All Episodes
Previous Next
May 30, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:31
May 30, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plain.
It's uh time once once again here to hit the boards on the Rush Limbaugh program from the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Looking forward to talking to you.
Here we are already at the middle of the week.
The fastest week in media, the fastest three hours that goes by lickety split just like that.
Telephone number 800 282-2882 and the email address is Rush at EIBNet.com.
Well, lots going on here today.
Uh here's just to give you a little rundown of some of the things we're going to be discussing.
Uh, many people uh think that President Bush yesterday and his remarks about conservative critics of his immigration bill were actually aimed at me.
Uh many of the people who think they actually aimed at you, uh, but but uh uh maybe me too.
But the drive-by media is rejoicing today that they are aimed at me.
Uh uh Brian uh Bramalone, who uh has a blog called the uh Radio Equalizer, has got a little piece he just posted called Bush versus Rush.
Uh and uh this is all about how the media is excited.
Now the media is excited because the President of the United States has taken me on.
And the uh there's a McClatchy story that's running in all the McClatchy newspapers and and quite a few others around the country today as uh as well.
Uh and the media is just having a field day with the New York Times.
I mean, some of the some of the uh some of the reporting on President Bush today is some of the most laudatory and some of the uh friendliest that he has had in a while.
It it leads me to believe that drive-bys hate me more than they hate President Bush.
And it seems that I may have been able to have done a service here in some regard, because if uh if I can single-handedly turn around press coverage for President Bush, who knows how valuable that is to the uh to the people at the White House.
Uh some are speculating that that uh President Bush might become the new McCain with uh because he's essentially attacked me, uh, i.e.
his own base, and this is what uh you have to do to get the drive-bys to love you.
This is what McCain did, constantly attacking Bush and his own party uh in order to get fawning press coverage.
Of course, that's dried up now that McCain is seeking the Republican presidential nomination.
Speaking of McCain, he was in Carlsburg, California yesterday, and he urged Congress to adopt a sweeping overhaul of his immigration bill, criticized his leading rivals, Romney, uh Giuliani, and a reporter said, uh, what about their opposition to the uh Senate compromise brokered earlier this month?
And uh and McCain said, Look, anyone, anybody says we shouldn't pass this.
I would ask for their proposal.
What's your idea?
I got the answer.
Stick with existing law.
We don't need to pile more laws on top of more laws.
What's the solution?
Enforce what's on the books now.
If it did it makes.
And of course, that answer would be greeted with uh uh show of frustration, throw their hands in the air, be totally frustrated.
Uh oh, yeah, easy for you to say.
Sort of like telling homeless people to go out and uh try working.
Uh get a um get a job.
At any rate, uh we'll we'll have a we'll have a full stack on uh illegal immigration and the process of this bill winding its way through the uh through the Senate.
What a call your attention.
We've we've linked to this at my website, www.rushlimbaugh.com.
A man by John Burlowe has written an open letter to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in Oslo.
Let me tell you who he is.
He is director for the uh uh director of the Center for Entrepreneurship at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, uh, author of the book Eco Freaks, Environmentalism is hazardous uh hazardous to your health.
And it's a long letter.
I printed this out at seven pages.
I can't begin to read the whole thing to you.
But he makes the case, and this is in this open letter to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, and actually the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, that uh I am far more uh qualified for this year's Nobel Peace Prize, and I have been nominated for those of you just tuning in for the first time.
I am a Nobel Peace Prize nominee for this year's prize.
It's handed out in October and November.
Al Gore is the odds-on favorite right now, but the purpose of Mr. Burlowe's letter is to suggest to the Nobel Committee that I am far more worthy of this August award than Al Gore could even hope to be.
And he cites as one of his primary examples my ongoing crusade for the last 10 to 12 years to discredit Rachel Carson and to get DDT back in production.
The uh banning of DDT has led to increased cases of malaria in Africa.
Uh and Gore has not spoken up about this.
It's a great, great letter, and it's at Rush Limbaugh.com right now.
If you would like to go and check it out when you have time, because that's much too long here for me to read to you in its entirety.
Um tonight, the uh uh school bus Nagan, Ray Nagan will, the mayor of New Orleans is going to give a state of the city speech.
And on the uh on the eve of this, Louisiana, the state of Louisiana says they want thousands of state and local government workers to send back $10 million in unemployment pay that they received while still collecting regular pay after Hurricane Katrina.
State audit found lax control by the st no kidding, lax control by a state agency.
In this case, it was the State Department of Labor.
State audit lax control was the main reason that 5,439 ineligible workers were able to collect up to 258 dollars a week.
And with this, of course, they went to Vegas, so they played the lottery, they did uh any any number of things.
Administrative workers with the city of New Orleans got the most money, with uh oh, 2200 of them wrongfully collecting 4.3 or f yeah, 4.3 million dollars.
There were about sixteen hundred state workers, many with the State Department of Health and Hospitals who got 2.7 uh million.
And so now they want the money back.
Fat chance.
I remember when this all happened, that some said that they were entitled to the money in the first place.
And in today's installment of it's a crisis, it's chaos, it's tumult, and we're all going to die out there.
This is from the UK Daily Mail.
Booming sales of laptops have led to a surge in the number of computer users with back and muscle problems.
Experts have warned.
It's those backpacks out there that the kids carry these little laptops around in.
They're destroying their spines, ladies and gentlemen, they're gonna end up being crooked out there.
They're gonna be they're gonna stoop-shouldered, they're not gonna grow up and uh and have good posture.
They may be wounded and damaged for life, ladies and gentlemen, because of laptops.
Girls as young as twelve are being diagnosed with nerve damage caused by slouching over the screens and carrying them around out there.
Millions of others are at risk of irretrievable damage to their spines, their necks, and their shoulders because of poor posture when using laptops and when carrying them around.
So, you know, you've had we've had the evil backpack and we've had cell phones and all these things are going to wipe us out.
Now it is after you take the laptop out of the bag, the backpack, uh, you are going to die.
Uh the degeneration in the joints is occurring.
It never ends.
Uh you you could you can make book uh this kind of stuff is going to show up every now and then.
This just it just the nanny state fed by the drive-by media.
Now, the politico, this is the bunch that said Elizabeth Edwards uh press conference because of cancer would lead to her husband John Edwards dropping out of the presidential race.
And then he went to the press conference and no, I'm not dropping out, and she not dropping out either.
We're going to campaign together.
Uh, Politico corrected the mistake.
They now have Fred Thompson planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing that week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican uh administrations.
Thompson advisors told the politico attesting the waters committees to be formed June 4th so that Thompson can start raising money and staffers will go on a payroll in early June, even going to have that red pickup truck that he used to run for the Senate in Tennessee on display in Iowa, but not so fast, ladies and gentlemen.
Our buddy Jim Gardy at National Review Online in his blog called The Hillary Spot says that uh he just talked to a Thompson source this morning that he calls Thompson Associate three.
Uh and the uh uh first word was that there will not be a presidential announcement from Fred Thompson on July 4th.
There was some discussion of a June 4th beginning of fundraising.
That's the date checks will be collected.
I suppose that's where there was some conf uh confusion.
The uh forthcoming announcement will be that Thompson is testing the waters.
So um we're a little conflicted here.
Politico says he's running and going to announce on July 4th, but some of his own associates are telling National Review Online and Jim uh Garrety uh that that is uh not the case.
Brief timeout, we'll come back, get started with uh some audio soundbites here.
Al Gore talking about the fairness doctrine as well as uh the evil United States when it comes to uh global warming.
Uh Democrats uh it uh duplicating the feat executed by Walter F. Mondal when he ran for president in 1984, and the Democrats one after another are promising to raise your taxes, ladies and gentlemen.
Back with lots more after this.
Well, had another one of those famous big-time dinner parties last night, ladies and gentlemen.
Mmh.
Another August guest list.
This time uh it was a retired high-tech mogul, uh, who uh not gonna mention any names here because it's it's uh it's not the point.
Walked in there.
I don't think the retired high-tech mogul had been informed that I was going to be there.
He looked a little stunned when I walked in and started saying, ah, the last place I ever thought I would be is having dinner with Rush Limbaugh.
Then he started talking about how rotten Bush is.
And I was my usual charming self.
And I refused to take the take the bait out there.
I said, Look, I I got my own disagreements with President Bush.
They're probably far different than uh than yours.
His was based totally on a rock.
Uh mine based on this uh on this immigration business, some of the some of the spending.
Uh then he started to say, well, look, it's gonna be a contest between who's the worst president in American history, your guy or Nixon.
Said, well, you know, by the time you and I are both gone, both those guys' historical legacy is gonna be far better and far greater than what you think.
That's just an amazing.
It ended well, folks.
No fireworks started.
There were attempts by the host once again to start the fireworks, but I uh refused to do so.
The woman that I was seated next to is a contestant.
I didn't even have you heard of this show Hottest Mom in America.
Oh, yeah, the Oh, that's right, that's right.
That's well, anyway, sat next to the contestant on the show.
Apparently it's already done.
Everybody's trying to get her to divulge whether she won it or not, and she, of course, wouldn't.
It's like when you go on Survivor, you got to sign all kinds of confidentiality agreements.
But anyways, it was a uh great, there was a late night uh out there, ladies and gentlemen.
I sound all stuffed up to myself.
I got a little bit of a of a head code, even though I don't.
So I asked the staff mere moments ago to I sound like I'm stuffed up, or is it just the baseline running through my cochlear implant that they said, Oh, no, no, it's not fine.
So that is uh that's good to know.
Democrat presidential candidates want to raise your taxes.
Most of them aren't exactly advertising the fact when they talk about their plans for health care or the environment or education.
But for a party, this is ABC.com, for a party that has long feared political fallout when talking about taxes.
The Democrats 2008 crop of presidential contenders is showing remarkable frankness in talking about the need for additional revenue to fund their priorities.
We don't need any additional revenue.
Revenue is poor.
Remarkable frankness.
Isn't it love?
The drive-by's just love it when you start talking about raising taxes.
It doesn't matter the circumstances, and it certainly doesn't matter what the result will be.
Yes, we're gonna raise taxes.
Remarkable frankness.
How can they be speaking with remarkable frankness if they aren't exactly advertising the fact that they're talking about raising taxes?
Those two phrases appear in one paragraph.
Uh Senator Barack Obama became the latest candidate to call for higher taxes Tuesday when he unveiled his health plan, his universal health coverage.
Look at I can do this much simpler.
I can do this much more cogently, much much uh much uh quicker than reading a drive-by media story to you.
And when I when I go through it this way, you you might you might think that it is an absurdity, but it is not.
Uh this is real.
It's straight from the playbook.
This is real liberal thought thought.
Osama sorry Obama has a plan for universal health care.
And the plan is to roll back tax cuts for the rich.
That's it.
The New York Times has a plan to fix the alternative minimum tax mess, and that's roll back the tax cuts for the rich.
Mrs. Clinton has a plan to fix income inequality, and that is to roll back tax cuts for the uh for the rich.
Before uh before long, I am I'm certain one of the liberals will come up with a plan to make his energy independent, and the plan to make his energy independent will be ta-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da to roll back the tax cuts for the rich.
I mean, it's just and they they go down the tubes each and every time they talk about this.
And Clinton, in fact, you go back to 1992 during the campaign, promising everybody a middle class tax cut, and then within a week or two after he was inaugurated, he has this press conference or this address from the Oval Orifice.
And he said, I've worked harder than I have worked on anything in my life.
I have never ever worked harder on anything.
I just can't come up with I can't I can't come up away, give you a middle class tax.
A fact, I'm gonna raise everybody's taxes, I'm gonna make them retroactive.
He did this after he was in the Oval Office.
Mondal tried it in his uh acceptance speech at Demo Democrat National Convention in San Francisco.
He said, President Reagan is gonna do exactly what I'm gonna do.
The difference is he won't tell you, and I will, I'm gonna raise your taxes.
So long he lost in a 49-state landslide.
Let's start on the phones of Washington, D.C. Bob, I wonder what subject people are going to bring up today.
Bob uh, how are you, sir?
I'm doing all right.
Good luck to you.
I got several topics I like to talk about, but of course Fred Thompson's right on the docket right now.
And of course, as a lot of people know, he backed the McCain Fein Gold, pushed it through the sentence, so we're stuck with the uh campaign campaign finance to form.
But he was also in charge in the Senate of investigating Red China owning the Clintons.
And I didn't see the results from that.
Whereas in the House with Chris Cox, I saw the Cox report, which resolved in Clinton uh either bombing uh a rather cut cut to the chase.
What what are you saying here?
I'm saying that uh I don't like uh Fred Thompson.
He's not what he claims what a lot of people perceive from being being on TV.
Well that's not that's that's that's not what interests me about uh this whole Thompson thing.
Well, uh if you're interested in the taxes, you were just talking about the taxes, and you know, the there's uh the flat tax, but even more importantly, the national sales tax is pushed through by Tom Tancreto as well as co uh closing the borders and uh wait wait wait wait a second.
Who are you supporting?
Who who is your choice of the Republican field?
Well, as a libertarian, I've never voted Republican, but I would vote for Tom Tancredo.
He's got uh taxes.
HR, we got a spam campaign going on out there.
The the the politico runs the Thompson thing today, and so all of the Tancredo and Ron Paul people are gonna be out on a war path today.
Uh uh keep a sharp eye on that.
Well, the fascinating thing about the Fred Thompson candidate, whether he it happens or not, is that so many people are waiting in baited breath for it.
Um, which is an indication and I think the same thing exists on the Democrat side.
So there's a lot of Democrats out there just panting away hoping an Al Gore gets in.
You know, you you realize that right now, 70 percent, 65% of Democrats in polls are not excited about Mrs. Clinton.
Uh she's what, 35%, something like that, uh, in these uh in these preference polls.
Uh so the Democrats are not happy with their field.
Republicans, I mean, if if if Fred Thompson, you know, uh tickling everybody with what he might do can cause a lot of people to get all excited.
It it it tells me that there's not uh a a clear front runner yet.
Uh well, we know that it's worse than that.
There's that that there's just not a whole lot of excitement about any one of the front runners either.
I think in uh in either party, which is why I have restrained myself in throwing my hat in the ring, because you know, I have the power to pick the Republican nominee.
They all know it.
Everybody knows it, is the elephant in the room.
I finally admitted to this power mere weeks ago.
And it's just not time, folks.
It's not it's uh it it certainly isn't uh time to do so.
This is Case in uh in Stafford, Virginia.
Great to have you on the program, Case.
Yes, sir.
Thank you for having me again.
I can't call it a few months ago.
Hey, uh, I'm kind of with uh President Bush on this immigration thing.
Um I think we are enforcing the uh the laws on the books right now.
I think ICE probably returns what a million folks a year or something like that.
It's the analogy I like to use is like creating a ten lane highway and pushing a speed limits on at 15 miles an hour.
And you don't have to have enough cops out there to give speed to get to everybody, and I think that's what ISIS is facing.
For whatever reason, there's a these guys come across the board and work.
And uh so I we have twelve million folks.
Uh doesn't mean that we didn't return a million folks each year.
Yeah, you know, all all I know is is that Kant never did anything, and and uh you're right.
If we can't divort 12 million people, by the way, nobody is suggesting that.
Got to take a brief time out.
We'll be back in a moment.
By the way, a little program note, uh, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Snerdley, our regular call screener, is out today, had to get the car washed again.
And so my uh trusty and loyal chief of staff, H.R. is doing the screening today.
I just want to warn you he's much less patient uh with people than is Mr. Snerdley, and Mr. Snurdly doesn't exhibit a whole lot of patience.
So um uh any complaints, uh, if you get past HR heavy complaints, uh tell me about them and we'll deal with them uh accordingly, uh, if I believe that you are being honest.
Uh I note that the ratings for the CBS evening news have now plummeted to an all-time low.
The CBS Evening News with Katie Courick now at an all-time low, five million nine hundred and sixty thousand viewers for the week of uh May twenty first.
And I think because I'm a nice guy, and I I would like to help out here, I will renew my offer to sit for a live interview with Ms. Kurick on the CBS evening news to jump start the ratings.
I am ratings, they will happen.
It has been established and proven countless times.
Now, the last time I made this offer, uh Bob Anderson, who's a producer at 60 Minutes, yeah, they have been they've been trying to get me to sit for a segment there for a year.
Um they're very pleased, and the nice guy did he produce the first sixty minutes profile of me many, many, many moons ago.
Uh Bob Cole.
Well, hey, I just heard your offer.
We'll have Katie do the piece for you on sixty minutes, and we'll run uh we'll run highlights on the evening news.
I said, nice try, Bob, but that isn't how it's gonna work.
This is a one-time offer.
Now I'm I'm reviving it since the numbers continue to plummet.
I'm not worried that she'll accept this.
It won't happen, which is why I'm extending the uh the invitation.
Uh but uh it has to be live.
Uh no tape, no editing, no nothing.
And not even the whole show.
I don't care how long it is.
I just something has to has to jump start the uh the numbers of the CBS evening news.
It's a crying shame what's happened over there.
And uh I'm here to help.
Uh just wanted to once again extend the offer.
Let's go to the audio sound bites.
Uh speaking of CBS on the early show today, Harry Smith was talking to former Vice President Al Gore.
Uh Gore says the element of television that I think has been troubling for democracy, now that it's become the most dominant medium by far, even with the rising importance of the internet, is that it's one way.
Harry Smith said, Well, radio's one way.
If you look back, some of the greatest uh presidents of our democracy are the republic happened during the age of radio.
That was one way.
Simulates two-way communication by having having call-ins.
But you're quite right that radio preceded television as a the first broadcast medium.
Right.
And the first concerns among defenders of democracy arose with radio.
And that's why the Equal Time Provision and the Fairness Doctrine and the public interest standard were uh invo were put in place uh here.
Those protections were almost completely removed during uh President Reagan's term.
Yeah, well, I think it's it's time.
I've had this in the stack for a while here, and it's time to to get to this because Gore he is he's he's uh makes this this false claim that radio is uh uh two-way now, simulates two-way communication by having call-ins.
Uh and uh but you're quite right, uh radio preceded television, and then the first concerns among defenders of democracy arose with radio.
And that's why the equal time provisions and the fairness doctrine and all that were put in.
Robert Tresenski, Real Clear Politics is back on May 23rd, had a piece called Al Gore's Insolent Assault on Reason.
It's about his book, which by the way, has been outsold the first week by Ronald Reagan's Diaries.
Reagan's diaries out the latest book scan outsold uh Al Gore's book by five copies, which means that the Al Gore people will no doubt be demanding a recount on this.
Early coverage of Al Gore's new book, The Assault on Reason has focused on the fact that the book is largely an assault on the Bush administration.
But they have glossed over the most significant and alarming theme that Al Gore has taken up.
His alleged defensive reason includes a justification for government controls over political speech.
Now, judging from the excerpts of Gore's book published in time, his not so subtle theme is that reason is being assaulted by a free and unfettered debate in the media, particularly by the fact that Gore has to contend with opposition from the right leaning media.
Now, this piece goes on and on and on.
I tell you, it it makes the point that I've tried to make over and over and over again here about liberals.
To them, there is no debate.
There is no alternative point of view.
Anybody who expresses one is simply a gnat that has to or a fly.
It has to be swatted away, not engaged.
You don't debate your opposition because there isn't any.
They are just a bunch of kooks.
And they, the opposition, me, we're the ones getting in the way of reason.
Developing a dangerous theme that the left has been toying with for years, Gore says that reason is being suffocated by media Machiavelli's.
A veiled reference to Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch, Carl Rove, and people like me.
According to Al Gore, these puppet masters take advantage of the clever use of electronic mass media to manipulate the outcome of elections.
It's sort of like Newsweek magazine back in uh 1994, we did a cover story with me, of course, on the cover, or time did whatever I forget which one.
Is there too much democracy in America?
Can there be too much democracy?
Meaning all of a sudden the Libs had lost their monopoly, and oh here come these alternative points of view.
Well, that's not what we're thinking.
Oh, that's just getting in the way here.
Too much democracy.
But here's the really ominous part.
This manipulation of the outcome of elections is rendering our representative government illegitimate because it only has the public's consent.
He repeatedly puts consent in square coats, uh, quotes, just to emphasize the point that this consent is not in Al Gore's superior judgment, genuine or legitimate.
As he puts it, the consent of the governed has become a commodity to be purchased by the highest bidder.
He simply doesn't like the arena of ideas.
He doesn't like people in the arena of ideas competing and trying to win the day on ideas.
His ideas are what should dominate, and anything that threatens them must be swatted down with government control.
And that's why he is for the fairness doctrine.
His new argument doesn't do anything to reverse this impression.
His basic theme seems to be this.
If the left isn't winning in the marketplace of ideas, there can't possibly be anything wrong with their ideas.
It must be the marketplace itself that's broken, and the left needs to use the power of government to fix it in both senses of the word fix.
Now, this is by no means a new theme on the left.
Noam Chomsky has been peddling this stuff for years.
We only think that we're free to write and to speak and to make our minds up for ourselves, the left tells us, but behind the scenes we're being manipulated by big corporate media.
So the votes we cast and the consent we give to those who govern us is artificially manufactured.
We need to be liberated by having the left take control of the media and manage it in our best interests.
So that's that's the way to translate this soundbite uh uh from Al Gore.
And what's really bugging him here is that there is an alternative point of view that's gaining traction, uh, and it's persuading a lot of people that his global warming hoax, which is his latest religion, is having trouble getting traction with the majority of the American people.
And so his idea is not to go out there and continue trying to persuade people he's right is to shut down the people who are standing in the way of reason.
He, of course, is reason, nobody else is.
And this by the way, he's not alone.
This is pretty much the uh attitude of of most liberal Democrats today, be they elected or not.
This is uh Dave and Linwood uh what is that, Michigan?
Is that right?
Well, welcome uh Dave.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Rush, it's an honor.
Thank you, sir.
Hey Rush, if uh if Al Gore wants to cite Ronald Reagan to uh sell the case for the fairness doctrine, I think we ought to bring our former president on posthumously, and I think he could clean his clock.
Uh oh, there's no question.
If you just you know Rand Reagan is a corpse, you mean?
Well, you know, let's have powerful media types uh start start it out.
You know, let's run some spots with Reagan, citing government as being the problem.
And uh, you know, whatever.
You know, this leads this leads this this is uh at first I was saying, what is this?
We're not gonna run corpses here, and that's not the one but you have raised an interesting point.
And the point is the antidote to all of these Democrat candidates is Reaganism, which is conservatism.
All these guys, Obama and Hillary and uh whoever else are gonna raise taxes, want to grow the government.
Not to mention what they're trying to do with his immigration bill.
They want to increase the redistribution of wealth.
They want people to be poorer.
They want to they want to take wealth and opportunity for income away from people, and the antidote to this is uh exactly the kind of things Reagan said.
It's mystifying to me that so many Republicans today remain unwilling or maybe even embarrassed.
Well, it's not totally mystifying on why they're embarrassed to evoke Reaganism.
It's simply to drive by just kills them.
In Washington.
Hell, you know, in fact, we have some JFK quotes that precede Reagan.
We have a uh JFK in uh I guess a 62 made a speech in the fall of the economic club of New York, making the case for his big tax cuts.
I swear if you listen to these, you convinced you're listening to Ronald Reagan.
Uh we've played those sound bites over the course of this program's many, many stellar years of broadcast service to mankind.
And when we do, liberal Democrats call here and are outraged.
And they told me that I don't have the right to play JFK's words.
Who are you?
You're a Republican.
You can't take his words and appropriate them for yours.
The I'm an American, he was president, and he was right about it.
They just don't want to hear Democrats talk that way.
It's funny.
Quick timeout is a clock, just keeps chugging on back after this.
I've been looking at the emails here during uh our obscene profit center timeouts.
And I'm getting a lot of emails from people who are expressing surprise and incredulity that I am not outraged and angry at President Bush for his attacks yesterday on his base.
Uh and many people in their emails, you know he was talking about you.
You know it was you, and you're not firing back, and I don't understand it.
Uh let me try to explain it.
Folks, uh I've known President Bush since before he was uh governor of Texas.
And uh I don't know him well, but I've I've been with him socially on uh two or three occasions, and I personally like him very much.
I don't associate his motives on this immigration bill uh the the same uh characteristics that the Democrats have on this.
It's disappointing to me.
I'm not I'm not gonna hide them.
But the fact that he may be attacking me isn't I don't uh doesn't bother me.
I that that's what what concerns me more about it, because you can't take this kind of stuff personally.
I this he didn't mention my name, and I'm not gonna sit around here and start making assumptions.
Uh the the thing that that is most troublesome to me is is that the uh the words that he spoke yesterday were were were criticism of the people who have stood by him through thick and thin when everybody's been trying to destroy him.
Uh be it on the National Guard story, uh you take your pick.
Rumsfeld, the entire war in Iraq, uh the whole weapons of mass destruction uh thing, uh the people have stood by him, and because they they they trust him and believe him on those issues.
And they also did not want the uh the Democrats to get away with taking him out.
Uh I'm even getting him I don't even want to mention it.
Never mind.
It's because it's nuts, what some people are suggesting that I now support.
I'll just say this.
I'm getting it is a few.
You ought to get behind the impeachment of Bush.
Now come on, folks.
This is asinine.
Uh I've told you what I think the president's motivations here are on the immigration bill, and I think they're far loftier motivations than political, frankly.
I I think they have to do with uh his his vision of uh and his desire to help uh the less fortunate around the world to realize dreams, his belief in this country is a way to get it done.
But this criticism of his base is going to be problematic for him because the uh the left is going to keep up their incessant harping on the on a rock, and he needs people to support him on this.
He needs to have a base of support that will not waver.
And I don't know uh I haven't talked to any of you about this.
I've gotten some emails, and those are just anecdotal, but there are people uh who are saying, I've had it.
I I'm I'm through, I'm through defending the guy.
This is this is the last draw because he's attacking me here as somebody who doesn't know what I'm talking about, somebody who wants doesn't want what's right for the country, uh, and and so forth.
And I understand uh you and and other people getting upset about it, and I can even understand if you if you flew the coupe uh in terms of supporting some of these other things.
I I just think that uh there's a there's a little bit of tone-deafness uh in the Republican Party on the impact of this on their base.
Uh they there has to be some either that or there's just there's so much arrogance now in the Republican Party over this that it's incomprehensible.
But I I don't I don't uh take this uh stuff that the President said yesterday personally at all.
I don't even think he he meant it that way.
He's just out trying to sell his position on this.
Uh I think he's wrong about it.
I have I've made no secret of that.
Uh but he does not in any way constitute an enemy to me on this.
The the enemy on this is the Democrats, primarily and the Republican.
Remember, this is Ted Kennedy bill, and he and he joined up there with with with uh with McCain uh to get this done, and there's some Republicans in the Senate that are recalcitred, but the Republicans in the House, the conservatives over there are fit to be tied over this, and it's it's gonna have uh a rocky road ahead of it, regardless what comes out of the uh of the Senate.
I just I just wish he hadn't done it, because uh he's not gonna lose me on Iraq, and he's not gonna lose me on national security.
He's not gonna lose me on the war on terror, but he might lose some of you, and that might mean losing some of your votes for other Republicans, because the President's not on any ballot anymore, but other Republicans are.
Uh and uh it's you know, the the people that have hung with you, that's that's that you you don't just cast them aside uh in uh in an even uh casual sense.
That's that's that's the thing about this that troubles me the most that's that's what's the saddest aspect of this to me, nothing personal.
Uh Stockton, California, this is Robert, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Good program, Rush.
You know.
Do you find it kind of interesting that um Al Gore's comments come as well as the fairness doctrine as uh all this is coming just as Hugo Chavez is shutting down media in Venezuela.
Oh.
Oh, let me tell you something about this.
I've got a story.
You will not, you will not believe this story about this.
It's a drive-by media story making excuses for what Chavez is doing because this TV station has ripped him and supported a coup uh against him.
Here it is.
It's Bart Jones, uh, who spent eight years in Venezuela, uh, mainly as a foreign correspondent for the associated press.
And he says this would a network that aided and abetted a coup against the government be allowed to operate in the United States.
Well, I yes, it happens every day.
What do you think the drive-by media's been trying to do for five years, if not sponsor some kind of a democratic coup against George W. Bush?
But this guy goes on to praise uh Hugo Chavez for standing up to this TV station uh uh uh for for because they tried to oust him, they tried to run a coup against him.
And well, well, what do you expect?
So that he has a lot of support, and the Democrat Party in this country he has a lot of support because he hates Bush and they hate Bush.
And so any friend of theirs, anybody who hates Bush, whether they're an enemy of the country or not, is a friend of the Democrats and a friend of the liberals.
But you're right, what Hugo Chavez is doing, nationalizing TV stations and shutting them down, is the Venezuelan version of Al Gore's fairness doctrine.
First hours in the can on the way over to the museum, well, the warehouse, housing artifacts for the future Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.
▲
Export Selection