All Episodes
Previous Next
July 12, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:36
July 12, 2007, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I want to start today's program, ladies and gentlemen, by giving a huge shout-out.
A huge attaboy to the troops over in Iraq.
And I want to do it early in this hour because this hour the program is broadcast on the armed forces radio network around the world.
And the men and women serving in uniform will hear it.
We got the progress report.
We got this interim progress report.
The drive bys have done everything they can to cast it in a negative light, as we knew they would.
That's their action line.
But in less than a month of full surge troop strength over there, this is the first good news that the drive-bys can't possibly hide.
And uh, and I don't know how long.
Here's just some of the details.
Um basically uh half of the benchmarks are great, half of them are not so good, and then the other two 50-50.
The uh the jury is uh is still out.
Uh but in the in terms of the sectarian killings in Baghdad, there has been a decline since the surge began.
Um a decline in bombings, a decline in Iraqi casualties, uh, and high-profile bombings for the New York Times to report on have also uh declined.
Uh I'll tell you our our people in uniform over there are moving the ball and kicking butt, and I want to congratulate them and uh and give them a huge shout out here from the EIB network.
Greetings.
That's a long way to go.
I mean, I I'm not trying to be overly optimistic here, but this is uh totally un unlike what we were expecting given this incessant drum beat of negativity that we're treated to uh day in and day out.
Long way to go, but this this is this is uh really, really positive news.
And what's it like today to be a Democrat?
What what must it be like to be a Democrat and have to get up and spin the good news?
Hmm, military showing progress.
Well, where are the negatives here for I can use?
Um they gotta be gotta be government negative.
Oh yeah, the Iraqi government, that Iraqi government isn't working.
That's the Iraqi guy uh the government's not working.
Okay, the benchmarks for the Iraqi government, Maliki's not meeting the benchmarks uh too well, the political process not going so oh, the good.
That's something a Democrats can harp on.
Well, more on that in just a second.
But I got to introduce the show.
It's the Rush Limbaugh program, it's the EIB network.
It's great to be with you.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, is 800-282-2882.
By the way, Mr. Snerdley.
Uh-huh, Mr. Snardley, wake up in there.
Um, we are what are you doing?
Playing with your iPhone.
Oh, he's just now setting up the computer.
Well, way to get in gear.
Uh we're uh I'm not gonna be here tomorrow, folks.
I have to fly off and defend a golf tournament championship that I won last year.
Uh it's Walter Williams will be here tomorrow.
Oh, that'll be great.
You people in for a treat with Walter Williams here tomorrow.
Uh so let's do open line Friday on Thursday today.
All right, open line Friday on Thursday.
Uh 800-282-288-2, if you would like to be on the program.
Now, I know the benchmark news is good on the military side on the political side, uh, and we'll have Tony Snow here uh at an hour.
Top of the next hour to discuss all this.
Uh but frankly, folks, uh all this benchmark stuff, even with the good news on the military side.
Frankly, who cares?
Who really cares about the benchmarks?
These benchmarks were imposed by leftists in Congress.
And there's a story here in the stack, the Los Angeles Times and the uh headline, administration foiled by own Iraq goals.
And the point of this story is that by agreeing to benchmarks, Bush gave critics ammo to hurt the effort uh when it comes up short.
Uh I cr I'm sure that was the intent of the leftists in Congress who came up with this whole benchmark idea of the president just trying to be cooperative with them, you know, the way he is.
But uh these benchmarks are imposed by the leftist in Congress, and the ones that came back today in this interim report don't show that the Iraqi government is doing too well.
Well, let me tell you something.
We are in Iraq, and I've said this repeatedly, we are there because it is in our national security interest.
This is not just a stabilize the country mission.
There is much, much more to it.
Frankly, the president was great today in explaining the rationale.
Our military, along with Iraqi armed forces, are making solid progress.
The interim report indicates that the Sunnis are now turning on Al-Qaeda, uh, and that's all that matters.
What we have here, we have an incompetent obstructionist Democrat Congress, which has accomplished nothing good for this country.
Trying to use benchmarks to tell another legislative body it's not up to standards.
The Democrat Party, the Democrat-led Congress is one for seven in its benchmarks, and that one is a worthless minimum wage bill.
These guys have no business telling anybody else, fledgling or otherwise, how to do their jobs.
It's pretty funny if you stop and think about it.
Our Congress can't do anything right or well right now, despite the fact that our politicians live in luxury.
They don't have to worry about getting gunned down or running into a roadside bomb on the way to work every day.
They live in in the lap of luxury and they still can't get anything done.
They our politicians live in a safe country, no thanks to them, by the way.
Our Congress sets down standards for everybody else, but they can't even fund the military.
They can't control taxing and spending, they can't control the border, they can't reform Social Security and Medicare.
But this Congress will tell everybody else what they have to do, and that it must be done tomorrow.
A bunch of incompetent boobs on the Democrat Party running this Congress can't do diddly squat in the House or Senate, and they dare to sit and tell their uh fledgling little democracy like uh Iraq and uh Prime Minister Maliki, you aren't good enough, pal, you're not moving fast enough to meet our standards.
Sorry, folks, doesn't wash.
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reed now run Congress.
They are responsible for what does or does not occur there.
They keep talking about Bush this and Bush that.
But they have the power of the purse.
They can come up with fixes for entitlement programs.
They can defund the war if that's really what the American people want.
They can initiate tax cuts for all Americans.
They can confirm solid judges, they can direct funding for border security, they can do all these things.
Yet they do nothing.
All they do is harass and investigate the administration.
And now tell the government of Iraq that it ain't good enough, and it is not moving fast enough, that the benchmarks aren't being met, probably gave them some impossible benchmarks to uh to meet anyway.
Let me suggest, for all I know, uh, which is a constant judgment and assessment of this Congress, the Iraqi Parliament may well be more competent and more successful than our Democrat Congress.
Harry Reid could only hope to be as good as Maliki.
Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi, who has nothing good to say about the Iraqi government, and this is, folks, I want you to hear me on this.
This is important.
Nancy Pelosi, who has nothing good to say about the Iraqi government, an ally of the United States, slobbers all over the Iranian and Syrian terrorist regimes.
And we learn in this report that the Syrians are sending what, 40 to 80 suicide bombers a week or a month, whatever it is, into Iraq, and she's over there breaking bread with his little Basher Assad.
She doesn't criticize the conduct of the Syrians.
She doesn't criticize the conduct of the Iranians in slaughtering American soldiers, in torturing and imprisoning dissidents, attacking Israelis and all the rest.
She broke bread with the mass murderer of Syria.
And she wants to go do the same thing with Mahmoud Ahmadinezad in Iran.
And she was all happy about the pictures.
She's trying to present the pictures to the world that she runs this country, that George W. Bush doesn't, that the U.S. Congress will well, she's not got much to point to in terms of her accomplishments to make the world proud of what she's doing.
And yet they sit there.
And they demand that other legislatures, other legislative bodies, do it, do it right, do it tomorrow, or receive our condemnation.
Why doesn't why doesn't Congress set out any benchmarks for Syria?
Why doesn't Congress set any benchmarks for Iran?
He can sit there and make all these benchmarks for Iraq all day long.
Well, let's have some benchmarks for the Iranian nuclear program.
Let's have some benchmarks here for Syria and some of these other terrorist regimes.
We are holding the Iraqi government to standards that our own Congress can't meet.
Another example, we hear it said that they can't even agree on how to split up oil revenue.
Yes, they're having a problem with dividing the wealth in Iraq.
And of course, our people in this country in the Congress, well, that's horrible.
Can't even figure out how to split up the oil revenue.
Well, our damn Congress can't even agree to open up drilling and war.
Our Congress can't even agree to reduce regulations to allow the construction of refineries.
To tell the Iraqis where they're screwing up in their energy program, we know nuclear plants are being built, no Newton, no new refineries are being built.
They don't do anything to get rid of the regulations that actually would help us become energy independent.
We have no effective energy policy.
And yet here they are pointing fingers at the Iraqi regime for not figuring out a way to share the wealth.
I think we should uh take some of these benchmarks that I have just mentioned, the failures of the U.S. Congress, measure our Congress against them, and give them a grade.
And let's see how the Democrat Congress would fare under such benchmarks.
Time to announce the winner of our seventh iPhone, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh program at the Limbaugh Institute, the distinguished uh Limbaugh Institute.
Today's iPhone winner is Gustavo M. He's uh from Medford, Long Island, listens to him on our uh on our What are you shaking your head?
Another man?
Well, these are random drawings, Don.
I'm sorry, there's no sexism involved here.
There's no prejudice, there's no bigotry.
I mean, Gustavo.
Gustavo M. lives in Medford, Long Island, listens to us on AM 77 WABC, our flagship in the big Apple.
Uh, and here's what he gets.
He gets the eight gig iPhone.
He gets uh a check from us to cover two years of service with ATT, a one year subscription to the Limbaugh Letter, and a one year subscription to the uh website Rush 247, plus a $100 gift card from Boca Java.com.
I don't know when Gustavo registered, but but uh he did because he won the iPhone.
All you have to do is go to Rush Limbaugh.com and register for Rush in a hurry.
It is a free flash email.
It goes out about an hour, hour and a half after the program.
A summary of the program that day, a little heads up of what's happening on the full website update uh update that later that night.
Uh, and that's it.
Uh, nothing more to it.
Once you sign up and give us your email address, you are registered and eligible.
We have three more iPhones to give away.
Walter Williams uh will be announcing tomorrow's winner, even though I'm not here.
Uh, make sure he doesn't give all three of them to one person and bring in his own winner.
Just make just make sure he follows the rules here.
Uh, make sure he doesn't give one to his wife and then make her pay the service.
Um, ladies and gentlemen, I need to uh issue an apology.
Um, because I I as I was honest with you about it.
I arrived yesterday for the program in a foul mood.
I was highly irritable.
I was irritated.
I want to say rotten mood.
Uh, and bad moods can lead to careless thoughts that beg for apologies.
Yesterday I asked a question.
I said, where are the leaders in Congress?
And for that slip up.
I wish to apologize.
Congress doesn't have leaders, and had I not been in an irritable mood yesterday, I would not have made this egregious error.
Congress doesn't have leaders, it has politicians.
Leaders lead.
Politicians play politics.
And today there's no connection between the two.
There was a time.
I mean, I can go back and in uh not so long ago, uh, where we had leaders in the Senate like Moynihan.
Didn't always agree with him, but we had leaders.
So we've gone from people like the leaders and the leading of Daniel Patrick Moynihan to the scheming of Chuck Schumer.
The scheming of Pat Lahey.
These people are just a bunch of schemers.
They're not leaders.
Sam Nunn was uh uh a leader on national defense.
We've gone from Sam Nunn to the politics of defeat of Harry Reed.
Uh so I humbly apologize for the slip up, uh, ladies and gentlemen, even sorry for the state of our leaders or lack of them.
We Have schemers in the U.S. Congress today, not leaders.
Let's listen to um some of President Bush.
We have two sound bites from his opening remarks today at his press conference.
President, my most solemn responsibility is to keep the American people safe.
So on our orders, good men and women are now fighting the terrorists on the front lines in Iraq.
I've given our troops in Iraq clear objectives.
And as they risk their lives to achieve these objectives, they need to know they had the unwavering support from the commander-in-chief.
And they do.
And they need the enemy to know that America is not going to back down.
The president later said, The real debate over Iraq is between those who think the fight is lost or not worth the cost, and those who believe the fight can be won, and that it's as difficult as the fight is, the cost of defeat would be far higher.
I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must.
So we're working to defeat al-Qaeda and other extremists, and aid the rise of an Iraqi government that can protect its people, deliver basic services, and be an ally in the war against these extremists and radicals.
By doing this, we'll create the conditions that will allow our troops to begin coming home while securing our long-term national interests in Iraq and in the region.
When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq, it will be because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it'll be good politics.
He had a great answer on uh on polls, because the drive-by's kept saying, and of course, there were there were no questions from the drive-bys about any of the um uh upbeat possibilities.
It was just it was just questions all came from the the liberal action line on this whole on the whole war.
President deftly handled them.
They kept asking him, Well, what about the American people want to kill the American people want to get how many American people don't have any confidence?
I understand that.
He said, I understand we've got war fatigue in this country, and it's led to some, you know, psychological problems uh with the uh with the general American mood.
He said, But how can how do you think that the men and women in uniform would react if they found out that their commander-in-chief was talking to focus groups about how to manage and win the war?
How do you think they would react?
I can't do it and I won't.
And he furthermore said, Congress has one role in this, and that's to pay for it or not.
They are not commanders-in-chief.
I'm paraphrasing here.
They do not get to set day-by-day strategy.
They do not get to say they can only go 50 feet that direction, fire only when these circumstances happen.
He was firing both barrels, but in a, you know, reasonable uh manner of speaking.
It wasn't, it wasn't pounding the podium or anything of that nature, but he uh he really really said some good, long overdue, I think, uh powerful things.
Listen to this question.
The first question uh today came from uh Helen Thomas.
I I I guess part of the deal she got her seat back when they uh when they this is by the way, the first day they used their newly renovated White House pressure, but listen to this question.
President, we started this war, the war of your choosing, and we can end it alone today.
At this point, bring in peacekeepers, UN peace people.
Two million Iraqis have fled their country as recognition.
Two million more are just played.
Thousands and thousands are dead.
Don't you understand?
We brought the al-Qaeda into Iraq.
Don't you understand we brought the Al-Qaeda into Iraq?
This is Helen Thomas, considered the dean of the White House press corps for all of those years.
She's no different than and they're all sitting there thinking that.
They're all silently nodding their heads.
They're all going, yeah, yeah.
What do you say to that?
You know it's true.
You know she's right.
You know they're only in Iraq because you went there.
You're choosing, you just know they're all saying that in their minds.
Here's the president's answer to that.
Actually, I was hoping to solve the Iraqi issue diplomatically.
That's why I went to the United Nations and worked with um the United Nations Security Council, which unanimously passed a resolution that said disclose disarm or face serious consequences.
That was the message, a clear message to Saddam Hussein.
He chose the course.
It was his decision to make.
Obviously it was a difficult decision for me to make to send our brave troops along with coalition troops into Iraq.
I firmly believe the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power.
Now the fundamental question facing America is where we stand with this young democracy.
And he has every intention of uh of doing so for the uh for the rest of his term.
I also think that this this uh interim report bodes ill for the uh for the cowardly caucus up on Capitol Hill who wants to not wait for the full report to come out in uh September from General Petraeus.
Uh they just they just want to declare this over with uh we're dead, we're finished, and it's get out of there.
And the president even talked about that today.
He said, if you think that that uh we're just gonna come back home here and everything's gonna be happy go lucky because we get out of there, you do not understand the uh enemy we face, and you're not listening to what they themselves are saying in form of threats.
Be right back, folks.
Sit tight, stay glued.
Here's another way to look at this interim report, 50% progress.
50% progress.
There are a lot of public schools in this country that can't make that claim.
There's any number of ways of uh looking at this.
One more George W. Bush soundbite.
He got a question from uh Ed Henry of uh CNN basically saying, uh, how do you put up with all this criticism?
You know, I I guess I'm like any other political figure, everybody wants to be loved.
Uh just sometimes the decisions you make and the consequences don't enable you to be loved.
And so when it's all said and done, Ed, when you ever come down and visit the old old tired me down there in Crawford, I will be able to say I looked in the mirror and made decisions based upon principle, not based upon politics.
And that's important to me.
President George W. Bush today in his uh press conference.
Uh, speaking of principle, uh, ladies and gentlemen, an honor.
I am seriously considering withdrawing my nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Uh, I'll tell you why.
I'll tell you why.
If I if I am to win this, I'm already going to be in a club that's got schlubs like Jimmy Carter in it.
That that bad enough.
But get this.
You ever heard of Nobel Peace Prize winner Betty Williams?
She won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1976 for creating a group that helped start peace talks in Northern Ireland.
Uh, Ireland.
1992, the Texas Governor Ma Richards appointed Betty Williams to the Texas Commission for Children and Youth.
So she still lives in Ireland.
She came back, she was in Dallas last night making a speech.
She was a keynote speaker at the International Women's Peace Conference, the International Women's Peace Conference, and she told a crowd they had about a thousand people there that the Bush administration has been treacherous and wrong and acted unconstitutionally.
Right.
This is a quote from her remarks.
Right now, I could kill George Bush.
No, I don't mean that.
I mean, how could you nonviolently kill somebody?
I would love to be able to do that.
Nobel Peace Prize winner from 1976.
She was at the Adams Mark Hotel and Conference Center in Dallas speaking at the women's peace conference.
Half the crowd gave her a standing ovation after she called for Bush's removal from power.
She then said, the Muslim world right now is suffering beyond belief.
Unless the President of the United States is held responsible for what he's doing and what he has done, there's no one in the Muslim world who will ever forgive him.
When an audience member told Betty Williams that Vice President Cheney would become president if Bush were impeached, she said, Can't you impeach both?
It's twisted, it's all wrong.
There are so many lies being told it's hard to be an American and go in, go out into the world right now.
She started her speech by asking every member of the audience to hug everyone around them.
Then she cut to what amounted to both a call for peace and a stinging rebuke of the American government.
Call for peace while she then expresses a desire to be able to nonviolently kill the President of the United States.
And that is a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Well, my friends, this this obviously, this club of Nobel Peace Prize winners is certainly a group of people around whom I would not like to associate, nor would I like to be considered in any shape, way, manner, or form like them.
The only problem here is that I have a thriving merchandise business with my Nobel Peace Prize coffee mug.
The agent for change.
Yes, I can be the agent for change.
So anyway, uh just just the Bush derangement system or syndrome is all over the place out there, and it is spreading, and there are nutcase liberals shooting and trying to blow up Americans, people that read the left-wing Democrat blogs and so forth.
And now this peace prize winner goes and advocates the nonviolent murder of George W. Oh, it's not the first time of a movie has been made, a book has been written.
And of course, there's no condemnation.
There's serious analysis.
Well, this is a noble peace prize winner.
We must listen carefully to her thoughts.
There may be something we can all learn from it.
They just want to make you puke.
To the phones, because it's open line Friday on Thursday.
Ron in Omaha, you're up first.
It's great to have you on the program.
Rush, I love you.
Make it us.
Thank you, sir.
Uh, you know, our government is so inept that it takes six months to get a passport, yet in only 28 days, a fraudulent company can get licensed by the NRC and by enough nuclear material to build a dirty bomb.
So uh I don't know how good we're doing compared to the Iraqi government, but we've got a few hundred years ahead start on it.
That's the best we can.
Well, this is my this is my point that the U.S. Congress pants out benchmarks against the Iraqi government.
We ought to be grading them.
Who are these people to tell us or tell everybody else how they must run their legislative bodies?
In case you missed the story, old Ron from Omo here Omaha here is right.
Congressional investigators set up a bogus company with only a post office box, and within a month obtained a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that allowed them to buy enough radioactive material for a small dirty bomb.
Senator Norm Coleman, Republican Minnesota, who will ask the NRC about the incident at a Senate hearing today, said the sting operation raises concerns about terrorists obtaining such material just as easily.
Nobody at the NRC checked whether the company was legitimate.
And an agency official even helped the investigators fill out the application form.
The NRC acknowledged that more checking is needed in such licensing and said that since being told of the GAO sting operation, it is tightened licensing procedures.
Whoa.
I'll tell you what.
This is another testament to the bloated inefficiencies of bloated government agencies and so forth.
You know, I once asked a question.
Yes, Mr. Snertley, you've what's what are the what I well, you know the question is where what are the Titan procedures?
I want to see that's a good question.
What are they?
Prove it.
Yeah, we're Titan Procedures.
What are you doing?
Um, six-month waiting period before that you can get license to go radioactive on us.
Um, ask for their last names.
That's a good one.
They might start there.
I'm sure they ask for their last names.
Um anyway, uh, it is what he's also right.
The passport delay is people are canceling vacations this summer that they prepaid, can't get refunds for because they're uh they're not able to uh get their passports.
Democratic presidential hopeful the Breck Girl has a ready answer to the criticism about his expensive haircuts in his huge home.
The former North Carolina Senator says a man can be wealthy and care about poor people.
He's getting some um actually got his poverty tour next week, starting in New Orleans, and he's making a point of going to places that are not early primary states to show that it isn't political.
He's not just stumping for votes out there.
He is going to show that he cares about uh about poverty.
Uh But he's had all his publicity about the $400 haircuts, a $1,200 haircut, the 28,000 square foot house that uh half a forest had to be clear cut to make room for hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary, has threatened his message that he's a man of the people.
And his advisors are pointing out nearly all the leading candidates for president are wealthy.
So here once again we are treated to the blinding intelligence of John Edwards.
Intelligence that few of us will ever understand.
Remember, it was only, I guess, earlier this week, where the Breck girl actually came up with a solution to poverty.
And that was to reward work.
And we've been around for 231 years as a country, ladies and gentlemen, thereabouts.
And it's amazing.
It took that long for somebody among us to come up with that idea.
It was brilliant.
A check.
A pay check is what the Breck Girl was suggesting, that work be rewarded.
Now I know why so many liberals are against uh all these corporations.
They haven't been paying anybody.
Indentured servitude out there.
So we were treated to that brilliance, blinding brilliance earlier in the week.
Today, we get another flash of that blinding brilliance from the Breck Girl.
A man can be wealthy and care about poor people.
Yeah, maybe, but only if you are a Democrat.
I uh Bret Girl, you're you're behind the times here.
Ted Kennedy owns this one on you.
Or there are many Democrats that have come before you that are far, far wealthier than you, and they don't get the same garbage about $400 haircuts and stuff.
They shelter their wealthy lifestyle habits in ways that their constituents never ever see.
Ah, Ted might end up on the yacht with Walter Cronkite now and then, but you never you never see Ted out there flaunting his wealth, building big houses.
Of course, he didn't have to build one, as he inherited it.
Uh or two or three.
Well, what a signature cause, folks.
Uh I I I don't I I I don't know where in the Sam Walton that the Breck Girl got the idea that rich men don't care about the poor.
How is it Sam Walton and his family among the wealthiest?
And look at what they do, Walmart.
And they care about poor people.
They are priced those stores so that people of modest means go in there.
And guess who's trying to shut them down?
People like the Breck girl.
The idea that wealthy men care about poor people.
Yeah, and if you're not the right kind of wealthy guy and you care about poor people, people like John Edwards come sue you into bankruptcy or try to put your company out of business.
Wealthy men and women in this nation's a generous throughout our nation's history, more so the less government is seizing their wealth through confiscatory taxes.
We know that giving boomed during the uh during the Reagan years, those Reagan uh tax cuts.
I'll tell you something else.
USA Today had the story earlier this week that we talked about that the primary giving, the largest volunteer charity giving comes from the Midwest, comes from the middle class.
Brief timeout, ladies and gentlemen.
Uh sit tight, we'll be right back.
Don't go away.
Having more fun than a human being should be permitted to have.
Rush Limbaugh and the golden EIB microphone here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
This is the third time.
This has happened.
A suspicious package addressed to the Breck Girl, forced the evacuation of his campaign headquarters today.
The third time authorities have responded to mail addressed to the Breck Girl's office in Chapel Hill.
Captain Bob Overton of the Chapel Hill Police Department said he didn't know the contents of the package, but said that the authorities have deemed it suspicious.
We're uh we're investigating the package at this time.
Showed up about 10 o'clock this morning.
Uh a small section of the Southern Village Complex in Chapel Hill was blocked off.
They call a bomb squad.
Let's see, another serious package, suspicious package in May after finding a letter contained a powdery substance.
So they've evacuated this a third Time.
Uh that this guy's office been shut down to a suspicious package with a powdery substance.
Three times you're gonna start wondering if this is real or a contrived way to make it appear like you're under attack.
I wonder if they're gonna find a return address.
And Coulter, New York, and Elizabeth Edwards will go, look at what just showed up in our office.
And Coulter's That's right, terrorism's just a bumper sticker.
I think what's going on.
I think the Brett Girl is failing to warn his staff of incoming Avon shipments, right?
Uh and they're getting all hot to trot here over nothing.
I seriously, I have a I have a question.
If poverty, you know, the Brett Girl starts his poverty tour on Monday in New Orleans, he's already been in New Orleans.
He announced his presidential candidacy in New Orleans.
If poverty is so widespread in the country, why does he have to take a tour?
All he ought to have to do is leave his front door.
You know, get in a car, drive a couple miles, and there's poverty.
I all you'd have to do is look around him, wherever he might be, not have to go on a tour as if going to a museum.
I mean, if it really seriously, folks, if poverty is so widespread, then why hasn't the Bret Girl pointed out that after the New Deal, the fair deal, the Great Society, the war on poverty, the raw deal, the Democrats have failed to make a debt in poverty.
We've got the New Deal, we've got the Great Deal, we've got we've got Great Society, we've got the war on poverty, and the percentages are still the same.
And these are big, big, big Democrat programs.
It seems to me, Bret Girl, somebody get because I know he's not going to listen.
But if you really want to have a meaningful poverty tour, instead of going to New Orleans and Appalachia and these other places, do a tour of the failed bureaucracies and buildings that house them and tell us how he intends to fix them.
Go wherever the Great Society is administered.
Go to wherever the New Deal remnants are administered.
Go to wherever the war on poverty is being fought because that's where it's being lost, and go find out why.
That's what you need to tour a bunch of failed government bureaucracies, Bret Girl.
That's what you need to do.
Do a taxpayer tour.
Apologize on behalf of his party for the biggest ripoff in world history.
We've had six trillion dollars.
Transferred, wealth transfers.
Uh to wipe out poverty since 1964, the Great Society.
Hasn't worked.
So he wants to do any kind of a tour taxpayer tour, apologize to us for wasting a bunch of money, a huge ripoff.
Here's the thing, folks.
Excuse me.
The Democrats cannot have it both ways, and we allow them to get away with this.
And it's time this stopped.
They claim their programs are critical.
They claim that the social safety net, the hammock, hey, all these programs that they have come up with to wipe out poverty.
They claim those programs are so critical and humane, and then half the Democrats run around and talk about what rotten lifestyles Americans have.
So if you're gonna praise your own programs, oh, these programs have meant so much to so many people.
And then you got a leading presidential candidate running around talking about all the poverty in America.
Isn't it time you start looking at yourself?
Because you can't have it both ways.
Either your programs aren't working, well, not either, because we know the uh programs aren't working.
Why go back to New Orleans anyway?
You already been to New Orleans.
You announced your campaign from there.
We can measure, by the way, the poverty tour that the Brett Girl is going to take.
It'll be very, very easy to measure the tour.
He's gonna be in New Orleans for what?
He's not gonna be the whole day, be there sometime in the morning.
Let's say he's there for two or three hours.
When he leaves, will there still be poor people?
If after the Brett Girl leaves Appalachia, will there still be poor people?
If there are still poor people in New Orleans, and there are still poor people in Appalachia, wherever else wherever the hell else he's going.
Because he cares.
He's he's the only one, folks.
Nobody else is doing anything about poverty.
Do you understand that he's gonna go on this tour?
And we'll find out just how much of it he cures on this tour.
I really think, folks, we need benchmarks in the war on poverty.
That's what we need.
We need benchmarks we can measure.
We actually have the benchmarks.
Uh, and we know that uh they're not being met.
Anyway, you know, Bret Girl might have a bit of a challenge finding a lot of people in poverty in New Orleans because most of them are gone.
Most of them move to Houston.
And the people that are back in New Orleans are the uh entrepreneurs and uh risk takers and uh moderately well off rebuilding it, which, by the way, is a meaningful problem for liberal Democrat politicians down there.
Quick timeout.
Stay glued to the seat.
We're coming right back.
▲
Export Selection