All Episodes
Previous Next
July 11, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
July 11, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Isn't it funny how the drive-by media is totally missing this problem that McCain is having?
When they assign reasons to it, I it it they're in a they're in a parallel universe.
I mean, they've got their action lines and they've got their their ways of moving things forward, and anything other than that, uh, they don't see.
It's I mean, it's worse than managing the news.
I it's it's it's worse than group think.
Anyway, greetings, uh, my friends, and welcome Rush Limbaugh back at you, middle of the week.
Hump day, as you know, get this day behind you, only two to go.
And we are here for three hours, a busy broadcast excellence.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program is 800-282-2882, the email address rush at eIBNet.com.
A warning.
What are you staring at at him?
Well Yeah, no, I I don't I'm not can't I can't hold those things up now.
I got some pictures from the Golf Digest uh interview that I did.
By the way, I just I just saw it on the uh on the web.
But they brought the photographer took some great pictures here.
That's what Snerdley's asking me about, and they're sitting over there on the uh the coffee table in front of the sofa.
But I mean, it's uh I can't do it myself.
I need two or three people in here.
Those are big pictures.
I gotta refocus, I gotta resize, I gotta.
We'll find a way.
We'll find a way, but uh, I assume I can use them with the proper photographer credit, because uh took a bunch of them, sent me three.
Anyway, uh a warning, ladies and gentlemen, I'm in a foul mood today.
I am irritated beyond belief.
It it matters not why.
Uh I just I just am, so uh it may not even be a factor as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears today, but it might.
And if it is, I don't know how it will manifest itself, so just be cool.
We have an iPhone winner again.
This is uh number six that we have awarded.
Today's iPhone winner, John S. of Arden, North Carolina, he listens to us at WWN C in Asheville, AM570.
And get this.
Our iPhone winner today only registered yesterday for Rush in a hurry.
He signed up yesterday, he wins an iPhone today.
Uh those of you who've not registered may wish to take note and uh and sign up right now.
It's it's not too late to uh win an iPhone.
Uh every Rush in a Hurry member is a winner, and membership is free.
Just go to Rush Limbaugh.com and sign up.
You can't miss it.
Rush in a hurry is all over the the ho the home page.
Just click on it, gives your email address, and you are registered.
That's it.
Uh nothing more complicated than that.
It's uh it's an email flash uh that goes out after the program, summarizes what happened on the program, and gives you a little idea what's coming up when the full website updates later on, usually around uh 6 p.m.
Eastern.
Uh in addition to the iPhone, John S. in every iPhone winner gets this, a check from us to cover two years of service required to use the iPhone with ATT.
One year subscription to the Limbaugh Letter one year uh subscription to our website at a $100 gift card to Bookajava.com, which is some of the most unique and amazing coffee, I think that you will ever taste.
So go to Rush Limbaugh.com, sign up.
We've got four more iPhones to dispense, one a day for the next four days until uh we are finished.
I'm I am I'm amazed and amused as I watch the drive-bys try to analyze the McCain thing.
And it's it's it's uh it runs a gamut.
Well, his uh close association with uh President Bush uh brought him down.
Well, it's uh there's uh close association with President Bush in the war with uh the war in Iraq, uh supporting uh increased troop buildup uh brought him down.
Yeah.
Uh uh whatever.
I mean, they they um uh they they're totally missing this.
Totally, totally, totally missing it.
McCain was never, I may except maybe in his mind and in the minds of the drive-by media, McCain was never the presumptive nominee of this party.
He was never the front runner.
They may have assumed so in his camp, and they may have assumed so in the drive-by media, but he never was.
And he never I'll be honest, I don't think he ever stood a chance.
I mean, he the the the nomination for the Republican Party requires support from the base.
And he never had it.
Long before the the base, the base is not yet folded on a rock.
Uh is nothing to do with it.
Illegal immigration, hugging Ted Kennedy, uh McCain fine gold, infringements on free speech, uh uh buddying up with the drive-by media, you know, becoming their best friend, and the way you do that if you're a Republican is re criticize your own party and president and so forth.
I Never had a chance.
Uh to miss this, to get this so wrong.
See, the action line is a rock is going to destroy everybody who supports it.
The Iraq war is going to destroy everybody, and uh, of course, I think didn't Joe Lieberman win re-election as an independent in Connecticut?
And and I think didn't Joel Lieberman, hasn't he always been at the top of the list of people who are trying to warn the American people about what's at stake in Iraq?
And hasn't he always been a supporter?
The this is these silly presumptions that these people make uh just become laughable.
But it's it's educational, folks, because it'll give you a heads up if you need it anymore about how to analyze what they're doing uh in other news stories that they cover.
Now, this uh this David Vitter thing.
Have you noticed?
You know, we got Larry Flint out there now, and every Flint's taking credit here for outing David Vitter, and Flint says, well, you know, we're gonna find some Democrats in this list, but probably we'll throw them back in the river.
Uh because we're not gonna Democrats are not hypocrites on this.
Democrats are not out there talking about moral values, Democrats well, that may be true, and I'm not naive, and I understand this, but I gotta tell you something.
Have you noticed when Democrats have sex outside of marriage, even with interns, it's no big deal.
In fact, it's a resume enhancement.
You got the thing going on with the mayor of Los Angeles, you've got Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, you get Bill Clinton.
I mean, the list is long.
This stuff happens on both sides of the aisle.
However, when Republicans uh engage in sex outside of marriage, why it's a huge story.
Look at Clinton is the Democrats big man on campus, the mayor of LA still said to be unbeatable, a rising star.
But David Vitter is today a slob.
Well, frankly, folks, uh, people that do this to me, they're all slobs.
Uh, you know, this this talk about double standard.
I know the Democrats don't out there go out there and talk about family values.
Well, actually, it's not even true to say that.
After the 2004 election loss, you know, they were wringing their hands for a couple days over what they were going to have to do to get the values voters.
Because the exit polls showed that the values voters uh did them in.
So they're out there making move, and they got this new this new guy, uh uh Drew Weston, who's trying to teach him how to speak again.
By the way, George Lackoff rhymes with, speaking of which, I have the most unbelievable emails.
What I don't rush, what is Lackoff rhyme with?
I can't, I don't get the joke.
Uh needless to say, folks, I did not reply.
It's one of those things, if you don't get it.
Go ask your mom.
No, don't do that.
Never mind.
Don't.
If you don't get it, just just ask somebody.
Ask ask your dad.
You know, ask your dad.
Call Clinton's office.
That's that's the way they get the answer.
Uh so anyway, they're out there, they're they they they make this um now and again push uh for uh values now and then you get the mayor of uh Los Angeles uh V Rigosa, I want my privacy, I ask that you will leave us alone, my family to deal with this in private.
Well, of course, well, we understand the need for privacy and uh circumstances like this.
But here's the thing.
These people take marriage vows too.
Are their marriage vows worthless?
If they don't mean it when they take the vow, I assume their oaths are worth nothing as as well.
And look, the libs are out there calling for gay marriage, are they not?
And why?
Well, because uh the strength of commitment, love is love, and we cannot deny love anybody who finds it anywhere.
And we're gonna redefine what the family is and all of these sorts of things.
They talk about the importance of commitment, and they say, I know a lot of gay marriages have a stronger bit of commitment than some heterosexual men.
They're all that they're talking about the commitment, and they're talking about the vows and all these sorts of things.
Well, when it comes to the Clintons, what commitment?
I mean, if if marriage is important, and I for some people it is, uh, then if they don't honor it, they can't simply say that we don't hold ourselves to a higher standard.
What higher standard?
You took a vow, you claim marriage is important, then you violate those things, you shouldn't get a pass.
But they always get a pass.
Uh they should all be treated like viters.
I'm not arguing for Vitter to be ignored and so forth, but anyway, these little things just irritate me now and then.
Michael Chertoff, the uh director of homeland security yesterday, told the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune he had a gut feeling about a new period of increased risk.
Well, I do too.
And I would uh if I were Chernoff, anybody in the administration, I wouldn't blame him for having a gut feeling about a new period of risk.
You got the Democrats and a bunch of weak need Republicans talking defeat.
The media glorifies every bomb going off over in Iraq as some sort of devastating defeat for the United States.
Al Qaeda videos get massive airplay here, and they um uh Zawayhiri and all these people get any any kind of uh airtime and exposure they want, and terrorists watch CNN too, although they may not have to anymore with a new Iranian news agency, which is apparently a copy of CNN.
I mean uh yeah, good.
We got terrorist bombs going off in London.
Somebody ought to have a gut feeling about a new period of increased risks.
By the way, uh ABC, Brian Ross.
Um something's wrong.
Uh quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue after this.
Don't go away.
And we're back.
El Rushbow behind the golden EIB microphone, America's anchor man, truth detector, national treasure, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, and general all-round good guy here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
All right.
Last night, late yesterday afternoon, uh ABC flashed an urgent bulletin that the White House had called an urgent multi-agency meeting for today to discuss a potential new al-Qaeda threat on uh U.S. soil.
Top intelligence and law enforcement officials have been told to meet in the White House situation room to report on steps to minimize or counter the threat and what steps are being taken to tighten security at government buildings, this according to ABC.
The meeting would be one of a number that have been convened in light of new intelligence and information learned from the recent failed car bomb attempts in London.
Well, okay, all well and good, and everybody got all hopped up and something happening.
And then the Bush administration said today that there was no specific credible terrorism threat against the United States, and they denied that an emergency meeting had been called.
ABC News reported yesterday that the White House had called this urgent meeting.
White House officials said nope, regularly scheduled meeting, not attended by the most senior national security officials.
Uh one of the spokesmen up there, Tony Fratto said there continues to be no credible specific intelligence to suggest that there is an imminent threat to the homeland.
Now, I don't think that Brian Ross made it up.
Uh but I don't it, you know, we've Brian Ross uh its investigative unit at ABC gets all kinds of news and runs out with it.
And who there are all kinds of people in this administration, and I don't mean directly in it, but I mean, you know, in the little coves and cubbyholes in various agencies over there that obviously would like to bring the administration down.
They leak all kinds of stuff.
Uh this is uh somebody's not telling the truth here, it's either White House or ABC.
And it's I'll tell you, I th this here's let me what the biggest threat is here, folks.
The biggest threat that we face right now, because with the the ongoing threat, of course, of another attack.
But the biggest threat that we face is the collapse, the continuing collapse of any kind of manhood in the United States Senate.
The Democrats are who they are, and and they are they are already invested in defeat, as we have discussed many times.
Now more and more Republicans are starting to get all wobbly and go weak need.
Uh in the period of time here where things actually appear to be working, Senator Lieberman yesterday on a situation room on uh on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, he said when I when I play the soundbite of you saying the U.S. has the enemy on the run and the U.S. is winning to Senator Jim Webb of Virginia the last hour, he suggested it sort of these tactical victories that he personally saw happen in Vietnam and he was a Marine during the Vietnam War.
But big picture, it by no means is looking very good right now, Senator.
What I'm saying is it's moving in the right direction, and that's why this is such an unfair and inappropriate time to be mandating a retreat.
I mean, that would be basically legislating defeat when we still have a chance to win.
And I think you only want to do that if you don't think it's worth winning.
I think it's worth winning and fighting to win because if we don't, Iran and Al Qaeda win.
Iraq falls apart, the Middle East is in chaos, and they come after us back here at home.
I think it's we have a chance to turn this around.
And and uh shame on us if Congress uh from here legislates a defeat that our military uh will never allow to happen over there.
So uh Blitzer then said, well, you you caused a stir in recent days by suggesting, and I'm paraphrasing that the U.S. should consider, if necessary, bombing Iran's nuclear facilities.
A lot of people were alarmed by that.
But tell us precisely what you had in mind, Senator.
In this case, what I was saying is that the American military has given us evidence that the Iranians are training Iraqi terrorists up to 60 at a time at three bases outside of Tehran, and we know where they are.
And we presented to come back into Iraq, and and those terrorists have killed hundreds, and I stress that hundreds of American soldiers.
We simply cannot sit back and allow Iran to do that.
So my point is we gotta send them a clear message that they gotta stop it.
And if they don't, they have to believe that we will take military action against those training bases.
This is I uh I can't tell you how refreshing and uplifting it is to hear this from anybody.
Uh a single voice, I don't care if he is an independent slash Democrat, Joe Lieberman uh is right about that.
There's several questions uh to ask.
Tony Tony Blankly in his Washington Times piece today uh entitled The Senate, Chamber of Shame, asks a couple of really good and relevant questions.
What in the world do so many misgivings of U.S. senators have to do with whether we should continue to advance our vital national security interests?
Has anybody who's is who's retreating on this got any of that in their mind?
Is U.S. national security on anybody's mind, or is all that's on their mind up there is the next election?
And fear, fear of being associated with this effort because of polls.
Uh I still I maintain to you, ladies and gentlemen, the United States population, the American people, particularly the voters, do not want to lose this war.
They do not want the U.S. military humiliated because what happens to our national security day?
Are we safer?
If we pull out of Iraq like these senators are suggesting that we do, are we going to be safer after that?
Where where is this thinking?
Where is it rooted?
What kind of reality or realism are these people who hold this view?
What where are they centered?
How in the world is getting out of there make us safer?
How does losing this war make us safer?
And nobody's asking them that, and they're probably not even asking them themselves that question.
Uh look at what happened in Vietnam.
We pulled out of there mass murder on a grand scale.
Same thing will happen over there in Iraq if we pull out, and nobody seems to care.
In addition to the mass murder that will occur over there, can you imagine the flexed muscles that Al Qaeda around the world will feel at having defeated the great Satan?
What do these people think?
That oceans are gonna are gonna stop them?
These the idea that 9-11 is so far ago and so extraordinary that it's unique, it's never going to happen like this again.
Uh it's it's perplexing.
And as more and more of these people decide to cave, particularly the uh the the Republicans, uh if they if they think they're enhancing their electability and re-electability coming up the next time they're up, they uh they've got another thing coming.
Uh I think too many of these people believe drive-by media polls, and they're they've been managing the news on two two fronts here in which they've been totally lying and using propaganda to convince the American people to believe things that aren't true.
One subject is the economy, and the other is the overall war on terror and the war in Iraq.
And they have browbeat the American people with news and then the so-called polls that uh they do after managing a month's worth of news, the polls reflect how rotten it is.
People end up who live and die by polls think the American people want out of there, and yet every resolution to get us out of there has had to be purchased with pork.
If the American people were really a bunch of Cindy She hands, they would have been in the streets demanding we get out of here long ago.
It isn't the case.
And the gutlessness of people in the United States Senate to not see reality for what it is and instead react to the media and polls and Democrats in maddening.
All right, now I want you to listen to some sheer idiocy.
I want you to listen to sheer naivety and ignorance bordering on just plain stupidity that happened today on Joe Scarborough's show at PMS NBC.
He was talking to John Kerry, who served in Vietnam.
And uh uh he said, uh, how do you explain to the American people?
This is Scarborough's question.
How do you explain to the American people who want to hear about Paris Hilton, who get their news in sound bites?
How do you explain to them that what's happening in Al Anbar province is different from what's happening in Baghdad, what's happening in Soder City, where you've got, you know, Shia killing Sunnis, you got the Sunnis killing Shia, then you've got the Shia killing Shia.
It seems like a great challenge for any leader in America today to explain this to Americans in sound bites.
The president, who has the bully pulpit of the nation, who has the greatest uh, you know, uh uh podium there is, keeps talking about Al Qaeda and keeps bringing it down to the sort of we gotta fight him over over there so we don't fight him over here argument,
which which doesn't stand the test, because in fact, if you even take away Afghanistan and take away Iraq, the incidence of foreign terrorism in other parts of the world is up.
And so uh you know, this is something that started before Iraq.
It's been exacerbated by Iraq, and the president needs to explain the nature of this struggle, uh, frankly, a little more directly and honestly, to the American people.
Uh uh, you know I think the president went out and made a speech yesterday about it.
I wish he would talk more about some of the atrocities that are being committed.
I wish he would talk more about the the sheer barbarism of the enemy and who they are and and uh some of the things that they are doing to uh to innocent Iraqis.
But Senator Kerry, for you to sit there and to suggest the president needs to get out there and explain what's going on, he's done that.
He may have the bully pulpit, and he may be on the front page of the newspapers every day.
But your party and the drive-by media are doing everything they can to call him a liar, well, not doing everything they can.
They are calling him a liar.
They're claiming there is no threat.
What is this, Senator?
Uh uh terrorism was happening before Iraq.
Did you clear that with Cindy Sheehan?
Did you clear that with Pelosi and Reed?
You're off the page here, Senator.
You're off the party page.
There was no terrorism before George Bush took us to Iraq.
That's the Democrat Party line, that's a drive-by media line, and all of a sudden you've gone off the playbook now, and you've acknowledged that there's terrorism over there and around the world.
Yet one of your leading presidential candidates, the Breck Girl, your former vice presidential nominees running around saying it's just a slogan, it's just a bumper sticker.
Uh your party, sir, and your media is done everything it could to divide this country on the issue of national security.
You call it Iraq and you call it Bush lied and all this.
We've made heroes out of absolute worthless dolts like Joe Wilson, because your party and your Senator Schumer prop him up and his wife.
You have done everything you can to destroy this nation's effort to defend itself, to protect itself against future attacks like this.
And now you come out and say the president isn't doing a good enough job of explaining what's at stake.
How about September 11th, 2001?
Does that remind Anybody of what's at stake and what's possible.
The two bombs, four bombs, whatever it was recently in London.
How about Madrid?
How about the subway bomb in London?
What what more does anybody need here?
We are so affluent that we've got a half number of people here, a large number of people don't even have to pay attention to this stuff because it doesn't impact them directly yet.
But there are people who are paying attention to it and devoted to the cause and so forth.
This business, too, of um fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here.
Damn right.
What the hell is so stupid about that?
There's nothing stupid about it.
Go back to Zawahiri's tape, Senator Kerry of last week.
Zawahiri made it plain they are losing.
And he made it plain that Iraq is the central focus of their war against us.
They are the enemy, and they're telling us exactly who they are and what they're going to do, what their intentions and designs are.
And you want to sit here and quibble over whether the president lied or the president's not being vocal or articulate enough about this.
If th this this argument that that Iraq is worthless and he to bring the troops home, the guy running the opposition says it's the central front.
Why do we we we uh choose not to believe what he says when our president says things we call him a liar?
You ignore Zawa here, I guess Zawahiri makes it tough for you guys, the Democrat Party to drive by media to continue this this charade of yours that we're under no threat and they have no danger uh that faces us.
But if let's let's grant every bit of your argument, Senator Kerry, that there was no terrorism in Iraq before we went.
Let's just say Al Qaeda, as you just admitted, was all over the world, everywhere.
They were in Florida, they were in Minneapolis, they were in Phoenix, they're everywhere but Iraq, okay?
Let's grant your silly premise that they weren't there.
Now they are.
That's the reality.
It is what it is.
And we are at war with them over there, and and whether or not they weren't there doesn't matter.
It is now the war, and they're trying to defeat us, and they're saying so.
And their intention is to take over that country and make it a militant Islamist radical country and government.
Think Afghanistan under the Taliban.
And that's exactly what's going to happen if we pull out.
How are we safer if we do this?
Uh none of the none of the reality of this is being dealt with by any of these people who are making all these public noises about it, from Republican senators to everybody practically except Lieberman in the in the Democrat Party.
But this is this these are these are supposed to the best and brightest among us.
These are the people we elect to represent us and make these important decisions.
Now you've got these senators running around uh like they're all president of the United States and they're all Secretary of State or they're all Secretary of Defense, and they're wringing their hands, uh, this is so I I can't support this.
There's no direction, we can't wait for the Petrayus report and so forth, as a bunch of cowards undermining the effort in the process.
And for what?
I don't know what, but whatever it is, it's something totally personal like their election or whatever it is.
Fundraising.
I haven't the slightest idea, but it sure as hell isn't statesmanship.
Uh who's let's go to the phones.
I'm gonna Hendersonville, North Carolina.
This is tag tag.
Welcome to the uh EIB network.
Nice to have you with us.
Thanks, Rush.
Rush, my question is uh I'd really like for you to define for me uh what it means to have victory there.
I mean, I keep hearing you say that the American people don't want to leave in defeat, but I don't understand what victory is.
Um about a month and a half ago, I think it was, I heard you quote a poll of taking uh Muslims here in the state, and they were less inclined towards democracy after living here.
And uh I mean if if victory is defined as uh the uh Iraqis embracing democracy, do you do you really think that's gonna happen?
Uh well they already have.
Where are you been?
What network newscast are you watching?
They already have.
They've got a president, they got a parliament, they have legislation.
They've already embraced democracy.
That's you know, d victory is is really not that hard to um uh define, but before I define it for you, can I ask you a question?
Sure.
Uh why do you seem so I mean, I may might be falsely assuming this, so correct me if I'm wrong, but why why are you so willing to embrace Vic the defeat?
Well, I'm I'm not sure what what it defeat would be.
I mean, uh from what I'm hearing now, even from the Republicans, is that the you know the Democratic government is falling apart.
They can't they're not meeting any of the uh deadlines.
Let me tell you something.
You know, I I I'm glad you called, because I there's something I need to say again.
This war in Iraq is not about the stability of that country alone.
It is about U.S. national security, and we are fighting the enemy who has vowed to destroy us, and they did so on 9-11.
It's a reality you can't ignore.
The two-pronged effort here is simply to stabilize that country and make sure that to try to establish a beachhead uh that that would uh provide an opportunity for something other than a cauldron of hatred to keep boiling over in that part of the world.
The second prong of this is to vanquish Al Qaeda, dispirit them, send them scattering, and let them know that they cannot defeat us.
Dispirit them and demoralize them.
Everything else that is being talked about here secures defeat.
You don't know what's so wrong about defeat.
Look at Cambodia and look at Thailand and or not Thailand, but the Vietnam afterwards.
And and really that's a that's it's a it's a good comparison in one sense, but we were never attacked by the North Vietnamese on our soil.
Al Qaeda has.
They'll follow us.
They're probably here already anyway.
They're we know they're in in Great Britain and all over Europe.
Uh and the the idea here that we can just leave there, pull out, admit defeat, and say we're safer.
Uh I I just I don't understand it.
But you're looking at this in the wrong way.
If a defeat doesn't bother you, and you can't define victory, then um you got to stop watching the drive-by media.
Stay here exclusively.
We'll fix you up.
May take a couple weeks, but give us the chance.
So while we are at a at a crucial moment in turning the corner in the war in Iraq, Democrats in the Senate have done something purely symbolic that will never happen, and they're going absolutely nothing of any substance what's which, by the way, is okay.
When it comes to legislation, they are doing plenty of things that are harmful substance-wise in terms of their attitude and words and rhetoric about U.S. troops, about the mission, about the war in Iraq and the president and you know, aiding and abetting the enemy and so forth.
But this Senate Democrats moved Tuesday to cut off funding for Vice President Cheney's office in a continuing battle over whether he must comply with national security disclosure rules.
Senate appropriations panel chaired by uh Dick Durbin of Illinois refused to fund 4.8 million dollars in the vice president's budget until Cheney's office complies with parts of an executive order governing its handling of classified information.
They can't do this.
This is not an agency.
This is in part of the executive branch, and they this is purely symbolic, and yet the drive-by media is like, oh, wow, Cheney gonna be defunded.
They just they just people would like to see Cheney executed.
I know that's why when they we learned that the Chicoms executed their version of the FDA guy, there's no these Democrats were salivating over the possibilities that loom ahead should they regain power.
Cheney ought to just tell his staff to go on a two-month vacation and shut down his office.
Perfect example of how lacking in any real substance the Democrats are, that they would, in a time of war, ladies and gentlemen, threaten to shut down the vice president's office even on a meaningless symbolic effort.
It is illustrious of how unserious they are.
You there is a reason why congressional poll numbers are in a tank and lower than President Bush's, and if these clowns don't start paying attention to why, there ought to be a there's gonna be a as a bunch of them as surprised on Election Day 08 as John McCain is surprised today over what has happened to him.
Now, to follow up, last November, a group of U.S. Marines apparently went on, quote, the worst rampage by U.S. service members in the Iraq War, killing as many as twenty-four civilians in cold blood.
Remember what Jack Murpha said?
The architect of defeat in the House of Representatives after U.S. officials learned of the alleged massacre a few days after it had happened and organized a cover up.
Mertha said this is what the Marine Corps told me at the highest level.
A common non-marine corps was in my office just last week, so you know.
I know there was a cover up someplace.
They knew about this a few days afterwards, and there's no question the chain of command tried to stifle a story.
I can't understand why, but that doesn't excuse it.
Something like this has to be brought out to the public, and the people have to be punished.
And he went on to call these Marines murderers.
And he just knew it.
He just knew it had to be the case because he knew there was a cover-up because the Bush administration lies.
In fact, the Bush administration probably ordered the murders.
Uh Jack Murtha is like so many damn Democrats today, so eager to immediately believe the worst about the people you are supposed to love and support.
The United States military, which is trying to protect everybody against incredible odds here at home.
They're fighting two wars, the enemy over there and the enemy here.
And for a member of the Congress to come out without any evidence and call them murderers, because he knows there's a cover-up.
Well, has he apologized for this today yet?
Has anybody has anybody heard Murpha's apology?
Because I'll tell you what, an investigating officer has recommended dismissing murder charges against the Marine accused in the slayings of three Iraqi men in a squad action that killed 24 civilians in the town of Haditha.
The government's theory that Lance Corporal Justin Sharott had executed the three men was incredible and relied on contradictory statements by Iraqis.
This report was uh issued uh yesterday by Sherat's defense attorneys.
To believe the government version of facts is to disregard clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, sets a dangerous precedent that, in my opinion, may encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps and the mission in Iraq.
That's Paul Ware, the Marine's lawyer, and he's exactly right.
Had this gone down, had this man's framing been confirmed with a conviction, it would have led to all other kinds of, and you would have had Jack Mirtha and any Democrat standing up and suggest this is absolutely outrageous.
This is horrible.
How about how about this airman who got shot by a deranged anti-war lunatic who said he was fed up?
This happened on the 4th July.
This guy's been to Iraq.
He got out of Iraq unscathed.
He's on leave.
I was uh uh uh forget exactly where this happened.
He's in from Ohio on leave from Ohio, and and uh this deranged anti-war lunatic just shows up and and uh says, Is this a you live in this house?
And the airman said, uh, yeah, psh.
Point blank ranch shoots him in the chest.
He's struggling, fighting for his life now.
The gunman committed suicide, they found suicide notes.
The guy was upset about Katrina.
The guy was upset about Bush lied, and a guy wanted us out of a rock, and he thought this would do it.
Where is he hearing this kind of stuff?
Who in the world is polluting his mind with this kind of garbage?
The Democrat Party is a drive-by media, guys like Jack Mirtha, who's who owe this Marine a public apology.
Marine investigator recommends dropping charges.
I suspect what's going to happen is that Murtha, in order to cover his sizable rear engine, to come out and say there's another cover-up going on.
I demand a new investigation or what have you.
This this kind of thing has been going on for the last four years.
Efforts to undermine the people who wear the uniform, and now, and we had the story the other day, the guy wanted to blow up a fuel pipeline because he too was upset about the war at Iraq.
Uh, and he had uh read some pro-Iraq or Al-Qaeda postings on the uh on the internet.
I mean, the left is so filled with rage and hatred.
I guarantee you, if if a soldier had shot a peacnik like this soldier got shot by the anti-war nut.
Do you know what the new you you you can't believe what the news coverage of me military's being trained to kill military, a bunch of murderers going nuts.
Maybe it is post-traumatic stress disorder or whatever.
You turn that around.
You can't even find this story in the drive-by media about this lunatic fringe, left winger who shot a U.S. soldier at point blank rate.
You can't find reference to it.
It's not a big deal.
Doesn't raise an eyebrow.
Doesn't move the story forward.
Doesn't move the action line.
Quick timeout.
We're waiting for your apology, Senator Mirtha.
You know, actually, uh, Murtha is who he is.
One of the things that's beyond Mirtha is a media who lets Murtha get away with this stuff, and an American public that doesn't loathe the guy.
So, anyway, we gotta take a brief timeout here at the top of the hour, ladies and gentlemen.
Two more hours of broadcast Exclus, hosted by me, your highly trained broadcast specialist, coming right up.
Be patient.
▲
Export Selection