All Episodes
Previous Next
May 23, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:13
May 23, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host of this show are not necessarily those of the staff management nor sponsors of this station, nor are they the views of some in the audience.
But they should be and soon will be.
Great to be back with you, having more fun than a human being.
Should be allowed to have Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
I am America's real anchorman, as well as America's Truth Detector and the Doctor of Democracy.
Combined into one harmless, lovable little fuzzball, a telephone number, 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
We mentioned at the beginning of the program that the Democrats have surrendered from surrender.
They got an Iraq funding bill, but they agreed to pull out any timetable for troop withdrawal.
This is not sitting well out there with their kook fringe that is also their base.
It's a total sellout.
Read to you a post on Democrat Underground where the kooks out there actually think that this is a Rove Bush plot to throw the November elections.
I can't do this with a straight face.
Bush Rove decided to throw the congressional elections and put the Democrats in power, knowing full well the Democrats wouldn't withdraw the troops and make them look bad with their own people.
Anyway, the Brett girl was on the Today Show today with Matt Wauer.
And Matt Wauer said, let's talk about this deal that was struck in Congress, the supplemental funding bill.
18 benchmarks the Iraqis have to hit.
But the headline here is no deadline for U.S. troops.
Why did the Democrats cave in?
The Democrats should be standing their ground.
I mean, the American people said very clearly in the last election that they wanted to see a different course in Iraq.
They sent a mandate by putting the Democrats in charge of the Congress.
And it's very clear that George Bush has no intention to compromise.
And what the Democrats need to do is to strong stand their ground and continue to...
Why they cave in then?
Well, I don't know.
I mean, I think that what the American people wanted them to do was stand their ground, force this president to start withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Really, Brett Girl, where were all the American people protests?
Where were the letters to Congress?
Where were the emails?
Where were the phones?
The phones are being flooded on this immigration bill, Brett Girl.
They're not being flooded on getting out of Iraq.
This big myth is that the election of 06 was about getting out of Iraq.
Hell, if it were, the Democrats wouldn't have to be spending pork to buy the votes that they did get on their first bill that had no chance of being sent.
The one President Bush promised to veto.
It's just another myth that they believe it.
They've fallen into the trap of believing that they had a mandate in last year's election.
They didn't run on anything except Bush sucks.
And Bush should be hated, and Bush is an idiot.
America's hated around the world because of Bush.
They didn't run on anything.
Now they're claiming a mandate that doesn't exist.
Next question for the Brett girl from Matt Wauer.
There seems to be a bit of a growing PR problem in your campaign, and it's this idea of two Americas, a haves and a have-nots, and a candidate who's clearly a have, who has multi-million dollar residences, worked as an advisor to a hedge fund, received about a half million dollars in payments, 55 grand from a public university for sharing ideas on poverty, the haircut we've all heard about.
How, Senator Edwards, are you going to change this perception that you aren't just a rich guy talking about poverty?
Matt, I am a have.
There's no doubt about that.
I mean, it's not where I come from.
I come from being a have-not, but I have been lucky in my life, and I'm a have now.
And if you look at what I've spent my life doing just since the last election, I mean, I've helped raise the minimum wage in six states, helped organize workers into unions all over this country, started a college program for kids who otherwise couldn't go to college.
I've been all over the world doing humanitarian medicine.
Oh, I don't think there's any doubt about that.
Okay.
The fact the San Francisco Chronicle has another story on this today about, and they chronicle all of these things that Matt Wauer threw up there at the Brett Girl.
What he has to focus on here for him is winning Iowa.
If he didn't come out of Iowa winning it or being very strong, his deep, deep doo-doo.
Chicago Tribune today, actually, this is a Baltimore Sun story.
Americans will be choosing change in 2008 if a group of Maryland voters is any indication.
Whether the next president will be a Democrat's another question, though.
Senator Barack Obama drew the most positive.
Oh, Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, has quit that company.
She's quit the board of that company that sells food to Walmart.
Buckling the pressure.
She got out of there.
She hightailed it, folks.
No longer going to sit on the board.
It's pickles and beets or some such thing that they make, and they sell a Walmart, the pickle company.
She's quit.
She's resigned the board.
I'm not going to have any phony baloney plastic banana good time rock and roller stuff in the Obama household.
They're not going to allow themselves to be Edwards.
In other words, anyway, Senator Obama drew the most positive responses in this.
It's a focus group on the Democrat candidate.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton came in for rough treatment during the first in a national series of focus group discussions sponsored by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
Who would that be?
Kathleen Jameson is her name.
Well, I don't know.
Yeah, she's there.
But when the voters were asked who would be the safest choice to lead the country, nearly all the people in the focus group, including Democrats and Independents, picked Republicans.
Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain, or Mitt Romney.
Only two people in the focus group chose Democrats, Obama and the Breck girl.
Nobody mentioned Clinton.
Can you say ouch when asked who would be the safest choice, a bunch of Democrats, to lead America, focus group of all party affiliates, affiliations picked the GOP candidate?
There were five Democrats, four Republicans, and three Independents in this group.
And this cannot, look, it's anecdotal.
They try to get a cross-section of people in this focus group to be somewhat representative, but you have to take it for what it is.
When you've got that many Democrats in the focus group and they're naming Republicans when it comes to being safe, you know what this means to me.
I have told you people, the Democrats are slitting their throats.
I don't know if it's going to be an 08, but they are preparing.
They're sowing the seeds for a massive landslide defeat.
You cannot actively, eagerly appear to want your country to lose.
And they, in fact, want to.
They've been out there saying we have lost.
Dingy Harry's said as much.
And you can't constantly rip the troops, and you can't constantly talk about taking money away from them and pulling them out of there before.
The American people do not want to lose.
They don't want America to lose.
They don't want the troops to be underfunded.
And the Democrats think just the odd thing.
They think their mandate from the 06 election is just that.
And they're blowing it big time.
Here's the story about Michelle Obama has resigned from the board of that pickle food supplier for Walmart stores.
Been a target of criticism there for Obama because Obama's been out there ripping Walmart and the news leaked that his wife worked at a board of a company that sold pickles to Walmart.
Michelle Obama cited the increased demands of his campaign for all the, what was that babe's name at Salon?
Deborah Dickerson.
She's going to be fulminating all over again.
She's already upset that Michelle Obama quit the hospital gig to become official hostess and wife and basically a subordinate for his presidential campaign.
Now she gives up the position on the board of the pickle company because of the demands of his campaign.
So her husband's demands have led her to give up.
Board work is pretty cushy.
You show up anywhere from two to four times a year.
Your expenses getting to and from it are paid.
And the pay can be anywhere from 45 to 100 grand, depending on the company and the board.
I think it was 50, I think it was 53 that she was making on the board.
So she's making 217 or 230 at the pickle company.
You add the 53, well, it's 260 grand now not coming into the Obama household.
Well, maybe not.
She maybe hasn't lost all that 200 grand plus from the pickle company because she's still a consultant there.
Her position on the board of the pickle company had raised questions because Obama, her husband, had praised a union-led effort to change working conditions at Walmart, which again begs the question.
If we can have all kinds of unskilled, uneducated, and cheap labor in agriculture and other businesses where it's the illegal aliens doing it, well, then what's wrong with non-unionized work at Walmart?
Just another illustration of the political nature of this so-called immigration business.
Treehouse Foods is the name of the pickle company.
And they said in a Security and Exchange Commission filing that the resignation of Michelle Obama from the position she has held since 2005 was not due to any disagreement with the company.
So yet $51,200 in fees from the company last year.
Now missing from the Obama household bank accounts dinner table.
What happened?
Hey, we're back.
The jump in U.S. gasoline prices this year has so far cost consumers an extra $20 billion or about $146 for each passenger car in the country, according to the Government Accountability Office in congressional testimony yesterday.
That's also known as a GAO.
The national price for regular unleaded gasoline hit a record $3.22 a gallon this week and is up a buck five since the beginning of February, according to the Energy Department.
The added expense, and listen to this.
The added expense is taking money away from consumers to spend on other goods and services.
Yes, it is.
Spending billions more on gasoline constrains consumers' budgets, leaving less money available for other purchases.
Why don't you people think this about tax cuts for crying out loud?
If you want to cut prices on gasoline, cut the taxes, the state, the city, the feds, whatever else.
It adds up to 60 cents a gallon, and it's all profit.
We've been through this.
I don't know how many times.
You've got Mrs. Clinton out there saying, well, we need to invest in ExxonMobil.
We want them to – she said something about – I can't find exactly what was on Monday – something about doing something to increase the supply, lowering the price.
I forget what it was.
I'm sitting there.
If you are big oil and you are a global concern, your market is the world.
Why in the world would you invest heavily in the, I think this is about refinery.
Somebody, we need to be building more refinery.
Who's standing in the way of building more refineries?
Environmentalist wackos, and who are they aligned with?
They're aligned with the Democrats and the left.
But if you're big oil, why would you even consider investing gazillions of dollars in a country that's trying to ban your product?
Somebody needs to ask that question besides me.
Here's John in Yuma, Arizona.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB network.
Great to have you with us.
Hey, Gresh.
Great to talk to you again.
Thank you, sir.
Hey, I wanted to disagree with you a little bit about this Iraq warning.
This is always a risk when callers try to disagree with me, but I appreciate the confidence that you bring to this, so go ahead.
This Iraq war funding bill, I don't believe that the Democrats caved on the timetables for withdrawal at all.
I believe that was the plan all along.
And one of the reasons they, the only reason they really did put that in there in the first place was to pander to their base.
They knew it would never go through, and it would take the emphasis off of the fact that they've put a minimum wage hike in the bill.
I can understand your thinking on this, that the Democrats knew all along that they never had a chance of withdrawing the troops out of there, and this was just a sneaky backdoor way to get the minimum wage increase in.
Absolutely.
Well, it's a nice try.
It's a nice try, but this was not about getting a minimum wage bill signed by President Bush.
I just have to tell you, they won the election.
They came out.
They think they've got this big mandate to get us out.
They tried and tried and tried, and they couldn't get it done.
And they, in the process, you know, this is something that we all should learn from.
If you're going to go out and you're going to kill the king, and that's what they were trying to do here, was kill Bush.
They wanted Bush to essentially surrender and give defeat to the country so that he would be blamed for it.
If you set out to kill the king like this, you better succeed because they got their supporters all revved up.
Their supporters believed that they intended to get the troops out.
That's the only thing their supporters came about.
Minimum wage, that's hunky-dory, and that's not a big deal to their supporters.
It's down the priority list.
Getting the troops out, ending the war, that's what their fringe kook base is all about.
And they have been hung out to dry here.
And if you go read what these people are writing, it's hilarious.
They are fit to be tied.
And they think their party's been snookered again by Rove.
They think in large numbers that Bush and Rove purposely threw the elections of 2006 by not stealing them.
Still kids.
We decided, we Republicans said we were going to steal the elections.
To think they believe it.
They believe it.
I'm telling you, they're fit to be tied out there, and they're not going to be mollified by the minimum wage bill.
Mike, Republicans support that anyway.
I mean, that was going to happen somewhere down the line.
That's not a big achievement.
Mike, in northern Wisconsin, somewhere, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Rush, how's it going?
Fine, sir.
I drive a tanker up here, a gas tanker.
And I'm not going to tell you who I drive for.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on, hold on, hold on.
Time out.
I want to hear what.
You're driving the tanker?
Yes, I am right now.
I'm going to get another load of that precious liquid gold.
Yes.
Anyway, what I wanted to say was, I just delivered in a store here, and the line, they were lined up at two stations.
One I was at and one across the street.
The prices, for granted, let's say they're just high.
Okay, whatever.
Right.
We can't keep gas in the ground.
People are buying it as fast as we can put it in the ground.
I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
I'm just telling you, it doesn't seem because if the world is going, you know where in a handbasket and everything's gone bad, people seem to be buying gas and going on vacations up here.
We know this is true.
We know that your little story here is anecdotal, but we know it's true.
There have been surveys.
Something came out yesterday that the driving went down for a while on a percentage basis from a previous year.
But from what you're describing, I mean, people waiting in line for your truck to show up to refuel the tanks at the station.
There was people there and waiting.
I pulled in and I had to block in the road just so I could get in to unload this thing.
And we ran all weekend.
We had trucks out all week running.
Now, if the economy is so bad, how come people keep buying all this gas and have their motorcycles in their motor homes and somebody's going to get some money somewhere putting this gas in their tank?
You are really shrewd.
I have to tell you, and plus you have the benefit of being an eyewitness to this.
This notion the economy is in bad shape and that people are fretting over gasoline prices is simply manufactured news.
It's manufactured news in the Democrat Party, and they're trying to compare it to food prices, which it is a necessity.
I mean, you can't, you know, we all have to eat in this country.
I had somebody ask me the other day, Rush, let me ask you a question.
You once said, and you're right, that you go to the grocery store and the profit markup at a grocery store on basic foodstuffs at 1%.
Grocery stores make their money selling the stuff at the checkout counter and the magazines and the candy and all this sort of stuff and the other, the mops and the spick and spam, whatever's in there.
But on basic foodstuffs, profit margins 1% is people have to eat.
He said, well, why doesn't big oil look at it that way?
People have to drive to get to the grocery store to eat.
I said, well, both prices, both profit markups, both businesses are constrained by the market forces in which they operate.
And people do need gasoline, and that's why they're driving.
They're not going to slow down, and they're not going to stop going to work, and they're not going to get on the light rail train.
They have some of the ugliest light rail trains I have ever seen in my life right down here in West Palm Beach.
I don't go over there much, but sometimes I have to to get to the airport.
And I once saw you get stopped sometime when I'm coming in late from a flight getting home at midnight or one o'clock.
That seems to be when these things are moving and nobody's on it.
Wait, no, that's the freight trains.
Take it back.
These are the transit, the rush hour little all-day-long light train.
And they painted, they're supposed to be painted to look like Florida blue with the palm trees.
It don't look like that.
They look ugly.
They look like they're unfinished.
It looks like they bought used train cars and haven't done anything to them.
But the thing I noticed, they're always empty.
I scour, I look in the windows.
You might see one or two people on a three-car train.
They're empty.
People don't want to get on these things.
And they don't want to get on buses.
Not outside of New York, where this is a standard form of transportation, cabs and buses and subways and so forth.
But around the rest of the country, they want to drive their cars.
And they're going to, and they're going to pay whatever it costs.
We'll be back.
And they might complain, but they'll pay it.
A man, a living legend, a way of life, utilizing talent on loan from a God with Have My Brain Tied Behind My Back.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program.
I just got a fascinating email.
Rush, I heard you in the last hour say that your cat, your vet, thinks that your cat punking may have gotten sick because she ate some flowers.
Now, look, Rush, you're a single guy.
You live alone in your testosterone compound, it says here.
What are you doing with flowers in your house?
Where is it written that I, as a man living alone, cannot have flowers in my house?
I have orchids in the house all the time.
I have scented candles all over the place.
I love those things.
I get a Joe Malone care, grapefruit and orange blossom.
They're all over the place.
I love the scents.
S-C-E-N-T-S, for those of you in Riolinda, the smells emanated, they're emanating from these things, like the colors.
Somebody put roses in there.
Every day, every day.
And the orchids are there even when I'm not there.
I mean, I don't have this done every day when I'm not there.
And this is the first time, if Pumpkin got anything, it was the lilies.
Because when I got in from California, a couple of lilies, I have a little niche off of the front door, and a couple of the lily petals, I guess, had fallen on the floor.
And if she had gone around, sniffed around those things and chewed on one, that could be the source of the bladder inflammation.
So I took the lilies out of there, but they're the only thing.
And they're in there all the time.
I mean, the idea that I would go out, not have flowers in the house, only do it on special occasions.
I like them.
What the hell?
What can I tell you people?
I'm just a sensitive guy.
Get used to it.
You don't sound humble enough, Rush, to be a man of flowers and scents and so forth.
You people have no clue.
But you do now because I have told you.
Here's Steve in Chicago.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, how are you?
Longtime listener and a great admirer of yours.
Thank you very much, sir.
Rush, I'll tell you the reason I'm calling is, first of all, I'm glad to see that you've come around on this immigration issue.
It's been a major issue for conservatives around the country for the last several years.
And, you know.
I have, maybe I came around on it, but it's been years ago.
I'm the one who said a couple years ago that if the Republicans don't get their acting gear on this, that they're going to lose the election in November of 06.
And I said it's going to be largely because of this.
Well, I think you're right.
However, I think that you're not being totally honest with your listeners as to the source of the problem.
And I think the biggest source of the problem is Bush.
Bush has been shilling for amnesty for illegals since before 2000.
Look, I have said this before, too.
Let me take a cigar out of my mouth now.
When the Bush administration first proposed the plan that has become what this is some years ago, I cannot mention any names, but within two days, an emissary from the White House was dispatched to my home to try to get my mind right on this at breakfast, and it featured a phone call from the president afterwards.
And have you heard me waiver on this?
Well, I have not made Bush a primary target here because Bush is a lame duck.
He's not going to be standing for reelection anymore.
And so, yeah, it's the Bush-Kennedy-McCain bill.
There's no question about it.
But look, I am a Republican.
And I have, when you, do you think I did this thing on the elites yesterday?
You think I was not talking about all Republican elites looking down and thinking, we don't understand this.
We've got to be taught how this is right?
I ripped my own party to shreds yesterday on this, so much so the Washington Times quoted it in their news story on it today.
You know, I think this immigration issue is greater than party affiliation.
But that's the point.
But you must understand my perspective.
This is clearly an effort desired primarily by Democrats politically.
And I talked about why Bush.
Bush, I don't know this.
I think Bush's view on this is not really political.
I think some may think in the White House this is a way to get Republican votes.
I know that Republicans in the Senate think it is, and maybe some Republicans in the House, but I think Bush is a man of faith.
I think he views himself as helping the downtrodden step up in life.
I don't know that.
It's just a wild guess.
But my focus on this, if you think it's a bipartisan issue, it is, but the Democrats are the ones that stand to gain by this, and it is they who are doing everything they can to destroy the traditions and institutions that have made this country great and then rebuild the country in their own image.
And what frustrates me is the Republicans have no knowledge.
They have no ability to see that this is what they're party to.
You know, I think part of the problem is that you're correct in what you're saying, but someone should maybe explain to Bush that, in fact, this is what's going on.
He's not going to change his mind on this.
Well, the fact is then that the Republican Party will go down with Bush.
Because, you know, I myself am an immigrant rush.
And I want to tell you, when we came here, not only did we have to have a sponsor, we had to have someone that would sign an agreement that they would financially support us if we were unable to support ourselves.
And, you know, when I came here, I went to second grade.
There was no bilingual education.
It was sink or swim.
I had to learn English and assimilate.
And when you've got millions and millions of third-world uneducated people.
I understand all this.
You know, I don't, I'm surprised that you even know I've come around because you're saying things to me that as though you don't think I know them.
And I've been talking about it for the past week intensely on the very subjects that you were raising.
I do think that you understand the issues, but I don't.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
I don't think that the importance of the issue has been highlighted enough.
And it's been an important issue for quite a long time.
I mean, I think our country is going down the drain.
And we can talk about wages.
We can talk about in stunned amazement because at the same time, you're telling me we're not hitting this hard enough.
I got people on my own staff and in my email.
So would you drop it and get on to other things?
I'm tired of hearing about it.
Yet, you know what?
Your staff may be saying that, but people out here are not saying that.
No, some emails, some people are.
I don't follow all this.
I mean, I don't put this program together based on anecdotal emails or comments from the staff.
I always follow my own instincts on it.
But you can.
You've got to be careful.
You can stay too long on anything, and you'll run people's emotional reservoir dry.
They just won't want to hear it.
It's impossible for people to stay angry and revved up and passionate about something for years.
And you have to be very careful about this.
And there are other things happening at the same time.
But trust me, be confident.
The things that are bothering you, I'm on it.
And I've been on it intensely here for a week ever since this bill, ever since they came out and said, hey, we got a deal.
We negotiated it in private, which was last week.
Have been hitting it hard.
And for many, many years prior to that.
I think what you're really getting at is you want me to hammer Bush.
You want me to.
That's what this is really.
That's the play.
You really want me to do that.
And, you know, I'm not hammering anybody by name in this other than McCain, people putting their names on this thing and the Democrats.
But because Bush is a lame duck.
I mean, and he's not going to change his mind on this.
He's as committed to this as he is in the war on terror.
So you deal with it in other ways.
But I resent this notion from people that I will no longer have credibility or I can't have credibility if I won't attack my own president.
Ask him if I have it.
I have.
I'm back to thinking there's going to be a requirement on this program.
If you call, you have to listen three hours every day, five days a week.
Otherwise, otherwise, yes, Mr. Snowdly, I'm thinking of putting that requirement out there.
And pictures for the women.
If I compromise, you'll go.
Just kidding about that.
Well, the Brett girl went to the Council on Foreign Relations today to make a big speech.
I knew he was going to do this.
We had a story about two or three weeks ago from the Brett girl in which he first sent this phrase out, this thought out as a trial balloon.
But he, before the Council on Foreign Relations, he repudiated the notion that there even is a global war on terror.
He said, global war on terror is an ideological doctrine advanced by the Bush administration that has strained American military resources and emboldened terrorists.
In a defense policy speech at the CFR, the Brett girl called the war on terror a bumper sticker slogan that Bush had used to justify everything from abuses at Abu Ghraib to the invasion of Iraq.
This is dangerous, folks.
It leads me to something that we were talking, Snorterly and I were talking about this at the last top of the hour break.
This is first place.
I have never, I don't care what other people say, I have never thought this guy is particularly bright.
You know, he may be able to dazzle a jury by channeling the thoughts of a dead baby, and he may be able to reach in there and tug their heartstrings and get them to award $60 million or whatever to a client of his.
But I've never thought that he's the brightest bulb in the room.
I've never thought the elevator went to the top floor.
I've always thought he was a happy meal, order a French fries short of a happy meal.
This confirms it.
This is stupid.
The Council on Foreign Relations, I mean, they got some blockheads in there, and they got some pure libs, but they are not, some of them are not this stupid to run out and say that the global war on terror is nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan that Bush used to justify abuses.
Does he really think that this president wants to go around abusing people?
After all that Bush has put himself through, he really think this is just about something other than national security and the invasion of Iraq.
This kind of comment, by the way, is exactly what Bob Kerry was writing about in Opinion Journal yesterday.
This is dangerous stuff.
And I'll tell you, folks, let's move forward to 2008 and let's assume the Democrats win the White House.
If this actually represents their belief system, if there is no war on terror, and if Iraq was totally unnecessary, and if all this administration existed to do was to engage in torture of innocent, downtrodden Islamo fascists, then we are in deep doo-doo.
Because I don't know if you've noticed or not, Nancy Pelosi goes to Syria, and the opposition movement in Syria has just been wiped out.
I mean, they've been under her visit giving the imprimatur of U.S. the United States condoning what Bashur Assad is doing when we don't.
It's not our official policy.
She goes over there and does this.
They've just had the rug cut out from underneath them.
The situation at Tripoli in Lebanon, which we haven't talked about, let me tell you something.
And the situation with Hamas and the Palestinians, the Arab world does not want peace between the Palestinians and Arabs, or the Israelis, because that conflict allows the Arabs, the leaders, to tell their populations how rotten the Jews are and how bad America is, and that they're foaming on it.
The last thing they want is peace.
They're the obstacles to it.
And you've got the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad in Iran who are thumbing their nose at the world and everybody on uranium enrichment every day with repeated threats to wipe Israel off the map.
You've got the religion of peace, militant Islam, running around conducting terror attacks all over the world.
And they are involved in what's going on in Darfur, where Senator Biden's so eager to get us to go in there and stop the genocide.
It is a powder keg and it's ready to blow.
And if it blows over there, we're going to have to go in somewhere.
I don't care what anybody thinks about this.
If something blows up over there, and the fuse is lit, and you put somebody in the White House who actually thinks what John Edwards said today at the Council on Foreign Relations, you're going to just encourage that powder keg over there.
The Iranians are hell-bent on controlling that region, including Saudi Arabia.
And that's why we're going to have to go in there, not because of our love of the Saudis and not because of our love of the United Arab Emirates, where you'll find Dubai.
Love saying that word.
We're going to have to go in there to make sure the oil fields in that region do not come totally under the control of militant radical Islamists like Ahmadinejad and bin Laden disciples and so forth.
If the Democrats win the presidency in 08 and whoever it is believes the same thing Edwards is saying here today, within what would you think, five years?
Five years, what everybody's been saying is going to happen in that region is going to happen.
It's going to go sky high.
Because the Iranian, somebody is going to get the impression if these guys win it, that we're not going to stop them.
There's no global war on terror.
Bush, all he wants to do is torture people.
And believe me, the Iranians tried to engineer as best they could.
The Democrats are supporting Democrats in the last election.
So were al-Qaeda types, Al-Zawahiri.
They know full well what they're getting in the Democrats, and they know full well what they're getting when they get Democrats and their buddies in the drive-by media.
They're getting a bunch of isolationists.
They're getting a bunch of people who don't think that there's any problem over there other than that problem created by Bush.
And once we get Bush out of the equation, it's going to be peace and light.
And they're just waiting for that because they'll fall for the notion that we won't do anything.
And we will have to do something.
I don't care who's in the white.
We will have to do something.
And it will dwarf what's happening in Iraq.
And if they just get behind this whole effort to try to win in Iraq and establish something over there that could serve some purpose in perhaps putting out this fuse that's been lit.
And do you realize what unity in this country on this whole thing would do to that part of the world?
If the Democrats and the media would just either shut up or put on their proper patriotism hats and understand that this is in the best interest and the national security interests of the United States, do you realize what unity in our media every day, unity from Capitol Hill, Democrats and Republicans, would do to that situation?
You think that that situation is not effervescing and bubbling up over there faster than it would be were it not for the rift in this country?
The Democrats and the media are enabling all this hatred for America because they're spewing it themselves.
All this hatred and lack of respect for Bush, they are spewing it themselves.
So they give coffer to the Ahmadinejads of the world and all the other radicals, the Basher Assads.
Take your pick.
So mark my words: Democrats win, going to be hell to pay.
And if you don't like the war we're in now, get ready because this will look like a sandbox skirmish.
Fastest three hours in media.
Just got two hours done and in the can on the way over to the museum.
Well, the warehouse that will house the museum, the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum, some busy day.
But we've got a big, big hour remaining.
▲
Export Selection