All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 10, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:22
August 10, 2007, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I have heard it all.
This escaped convict that's on the loose somewhere out there.
This guy, his name is Richard McNair.
He mailed himself out of prison in an escape pod.
How the hell do you do that?
And then there's this poor homeless guy, this sex offender, and they're putting him in jail here because sex offenders have to register where they live and he doesn't live anywhere.
He's homeless.
So he's going back to judge Friday, folks.
Let's go.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Alrighty then, you know the drill.
You know all this.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
You can bring up whatever you want on Friday.
Question, comment.
You think something needs to be discussed that hasn't been?
Bring it up.
Monday through Thursday has to be subject I care about or I won't fly.
But on Friday, we cast that a fate to the wind.
The content of the program, when we go to phones, is basically up to you.
So again, the number 800-282-2882.
Email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
I want to comment a little further on Rush Limbaugh listener Steve Graham in Texas.
He has been fighting with his wife since 1999, and he moved out of the house, but he didn't leave the property.
He's living in his car.
He's 55, been living in his car parked in a backyard, the house that he and his wife, LaDonna Graham, own.
They've been having troubles for a lot of years.
He's been out of the house since about 2000.
His wife is still in the house.
He said, well, she's not going to support me not having a job and bumming around.
I'm trying my best to get a job and get up out of this rut, but his neighbors don't like it.
Say Graham plays the music loud.
He spouts obscenity-laced tirades, uses the yard as a toilet.
They're not amused by this.
And they've asked the city to prohibit such living arrangements.
Linda Sanders, whose backyard across the alley from Graham's property, said, we can't even enjoy our backyard because this guy's out there.
Turns out that he's a regular Rush Limbaugh listener.
He proudly admits that he gets better reception outside his car than he ever did in the house.
So I listen to Rush just about every day.
Now, when you hear this, when you hear this story, you think, my God, this guy's got to be a lunatic.
This guy's got to be have seriously something wrong.
But stop and think for a second, folks.
This guy may have it all figured out.
He is away from his wife.
He has his own little place where no one bothers him other than the neighbors now and then.
And he didn't have to give up the house and the car in a divorce.
Still got the house, still has the car, but he's away from his wife.
I mean, this guy may be showing, you know, usually, you know, my advice to people who say they're going to get married is don't do it.
Just go out, find somebody you hate and buy our house and save 10, 15, 20 years.
This guy has got it all figured out.
I'm not surprised this guy is a limb ball listener.
I mean, this guy is, in his own way, he's extremely, extremely creative.
This is interesting.
The president charged yesterday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues.
At his news conference yesterday, Bush said that Iran had been warned of unspecified consequences if it continued its alleged support for anti-American forces in Iraq.
Our ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, had conveyed the warnings in meetings with his Iranian counterpart in Baghdad.
The president was not specific.
A State Department official refused to elaborate on the warning.
Behind the scenes, however, the president's top aides have been engaged in an intensive internal debate over how to respond to the nuclear program in Iran and its support for Shiite Muslim groups in Iraq.
Look, I don't know what the president's going to do, but I want to tell you something here, folks.
I cannot see, and I'm going way out on a limb here.
I cannot see this president leaving office with a nuclear-capable Iran.
I just can't see it.
Not after the sincerity and seriousness in which he has devoted his presidency to the preservation of this country's national security.
I just can't see it.
And I think the president well knows.
There are a lot of similarities here.
We've talked about this on the program to what the Iranian mullahs are saying and what Ahmadinezad is saying to what Hitler was doing back in the 30s.
And it's amazing how history is repeating itself.
Back in the 30s, ah, nobody's not going to do any of that.
I mean, nobody's going to take that.
They didn't take him seriously.
Even when he started his march, didn't take him seriously.
Didn't want to face it.
You know, the world was just coming out of World War I.
Those memories were still lingeringly fresh.
Nobody wanted to rev back up into that kind of mode.
Here in this country, we have whatever percentage of the population has forgotten about 9-11.
We have the Democrat Party aligned with the drive-by media doing everything they can to convince people in this country there is no external threat to the United States because they're going to get rid of Bush someday.
When we get rid of Bush, the world's going to love us again, including the Islamofascists.
But I talked to Norman Podoritz, who's got a book coming out on what he calls the Fourth or World War IV that we're in now with Islamofascists.
And he's trying to sound a clarion call.
Book comes out on 9-11, by the way.
He's spoke to him and interviewed him for the newsletter next issue, September issue, and he is convinced that Iran is something that's going to have to be dealt with sooner rather than later.
And if we wait until they're nuclear-tipped, then what do you do?
Then the whole recipe for dealing with it changes.
And he said to me in our interview: you know, after World War II, and when we learned of all the atrocities in World War II, baby boomers grew up and they started learning about what had happened in World War II and the rise of Hitler and the Neville Chamberlain incident and so forth.
They started learning more about it in school.
There were frequent movies made, World War II movies, and in fact, to this day, movies still made about the Holocaust.
And 50 years after it was over, 40 years after World War II, there were young people looking back and saying to people in Europe, how could you let this happen?
How could you have let this happen?
And Norman Pedoritz said to me that his great fear is that in another 20 or 30 or 40, 50 years from now, if Iran is allowed to nuclear tip, people are going to be looking back and say, how could you have let it happen?
Meaning leaders.
How could you have let it happen?
How could you have let this happen?
And that's where I answer the question.
I don't think George W. Bush is a president who's going to let it happen.
So when you get a headline, president warns Iran, you might say, yeah, or else, well, else what?
Stop aiding rebels or else.
Or else what?
Well, there is an else.
I'm certain of this, not because of anything I spoke to the, you know, I was up there a week ago last night, and I was in two and a half hours.
And I want to assure you that none of what I'm saying right now are his words.
He didn't discuss anything militarily about Iran in any way, shape, manner, or form.
This is just my own assessment.
But I know that he doesn't want to be one of the people.
30 years from now that people say, why didn't you do something about that?
You know, this headline, crackdown on illegal workers, appears imminent.
Today, the Bush administration unveiled the new workplace regulations.
Cherdoff went out there and the Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez press conference on border security and immigration administrative reforms.
This is a huge crackdown, and it's being focused on the employers.
And of course, we talked about it all week.
The employer is a little bit upset about this.
And they're trying to say, oh, your food prices are going to go up, and this price is going to go up, and that price is going to go up and so forth and so on, which is what they always say to us.
But you know what's interesting about this to me?
It was just, you go back into mid-June, not that long ago, mid-June, and in the dark of night behind closed doors, a group of Republican and Democrat senators, accompanied by representatives of the group La Raza, crafted the comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act of 2007, called Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Control Whatever.
They hoped to ram that bill through with no amendments.
They hoped to ram it through with no hearings.
McCain said we have to take the usual politics out of this, meaning debate.
They were doing everything they could to sneak that bill by us, and we all know what happened.
It bombed.
It went down in flames.
Their attempt to sneak this thing by us blew up right in their faces.
Republicans and Democrats alike.
Now, all of a sudden, we are getting serious on border security.
We're getting serious on cracking down on the illegals where they work.
This is a 180, a 180, folks, from where our political leaders were back in June and July.
Remember, they wanted to get it done before the July 4th recess.
I mean, this may be bigger than a 180.
Back then, they wanted to ram this through, and they heard you.
What else can explain from the administration on down, getting tough, cracking down?
This appears to have some real substance to it.
I'll tell you what it is.
And it's actually something that you should feel pretty good about.
It's election season.
They knew they were trying to ram something down our throats that we had no stomach for and no desire for.
And if they could have, they would have.
They tried it.
It didn't work.
They heard you.
And now look what's happening going into the election.
Now that it's time to get your votes, not just presidential, but the Senate and House elections too.
Those are just over a year away now.
They know.
And when they want your votes, they will listen to you.
When they want your votes, they'll do what they think it is you want done.
But that time expires shortly after elections.
That's why they have to be kept honest.
But I think they got the message on this.
Because this, remember, I remember after the election, or after the bill went down, the initial reaction from all these people, we're going to rue this day.
You are going to rue this day.
Lindsey Gramnesty was how this is the biggest mistake.
Now, look at it.
Here's the thing.
We are going to rule this, if what they wanted to do was so great and so important and so good for the country, why have they caved on something that important to them?
Why did they cave?
Quick time out.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
We'll get to your phone.
Oh, you got to hear the Moyer soundbites.
So we'll get to Bill Moyer soundbites next, and then your phone calls.
Hey, Mr. Snirdley, I need you to look something up for me when you get a chance, when you get the board full of callers out there.
Would you look up on the Democrats' debate schedule and find out when their straight debate is?
They had the gay debate last night.
I want to know when the straight debates, I'm sure it's scheduled out there.
And I also see if you can find what is the Democrat Party's official position on civil unions for heterosexuals.
Said, it's got to be at the Democrat National Committee website.
So if you could find that, it's not pressing.
It's a way to get a full board before you go do it.
All right, Bill Moyers.
Yesterday in Washington at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
What?
There are more oxymorons in that title than I can count.
The Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication annual convention, Bill Moyers gave the keynote speech.
Here is a portion of his remarks attacking your host.
Journalism is under fire today from ideologues.
The journalist whose reporting dares to challenge their party line becomes a candidate for Guntanamo.
Rush Limbaugh, notably, railed against journalists for their reporting on the torture at Abu Ghraib, which he dismissed as a little sport for soldiers under stress.
He told his audience, quote, this is no different from what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation.
You ever heard of people who need to blow off some steam?
The Limbaugh line became a drumbeat in the right-wing echo chamber from which so many millions of Americans now get their news.
So I wasn't surprised to read that nationwide survey by the Chicago Tribune in which half of the respondents said there should have been some kind of press restraint on reporting about the prison abuse.
This is unbelievable.
In the first place, he doesn't have a sense of humor, but none of them on the left do.
They cannot laugh.
Number two, I'm reminded of the poll that the Pew people just put out showing that the American people think that a vast majority, by the way, of the drive-by media is inaccurate, is biased, and doesn't think or care much about them.
And this, when you hear this kind of elitism from Bill Moyers, when I saw the first pictures that Abu Grab with the Islamo fascists in a pyramid, and I said, it looks like a fraternity hazing stunt.
My reaction to this is because I knew what the people reporting on this, Mr. Moyers, were trying to do.
You were trying to destroy the U.S. military.
You were trying to destroy its credibility.
You were trying to harm the war effort.
You were doing everything you could to turn public opinion against the war.
And you took the occasion of what happened here and you tried to paint, tar, and feather the entire U.S. military As being just like those renegades inside Abu Ghraib.
What went on in there does not justify calling for U.S. defeat.
What went on in there does not call does not justify calling for U.S. withdrawal.
It does not justify painting the U.S. military as a bunch of barbarians.
It doesn't justify anything that you in the media did.
The thing that you've got to understand that you never will understand, the American people love winners.
The American people do not want to lose, especially in a fight.
The American people have respect for the men and women in the armed forces like any other group.
They understand that there are going to be some bad apples and some renegades in there, but they also understand that these people are under enormous stress.
They're under enormous tension.
They are putting their lives on the line every day.
And the effort that people like Moyers and the rest of the drive-by media made was to take that incident and trump up a bunch of stuff that wasn't true, like a Koran being flushed down a toilet at Club Gitmo.
Thank you, Mike Isikoff, turned out to be not true.
Never got a retraction, never got so much as an apology for that.
But people know this is inaccurate stuff.
It's based in bias.
The American people do not hate the institutions and traditions that have made this country great, and they resent the efforts of a bunch of elitists to make them try to hate the U.S. military.
They don't want to hate the U.S. military like the left in this country does.
And when the traditions and institutions that I value, that I know have made this country great, come under attack, you are damn right.
I'm going to defend them, and I'm going to defend the people in them.
I'm going to defend those institutions.
I'm not going to defend the people who may have engaged in torture.
I'm not going to defend the people who acted outside the bounds, but I'm not going to tar and feather the whole U.S. military with it.
And I'm not going to beat up my whole country.
And I'm not going to run around trying to get everybody else to hate my country because of something as innocuous as that in the big picture.
There was no sense of proportion reporting on that.
You were making us out to be worse than the enemy we face.
There weren't any beheadings in there.
There weren't any electrocutions.
There weren't any of the absolute subhuman horrors that our enemy perpetrates against us and others.
Pardon the civils today, folks.
I got a runny nose and I can't stop it in the middle of a rant here.
I am not going to hit the cough button and blow the nose.
I apologize for sniffing here.
I know it's very unprofessional, but I am such a professional.
I may redefine sniffing as a broadcast specialist art.
Before long, other hosts will be copying it.
Anyway, we don't have time.
How many more Moyers?
I've got two more, but I don't have time to get to either of them here before the break comes up.
We all know what Abu Ghraib was about for you.
It was Mr. Moyers and the rest of you.
Oh, that was proof positive of you that this country is worthless.
That is proof positive to you that this country is the problem in the world.
And the American people, Mr. Moyers, who in greater numbers disrespect you and people in your profession, understand that the United States is the solution to the world's problems.
All right, let's get back to the Bill Moyers soundbites.
He's just finished attacking me for attacking journalists.
He's speaking at the Association for Education and Journalism and Mass Communication annual convention yesterday, giving a keynote speech.
Here is the second of our three bites.
Journalists and others who tried to challenge the administration's fallacious evidence for invading Iraq found the Patriot police on their tail.
Whatever Kool-Aid he's brewing for the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch could make a singular contribution to journalism simply by calling Fox News from the Republican fog machine and giving it a mandate to report reality instead of attacking those who do.
I don't know what I'm beginning to think this is not going to be a fair fight.
I don't think he's, you know, the cylinders aren't all clicking here.
This is just, this is derangement.
This is utter derangement.
Journalists and others who tried to challenge the administration's fallacious evidence for invading Iraq found the Patriot police on their trail.
Mr. Moyers, the most offensive thing about this comment is that I am the chief of the Patriot Police, not Rupert Murdoch.
I am.
And then next, this is just, this makes you cry, folks.
It just makes you cry because nobody in journalism making any money.
I heard this week from a talented freelance reporter in his 30s who made the media beat a specialty.
He told me, the problem in journalism isn't that there are no jobs.
As a freelancer in broadcasting, I don't have the profile in print to land big magazine assignments, the only kind that pay well.
I'm at the top of NPR's freelance scale, he said.
But NPR pays freelancers dismally.
I make less than $1,000 for a piece that takes four solid days to report and produce.
Some people who consider their craft, our craft, a calling are working off the clock to ensure that the facts are properly checked.
Yeah, and they're failing miserably.
They are failing miserably.
They're not doing the factory, but it's so bad $1,000 for four days' work.
If this is such a great calling, who cares about money?
And by the way, Mr. Moyers, did you tell the audience how much PBS has paid you over the years?
$6 to $7 million a year in one year, I think.
Do you tell them this?
How about your son?
How much money he's getting?
These crocodile tears.
Let me tell you something about Bill Moyers, folks.
This is from a Bob Novak column back in December, December 1st of 2005.
This is a column about Judge Lawrence Silberman, who was a great man.
And Silberman had made some comments about J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, which Silberman had investigated decades ago.
Let me read you an excerpt from the Novak piece.
Even worse than dirt collection, Silberman continued, was Hoover's offering of bureau files to presidents.
He exempted only Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower from this use of FBI files, but Hoover said Lyndon Johnson was the most demanding of FBI files.
When President Johnson's aide, Walter Jenkins was arrested for homosexual conduct in a men's room during the 64 campaign, Silberman said that LBJ aide Bill Moyers directed Hoover to find similar conduct on Barry Goldwater's staff.
He's a hack, folks.
He's not a journalist and civil libertarian.
He is a Democrat liberal hack.
So he asks Hoover to find similar conduct on Barry Goldwater's staff.
Moyers' memo to the FBI was in one of the files, Silberman said.
An outraged Moyers telephoned Silberman to assert that the memo was phony.
And then Silberman, who is a gentleman, he was taken aback and he offered an investigation to publicly exonerate Moyers.
And there was a pause on the line.
And then Moyers said to Silberman, I was very young.
How will I explain this to my children?
He admitted it.
He admitted calling J. Edgar Hoover for dirt on somebody in Goldwater's campaign.
Silberman's account of our conversation is at odds with mine, Moyers said later to Novak when asked for comment.
Now, the incident is doubly embarrassing for the agency since it follows a case in August last year in which it published an image by a freelancer of Israeli bombings in Lebanon that had been dramatized using photo manipulation with the addition of smoke rising from allegedly burning buildings.
After that gaffe, Reuters promised to tighten up its control on material putting out the same.
Wait, I'm reading a different page.
I thought there's that's I fucked up something weird.
That's the next item on the stack.
I picked up two pages of my mistake.
So anyway, Moyers demanding that J. Edgar Hoover find the kind of dirt that just happened to be discovered about one of LBJ's guys and admitted it.
And then after Silverman's goes, I don't think that's my recollection of that conversation is not quite this.
He is a liberal Democrat hack hiding under the under the under the guise of being a journalist and a civil libertarian.
Here's the Reuters thing.
And again, this goes back to the poll from Pew.
Vast majorities of the American people think they lie, that they're inaccurate, that they have bias, and they don't care about their consumers.
Reuters has been forced to admit that footage it released last week purportedly showing Russian submersibles on the seabed of the North Pole actually came from the movie Titanic.
The images were reproduced around the world, including by the UK Guardian and the Guardian Unlimited, alongside the story of Russia planting its flag below the North Pole on Thursday last week.
But it has now emerged that the footage actually showed two Finnish-made Mirs submersibles that were employed on location filming at the scene of the wreck of the Titanic in the North Atlantic some 10 years ago.
This footage was used in sequences in the movie Titanic in 1997.
The mistake was revealed only after a 13-year-old Finnish schoolboy contacted a local newspaper to tell them that the images looked identical to those that he saw in the movie Titanic.
Reuters has now apologized for the error, has made changes to its video material on the expedition with captions denoting the various origins of the file footage.
What do you mean, apologize?
This is exactly the kind of stuff that's been going on.
They did it on purpose.
How do you cannot convince me that somebody at Reuters actually thought that that was video footage of a bunch of Russians on the floor of the North Pole planting a flag?
They had to know where it was.
They had to know where to go get it.
And they tried to pass it off as something that it wasn't.
And not one of their newspapers caught it.
Not one of their member websites caught it.
A 13-year-old kid caught it.
I'm surprised Reuters didn't say, this kid doesn't know journalism.
Tell a kid to shut up and go back to school.
Because that generally is the drive-by editor.
All right, look, it's Openline Friday, and I know that we haven't taken the usual number of calls.
I'm going to change that now.
We go back to Janet in, what is it?
Really?
Is that really Godly Illinois?
Yes, it is.
Well, Janet, welcome to the program.
Thank you.
I am so excited about talking to you, and I'm so nervous.
I wanted to talk about a different aspect of Obama's candidacy.
No one has touched on his very far-left stance on social issues such as abortion.
And there was an incident here in Illinois about, I think about seven years ago at Christ Hospital, a suburban hospital to Chicago, where babies who were born alive after a botched abortion were left to die in linen closets.
And a nurse exposed it, and she was, of course, fired, and there were demonstrations.
And it led to the Illinois legislature to Formulate the Infants Born Alive Act, which stated that infants who were born alive as a result of a botched abortion could not be left to die.
And Barack Obama.
May I stop you right there?
Yes.
Don't lose your train of thought.
Okay.
What does it say about the state of Illinois and the country in general when such a law is required?
Yes, I know.
It is.
It's very sad.
A baby born alive and a botched abortion can't be killed.
Right.
I know.
What did Obama do?
He voted against that act.
He went on record and voted against a law to protect those children.
Well, I'm sure he had a reason.
What was it?
You know, I could not for the life of me tell you.
I'm sure it was to protect the right of the woman to choose.
I don't have that.
You know, it is that, but I'll tell you what it is.
There is something corrupting about the Democrat Party.
Do you know that both Bill Clinton and Al Gore were pro-lifers?
No idea.
Yeah, they were.
When you seek national office in the Democrat Party, one of the first things you have to do is cash in that chip.
And you have to pay homage to the sacrament of the religion of that party, which is abortion.
And so you don't stand a prayer of getting a nomination in the Democrat Party if you do anything that would make any abortion harder to accomplish or to get done.
So that's Obama, clear to me.
He had national aspirations at the time, and he did not want to do anything that would anger the nags and the militant feminists and the general leftists in the party.
Right.
I think that should be publicly known during this campaign, how far far left.
This stuff won't come.
You know, I'm going to tell you something.
Aside from the most informed audience in media, which is you and everybody else listening to this program, most people really start paying attention to this stuff after Thanksgiving when the primary give you a great example.
This time in 2000, or was it 2004?
Yep, this time in 2004, who was all the hullabaloo on the Democrat side about?
Was it John Kerry?
It was Howard Dean.
It was Howard Dean.
He was raising all his money on it.
He's collecting more money than anybody ever knew existed on the internet.
Well, he's setting new examples for everybody.
Howard Dean here everywhere he went, frontrunner.
And then they had this little thing called the Hawkeye Calker that actually started voting, and he was nowhere.
John Kerry comes out of there as the guy wins it, and that's what launched Kerry because, ooh, he's the guy.
Well, look at the surprise.
Because everybody had assumed because the, you know, the wonks and the pundits that pay attention to all this stuff and believe the polls that are out there right now.
Howard Dean was exactly where Hillary Clinton is.
And in fundraising, maybe not as much money, but presumptive nominee, just a matter of time.
And most people didn't start paying attention to Howard Dean and find out how weird he was until late in the year, late November, early December.
So this stuff about Obama, I don't know that Democrats are going to bring it out about it.
If he happens to get the nomination or if he's chosen to be VEEP, you wait.
This stuff will all come out.
It's just waiting, but you don't want to bring it out now.
People forget about it.
Timing and this kind of stuff is crucial.
Back to the phones we go on Open Line Friday.
This is Bob in Callahan, Florida.
Thank you for calling, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Hey, Rush, how are you?
Good, sir.
Great to talk to you.
Hey, listen, you know, I've been wanting to call for a while.
I'm kind of nervous, so just bear with me here.
I will do it.
This thing with Bill Moyers, it goes a lot deeper than Bill Moyers.
But my problem is that every time that I see you on the air on mainstream media or anywhere you're quoted on the mainstream media, you're misquoted.
And the reason why I know this is because I was telling your screener that I was in a conference in New York City.
And on one of the monitors there, they didn't have the sound up, but I saw your face and I saw Michael J. Fox's name on there.
And so when I heard the news, I heard what they were talking about.
And then immediately I went to your website.
And here's the deal: is that any of these media people can go to your website if they're blind, if they're deaf, they can go to your website and they can get exactly what you said, word for word.
You don't leave anything out of your website on your daily shows.
And even if you go back to your archives, you can listen to exactly what you said.
And there is never any reason for them to take you out of context.
And these people are supposed to be professional reporters.
I just don't understand it.
If little old me can walk to my computer within 10 minutes and find out exactly what you said, why isn't that they can?
I mean, I know the answer to that.
Once again, I'm reminded of the Pew Poll that shows vast majorities of the American people think that there is bias, inaccuracy, and in the drive-by media.
And the drive-by media really doesn't care about the people that are their customers, consumers that they're reporting for, working for.
In this case, you are absolutely right.
We have marveled at this ourselves for years.
How difficult is it?
Especially the drive-bys don't listen to this.
Well, they probably do, but they'd never admit it.
But most of them probably don't.
You know, there's one website where they go to find out what was happening on this program, what was said.
Yeah, I know.
Media Matters for America.
It's a Hillary Clinton front group funded by George Soros.
And its purpose is to take things out of context here and misreport and cast aspersions.
The Drive-By Media chooses a website to find out what I said, but it's not mine.
Yeah, but any reasonable person, I mean, even see, now I've been a subscriber to your website.
I know it defies the beginning.
It defies explanation.
Other than they don't want me to be reported upon accurately because they are trying to harm my credibility.
They cannot beat people like me in the arena of ideas, Bob.
Yeah, but they can't do that with somebody like me who's a regular listener.
I'm not saying they succeed at it, but they've been trying for 19 years to discredit me in the eyes of people like you.
Yeah, but even the people that disagree with you, even the people that don't you think a reasonable person that disagrees with you even can go to the free site?
I'm not sure about your free site.
You would be stunned at how many don't.
You would be stunned at how many friends Democrats refuse.
They don't want to know.
They live in a cocoon.
They've got a worldview.
I have a whole family.
I have a whole family who does this.
They have a worldview.
They live in a cocoon.
The image of conservatives is ABCD and E. Image of Limbaugh, F-G-H-I-J-K.
And anything that challenges that, they don't want to expose themselves to.
Yeah, but isn't this part of the bigger picture?
If they're going to lie about you When you know that amen, if they're going to run phony photos during the Hezbo-Israeli war, as they did, Photoshop photos, and they're running phony photos about a Russian mission to the North Pole, if they're not going to report on people like me or President Bush or anybody else accurately, then why would you trust anything else that they?
Well, look at this headline.
This is from our buddies over at News.
Newsmax, we got this, but it's an AP story.
GOP makes inroads with Hispanics.
Now, now, wait, that can't possibly be because all the experts told us that we were alienating the Hispanic vote with the rigid, racist, separatist, nativist position we had on immigration.
▲
Export Selection