All Episodes
Previous Next
July 16, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:35
July 16, 2007, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings to you, my good friends.
A long tradition once again now begins.
An American occurrence.
Something genuinely American.
That is radios by the millions are being tuned to radio stations in the hundreds to listen to this program live streaming over the internet as gazillions of Americans tune to the Rush Limbaugh program on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network three hours straight ahead.
Great to be with you, my friends.
As always, telephone number 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
We've failed.
My partner and I failed to defend our championship at the Country Club of Fairfield, Connecticut member guest over the weekend.
We came in second, but boy, we finished hot.
We birdied six of the last 10 holes that we played, and four of those birdies were mine.
And the game never seemed easier.
The game is one of the most, they ought to make prisoners play this game.
It is so frustrating.
No, it's a pro tune.
No, no, no.
Playing in those pro-ams is enough.
You know, it's tough being the worst guy in your group when you're out there playing with the pros.
But at least you can manage your expectations.
All right, here's today's iPhone winner.
We got two more to go.
Well, this one is one of the two.
The last iPhone tomorrow will be given away.
Today's iPhone winner is Pam E. She's from Warrington, Pennsylvania.
That's in Bucks County.
Beautiful Bucks County.
They listen to the program there on the Big Talker WPHT 1210 a.m. in Philadelphia.
So Pam E. Was the winner on Friday, a male or female?
Do you know when Walter Williams was here?
It was a male.
All right.
So, well, we're moving in the right direction here.
Dawn's face lit up with pleasure and joy when I announced the name of today's winner.
So she gets the iPhone, 8-gig iPhone.
I finally had a chance to take my iPhone on the road and use it.
I mean, it's one thing to use it at home.
And that was flawless.
It was just absolutely flawless.
I keep learning more and more things about this thing.
It is just, it's really cool.
So I'm glad that we got these 10 to give away.
People are going to love them.
8-gig iPhone, a check, a little bit less than $1,500 from us to Pam and all these winners to help them pay the two-year required service from AT ⁇ T. Your subscription to Limbaugh Letter, your subscription to the website, Rush24-7, and a $100 gift card from Bocajava.com.
Now, there's still one more to go, and you can still register for it.
If you're not registered, it's free and it's easy.
Is go to rushlimbaugh.com, find the Rush in a Hurry banner, and sign up.
Put your email address in there.
And it's a free email flash, and we send out about an hour after the program each day that summarizes the program, gives you a little idea what the full website update is going to look like.
It happens every day.
So if you missed the program, Tisk Tisk, it is a great way for you to find out what you missed, and it'll remind you that you don't want to miss it ever again.
Rush in a Hurry.
It's just a little summary.
Sign up now, and you could be the final winner tomorrow.
We'll have that announcement in 24 hours, so you can bite your nails for the last one.
You know, I always like to start off with some lighthearted stuff just because I just do.
And I saw a headline.
I'm sorry to do this to you.
I had this reaction to the headline.
It's a horrible story, but It's an SUV story, and here's the headline.
This is from the Raleigh News and Observer.
Four killed as SUV hits disabled car.
Now, given the way SUVs have been written about minds of their own driving off the top levels of garages and going over bridges on interstate highways, my first thought when I saw the headline was, my gosh, now SUVs hate the disabled.
Now they're out there targeting people who are defenseless.
Now they're out there.
I mean, see a disabled car, retarded car, whatever, sitting on the side of the street.
That was my first reaction just based on the conditioning that I've had with the drive-by media and the way they report on SUVs.
All right, America was once the world's tallest country, but we are not growing as fast as the rest of the world.
And economists say that that's bad.
Too many of you people out there are small fry.
You are too short.
You're not as tall as you should be.
And wait till you see where this story goes.
Young adults in Japan and other prosperous Asian countries now stand nearly as tall as Americans do.
In Holland, the tallest country in the world, a typical man now measures six feet, which is two inches more than his average U.S. counterpart.
Why does this matter?
It matters because height is correlated with numerous measures of a population's well-being.
Tall people are healthier.
They are wealthier, and they live longer than short people.
Now, being tall doesn't make you smarter, richer, or healthier.
The things that make you tall, a nutritious diet, good prenatal care, and a healthy childhood, benefit you in other ways.
That makes height a good indicator for economists.
It goes on to suggest here that one of the reasons we are not getting taller is because there are 9 million children without health insurance.
It's all because we don't have universal health care.
This is an AP story, and the whole thing we're getting shorter, or we're not getting taller, I guess the two are identical.
And it's all because we don't have everybody in a universal health care program.
Tell me, no, I've never cared.
What is the real reason?
Why are we not getting taller?
Oh, oh, well, I forgot.
That's absolutely right.
And how do you leave genetics out of this anyway?
You know, all the reasons they gave, they leave genetics out of this.
But there's another reason, and that is Mr. Schnerderly wisely pointing this out to me.
We have had an invasion of a lot of people, very short people.
And for all intents and purposes, they get counted as Americans because they live here.
So that's the reason.
That has to be, but healthcare.
They want to tie this to health care and make it sound like it's just another thing to worry about.
Now, get this.
This is from Germany.
A round-the-clock television channel devoted exclusively to aging, death, and dying will be launched in Germany this fall.
EOS TV, which takes its name from the Greek goddess of the dawn, will feature documentaries about graveyards, televised obituaries, tips on finding a decent retirement home, and how to install in-house stairlifts.
The project was conceived by Wolf Tillman Schneider, 51, a former TV producer, obviously Lib, joined forces with Germany's funeral association to launch the 24-hour, seven-day-a-week death and dying channel on cable TV and the internet.
Now, is there a market for this?
This is the question.
Is there a market?
Germany launching this TV station devoted entirely to 24-7 coverage of aging, death, and dying.
Who are you that?
Well, Prozac might sponsor this.
Where are they going to go out?
It just is amazing.
Everybody in the drive-by media is obsessed with death, dying.
Wait till you hear some of the things in a global warming stack today.
There's an actual piece in Newsweek.
I think it's Newsweek, MSNBC.
We really got to get rid of humanity.
Humanity is destroying the planet.
And these people are serious about it.
And they've got a plan and a program to do it.
All right, on the agenda today, going to talk some more about Iraq.
Great dust-up yesterday on Meet the Depressed with Jim Webb and Senator Graham from South Carolina.
We have that coming up.
And, of course, the John Edwards poverty tour started today in New Orleans.
In fact, our microphones were there, ladies and gentlemen.
It has been pointed out to me, ladies and gentlemen, that we do have in this country a death and dying network.
In fact, you could make the argument that we have two.
The biggest death and dying network we have is MSNBC.
All the talent there have one foot in the grave anyway in their careers.
And then, of course, the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric are all three of the evening news broadcasts, the smallest audiences they have had in like 20 or 25 years, maybe even longer than that.
So the Germans got nothing on us.
All right, yesterday on Meet the Press, Jim Webb got into a huge dust-up with Lindsey Graham, and it's all about Iraq and getting out now versus waiting for September, even in the midst of what people now claim in the interim report we got last week confirmed that there is tremendous security and military progress being made.
And that, I think, is one of the reasons for panic on the part of Democrats and even some of these Republicans.
The Republicans are worried.
They think that the 06 elections were all about Iraq, and they want to rock off the table those Republicans that are up for re-election in 08.
So in the midst of all of this, we have four soundbites here.
This is a pretty good dust-up.
At one point, Jim Webb could barely contain his emotions.
I thought he was going to physically assault Senator Gramnesty.
Here is the first cut.
Tim Russert says, Senator Webb, are you trying to run the war?
No, I don't think that there is a war to start off with.
I think that this has been a botched occupation.
It's been going on for four years after the purely military part of it was done.
This administration has failed in terms of bringing the right diplomatic formula to the table.
All of the things that people like myself were predicting would happen if we went into Iraq are exactly the sorts of things that the president and this small group of people who have sort of rallied around him are saying will happen if we leave.
Now, Russert then said to Senator Gramnesty, he said, it would have been a nightmare of the ages if Congress had passed the Webb Amendment and it became law because you'd have deployment by Poles.
The Army missed its recruiting goals in June.
72% of the soldiers in Iraq are members of the Army.
Is the Army being broken by this war?
And why not give these Army members and their families a year off after being deployed for a year?
The worst thing I think we could do in this war or any other war is start micromanaging deployment of forces by the Congress.
The operational control of the war residing in the Senate or the House would be a nightmare.
Politicians are worried about the next election.
Commanders need troops based on what happens on the ground.
So I think any idea that basically allows senators and congressmen starts commanding troops should fail and will fail.
And then Russert said, Well, how long do you believe the surge will last, you guys?
General Petraeus comes back.
He will tell us these things.
I want to leave.
No American wants to occupy Iraq.
But history will judge us, my friend, not when we left, but what we left behind.
Do we leave a resurgent al-Qaeda that will kill every moderate who helped us?
Do we empower Iran?
Do they control the south of Iraq?
Nobody ever asked the consequences, polls, the consequences of this idea.
Just wash your hands of Iraq.
It's been a hard time.
I'm going to listen to this general, and I'm not going to let any politician take the place of the general.
I'll give you a chance to respond.
Lindsay's had a hard month.
You know, these people who have gathered around the president.
Don't let Lindsay having a hard month.
Now, it really heats up here.
Would they re-enlist in the highest numbers anywhere else in the military?
This is one thing I really take objection to.
Let them win.
They want to let them win.
It's politicians who try to put their political views into the mouths of soldiers.
You can look at poll after poll, and the political views of the United States military are no different than the country writ large.
Take a look at the New York Times today.
Less than half of the military believes that we're going to be able to do that.
We've been to Iraq in the first place.
Have you ever been to these?
I've covered two wars as a course.
Have you been to Iraq?
I have been told that I was afraid of the people.
Have you been to Iraq and talked to the soldiers?
No, you haven't been to the Irish Indian.
I've been there seven years.
You can go see the dog and pony shows.
I've been there.
That's what service is.
I have been there.
I've gone back in August.
I've been a member of the military when the senators were.
Listen, something we can agree on.
We both admire the men in the women uniform.
I don't know what they're doing.
Don't put political words in their mouth.
You know, my election says that.
I'm not sure if I'm going to be a Republican who's supporting this position.
You know, you said on the floor.
Let them go.
This is not about my election, my friend.
This is about the troops are not going to be.
Let them win.
The troops can win.
Now, here's what interests me about besides the obvious dust up there and Webb saying that Graham's never been there.
And Graham says, I've been there seven times.
Well, you got the tour.
You got the dog and pony show.
You really go out and see the troops.
What interests me is that Jim Webb's son, from his second marriage, he'd been married three times, has been there, may still be in Iraq.
I don't know.
But Senator Webb has never visited Iraq, even though he's got a son there.
I find that a little odd, especially when he can go anytime he wants on the U.S. government dime.
He can go in comfort.
If I were a senator and my son was there and I was able to travel there and do fact-finding on my own, you bet I would.
Yet he dismisses Graham having gone there seven times as some kind of a guided tour.
And then he completely writes off what Graham says, who's been there, conveniently dismisses his many trips there as propaganda.
And this phrase, stop putting political words in the mouths of soldiers.
That's the new mantra.
What a great point, everybody.
Now supporting the troops and their mission is putting words in their mouths.
By the way, that New York Times poll that was referred to by Webb, you go back, the New York Times fudges their polls and doesn't release all the data in their polls.
And this is a great example, too.
There was a poll in May that nobody really got a look at.
There wasn't much made of it because the news about the troops and their attitude about Iraq did not fit the action line of the template for the New York Times.
Now, they can go out and they can produce any kind of poll result they want to give cover to people like Jim Webb and others who want to yank our forces out of there and secure defeat.
Now, the one question that Russert did not ask on the show yesterday of either of these two guys, no media will ask it.
Why don't you wait till September?
Why have to get out now?
Why won't you just wait until September?
If Congress doesn't want to give the Petraeus plan three months, then how much time would you give the plan B that you're demanding?
The Baker-Hamilton plan, would you give that three months?
Would they give Harry Reid's surrender plan three months?
All of these, the Murthy plan, withdraw to Okinawa.
I mean, the list of plans that's been offered to the Democrats is endless, and it's all basically, they're all basically the same, and that's pull out now.
But the sad reality is, and this is what you have to know, they're not debating plans.
They are debating political strategies.
You've got our high-minded, principled politicians are not looking at solutions.
They're looking at polls.
And you want a poll?
Here's one they can see.
Newsweek, July 11, 12th.
It could be any of the polls.
27% approve of Iraq.
68% disapprove.
5% are undecided.
Now, what does this mean?
27% approve of Iraq, 68% don't.
If you have half a brain, whether you use it or not, the news that you hear day in, day out is 100% bad news about Iraq.
Am I right?
Yes, I am right.
Always right.
Love hearing myself speak when I'm right, so I love hearing myself speak.
The news is universally bad.
Either there's no good news or there's no good news reported.
So what do we have?
We have 100% bad news.
And it's been bad news every day for four years.
And still we only have 68% opposed, 100% negative pictures, and only 68% in the Newsweek poll are ready to quit.
The most biased, negative news coverage of any war in our history, that includes Vietnam, and it turned only 68% against the war after four years.
Now, as you know, I'm an optimist, and I'm a person of good cheer, and I look for the good news as often as I can in the midst of what appears to be bad news.
But this is just, it's over the top now, and this reason for wanting to get out now, I'm telling you for the Democrat side, they fear a report and pictures that will show this mission working.
We'll be back.
We'll continue right after this.
That's right, folks, serving humanity simply by showing up, firmly ensconced here behind the golden EIB microphone.
Let me say something here that some will no doubt consider controversial.
It's actually a question, what is the great downside if we stay in Iraq and fight this enemy?
What's the downside?
Do you realize how this is all being portrayed to us?
That there is the downside is staying, the downside is winning, the downside is dealing with this enemy.
The upside is losing.
The upside is getting out of there.
There is no military reason offered by any people supporting a withdrawal.
No military reason at all.
Pure liberalism as reasons.
And they're absurd.
They're ridiculous.
And they secure defeat.
And I guarantee you, the Democrats would love for there to be this notion in the voters' minds of defeat in Iraq while the president is a Republican.
This is a pure political calculation.
But what is the downside if we stay in Iraq and fight this enemy?
I want all of you who are feeling upset about this.
I want all of you who may be in that 68% number that Newsweek produced, ask yourselves a question.
How is it affecting your life?
Why is it affecting your life to the point that you want to stop it?
Is it you just don't want to hear about it anymore?
You don't want to hear about the carnage.
You don't want to hear about the bombs.
You don't want to see the pictures of flaming cars.
Then don't turn on the news.
But there's something much larger going on here than our selfish feelings about what makes us uncomfortable as we go about our day when this incident, this war, aside from you, military families, is not affecting any of us personally unless we let it.
Unless we get totally bogged down in all of this, let it affect our mood and this and this and that and everything.
But that's no reason to pull out of here because people are uneasy.
Because people are uncomfortable with their limbo.
They don't like what they see.
Well, then don't watch it.
War is hell.
Couldn't believe Webb said not even a war.
And this guy wants to run it.
And he doesn't even think it is one.
The facts are these.
Our armed forces have kept much of this enemy bogged down in Iraq and they have done exactly what they're supposed to do.
And that is keep our homeland safe, keep all of us safe.
They're doing exactly what they were supposed to do.
Now, I know that the media and the Democrats want to continue to portray everything as a failure or loss.
And I know they want us to leave Iraq and I know they want us to leave now, but so what?
They don't run the country, folks.
The Democrats and the drive-by media do not run the country and they do not run the military.
They may think they do.
They may think that they have the power to by creating all this angst in as many hearts and minds of the American people as possible.
But they have to win the White House before they can pull any of this stuff off.
In the meantime, before they win the White House, they're trying to destroy America's morale.
Not only the uniformed people, but yours.
They're trying to make you think you live in the worst country ever.
No economy, no future.
We're getting shorter now because we don't have health care for everybody.
All of this rock gut.
And it's all aimed at getting you to admit in a poll by 68% that you disapprove of what's happening in Iraq.
And well, who the hell are we?
We're not running the thing.
But Rush, this is a democracy.
It's a representative.
That's right.
And as such, we have a commander-in-chief, and we've got the people running this, and they're in charge.
It just hit me the other day: the whole notion of staying and seeing this through, what's the downside to that?
As long as the pro-national security president sits in the White House and enough Republicans in Congress support him, who cares what these people demand?
Who cares what the Democrats demand?
Who cares what Jim Webb demands?
Who cares what Ted Kennedy or Dick Derbert or Pelosi or Reed or any of them?
Who cares?
Who cares what members of the drive-by media have to say?
They're not running the show.
They might think they are, but they're not.
I'll tell you this: despite all these years of these antics from the left wing, the Democrats have yet to lay out a comprehensive, detailed plan for defending this country from this kind of enemy.
They don't present one plan.
Well, take that back.
Global test was offered by John Kerry.
And of course, there's the obligatory trip to the United Nations every time somebody does something we don't like.
But they don't have a comprehensive plan to protect this country.
And they dare not offer one now that uses the military because they've just trashed the entire mission of the military.
They're demanding withdrawal and nothing else.
We are allowing ourselves here, folks, to be stampeded into doing the unthinkable, pulling our forces off the battlefield against enemies that'll strike us in our cities if they can.
And in fact, did.
It's not as like this enemy has not made itself known to us on a personal basis.
The drive-bys, the Democrats trying to rush us into defeat with the help of some Republicans, but they've really given no reason for meeting their timelines and their demands for withdrawal.
Who makes them superior to everybody else?
Why is it their timeline of July is the one that should be the benchmark?
When the original plan is proposed with the president, General Petraeus is September.
Now, all of a sudden, well, they don't know what they're doing.
Dick Durbin knows how to handle this.
Jim Webb knows how to handle this.
We need to get out of there in July.
Well, why?
Tell us.
Nobody will ask them.
That's why I am repeating it constantly.
So it's a frustrating thing here.
Especially, we're on the move.
We are making progress, good progress.
I think this is one of the factors, by the way, in this ratcheted up desire to get us out of there this month.
But too many people are allowing the idiocy of the left and the political agenda of the left to intimidate them, to clutter their thinking, and to make it the benchmark against which we measure everything else.
And everybody goes on the defensive.
When the drive-bys and the Democrats start making these demands and they're powerless to implement their demands, why does everybody go on the defensive?
Now, don't misunderstand here, because I know what the selling point is, I know what they're saying to get us out of there, soldier deaths, troop deaths.
And I'm not saying that over, what is it, 3,500 now, 3,600 dead soldiers, not all of them killed in combat, by the way.
That's not to be dismissed because these people are the most honorable and precious of all Americans.
But when you consider, ladies and gentlemen, that we are fighting an enemy in Iraq, Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and their surrogates and their supporters, and that they killed 3,000 unarmed civilians on our own soil in less than a few hours.
We have more than held our own against this bunch of people.
We are fighting and we are winning.
And now we've got a general that every one of these Democrats unanimously confirmed to the post.
He is in charge, pressing the war against the enemy, and the demands of the left that he be stopped in mid-battle and forced to surrender.
What's a disgrace?
It is a 100% disgrace.
And it's unwarranted.
It's an unwarranted response to what's going on over there.
It's obvious what they're up to.
The better the news, the better the military progress, the more panicked they become to lose.
And there are some Republicans who are running scared because they look at the results, as I mentioned moments ago in 06, and they say, gosh, I got to distance myself from the war or at least appear to be critical of our progress here so I don't get caught up in the next landslide defeat.
Well, we'll deal with what the Republicans ought to do to win in 06, but it certainly isn't running away and isn't being cowardly.
And it isn't when you're an elected official and then this is your job to run away from it, is not going to stand you in good stead.
I mean, what these Republicans and others have to understand is that the opponents, the Democrats, the drive-by media, all the left, they have no plan for fighting this enemy, just as they absolutely had no plan for defeating the Soviet Union.
And if you think this bunch doesn't need to be defeated, and if you think al-Qaeda is just going to go away when we go away, you have another thing coming.
This is more hideous and dangerous than anybody is letting on.
I will bet you that if anybody in the intelligence community were to tell you and me what they know about what's going on out there, that we wouldn't be able to sleep at night.
That's how dangerous it is.
When you've got the upper crust of Islamo-fascist culture, doctors and so forth getting brainwashed becoming terrorists in the UK, folks, I'm telling you, it's far more serious than anybody wants to realize.
And we pull out and don't defeat this enemy.
We're just going to have to do it at some other point.
We will at some point have to deal with this.
This is, I got to thinking about this the other day.
I got mad at myself after a pretty good monologue on Friday about all this.
And I got mad at myself because even I was acting defensively.
I was taking their talking points and responding.
Who are they?
Screw them.
They are not in charge of this.
They are not the commander-in-chief.
They have the power to purse, and that's it.
And they don't have the guts to cut the money off.
That's their power.
That's what they could do to pull us out of it.
But they don't dare have that vote.
And these resolutions have all failed.
If we got 68% of the American people who think this is bad news and want out of there, it ought to be a slam dunk in both houses of Congress to get that resolution passed.
And it ought to be a slam dunk to get it veto-proof.
But the resolutions are symbolic.
As long as they don't touch the money, as long as they keep allocating more, in fact, all this is just political rhetoric and BS.
As far as Republicans are concerned, I think it's time that they start acting like statesmen.
Of course, we discussed this last week, too.
There aren't very many left.
But they need to be condemned for joining the left, abandoning their obligation to protect the country and support the troops, and condemned for failing to speak the truth about what's going on here.
What is it?
You know how many kids are killed every year in car crashes in this country?
6,000.
6,000 kids, 48,000 people killed in car crashes.
And you don't see the Democrats demanding we get off the roads, pull off the highways, or whatever.
None.
3,600 soldiers in war where casualties are part of the job.
It's part of the business.
The people who sign up and volunteer know it.
I think it's a battle of wills now, folks.
We're not suffering massive casualties here as in past wars.
We haven't been hit again.
We're on the move.
Why in hell surrender?
Because the same appeasers who tried to undermine Reagan want to undermine this effort.
The same appeasers, the left, undermined Nixon during Vietnam, want to undermine this effort.
And I said, screw them.
Who are they?
They are not elected to run the country.
They are not appointed to anything.
They don't have the power to do any of what they're demanding.
Why does anybody listen to them?
Why?
I know the Republicans listen to them because the media amplifies what they say.
And what do you think of Senator Foghorn Leghorn's response that we ought to get out of the Republic?
Well, I'm looking at this, the Republican says, because I, you know, so the, you know, the drive-bys promote these guys, I understand that, but it's time to stand up against it.
We can do it here.
Do we want to allow the leftists in this country to force defeat on the battlefield again?
Time to call them out.
They don't support the troops.
They don't support the troops' families.
They don't support the military.
They don't support the war effort.
They don't support national security, any of it.
They don't support these things.
They want to tell you that they do.
They can put Webb out front and a handful of others, but he and they are not representative of the vast majority of military personnel and their families.
Quick timeout.
Be right back.
Stay with us.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
I want to make one more comment on polls before we go to the phones.
We got all these polls about Iraq.
The American people don't want this.
The American people like that.
And they think, you ought to get out of there.
We can't win.
And so, of course, we got to act on that poll.
You got to take action on that poll.
Well, let me tell you, there are far more Americans who support what's going on in Iraq than support Congress.
Congress's approval numbers are lower than the approval numbers for the war.
So if we're going to react to polls on a consistent basis, then we are saying to Congress, we don't trust you.
We don't trust what you're doing and what your legislation promises to do, immigration a great example.
We don't trust you.
Why, in the midst of having politics, politicians, congressmen, and men and women in Congress polling worse than support for the war, why are we listening to what any of them say about what we ought to do?
How can you go from not trusting them in the immigration bill, knowing full well that they had no intention of ever implementing most of what was in that?
How can we go from that and then anoint these people with some sort of religious credibility when it comes to the Iraq war?
So much in that, that's why, you know, governing by polls, and the president said it last week at his press conference.
He said, men and women in uniform knew their commander-in-chief were taking focus group results and managing the war with it.
Do you think that they'd have a morale problem?
Damn right they would.
Here's Kurt from, we've got a civilian who is on the phone from Iraq.
Kurt, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program.
How you doing, Rush?
It's an honor to talk to you.
Thank you, sir.
Hey, I just wanted to thank you for that Russian a Hurry newsletter that comes out.
Seems we only get one hour of you a day here.
So you listen on Armed Forces Radio?
Yes.
Okay.
Well, what do you do?
I mean, you're a civilian.
What kind of work are you doing?
I'm not sure I should really say.
Ah, it's classified.
That's quite all right.
I understand.
I'm sorry I asked.
I was just trying to learn a little about you and get to know you.
But well, I'm glad that you get the Russian a hurry, but there's a problem.
You only are able to hear one hour of the program, but you've got a summary of the whole program.
It's got to drive you nuts to see what you're missing.
Well, there are a lot of holes in the synopsis there, but I understand they can't send it all.
Well, we've got to find a way.
I mean, you get it, Emo.
Are you allowed to go on a computer and stream audio and video?
Are there restrictions on your machine for that?
No, we can do that, especially at 8 o'clock at night.
And that's what time it is now, coming up on 8 o'clock?
That's coming up on 9 right now.
That's right, 8-hour difference.
Well, then you can actually listen to it on the website.
You could be listening to live streaming audio even as we speak.
Yeah, I could, couldn't I?
Yeah, you could.
You actually could.
See what Russian a Hurry has done for you.
It has opened up new vistas of opportunity and knowledge.
And that's what happens on this program.
Kurt, thanks for going to trouble of calling us all the way from Iraq doing classified work.
I could tell he was tempted to tell me, but I shut it down because I, you know, I understand rules and regs.
Kurt, thanks much.
Let's see.
Another Kurt from Fort Knox, Kentucky.
Kurt, squared, you're next.
Hello, Rush.
Hey.
Great to talk to you.
Thank you, sir.
I was calling.
I was infuriated yesterday watching Meet the Press when Jim Webb went nuts with Lindsey Graham there.
At least one cool head prevailed.
But there was something that you guys didn't replay.
I don't know if you caught it or not.
I barely caught it.
I watched it twice after watching it again on a rerun.
They give him off, give time off.
Actually, he said something about time off, but then he mentioned not having a military member go back overseas for three years after doing a tour.
I don't know how he could factor in three years, where he pulled 36 months out of it.
You're making my point.
Who cares what he says?
Jim Webb, he's a freshman senator.
He's got for power.
For power.
Who cares what he says?
All he's trying to do is make military families think he's got concern and compassion for them because he's responding to what he thinks is truth in the polls.
Back in just a second.
All right, we'll get to a lot more of your calls as the next hour opens and progresses, ladies and gentlemen.
We are here having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, and that will continue.
Telephone number if you want to be on the show, 800-282-2882.
▲
Export Selection