All Episodes
Previous Next
May 1, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:59
May 1, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, welcome back.
It's El Rushbo and the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network, by far and away the most listened-to radio talk show in America.
And by virtue of that consensus of the American people, I am right.
What I say is right, so you should agree.
And if you don't, you are a rush denier.
We have broadcast excellence for the next two hours.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, and the email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
So I got home last night after the charitable outing.
And I had to leave really, really early in the morning.
I didn't get a chance to look at the computer at any newspaper stuff.
So I'm doing all that last night when I get home, and I run across this blurb about me in page six.
Did you see this?
I told you people, I went to this restaurant in New York last Thursday called a Kobe Club.
And a Kobe Club is, I described it.
It's a Japanese, it's a steakhouse, but it's unlike any steakhouse that you've ever been to.
And I did my best in a short period of time to describe how indescribable the place is.
So I'm reading about this in page six yesterday.
According to the New York Post, Rush Limbaugh lived large at Kobe Club Thursday night, devouring bacon with truffles, Japanese strip steak, Kobe beef cheek ravioli, a large seafood platter, a combo of American, Australian, and Japanese Wagyu steak, and several side dishes.
After the $700 feast, Limbaugh left the server a $1,000 tip.
Well, if you people think I ate all of that while in the midst of, if I've just, I've probably hit 50 pounds here because I had to tighten my belt another notch today.
Now, I have a friend whose brother-in-law is Jeffrey Chotorow, who owns the place.
He's been raving about this to me.
So I wanted to go check it out.
And I got in there, and we didn't order anything.
They just started bringing things as like a tasting sampler.
And I swear they brought half the raw bar.
It was in two stories.
Two trays, one on top of another with the raw bar stuff in it.
Took a couple things off that.
Then little portions of all these different cuts of beef that they sell.
They do sell Kobe.
And Kobe is kind of like champagne.
You can't call sparkling wine made in any other country champagne.
It has to come from the Champagne region of France to be called champagne.
Same thing at Kobe beef.
It has to come from Kobe, Japan to be called Kobe.
Well, the Australians and the Americans have come up with their own brand of Kobe beef.
They call it Wagyu since they can't call it Kobe.
And then there was a sample of U.S. Prime on the plate.
And they brought out three different flavors of mashed potatoes.
And they brought out a couple of different flavors.
I mean, the table was overflowing with things.
We didn't order any of it.
It was just the restaurant owner being nice.
This thing gets written up as though I'm a pig in the midst of this diet that I'm losing 50 pounds on.
And there were other people in there.
I mentioned it.
Randy Jackson, one of the judges from American Idol, was in there.
And John Rich of the Country Crooner Duo, Big and Rich, bought me an adult beverage.
I don't know how they didn't get mentioned.
They had a much larger party than I did.
They probably had, they ordered and ate more than I did.
Didn't show up in there.
It's just, and you know, people read this stuff and they believe it.
If it's in print, why they believe it.
By the way, I mentioned earlier, and by the way, I want to thank the people at Kobe Club.
They were very nice that they just brought out a little sampling.
Well, it wasn't little, but they, in fact, I remember, you know, looked at the menu and did order some things, and all I can tell you is that far more than what I ordered showed up and didn't eat a smidgen of it.
Wanted to eat more.
It was delicious.
It was superb.
At any rate, as I mentioned earlier, the NAALCP will hold a symbolic funeral for the N-word at their July convention, part of its national stop campaign.
That's in CAPS, stop and campaign, to end the prevalence of racist and sexist language, images, and concepts in the media.
Holding symbolic funerals to demonstrate the end of a racially discriminatory practice is common practice of the NAA LCP when they began a campaign.
The 1960s, the NAA LCP held a funeral for the segregationist Jim Crow policies in the South.
And most recently, they held a funeral for voter apathy.
Now, this stop campaign calls on young people to stand up against anyone who argues that words are not hurtful and calls for increased diversity in the music and television industries.
I know what that means.
It means it's time to get a minority host at MSNBC.
And we've, as you know, we agree with the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton on this.
And we ran a poll on our own website about who should resign in order to make their slot available for the first minority host at MSNBC.
And you people in our poll selected Chris Matthews.
49 to 47% over Heath Oberdork.
And then what was Tucker Carlson was in there at 4%.
Anyway, as you know, we have a sponsor here, the Justice Brothers.
And the Justice Brothers sent us a new commercial today that goes along with the NAA LCP funeral for the N-Word.
The Justice Brothers, Reverend Sharpton and Jackson, and you can't say that exclusive.
The Rushland Blaugh and the EIB network.
All right, your phone calls coming right up after this.
Rupert Murdoch has offered $60 a share for control of Dow Jones.
That would be the Wall Street Journal, essentially, and all of their subsidiaries.
That comes out to a total of $5 billion.
Now, this is a fascinating thing.
I'll tell you why.
This offer is really sweet.
This offer is north, way north of what you would think an opening bid would be.
And my guess is an offer of $5 billion, $60 a share, is going to tempt the family that owns Dow Jones Inc.
But here's the fear.
This is the fear that a lot of people have, is that other media powerhouses like Google or Bloomberg or maybe a Soros, Soros outfit, would now step in with bids.
And of course, Murdoch, probably the same mission as the Wall Street Journal has, the Dow Jones people, but you couldn't say that about Google or Bloomberg or maybe even Soros Front Group or what have you.
And I think that's one of the reasons why this price is so north of what an opening bid would be.
This is a sweet offer.
It's so far over the current trading price, the current share price of $60 a share.
And I'll bet you that's why this is so big, just to keep others from getting in on this.
We'll have to wait and see, but this could be, well, it is big.
And it could turn out to be even bigger.
All right, to the phones to Danville, California.
Oh, Mike, I'm glad you just reminded me of something.
That interchange collapse, the tanker truck that blew up the bridge leading to the Bay Bridge, the interchange, leading to the Bay Bridge.
You know what I read about that, Mike?
You read about it.
Yeah, I read that the flames melted the steel in the construction.
That's impossible.
Well, I thought that was impossible because the 9-11 conspiracy theorists say that fire could not melt steel, for example, in the Twin Towers, that it had to be Bush and the government setting off implosion devices in order to bring down the buildings on the program.
But now, here's a second instance here where fire melted steel in that construction project.
Well, no doubt you're onto something.
Yes.
Well, I usually am as host.
As host.
Well, anyway, it's an honor.
I haven't talked to you in a while, and now you're a Nobel Peace Prize nominee.
Yes, I keep forgetting to mention that because I'm not Dragadocious.
Yes, we're pulling for you on the West Coast.
Thank you.
You would be my vote.
Hey, right on, Cuba.
I'm a frequent visitor to the island.
How do you get there?
I mean, not.
Actually, legally through a humanitarian group.
Things are a little bit tighter than they were a couple years ago.
But I walked down where there are papers and scare immigration.
When I come back and I check the box, I'd have been in Cuba, but it works.
What are you flying to Havana?
You take a boat in there.
Well, there's a couple ways.
There's actually charters.
Air Jamaica used to have charters.
Yeah, and when Castro thought that we were getting close to ending the embargo, he'd shoot them down.
Well, no, not really.
But there's multiple pathways to get in.
A lot of charters out of Miami that go direct.
There used to be a flight from, I don't know if it's still flying, it used to go from L.A. actually, straight into Jose Marty and into Havana.
And I'm always amazed.
Anyway, you're right on.
You must have traveled there, obviously, you know, well-schooled on Cuba.
I'm not an expert by any means, but I know, I think, a lot more than the drive-by media is reporting.
And your first impression, I'm always amazed when the Oliver Stones come back and they talk the virtues of Cuba.
Your first impression, I've always said this, the place is broken.
And I think every high school kid should spend a week in Havana.
And you'll come back and kiss the ground you left in America.
And then you'll see recruiting go up.
What I'm getting at, for example, the trip from the airport into Havana, my first impression is, Fidel, this place is broken.
This is just busted.
Let me tell you something.
Mike, it's in such bad shape.
Even now, on places like the History Channel, they're being forced to do stories on the crumbling, beautiful, one-time beautiful Art Deco architecture in downtown Havana.
There is no restoration.
There is no maintenance.
It's just, it's literally all falling apart.
And you see, this is all a problem, the U.S. embargo.
But you wonder why, and I did for the longest time, too, how is it that leftists, be they academics or entertainers or whatever, go down there and they see what you see.
You can't miss it.
They see the squalor.
Remember the story not long ago?
Castro was going to give away rice cookers to every rice cookers?
And the reason he was giving rice cookers away is because a black market in producing food had started.
People were starving.
They are rationed beans in Cuba.
Beans.
They're rationed beans, folks.
You wonder why do the leftists from academia and entertainment go down there and come back raving about the place?
And there's a simple, simple answer for this.
They see what you see, Mike, but they don't see it.
What they see is a man with total power.
You have to understand leftists, and there's certain things about them that you cannot omit.
You can't forget.
They believe in huge, all-powerful government to tell everybody else how to live.
I will guarantee you that when these leftists that you're asking about take their trips into downtown Havana, they're picked up because they're there to see Castro.
They're picked up in nice cars and they're given the nicest way in a town possible.
But they listen to Castro and they hear an idealist and they hear a guy who's got his gripes against the United States, as they do, and they identify with him.
He's just this little guy.
Look at what he's done.
Why?
He took over that country.
He took it away from a right-wing dictator, Batista, and he's done his best.
And if it weren't for the U.S. targeting him and trying to kill him and assassinate him with exploding cigars in the Bay of Pigs, and if it weren't for our embargo, who knows what a paradise this would be.
They thought that about the Soviet Union.
There's this attraction they have to leaders who are omnipotently powerful.
And that's the attraction that Castro has for them.
They don't see Castro in any way responsible for the squalor and the poverty and the decrepitness of the country.
They see Castro as still in the midst of a 50, 40-year mission to fix it.
But my gosh, the odds that he faces.
The U.S. government, not one president has recognized him.
He's faced a country only 90 miles away that probably would like to bomb or invade or whatever.
Folks, it sounds convoluted, but this is how they think.
But the main thing is they look at the power and they're envious of it.
That's it in a nutshell.
And then they start lying to themselves about the good intentions that Castro has had all these years.
I mean, liberals, they've wreaked their share of havoc culturally in this country.
They don't own up to that either.
No, because you're not supposed to examine results.
You're supposed to examine good intentions and big hearts.
And that's what they see in Castro.
How else to explain the pure sophistry that Cuban health care is somehow a standard to be emulated?
How do you explain?
Do you see them sending their kids down there for health care?
When Castro got sick, he had to bring in surgeons from Spain for crying out loud.
He didn't even use his own people.
Well, the second time around, he did because the first, the Cuban people botched it.
He might have played a role in that by refusing a colostomy bag.
He demanded that his colon be resewn and broke and that he got infected.
So they had to bring some Spanish doctor and knew what he was doing.
I mean, look at it's like, like I said in the previous hour, get Andrew Mitchell down there, she honestly believes, she honestly believes the only thing holding Cuba back is the U.S. embargo.
Why, if it weren't for the U.S. embargo, communism would thrive.
So what?
We're supposed to support communism, lift the embargo, and then communism can thrive.
You realize that that's just ignorant.
It is sophistry.
As is their illusion, delusion that the Cuban health care down there is the standard which everybody should have their own health care measured.
Honolulu, Hawaii, Jim, thanks for waiting.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Aloha, Rush.
A little Hawaiian lingo there for you.
Great to hear it.
Your monologue today reminded me of something that one of the Democrat presidential candidates, Mr. Biden, said.
Which monologue would that be?
I've done four.
The one about how the Democrats are going to stay in Iraq.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Even if they get the White House.
And one of the contenders for that office, Senator Biden, said in his interview last week with Chris Wallace on Fox News, something to the effect of how they will need to keep some troops in Iraq in case an al-Qaeda camp pops up.
Yeah, So I thought, well, gee, isn't he basically validating your point about that they probably will?
Yeah, he's not the only one.
Now, for those of you just tuning in, this is the worst possible way to hear what I said.
This is a big, long monologue with plenty of context.
And I don't have time to go through it.
You'll have to check out the website later this afternoon.
We update it to reflect the contents of today's program.
But it was, I spent about, what was it, 10 or 12 minutes on this?
The Democrats aren't going to pull us out of Iraq.
Not when defeat will be lassoed around their necks.
They're not going to do that.
By the way, speaking of Biden, I don't know where he said this, but he says on television, we need to get rid of the incivility.
We've got to be more civil in our society.
And then he said he personally was going to shove the Iraq war bill down George W. Bush's throat.
And we'll be back after this.
No need to think about it, folks.
We do all the thinking for you here at the EIB network.
All you have to do is act like a mind-numbed robot sponge and soak it all up.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program today.
George Tennett.
If there's ever living evidence that President Bush held on to too many people from the previous administration and not only the CIA of the State Department number of place, George Tennet is the guy.
It's difficult to know where to start in dealing with this, but it is almost as though, remember when Charles Barkley wrote his autobiography and somebody asked him about a couple things and he said he was misquoted, misquoted in his own autobiography.
It's almost like George Tennet has written a book, but on a number of the things, he wasn't around when it was being written.
Now, the Weekly Standard, Bill Crystal, a bunch of people have been doing some incredible research into the book, even before, I think the book comes out today, or it's already out yesterday or whatever.
If not, it's going to be soon.
One of the most egregious things that Tennett reports is that after September, I was on September 12th, that he was in the White House, and he saw Richard Pearl walk out of the Oval Office.
So, what's Pearl in there doing before the president's seen me?
And Pearl, according to Tennett, said to George Tennet, now this is it.
It's a rock's behind us, and we got to go get a rock.
Finally, we're going to be able to get a rock.
Well, guess what?
Richard Pearl was not in the country on September 12th.
He was out of the country.
He couldn't get back in because air traffic control had closed all American airspace.
That was four days before we were allowing flights in this country.
Totally.
How does something like that happen?
Maybe Mr. Tennett was misquoted in his own book.
But Pearl's not even in the country for crying out loud.
He says he saw him coming out of the Oval Office, meeting with Bush before he did.
One of the other things that's, and it's this long been bandied about in the drive-by media, that the Democrats and the drive-bys have done their best to suggest that Cheney made it all up about Al-Qaeda being in Iraq before 9-11, and he didn't make it up.
It's in the book.
Of course, I don't know what we can believe in this book, frankly, with that Richard Pearl example.
But George Tenet cites all kinds of intelligence.
Yeah, yeah, Al-Qaeda was there.
Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was there.
He was there recuperating from injuries.
I think he suffered in Afghanistan.
Now, nobody ever said from Cheney Bush on down, nobody ever said that operational control for 9-11 had anything to do with Saddam.
All they ever said was that Iraq was infiltrated with al-Qaeda members, which was true.
And of course, the reason the drive-bys of the Democrats is trying to say this is that there was no reason to go to Iraq, or Al-Qaeda did 9-11.
Al-Qaeda was in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
And no, they were in Iraq.
And George Tenet's own book says so.
And he cites the intelligence on it.
And it's highlighted in this story by Thomas Jocelyn in the Weekly Standard.
Now, Saddam didn't control them, but they were there.
They were safe and comfortable in Iraq.
And Saddam had to know they were there because they were meeting with some of Saddam's lieutenants.
Tenet devotes an entire chapter to the question of Iraq's ties to al-Qaeda.
It's chapter 18, no authority, direction, or control.
And much of the chapter is used to vilify Doug Fife, the former Under Secretary of Defense and Vice President Cheney.
Tenet claims repeatedly that Doug Fife and Cheney and others in the administration exaggerated the intelligence on Saddam's ties to al-Qaeda.
Tenet says that they pushed the data farther than it deserved and sought to create a connection between Iraq and the 9-11 attacks that would have made weapons of mass destruction, the United Nations, and the international community almost absolutely irrelevant.
In this vein, Tennett also erroneously claimed to have met Richard Pearl on September 12th.
And according to Tenet, Pearl said Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday, but Pearl was in France.
He has a house in France.
He couldn't get back to the U.S.
He was not there on September 12th.
Could not have met with Tenet.
Richard Pearl's denying the conversation took place at all.
Now, Tenet doesn't offer much evidence to support his contention, but it's worth noting what he does not claim, and that is that the Bush administration cooked up the connection between Saddam's Iraq and Al-Qaeda in its entirety.
In fact, Tenet concedes in his book that there was evidence of a worrisome relationship.
For example, Tenet explains in late 2002 and early 2003, a quote from the book here, there was more than enough evidence to give us real concern about Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
There was plenty of smoke, maybe even some fire.
Ansar al-Islam, Zarqawi, Karmal, the arrests in Europe, the murder of American U.S. aid officer Lawrence Foley and Amman at the hands of Zarqawi's associates and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad operatives in Baghdad.
On Ansar al-Islam, Zarqawi and Kermal, Tennett elaborates further in the book.
The intelligence told us that senior al-Qaeda leaders and the Iraqis had discussed safe haven in Iraq.
Now, what in the world is Tennet trying to do here by saying that all this intelligence was cooked up?
He is confirming everything the administration said.
And nothing more.
The administration never ever said that Saddam Hussein or anybody in the Iraqi government had operational participation in 9-11, just that al-Qaeda was there.
Most of the public discussion thus far is focused on Zarqawi's arrival in Baghdad under an assumed name of May 2002, allegedly to receive medical treatment.
Zarqawi, whom we termed a senior associate and collaborator of al-Qaeda at the time, supervised camps in northern Iraq run by Ansar al-Islam.
We believe that up to 200 al-Qaeda fighters began to relocate there in camps after the Afghan campaign began in the fall of 2001.
The camps enhanced Zarqawi's reach beyond the Middle East.
Only the camps run by Ansar al-Islam, known as Kermal, engaged in production and training in the use of low-level poisons like cyanide.
Our efforts to track activities emanating from Kermal resulted in the arrest of nearly 100 Zarqawi operatives in Western Europe planning to use poisons in operations.
Now, according to Tenet, Al-Qaeda's presence was not limited to northern Iraq.
What was even more worrisome, he writes, was that by the spring and summer of 2002, more than a dozen of al-Qaeda-affiliated extremists converged on Baghdad with apparently no harassment on the part of the Iraqi government.
They had found a comfortable, secure environment in which they moved people and supplies to support Zarkawi's operations in northeastern Iraq.
Now, Thomas Jocelyn writes, it strains credulity to imagine that all of this was going on without, at the very least, Saddam's tacit approval.
Tenet says the CIA didn't think Saddam had operational directional control over the two Egyptians, Zarqawi or Ali, or Ansar al-Islam.
But he explains, from an intelligence point of view, it would have been difficult to conclude that the Iraqi intelligence service was not aware of their presence and their activities.
Certainly, Tennett adds, we believe at least one senior Ansar al-Islam operative maintained some sort of liaison relationship with the Iraqis.
It's a devastating analysis of the book here.
It's again the Weekly Standard by Thomas Jocelyn.
And I'll tell you, I don't take you back.
Do you realize, you know, memories I know are fleeting and sometimes short, but you go back to the days immediately after 9-11 and the ensuing two years leading up to our invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003, there was greater consensus in the world for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq than there is for global warming today.
Our allies agreed that Saddam had WMDs.
UN inspectors agreed that Saddam had WMDs.
The UN Security Council agreed they didn't want to do anything about it.
The left in America, the Democrat Party from 1998 on, led by Bill Clinton and Tom Daschell, were warning us of the weapons of mass destruction in the arsenal of Saddam Hussein.
The New York Times agreed.
Ex-President Clinton agreed.
His wife, Mrs. Clinton, agreed.
John Kerry didn't flip-flop back in 1998.
They all knew that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
Everybody, it wasn't consensus.
It was fact.
He had used them.
It was not consensus.
It was near unanimous that Saddam had weapons.
Well, it probably never was to Dennis Kucinich.
But it was unanimous to everybody.
It was factual.
And yet this myth has survived that there was no al-Qaeda and there weren't any weapons of mass destruction.
See, when you're not the senior officer of the United States government, i.e. the president, then you're free to just go off the reservation and say you were lied to and you were made a fool of and so forth.
The president can't do that.
He has to stand by what he does.
And it's far, and something the Democrats still are not doing, even though they have the majority in the House and Senate.
They're still acting like the minority, those little petulant kids in a sandbox going, no, Everything.
Anyway, quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Stay with us.
How do you?
Welcome back, El Rushbow, the EIB Network.
We go to Clinton, New Jersey.
This is Sylvia.
Sylvia, thank you for calling.
It's great to have you on the program with us.
Hi, Rush.
You know, I feel kind of sorry for George Tennett right now because he's getting blasted both from the right and from the left based on this book, as you probably know.
Oh, I know.
I just talked about that.
Okay.
But I just think that, you know, this just bears out what we all knew, that this intelligence was cooked going in.
And, you know, you always talk all the time about how to do it.
Wait, wait a minute.
Wait, tell me what was cooked.
What is in the Tenet book that convinces you the intelligence was cooked?
Rush.
I mean, I haven't read the Tenet book at all, but his, you know, I guess what I've heard in the media.
No, That doesn't work.
That's not good enough.
What you've heard in the media, the media is not objective.
They've got an agenda.
I just listened to you.
Sylvia, are you listening to the program?
Well, I just got in the car.
I couldn't believe I got through, you know, because I was so interested in that Tennet.
What website did you visit that gave out the phone number and the marching orders to call here and say the tenet book proves that intelligence was?
I listen to you every day.
I mean, I listen to conservative talk radio more than anything that I ever hear.
Once in a while, I hear hardball while I'm cooking dinner.
This is a rush.
But you haven't read the book.
But you don't, if you haven't read, even if you haven't read any excerpts, you're going to tell me it proves intelligence was cooked?
Well, Rush, what I'll just say is that you always say, Rush, can I say one thing?
Well, God.
You always say that the Democrats have been wrong about everything.
And I turn it to you and I say, my God, this administration, I'm willing to give him a pass on weapons of mass destruction.
But they knew darn well that he had nothing, that Saddam, who hated fundamentalist extremists, he was just a secular dictatorship, had no patience for al-Qaeda.
This is why I'm frustrated with you, Sylvia, because we're going to have a new rule on this program, and we're going to call it the Sylvia rule.
You have to be listening to the program to call.
I just talked about the weapons of mass destruction.
If you think that everybody knew that there were no WMDs.
I don't.
I think that that was the one honest mistake that they made.
What was dishonest was to try to link Saddam Hussein to the events of 9-11.
They didn't.
I never did.
I just got there talking about...
I'm getting frustrated, Sylvia.
Well, don't.
Please don't get it frustrated.
But you know what?
Cheney was on TV every time.
All right.
All right.
That's it.
Sylvia, thank you for the call.
Now, I'm going to have to repeat this whole thing that I just did.
Nobody ever said in the administration that Saddam had operational control over 9-11.
All they ever said, Sylvia, was that Iraq had members of al-Qaeda roaming the countryside.
They were in northern Iraq.
They were even in Baghdad.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
It's in Tenet's book that you haven't read.
There was no intelligence cooked here.
If you go back and look at what the president said, weapons of mass destruction were not the only reason for going to Iraq, that there were al-Qaeda members there.
But they never claimed that Saddam had anything to do with 9-11.
But there were Al-Qaeda members there, and the president said we're going to go wherever they are.
And we finally did, after a number of years, kill Zarqawi.
And we may have killed Al-Masri, his backup.
But look at.
I am sorry for my frustration, folks.
I really am.
It's bad enough when people listening to the program don't get it.
But then to have to talk, somebody hasn't listened to it, act like the expert.
The description of Zarqawi as a threat with al-Qaeda links and enjoying sanctuary in Iraq without being under the control of Saddam Hussein seems borne out by two things, what Tenet has written in his book and also his testimony before the 9-11 Commission.
So what's changed?
What's new?
Al-Qaeda was responsible for killing 3,000 Americans and one of its worst terrorists was freely enjoying sanctuary in Iraq.
Now, what's changed about this?
What's changed about it is that the drive-by media and the Democrats have sought to pollute your mind with a lie that Iraq was not hosting al-Qaeda and furthermore that al-Qaeda and Saddam worked together on 9-11 when Cheney never said it.
Rumsfeld never said it.
The president never said it.
All they ever said was that Al-Qaeda was in Iraq and we were going after al-Qaeda.
And now we got Tenet's book out there pretty much confirming all this.
Nothing has changed.
Now, I love Sylvia.
She's obviously a hack.
But I love her, but she epitomizes a problem that we've got.
And that is ignorant citizens who think that they're informed.
And I'm not calling her stupid.
She just, she's convinced.
She's convinced because she's heard it in the drive-bys that this administration said Saddam had operational involvement in 9-11.
And they never did.
The administration never, ever said it.
I feel like doing a Howard Dean screep here, folks, but I won't.
SUV tried to drown a woman, but she survived.
I'll have details coming up in the next hour.
This is Valerie out on Long Island.
Hi, Valerie.
Thank you for the call.
It's a pleasure to be on your program.
I've been a listener for years.
Thank you.
I won't admit my age, but anyway, what bothers me today they're celebrating our President Bush's quote, mission accomplished.
Yeah, Okay.
To me, a mission is, maybe I'm wrong.
I like to be corrected.
Several tries is a try toward a goal.
Well, your instincts on this, Valerie, are right.
They are celebrating this, as you say.
They sent their Iraq resolution up that he's going to veto today on purpose.
The drive-bys and the Democrats are trying to call attention to this is the four-year anniversary of the mission accomplished, arrival in the aircraft carrier because it's not accomplished.
Bush is a failure.
Can't get anything done.
Bush lied about accomplishing the mission.
The mission accomplished had to do with overthrowing Saddam.
The mission accomplished, and it was, and it was accomplished rather quickly.
Saddam was tossed from power.
Nobody at that time thought the war was over and it was never portrayed as such.
▲
Export Selection