profit timeout.
Start me up.
Too late.
We're already starting to hear some of the things coming up in the next hour.
Stem cells speed liver tissue growth.
Adult stem cells.
Not embryonic.
This headline's intriguing.
See if you can guess what this is about.
Worms live longer on fortified steak and chicken.
It's a new diet plan.
I kid you not.
Worms?
No, for humans.
Inject you with worms that eat what you eat.
That's simplifying it.
I'll give you details.
Democrat lawmakers, they're not actually worms, but they do things like, well, they're worms.
Just wait for the details.
And Democrat lawmakers to reintroduce the Equal Rights Amendment.
Oh, yes.
They're going to keep this show going for at least another nine or ten years with that one.
That's how long it'll take to ratify it out there.
▲
Export Selection