All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 6, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:15
August 6, 2007, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, I know, I know.
Hang on, late arriving show prep.
Let's start with Audio Soundbites 14 and go in order from there.
Greetings, my friends, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, serving humanity simply by being here.
Simply by showing up the EIB network on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
You can't take a picture that way because your reflection is going to be in a glass.
I mean, you can do it.
Might work because that glass is angled a little bit.
So you might snirdly's in there taking pictures of me with his iPhone.
Here's the phone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
We have more health news here.
Moderate exercise, like walking, may be as good or better than intense workouts when it comes to certain heart health measures, according to new research from, I don't even know where it's from.
It's on the second page of this, and I threw it.
It doesn't matter.
In a study of 240 overweight middle-aged adults, researchers found that moderate exercise, but not vigorous activity, improved participants' levels of blood fats called triglycerides.
Meanwhile, improvements in good HDL cholesterol seemed to depend on how much study participants exercised, not how intensely.
What's more, researchers found both benefits were sustained when exercisers took a vacation from working out.
I've known this even though I haven't known it.
I have known this all my life, even though I haven't known it.
So I'm going to start changing the way I play golf.
I'm no longer going to walk the course.
Walking from the cart to my ball will be plenty of exercise based on this latest bit of health news.
Let's listen to some of the sound bites from the Republican presidential debate yesterday, scheduled by ABC.
It was moderated by George Steffi Stephanopoulos.
Took place someplace in Iowa.
David Yepson of the Des Moines Register was also on the panel.
Nobody saw it.
Nobody watches Stephanopoulos' show anyway.
It's 10.30 on a Sunday morning.
I mean, if you're going to schedule a debate at 10.30 on a Sunday morning, don't you think it would be best to schedule a Democrats then?
I mean, look, from the standpoint, if you're ABC and you want an audience, don't you know that the audience for this debate is going to be in church?
The liberal audience wouldn't be.
Separation, church, and state.
When you got the Democrat candidates debating, can't go to church.
Separation, church, and state.
But they also put this thing up there on Sunday morning precisely is the conflict here because they want an audience, but they weren't going to get one, and they know it.
And they can bury the debate.
Nobody saw it.
Not in any really great numbers.
First question from Stephanopoulos was on abortion.
Is the first question in Democrat debates ever about abortion?
Not lately.
After going back and forth on Sam Brownback's ad attacking Mitt Romney for his abortion position, Romney gets a little bit angry about this.
I was pro-choice, and I am pro-life.
And I'm tired of a pretty truthful position.
That is truthful.
Governor, YouTube, and look for the governor what he says himself.
Governor Romney, you can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994.
I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice.
I've said that time and time again.
I changed my position when I was governor and when I faced an issue of life or death, when the first time a bill came to my desk that related to the life of an unborn child, I came down to the side of life.
And I put that in the Boston Globe and explained why.
And I get tired of people who are holier than thou because they've been pro-life longer than I have.
All right, now we're debating here.
We actually had a debate where it was Brownback and Romney that were arguing about supposedly the flip-flop position on abortion of Mitt Romney.
Now, the drive-bys did like one aspect of this debate, and it was Ron Paul.
Stephanopoulos said, Congressman Ron Paul, what would be your strategy in Iraq should you be elected president?
Just come home.
We just marched in.
We can just found out.
We went in there illegally.
We did not declare war.
It's lasting way too long.
We didn't declare war in Korea or Vietnam.
The wars were never really ended.
We lose those wars.
We're losing this one.
We shouldn't be there.
We ought to just come home.
I knew that was going to get the load of attention this morning from the drive-bys, and it did.
This is primarily what they thought.
They were having deep analysis and roundtable discussions about Ron Paul, who has no chance to win the Republican nomination.
And they noted that at the drive-bys, they were just, will this influence, because there's a lot of applause in that room.
Will this influence the other Republican candidates and so forth?
Here's a great line.
Romney, probably the line of the debate.
When it comes to, they asked people about Obama and his nuke strategy, Pakistan, which you talk about flip-flopping.
Obama's all over the place on this.
Here's Mitt Romney.
I agree.
The Brookings Institution report over the weekend was a very encouraging indication that we're making progress.
That's great news.
At the same time, you look at that Democratic debate.
I had to laugh at what I saw Barack Obama do.
I mean, in one week, he went from saying he's going to sit down for tea with our enemies, but then he's going to bomb our allies.
It's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove.
We're going to get to that.
Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week.
All right.
Now, David Yepson of the Detroit, sorry, the Des Moines Register says, Mayor Giuliani, the Republican dogma against taxes now precluding the ability of you and your party to come up with the revenues that the country needs to fix its bridges.
Now, this goes back to this piece from Robin Blunder from the Columbus dispatch that I shared with you in the last hour.
All of this, this bridge collapsed.
The Libs can't wait.
Got to raise taxes, got to raise taxes.
Never mind the fact more money is pouring into the Treasury than ever before.
Here's another drive-buyer ignorant of real world life and now just simply takes the template that exists in the narrow minds of these drive-bys and asks Giuliani about the Republican dogma, the dogma against taxes.
Is that precluding the ability of you and your party to come up with the revenues the country needs to fix?
The premise here is so flawed that it angers me.
We've got more money than we know what to do with.
Hell, folks, 55 or 57% of the federal budget is spent on entitlements.
The highway bill is loaded with all kinds of money.
This is state operation anyway in this bridge.
Anyway, here's Rudy's answer.
David, there's an assumption in your question that is not necessarily correct.
Sort of the Democratic liberal assumption.
I need money.
I raise taxes.
Then what are you going to cut?
What do you cut?
Wait, wait, wait.
Let me explain it for a second.
The way to do it sometimes is to reduce taxes and raise more money.
I ran a city with 759 bridges, probably the most used bridges in the nation, some of the most used in the world.
I was able to acquire more money to fund capital programs.
I reduced the number of poor bridges from 5% to 1.7%.
I was able to raise more money to fix those bridges by lowering taxes.
I lowered income taxes by 25%.
I was collecting 40% more from the lower income tax than from the higher income tax.
There is a liberal Democratic assumption that if you raise taxes, you raise money.
We should put more money into our infrastructure.
We should have a good program for doing it.
But the knee-jerk, liberal, Democratic reaction, raise taxes to get money, very often is a very big mistake.
All right, right on, right on, right on, right on.
I haven't heard this much from the Republicans in this debate, but this is crucial, this idea that it's been disproved so many times.
It's maddening.
You're going to sit here and listen to this mantra, this little cliché continue from the left.
I think the thing about Governor Rudy, Mayor Giuliani, talking to David Yepson, I'm not so sure that these guys like Yepson actually think they're going to raise more money.
I think they're into punishment.
They're into the punishment of people who unfairly have so much more than the rest of the little people.
And they just got to be gotten even with.
And of course, when you're talking about the government, and these guys in the drive-bys, I mean, they look at government with as much love and adoration as any Democrat candidate does.
And of course, government can never, never do it less.
So if you are going to cut taxes, according to Yepson and the Libs, why what spending are you going to cut?
Because obviously, if you cut taxes, you're going to reduce revenue.
No, it doesn't work that way.
And we're living it right now.
We lived it in the 80s.
We are living it right now.
And here are reporters who are charged with a responsibility to educate themselves, to be inform more than others.
It's their job.
And they live in a bubble.
And whatever doesn't compute with their worldview never finds its way inside their cranium to start circulating amongst the little gray cells in there.
Can't stand the conflict.
Next question from Stephanopoulos.
What's your biggest mistake?
Here's another question that Democrats candidates are never asked.
What is your biggest mistake, Mayor Giuliani?
To have a description of my mistakes in 30 seconds?
Defining mistake, man.
Just one defining mistake.
George.
Your father is a priest.
I'm going to explain it to your father, not to you, okay?
All right.
Radon, right on, right on.
We'll be back after this.
Let me ask you a question, ladies and gentlemen, as the man who can read the stitches on the fastball.
You ever notice that all of these drive-by reporters never say to the Democrats, oh, you know, Senator Clinton, you're always proposing raising taxes to fix that or to do this.
Yet the problem is never solved.
Why is that?
We have had $11 trillion of wealth transferred, redistributed in this country since the inception of the great society, the war on poverty.
Have we solved it?
No.
Even after, was it 64, 33, 43 years, 43, is that right?
I don't do math well in my head.
It's 2007, 1964.
Whatever it is, it's a hell of a long time.
And we still have a Democrat presidential candidate running for office on wiping out poverty because we're not doing enough.
You think any reporter will ever say, Britt girl, your party has stood for the increase in taxes and you have raised taxes every time you've been in the White House.
Has it fixed the problem?
They will never ask that question, will they?
Okay, back to the audio soundbites from the debate.
Now, we have one of these situations where you're listening to Soundbite 10.
You think Giuliani's doing really well.
And a lot of people who watch thought that Mitt Romney came out standing really well, too.
And Frank once had his focus group in there, and the guy that shined in the focus group was Mike Huckabee, the governor of Arkansas.
Here's a question from Staff Anopolis.
Governor Huckabee, what would you bring to the Oval Office?
I would put the very same frame on my wall in the White House I did as governor for 10 and a half years.
It's a frame that has a photo, and underneath the photo, it says our boss.
My picture was never in that frame in 10 and a half years.
Every week or so, we put the picture of some ordinary Arkansas citizen.
And I told our staff, let's never forget who the real boss is.
I hope every day I'd never forget I work for those people.
They don't work for me.
I'd like to be the kind of president that's more concerned about the people on Main Street, not just the folks on Wall Street.
And we need that kind of Republican running, that kind of Republican winning.
I'd never forget who the boss really, really is.
Okay, well, you can understand how the viewers watching that.
I mean, the guy running for president tells them they're going to be the boss.
I'm going to work so hard for you.
I'm going to cut your taxes.
I feel your pain.
No attack ever fed a hungry child.
So it doesn't surprise me that that would have an impact on viewers.
One more from Huckabee.
We've got a little interaction going on here.
Governor Huckabee, we got the polls of this debate.
Congressman Paul says, come home.
Congressman Hunter says we got to stay.
Is there a middle ground in this debate on Iraq?
Certainly there's a middle ground, George, and the middle ground is that we win this war and we do it with honor.
We don't just stay indefinitely.
We put some pressure, just like we have been the last week with Secretary Rice and Secretary Gates, on the Saudis.
The second thing we do for our own national security is end our dependence on foreign oil and let's not play around and say 30 years.
Let's get it done.
Let's get it done now.
And let's make sure that we don't have to depend upon their oil for our future energy needs.
If we can feed ourselves, if we can fuel ourselves, if we can manufacture the weapons to fight for ourselves, we're a free people.
If we can't do those three things, we're not free.
All right.
So that's Mike Huckabee, the governor of Arkansas.
By the way, speaking of the war, USA Today Susan Page is reporting President Bush is making headway in arguing that the increase in U.S. troops in Iraq, the surge, is showing military progress.
In the latest USA Today Gallup poll taken Friday through yesterday, the proportion of those who said the additional troops are making the situation better went to 31%, up from 22% a month ago.
Those who said it was not making much difference dropped to 41% from 51%.
About the same number said it was making things worse 24% now, 25% a month ago.
So there's progress out there in public opinion polls on whether or not the surge is working.
One more soundbite.
It's actually from last Friday, WHO 1040 News Talk Des Moines, our affiliate, our EIB blowtorch there.
Host Jan Michelson is interviewing Barack Obama.
No, is interviewing Romney.
And they had this exchange about Romney being a Mormon.
I mean, I don't like coming on the air and having you go after my church and me and my friends.
I agree with my church.
I know.
That's right.
But I'm not running as a Mormon.
And I get a little tired of coming at a show like yours and having it all about Mormons.
See, I don't mind being about that.
Yeah, I do.
I agree with the ethics of your church, for Pete's sake.
So do I.
So we're getting the tail end of this.
But Romney had spent some minutes before giving a pretty nuanced and detailed explanation of things.
And I think he was frustrated.
Thought the host didn't understand him.
Didn't understand the point that he was making.
Here's Rocky in Palm Beach, Florida.
Rocky, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Rosh, how are you doing, buddy?
Yeah, pretty good.
Hi, how are you doing?
I'm Rocky Bubble of the music industry.
I'm the fighter for the poor.
The real life poor.
You're calling the wrong guy because I'm not poor.
Well, I know you're rich, but I need a good rehab center for my wife.
Can you help me get into one?
I'm just serious.
Hazel Hazelton jumped up to 30,000 son of Betty Ford.
Rocky, I'm heading to Jim.
It's up to $30,000 to do $30,000 to do what?
For rehab.
What about it?
That's how much it costs today.
Oh, it's more than that if you go to different places.
I know, but can you help me get my wife into rehab?
No.
Okay, well, I need to tell you there's a national health care problem in America.
Yeah?
The five presidents in a row, all five of them have never ever, from Hillary to Bro Brock, what do you say?
I can't remember his first name.
He's going to be the president, by the way, I tell you.
None of them are addressing national health care.
It's a shame.
People that are adults, like Rocky, Rocky, who is it that needs a drug rehab?
Maybe you, not your wife.
You're saying Democrats are not pushing national health care?
No.
No, not at all.
They're tickling your ears, they are.
They're lip-syncing.
National health care, you want your neighbors to pay for your health care.
Yes, sir.
And you want your neighbors to pay for your drug rehab or your wife's drug rehab.
Well, I don't want to get no low-class drug rehab where they get put you in for two months and they don't get the issue done.
Well, let me tell you this: President Bush is a recovering alcoholic, right?
No, not a recovering alcoholic at all.
He's a recovering alcoholic.
No.
Ped Kennedy, recovering alcoholic.
No.
Well, you said President Bush might be Ted Kennedy.
I don't believe so.
That would be news to lots of people out there, Rocky.
Okay, well, I work in Palm Beach.
And basically, I just let you know that Jeb Bush's daughter, she had a problem.
I want to know who the best counselors are in Palm Beach.
Rocky, you do need help.
I know.
Do you live in Palm Beach or you work in Palm Beach?
I did work in Palm Beach.
I work for the Top Plastics let this guy across the bridge.
You know, here in Palm Beach, very, very tightly controlled who can get over those bridges here.
See, Rocky, I'd love to be able to help, but, you know, if you're going to offer help, you have to be confident that it's going to have results.
And nothing I heard in the conversation made me confident that there would be results here.
Anyway, we've got to take a brief timeout, ladies and gentlemen.
Sit tight.
We'll be right back with much more here on the EIB network.
A man running the country.
You know it.
And I know it.
Bad news for birdcages today, folks.
The New York Times, you hear about this.
They have cut back the width of their paper to 12 inches.
They've lopped an inch and a half off of this off the newspaper.
So there will be less room for lib news unless they add pages on a given day because of the importance of news stories.
Chris in San Jose, California.
I'm glad you waited.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hey, Megan Dittles, Rush.
Thank you.
On the designer baby issue, there was a sci-fi movie released not too long ago called Gattaca.
And what the parents would do is the doctor would tell them these undesirable gene traits and they could just remove them from the embryo before it was before conception.
And what that created was a class division where you had these flawless people, and then the rest of the population was like you and me, and they called them degenerate.
So it may not increase abortions, but it may, you know, if art imit if life imitates art, then it might be a movie worth looking at.
It's called Gattaca.
Well, I think I've seen Gattaca.
I think it rings a bell.
I may not have been able to get all the way through it, but who starred in this movie?
Do you remember?
Ethan Hawk, Ulma Thurman, Ernst Bardnine, and that tall English fellow.
Okay, then I saw it.
Yes, I saw it.
I think I have it in my K-Scape system.
But I did see it.
It's a dangerous thing.
That's a science fiction movie.
And of course, there's an element here of reality that they base it on.
It's true of all science fiction.
But it would be dangerous to extrapolate real life circumstances in movies.
A lot of people do it.
But I disagree.
I think it would enhance abortions at this stage.
Now, if we go down the line here, a number of years, I don't know how many, they go in there and actually tinker with the embryo without aborting it.
I'm just telling you, I think the whole thing is scary.
We're getting into areas that we don't belong.
There are questions, ladies and gentlemen, that human beings will always be able to ask, but we will never ever get the answers, not in this life, to some of those questions.
I don't care what we do.
I don't care how smart we think we get.
There are certain things that we are just not going to know.
And I understand the quest for knowledge and wanting to know these things.
But the day that human beings are able to take a little Petri dish and squirt something in it and from nothing have life ain't ever going to happen.
You can dream it all you want, but it ain't going to happen.
Liz in Columbus, Ohio.
You're next in the EIB network.
Hello.
Mr. Rush Limbaugh.
Hey, hubba, hubba.
I am so excited I'm talking to you.
I've listened to you ever since I was breathing on the face of the earth.
Well, I mean, that's you.
You have been successfully indoctrinated here.
Oh, my.
Well, you know, yeah, you have.
Educated, educated.
I was being funny.
Okay, here's the deal.
I am absolutely overwhelmed, incensed.
Couldn't even, I couldn't even sleep Friday night.
I was so upset over what happened on the House floor Thursday night.
Oh, you mean where they pulled the vote they lost?
Rush, rush.
Well, I don't know why you.
You have got to like go on the mountaintop and scream at what happened.
Liz, Liz, don't sweat it.
The House is going to investigate itself, and they will get to the bottom of this.
Well, I just called Pat T-Berry's office, and I talked to one of his, you know, one of his main guys, and he said that the Democrats, when you take a vote to the House, it has to go through two committees.
They're not even doing that now.
Oh, no.
Well, it's not that you have to, but there is a normal procedure.
And if they want to ram something through, the Senate did this with the original immigration bill.
Back room, dark of night, nobody knowing what was going on, abandon all the usual committee hearings with experts on both sides testifying about the impact, the consequences, so forth.
The House is doing this.
They got caught.
And it's, by the way, it is on video.
You can plainly see on video they stole the vote.
I don't know why they need to bother to take the time to investigate themselves.
Didn't I see also that Pelosi handed down a ruling that they're going to go to paper ballots from now on?
They're going to scrub this electronics.
They're going to go to paper ballots.
I don't know if that stood, or if she just suggested it.
But in fact, there's a funny story out today.
The former Speaker of the House, Thomas Holey, warned the Democrats before the November elections.
If you guys win, do not, even if you think you need to do payback, do not start doing this strong arm stuff.
It's going to come back to bite you.
And he was speaking from actual experience because one of the reasons Tom Foley lost, and I'll never forget, he was the Speaker of the House, the state of Washington.
He lost his reelection bid to a virtual unknown.
And I remember the drive-by media that night when the election returns are coming in the next day were destroyed.
They couldn't understand why.
How could the people of the state of Washington so savagely throw out the most powerful man in the House, their representative?
And I'll tell you what it was.
It was the assault weapons ban, if you've forgotten, the assault weapons ban, and he kept the vote open beyond the agreed to time limit.
And of course, when you're talking about the assault weapons ban, you're talking about the Second Amendment, you're talking about the NRA, you're talking about a lot of Americans who were paying attention, even in the state of Washington.
He was gone.
There were a lot of other things, too, but that was the primary thing.
And he warned them.
He said, don't, don't do it.
He was coming and speaking here from actual experience.
And they're doing it.
Their approval rating is at 3%.
It's not a pretty picture.
And it's not, you know, the drive-bys are going to be surprised by this if this stuff has a negative impact on the Democrats in the next elections because the drive-bys ignore all this.
The drive-bys don't report any of this.
The original incident, but they don't follow it up because they don't think anything's going to happen because they think their puff pieces and their support's going to get the Democrats re-elected.
And then when, like, couldn't believe it, Foley lost.
And they couldn't believe Kerry lost.
They were just beside themselves.
They live in a different world, too, where reality oftentimes doesn't permeate.
Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday criticized President Bush for not spending enough on law enforcement and said the cops were invisible to him.
She was at a meeting of the National Association of Police Organizations, and she promised more spending on police programs, including an anti-drug initiative and bulletproof vest program.
She said, honestly, it's like the police officers of our country, along with your families who stand with you every single day in the dangerous and difficult work you do, you are invisible to the president.
Now, she chastised what she was doing here, was chastising President Bush for a 2008 budget that she said would further cut the community-oriented police services program.
Now, does anybody remember 100,000 new cops?
This is her husband's program, which was a sham from the get-go.
The way that the 100,000 new cops, or whatever the number was, the way this program worked was the federal government would pay for these communities to hire new police officers.
And then after each year, the federal government's share of what they paid, the salaries of these new hires, would decline, would decrease.
Finally, after a few years, and we've reached the years, the states or the local communities have to pick up the salaries of the 100,000 cops who were hired and never ended up being 100,000 cops in the first place.
So now the program is supposed to be expired.
It has run its course.
The program was created under President Clinton to put more officers on the street.
The original program expired seven years ago, but Congress has kept funding it.
And this is a great example.
We don't have enough money for infrastructure, says David Yepson.
What are you going to do, Rudy?
Where are you going to cut taxes cut spending if you're not going to raise taxes and so forth to fix the bridges?
We've got more money than we know what to do with.
The COPS program expired seven years ago, and we have continued to fund it, ladies and gentlemen.
The House of Representatives last May voted to give more money to the program.
Democrats have complained it was cut.
It was not cut.
It was supposed to be expired.
It had an end date, just like the ships with a P children's health insurance program.
This was not to be extended.
So here's Hillary complaining that President Bush doesn't spend enough money on police and law enforcement.
Says the police are invisible to Bush.
And of course, as with all socialists, I mean, what is her solution?
Spend more money.
So let's see if this makes any sense.
Hillary gets upset because the 2008 budget cuts funding to the community-oriented police service program.
Of course, the program created by her husband.
The program expired seven years ago.
Congress has continued to fund it.
Isn't it funny how that works?
Incremental, hardly noticed control of the feds over the state government.
The program expired seven years ago, and they've kept paying it.
Redundancy after redundancy after redundancy.
So Hillary's upset because the president has cut funding for a program that her husband said would cease to exist seven years ago.
It just, I mean, it literally makes no sense.
Quick time out here.
We'll be back.
Well, I mean, it makes sense from the liberal perspective, not in a common sense way.
However, now documented to be almost always right 98.7% of the time, according to the latest opinion auditing firm, Rush Limbaugh, serving humanity and having more fun than anybody should be allowed to have here on the EIB network.
This is an amazing story.
This is from a buddy, Ron Fournier, the Associated Press.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is running for president on her husband's White House record.
And it is a strategy that cuts both ways.
Now, I have to tell you something.
If there were a Republican equivalent here and a female wife of a former president, Republican were running with such a paper-thin record of competence that she had to run on her husband's record, she'd never hear the end of it.
And the feminists would be out there bellyaching and so forth.
But here, with Mrs. Clinton running on her husband's White House record, it's a strategy.
It's a strategy that cuts both ways.
The New York senator and her husband, the former President Bill Clinton, it says here, constantly remind voters of the nation's economic prosperity of the 90s compared to like what today and also of his record on the environment, college aid, and family medical leave.
Press releases from the campaign often include sentences that start under the Clinton administration.
Last month in Iowa, while campaigning with his wife, Hillary's husband said, yeah, I mean, yesterday's news is pretty good.
But yesterday's, meaning his eight years in the White House, a San Francisco blogger made it very clear that yesterday's news isn't always easy to explain today.
A San Francisco blogger made it clear to Senator Clinton during the yearly, whatever, the Kook Fringe Convention, that he asked, or when he asked, whether she would support or repeal four major pieces of legislation enacted during the Clinton administration.
The Defensive Marriage Act, the Telecommunications Act, NAFTA, and welfare reform.
All four laws are unpopular with liberal voters who historically dominate Democrat primaries and caucuses.
Everything's unhappy with these people or unpopular.
Everything's unpopular.
In fact, I just, I read on one of these Kook blogs that some Kaz kid, one of these Kook fringe at the convention, he would rather die in a terrorist attack than for Valerie Plame's name to have been outed.
People are sick.
They really are just genuinely sick and deranged.
Anyway, the San Francisco man, according to Ron Fournier, had put Clinton on the spot.
So she hedged and she dodged in a complicated set of answers to explain herself.
The Defensive Marriage Act, which denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages and gave states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages, served a very important purpose, Hillary said.
The law staved off Republican efforts to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage, she said.
An argument seems to consign her husband's support of the law to the necessary evil category.
At any rate, it's by the way, she also has asked a question where Ron Fournier said, you know, it's rare to hear Hillary Clinton admit ignorance on a policy issue, but doing so came in handy as she fobbed off the questions on Gore about he's an actor.
So now it was a brilliant strategy to act stupid.
It was a brilliant strategy to be uninformed.
It was a brilliant strategy to be ignorant on a policy question.
Folks, if you ever had any doubts that the drive-by media work in concert to maintain and build these people's images and get them elected, this story alone, and I've got another one in here that's going to accomplish the same.
There's actually a story in this stack.
I have a story in this stack.
The son idiot, I think it's Reuters.
Yes, it is.
It's Reuters.
Talking in a marveling and admiring way of all the accomplishments of the Democrat Congress.
There aren't any accomplishments.
The minimum wage is it?
But this is a piece designed to muddle the minds of people who read Reuters.
It's prop them uptime.
Anyway, so the bottom line is that Hillary has a paper-thin resume.
And what it means is that Bill's record's really all she's got.
The Clinton name is all.
I've been making this point.
If her name weren't Clinton, would she even be considered for this on the basis of anything substantive that she has accomplished or achieved?
The answer is no.
Now, she needs to be called on it, but and this blogger, you know, maybe called on it, called on her some hard questions and so forth.
But the drive-bys praise her ignorance as a strategy and say that the strategy of having no resume of her own and then running on her husband's record, well, it's a strategy that cuts both ways.
It might work.
We hope it works.
But it might not.
If it doesn't work, we'll be there to help her make it work.
Hey, here's a story for you, Mr. Snerdley.
This is from Fox Television Station, Arizona.
Scottsdale woman, severely malnourished.
Her three children was sentenced to 30 years in prison.
According to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, this is from last Thursday.
Camus Parker convicted on three counts of child abuse, 10 years for each count.
30 years in prison, entirely appropriate for a person who almost starved to death three defenseless children.
We will strongly oppose any attempt to reduce the sentence, said the state attorney there.
Her three-year-old weighed 12 pounds.
Her nine-year-old weighed 29 pounds.
Her 11-year-old weighed 36 pounds.
She had them on a strict vegan diet.
This is one of the more heartbreaking cases of child abuse this office has seen in recent times, said the attorney Andrew Thomas.
We're relieved the children survived, are now doing well.
They just got back from McDonald's, but we take, I just threw that in, but we take great issue with comments made by the judge in this case that he may ask the state board of clemency to reduce the defendant's prison sentence.
Because after all, they won't have their mother.
Of course, if they have their mother, they might die.
So it's like the Menendez case.
What do we do?
▲
Export Selection