Rush Limbaugh Program - July 20, 2007, Friday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 20, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:28

July 20, 2007, Friday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 podcast.
	And welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program here on the EIB Network.
	Welcome to yet another session here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, where we uh, well, once again, engage in a relentless pursuit of the truth.
	Lots to talk about today, and we're going to get to it.
	There is much to discuss on the war front, uh.
	Hillary versus the Pentagon.
	Progress in Iraq.
	The drive-by's aren't going to like this.
	And uh Bush so upbeat that uh, well, it's causing a backlash.
	There's an update, too, on the uh Haditha Marine prosecution persecution, and we'll talk about that.
	Ballerie Plame's lawsuit was dismissed somewhat of behind the scenes on that.
	Um Senator Byrd has uh attacked Michael Vick.
	Not quite clear the uh logic, and I'll play the audio for you.
	You can share my consternation.
	Uh and uh the John Doe liability issue, the liability from immunity if you turn in the six Imams who have now sued the people on that passenger plane who complained about their erratic semi-9-11 behavior.
	We'll talk about that today, too.
	Uh Hillary and Obama news, we'll get into that.
	Bush uh down in Nashville, Tennessee, uh talking about uh Ramos and Compian, the two Border Patrol agents who were jailed for doing their job, jailed for shooting an illegal alien drug smuggler at the border.
	Uh the drug smuggler is free under a grant of immunity and has a green card.
	The two border patrol agents enforcing the law are serving eleven and twelve years in the federal penitentiary, respectively.
	We'll talk about an update on that.
	And I've got a final update uh on the uh Carver Elementary School, the the budding madrasa in the public school here in San Diego.
	Uh we talked about that last time I was here.
	There have been developments in that story.
	And we'll get to it.
	First, of course, as you know, uh Harry Potter Mania reaching a near peak here.
	Uh the uh Asia bookstores will have the book, I guess, first, uh midnight uh Asia time tonight, and then it will go across the globe.
	Uh a remarkable this is a remarkable story.
	I'm sure you know it, but let me just summarize it again.
	The author here, J.K. Rowling, an unemployed single mother without a publisher or an agent just thirteen years ago.
	She is now the world's first billionaire writer.
	After six novels.
	Six.
	The Hollywood movies, just the movies alone, have uh netted uh uh uh in the neighborhood of four billion dollars.
	Just the movies alone.
	The books have sold 325 million copies before today.
	325 million copies.
	So a huge success story.
	Uh but she's uh uh unhappy.
	J.K. Rowling uh reacting angrily to the New York Times review that came out yesterday on the seventh and last book, the Harry Potter series, uh Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows.
	Um I'll just quote her.
	I am staggered, she wrote, that some American newspapers have decided to publish purported spoilers in the form of reviews in complete disregard of the wishes of literally millions of readers, as particularly children.
	Um I uh wanted to find out what what she was upset about, uh went back to the review, and uh didn't see much there.
	In fact, they were very complimentary about the book and very guarded about what happens in it, including the uh, you know, the ending.
	This is like the Sopranos.
	What's what's gonna be the final uh installment here?
	What happens to Harry and all of his fellow students there.
	In fact, uh, the New York Times book editor, Rick Lyman defended the decision of the New York Times to run a review uh before publication of the book.
	He said, quote, we took great care not to give away the ending, nor to give away significant details about who lives and who dies, confining our review to broader brush assessments of the tone and the writing, unquote.
	Uh it struck me at that moment, ladies and gentlemen, that the New York Times was more careful about the secrets of J.K. Rowling and uh Harry Potter than they have been about the secrets of national security affecting the lives of our troops.
	They apologized in effect to J.K. Rowling for praising her book and censoring themselves from giving away the ending, this from the same paper, the same newspaper that published national security secrets throughout the Iraq War endangering the lives of our troops without an apology to date.
	Did you ever need I didn't, but maybe you did, another reason to know exactly the character of the people at the New York Times.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock, Infor Rush at 1800-282-2882.
	The uh Dow down uh a bit to today from the surge, this is another surge, uh, the surge at the stock market.
	The day before uh amounted to the 31st time that the Dowindustrial average had hit a record high since January.
	Thirty-one record-breaking Dow closes since January.
	Now you know what the Dow is.
	The Dow Industrial Index is generally speaking a six to nine month uh uh indicator of what's going to happen six to nine months from now in terms of the economy.
	It is a bet on the future health, the future growth, the future wealth generation of our economy.
	The tax cut-induced boom that the United States is now experiencing has uh uh not hit its peak according to the Dow, according to the stock markets.
	We have not yet, despite war, despite oil prices spiking, despite everything else we've been in the, you know, dealing with this boom rolls and its momentum is actually gaining speed despite what you might hear again in the drive-by's that this is the worst uh economy uh we've ever seen.
	And I just don't know how Congress gets away with this.
	How does Congress get away with getting the drive-by media focused on how bad how low George Bush's approval ratings are when their approval ratings are lower?
	According to Zogby, uh Bush's job approval about 34%.
	It's about the same as it was since uh the start of this year.
	He's not hitting any new highs, there's no question about that.
	Although he's not as low as Harry Truman when he went out of office in the Korean War situation.
	Uh Mr. Bush is not as low as Jimmy Carter.
	But uh at 34 percent is not very high either until you start looking at Congress at 14%.
	Fourteen percent is almost not registering.
	It's almost not, it's almost not there.
	So uh we have uh a pretty interesting uh situation with uh with that and the implications of it in the debate uh going on about the war, we'll get to that in a moment.
	Oh, and uh interesting news on the cultural front.
	Before I get to the war news, um you have I don't know whether this has happened all over all over the country, but here in San Diego, we've been peppered with ads for sicko, the Mike Moore, uh Michael Moore documentary about uh health care and how good it is in Cuba.
	Just parenthetically, he left out of the movie the most amazing fact about Cuban health care, and that is when the maximum leader, uh Fidel Castro actually got sick, he brought in a Spanish doctor to get well.
	Uh but that's not in the movie.
	But anyway, so Sicco uh trying to sell us on the fact that we ought to have a single payer government-run uh uh health care system.
	I d I don't know how you sell that.
	I mean, just stepping back for a moment, how do you sell giving your health, the future of your health, to a government after the way that same government handled Katrina?
	How do you sell that exactly?
	I've never been able to understand that.
	But anyway, uh neither can anybody else, apparently.
	The movie took in uh uh and we do this in California, you know, we look at the uh receipts because uh movies are such a big business uh in this sense, but uh this uh this movie uh moviegoers are staying away in droves.
	They've been publicizing and advertising this movie everywhere.
	I don't know whether in your town, but certainly in San Diego.
	We had uh, let's see, we had the health the uh nurses, the health uh industry, the nurses uh union and others uh doing their own ads.
	But uh after three weeks in widespread release uh on a couple of thousand screens, it's at fifteen point eight million.
	Just to give you uh let's see some uh some comparisons with uh Fahrenheit 911, it was 119 million.
	Uh Sicco is on life support.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock, in for Rush Limbaugh.
	Now I want to get back with the war.
	What's happening with Hillary versus the Pentagon and some of the other issues, also the kind of fish served at uh Gore's daughter's dinner apparently became a huge issue among environmentalists.
	Al Gore's now getting it from all sides uh and deserves even more.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock, in for Rush Limbaugh.
	1800-282-2882.
	Back after this.
	Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh today, rush back on uh Monday.
	All the information, of course, continues at Rushlimbaugh.com.
	Uh Keith in Chicago, you're next on the EIB network.
	Keith, go ahead.
	Hi there.
	Um I'm I'm a little bit concerned and confused about approval ratings.
	Now we know that Bush has record low approval ratings.
	No, they're not record.
	Okay.
	We know he has ridiculously low approval ratings.
	No, he has low approval ratings.
	They're not ridiculously low.
	Ridiculous would have been Richard Nixon at twenty-two, ridiculous would have been uh uh Carter, who was almost as low, and uh and Harry Truman after uh Korea, who was almost as low.
	All three of those were lower than uh than the current Bush rating.
	You uh you claim 34 percent.
	I keep seeing 27, 28 percent.
	Yeah, I'm just reading Zogby's the latest.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, but uh let's look at them as a total.
	Let's look at all the uh polling as total.
	Whatever, what's your point?
	Oh well, when we talk about congressional approval ratings, yeah.
	We're not talking congressional leadership.
	If that's the question, you get a different number.
	So you're mixing apples and oranges.
	No, it's not true.
	You're not reading the Zo.
	Go to Zogby and read for yourself, sir, because before you call the show because that's not what happened.
	He he asked specifically about the Democratic Congress, and the Democratic Congress got poor marks right across the ideological spectrum.
	Twenty-one percent of liberals and ten percent of the very liberal, self-identified, gave Congress Democratic leadership positive marks.
	Ten percent of the very liberal gave the Democratic-led Congress positive marks.
	Fourteen percent of conservatives gave the Democratic uh Congress positive marks.
	So it's low numbers all across the board.
	In fact, among liberals and very liberals, uh at least among very liberals, it's lower than it is among conservatives.
	Well, what is it among moderates and independents?
	The uh let's see.
	This is what I'm talking about, Robert.
	Eight percent.
	Well, if you'd allow me, sir.
	Okay.
	Eight percent of political independence.
	Eight percent of political independence gave Congress positive marks.
	Congress.
	What about leadership?
	Congressional.
	Democratic Democratic Congress.
	And by the way, today Today, sir, uh read the New York Times.
	They have an entire article about how Harry Reid is losing control of the Senate.
	They're starting to get critical of the Democratic leadership, too.
	Thank you, Keith, for your call.
	People should prepare themselves, I think, a little more uh before they call the show.
	All right, now to the uh to the uh unbelievable situation with Hillary Clinton versus the uh Pentagon.
	On um May twenty third, Mrs. Clinton sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Gates and the same letter to the uh chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace at the time.
	And uh Mrs. Clinton, of course, sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where she voted for the war after not reading the intelligence assessment that had been given to her.
	The uh uh the presidential candidate wanted to know uh the precise plans that the Pentagon was putting together to withdraw from Iraq.
	Yesterday, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Eric Edelman, responded and uh responded publicly.
	Here's his response in writing, and then he did a press conference with it as well.
	Here's from his response in writing quote Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon, and Somalia.
	Such talk, he went on, such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks in order to achieve compromises on national reconciliation, amending the Iraqi constitution and other contentious issues.
	He went on to say, this is again Eric Edelman and Under Secretary of Defense, in response to Mrs. Clinton, he went on to say that a fear of a fast American departure, quote, exacerbates sectarian trends, unquote, in Iraqi politics.
	In other words, makes the Civil War worse.
	Philippe Rhines, a Senate spokesperson for Mrs. Clinton called uh Edelman's response, quote, outrageous and dangerous.
	And he said that the administration, quote, must immediately provide a redeployment plan that keeps our brave men and women safe as they leave Iraq.
	Um is right on the mark.
	And this is a a stinging rebuke uh, as uh the Associated Press called it, a stinging rebuke of uh Mrs. Clinton, because it is, I think patently and obviously true,
	take out all the names in this uh back and forth and simply ask yourself if you were the enemy of the United States, if you were Al Qaeda in Iraq, how would you react to a letter asking you to disclose your surrender procedures?
	Who will appear at the uh flag uh lowering ceremony at the embassy in Iraq, and uh who won't?
	And uh will the last uh helicopter out be carrying out the officials we've supported there who are obviously going to be killed in the aftermath of our uh rapid retreat uh or not.
	Now, if you were an enemy of the United States, if you were fighting in Iraq, if you were Al Qaeda, wouldn't even the the knowledge that Mrs. Clinton had sent that letter give you a whole lot of hope, a whole lot of encouragement, a whole lot of, my gosh, we're winning.
	My gosh, all we've got to do is hold on.
	We're getting killed by the bushel basket full out here in Iraq.
	We're being cleared out of onbar, we're being cleared out of all these provinces.
	Our uh our whole networks are being disrupted in this uh Bush surge, uh damn hymn.
	Uh we're we're just getting killed out here in the real world, but back there we're winning.
	Because Mrs. Clinton wants to know the timetable for and the details of the surrender.
	Stephen Copper Hill of Virginia is next.
	Steve, uh, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah, thanks, Roger.
	Yeah, I just want to uh reiterate what you said.
	Every single thing that Edelman had to say is demonstrably uh right on, particularly from a logic flow standpoint.
	It doesn't even say whether or not it's not even political in the sense that it's not talking about whether we we should withdraw or whether we will withdraw or who's on the right side of that issue.
	It's just simply talking about that that it does not make sense to make these details known.
	And the thing that amazes me is that in the response from from Clinton to call that statement dangerous.
	I mean they're just they're just using words for the sake of words.
	That means how can that be dangerous to Well and don't be surprised Stephen that's the that's the standard liberal playbook you uh you throw up a bunch of words hoping some stick even because you don't believe in logic, you don't believe in reason, so you use words as weapons even if they're the wrong words.
	It doesn't matter and of course punctuation doesn't matter and grammar doesn't matter either they've all gone to public school, uh Stephen So yes, the Pentagon and Edelman, a logical reasonable person had it right.
	Back after this Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh.
	Let's get back to this notion of um what's really going on in this war because from quite an unexpected source comes some pretty interesting information from someone who's there in Iraq.
	His name is John Burns.
	He's the Baghdad bureau chief of the New York Times.
	The New York Times bureau chief in Baghdad was on PBS's Charlie Rose show.
	And Burns starts out by saying, the one thing I think virtually all of us who work here or have worked here, meaning Baghdad, for any length of time agree, is that the levels of violence would eclipse by quite a long way the bloodshed we've seen to date if the U.S. combat forces withdraw.
	Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
	The New York Times Bureau chief believes that violence would go up and up a lot if the U.S. withdraws from Iraq.
	Rose is stunned he says can you give me more understanding of what you mean by that?
	In other words, here's his you know Charlie Rose he's sitting there going, oh my God, this guy works for the New York Times and he just said what?
	So he gives Burns a chance to withdraw that statement.
	Burns then replies listen to this quote Well I think quite simply the United States armed forces here and I find this to be very widely agreed among Iraqis that I know of all ethnic and sectarian backgrounds, the United States armed forces are a very important inhibitor against violence.
	I know it's argued by some people that they provoked the violence I simply don't believe that to be true.
	Hillary Clinton are you listening?
	The New York Times Baghdad Bureau chief believes that the sectarian violence the uh to the extent there is sectarian violence and there is the insurgency by the Al Qaeda outside foreign fighter forces that all of that would wreak a tremendous bigger havoc than it already is if we weren't there.
	We're not provoking that we're inhibiting it according to the New York Times Baghdad Bureau chief who probably will have his job for another oh 24 minutes I would think after making these statements he goes on.
	He goes on there's more quote I think it's a much larger truth that where American forces are present they are inhibiting sectarian violence and they are going after the people particularly Al Qaeda and the Shiite death squads who are provoking that violence remove them that is our forces, remove them or at least remove them quickly and it seems to me controversial as this may be in saying under the pres saying this under the present circumstances, while I know there's this agonizing debate going on in the United States about this, you have to weigh the price here.
	And the price he says would be very likely very, very high levels of violence John F. Burns, Baghdad Bureau chief New York Times on the Charlie Rose show July 17 Tim in Fort uh in Fort Bragg Tim welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
	Hi Roger Megados.
	Thank you.
	I wanted to take issue with uh definition of a word that's and it's really we oversimplified it by c putting this entire thing in the context of a civil war because it's not a civil war.
	And uh what I tried to explain to your call screen was that you know what happens is if one Sunni tribe member has a conflict with one Shia tribe member in Iraq and I've been there three times I just returned recently that You know, that's not the end all be all, and they are not at each other over ideological reasons.
	I mean, these people are in a feudal tribal system, the likes of which, you know, the Western world hasn't seen since uh the dark ages.
	And you know, their entire family structure is their identity.
	So to say that they are embrawled in a civil war is simply over or well, it is oversimplifying what the the context of the struggle that they are currently dealing with.
	I don't think.
	Well, and then Tim, what is Tim, what is the war we're we're in there?
	If you've been there three times, what is the war?
	Well what we're trying to do is we're trying to introduce uh, you know, we are trying to introduce the idea of democracy to uh to a group of people who have not been introduced to the ideas of locks Locke and Hobbes and Hume and these other guys who we uh based the foundation of our system on, and uh it's it's uh it's gonna take some time.
	It's gonna take some time.
	They're not gonna get it overnight, but they're not unintelligent people.
	They're extremely caring and and uh, you know, I think a lot of the members of the tribes that I've worked with in Iraq, and and I think they'll get it if we just give them time to understand democracy.
	It's not a i i it's not hard, it's not a stretch to think that they can get it.
	I sense a I sense Tim and you in your in your tone of voice, and first of all, thank you for your service to our country and to the people of Iraq.
	I sense in the in your tone of voice uh a frustration because you're reading the same headline I am in in the in the wild and wacky world of Washington, D.C. in our Congress, they're actually debating whether they want to have a final report on whether or not uh we've won this war in September or November.
	I take it your frustration is since we've been in uh Germany uh uh f since 1945, a period of sixty-two years, since we've been in South Korea since 1953, after the hostilities ended there, a period of whatever that is, uh fifty s uh four years.
	Uh a couple of months uh to demand uh progress and victory and and a demo d uh demo a democracy that could be transplanted from, say, Iowa uh uh in uh by November seems a little a bit of a stretch.
	Right.
	It it it absolutely is.
	It's not a i it's not a struggle that is unwinnable in the context that we have the democratic request for a military victory.
	We're not there anymore.
	We're not struggling against an armed force who has uh you know our ill intentions.
	It we're struggling against ideas.
	We're struggling against the notion that you know the tribe or the family is more important than supporting the government.
	And you know, we're not trying to build nationalism over there, but we are trying to give them, you know, a national identity.
	And uh Iraqis for the most part are receptive to it.
	They understand that you know what, their tribe is part of the larger community of Iraq, and to give them some breathing room and to allow them to accept these ideas and these notions is only going to be to our benefit.
	It's not uh, you know, it's it's not gonna be in our best interest to leave this unfinished, and we can only benefit from having a thriving working democracy in that region.
	That's uh we can only benefit from that.
	Tim, I appreciate uh your call.
	Thanks for your thoughts, and thanks again for your service.
	Tim and Fort Bragg.
	Uh ladies and gentlemen, the uh the opposite reaction from Eugene Robinson it uh in the Washington Post, founded WashingtonPost.com.
	The headline of his column is Bush's cognitive dissonance.
	Now, if you if you get that cognitive dissonance, in other words, uh not having the ability to uh face reality.
	Eugene Robinson is one of these liberals who is he just can't envision Bush being successful, or the United States prevailing, or the Iraqis uh developing as uh as we did with the Japanese and Germans and so forth, uh uh democracy out of dictatorships.
	So his uh column Starts this way.
	One hopes the leader of the free world hasn't really truly lost touch with objective reality, but one does have to wonder.
	And he goes on to describe a meeting between nine conservative pundits, as he calls them.
	Cato Byrne and uh let's see who else is in here.
	Michael Baron and uh Rich Lowry and David Brooks went to the White House and met with the President, and uh they all came back and wrote about it.
	And uh said that uh Michael Brown said uh the president's president was very energized.
	Uh Rich Lowry said the president was confident and upbeat as ever.
	Uh David Brooks, New York Times wrote, quote, far from being beleaguered, Bush was assertive and good humored.
	You know why, folks?
	Because he's not buying.
	He's not drinking the Kool-Aid, the Democratic Kool-Aid.
	He's not buying the nonsense that we're losing in Iraq, or we should lose in Iraq, or we ought to get out of Iraq.
	Uh he's not buying any of that.
	The president is saying, oh, look, we're gonna win and we have to win, and we're winning for the right reason, and we're winning for the people of Iraq as much as we are for us.
	Uh and and it's going to take some time, and I'm going to sit here.
	I got 18 months to go, by the way, from today, I think.
	18 months to go, and the the job is not uh uh been untough, the job has not been uh, you know, undaunting.
	Uh my hair's all turned gray, and I'm having a colonoscopy tomorrow.
	In fact, I'm going under the uh anaesthetic uh and uh and I'm really gonna give you liberals a scare.
	While I'm in the anaesthetic, uh the vice president, Mr. Cheney, is going to be president of the United States.
	I think he just did I just they announced that today from the White House, I think, just to give a dig uh to the Democrats that the worst nightmare has come true that uh Mr. Cheney is president of the United States.
	Uh so Eugene Robinson, uh please.
	Uh the only cognitive dissonance that I can detect out here uh on the left coast, when I view Washington, D.C., are idiot liberals like you, who simply don't know how important it is that we do win, don't know that we're making progress toward that goal, that our magnificent military is adapting to the changed circumstances of the challenges there.
	Yes, it has taken time, too much time.
	Yes, it is, you know, who's more impatient than any American?
	Uh yes, it has taken too much time, but yes, they are making that kind of progress.
	They are adapting to the tactics of the enemy, and they are defeating the enemy.
	The enemy's only whole card, the enemy's only hope of prevailing against the United States is the Democratic Party, the drive-by media, and you, Mr. Robinson.
	I'm Roger Hedgecock.
	In for Rush Limbaugh, back after this.
	Welcome back to the EIB Network.
	Roger Hedgecock filling in for rush, rush back on uh Monday, got this uh email apropos of our topic headline, U.S. control this uh from John C. He writes, uh headline, U.S. control 40% of Baghdad.
	Well, he says that beats 25% of LA, 10% of Detroit, and 12% of Atlanta.
	Um you know the headlines, speaking of headlines, Palestinian kills Palestinian and immediately it's Israel's fault.
	And of course the great Satan that supports them.
	If Darfur is uh a killing field uh uh and a and a place where Arabic Muslims are killing non-Arabic speaking Muslims uh by the bushel barrel fold, it's uh the fault of global warming, according to the Secretary General of the United Nations.
	If uh Daniel Pearl is beheaded, according to the movie A Mighty Heart, which was seen by at least 14 or 15 people, uh Angelina Jolie, according to that movie, uh Pearl was beheaded because the U.S. bombed Afghanistan.
	So I'm used to this line of reasoning, which is unreasoning, but the intensity of it is increasing.
	There is a uh in the House of Representatives, an out of Iraq caucus.
	They're out of something, but I don't think it's Iraq.
	An out of Iraq caucus.
	One of the leaders is Democrat Congresswoman Jan Shikowski of Illinois.
	She uh uh she has not uh looked at the matter of what happens after A withdrawal.
	After Hillary Clinton badgers the Pentagon into saying, yes, we're doing a contingency plan, and yes, uh we do know which the last helicopter uh to leave and how many people will be on it, or dangling from it.
	But what about the bloodbath that follows?
	This recollection of the bloodbath that followed the cut and run from the Democrat-controlled Congress of 1975, the bloodbath that followed in Southeast Asia, the two million Cambodians dead, the hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese in concentration camps called re-education camps.
	The John Kerry Rush had this uh yesterday.
	John Kerry was uh saying, well, they were there's many uh people very successful in Vietnam today who are in those re-education camps.
	Made it sound like summer camp, you know.
	Uh no, uh John, uh sorry.
	Uh add that to the list of lies you've told over the years about Vietnam.
	The withdrawal from Vietnam, the cut-and-run surrender by the Democrat Congress of failing to even support the South Vietnamese as we promised we would do if the North Vietnamese invaded with their uh irregular army, which they promised in the Paris Peace Accords they would not do, and then they did, and we did nothing about it, including not even giving the South Vietnamese any more ammo to defend themselves because the Democrats cut off the funding.
	The two million Cambodians who died as a consequence, and the hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese who died as a consequence, are a rebuke to these people.
	I'm sorry, I think that the deaths of those Cambodians is as important as any other death.
	And if you are really saying we want to save American lives, even if it means a couple of million Iraqis die in the violence that follows our uh hasty withdrawal.
	If that's acceptable to you, then you don't have a moral sense.
	It's not acceptable to me.
	So uh the Investors Business Daily calls out some of these people.
	Uh talking about this uh uh bloodbath, uh House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey uh says, well, that's uh the only hope for the this is a quote the only hope for the Iraqis is their own damn government.
	I'm so glad, Mr. Obi, that you weren't around in 1945.
	The Japanese took seven years to get their democracy up and running.
	I'm glad you weren't around in 1945.
	The Germans didn't have their first election until the late 40s, and weren't really an independent national government until 1952.
	Took seven years.
	The uh South Koreans uh to get up and running in a democracy took 15 years.
	They had a they had a dictatorship at first after the Korean War ended in an armistice.
	Are 34,000 troops today in South Korea ensure that democracy?
	What's the exit strategy there?
	Uh this business of Iraq is clearly not rational.
	And I'm sorry, it so clearly is a cognitive dissonance on the left associated with their hatred of George Bush.
	It is personal, it is flagrantly not in our best interest as a nation, and it is so insanely unreasonable, given what this country has done, the sacrifices we've made, the decades we've spent making democracies happen all over the world.
	The latest of which, by the way, doesn't even get a a mention in the drive-by media.
	Panama.
	Panama has the most thriving democracy among all of Central and South America right now.
	Because we went in, took George Norrie, uh George, not George, George Bush took uh Manuel Noriega out, and at the time the Liberals were just beside themselves, they were just apoplectic.
	We kidnapped a world leader, uh a man of the people.
	Uh we uh brought to justice a thug.
	The people of Panama have, and they're so pro-America down there, been there.
	Uh, they're so pro-America, they have elected for the second time a an opposition candidate to president.
	They are uh uh they are a success story that Mr. OB, of course, doesn't want you to know about.
	Now you know because you listen to the EIB network.
	I'm Roger Hitchcock, in for Rush Back after this.
	All right, holding over to the next uh hour, we'll have updates on the Carver Elementary uh School Madrasa, updates on the uh Ramos and Compian Border Patrol agents and their future, according to George Bush.
	And uh yes, uh Harry Byrd, I'm sorry, um Senator Byrd, is going to uh give us the latest on Michael Vick.

▲