All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 10, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:27
September 10, 2007, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Amidst billowing clouds of fragrant aromatic first- and second-hand premium cigar smoke, I am Rush Limboy, and I am back at the EIB Southern Command Broadcast Excellence all week long, ladies and gentlemen.
Great to be with you.
And I know that you think it's great to be with us.
So, it's great.
And I'm great.
You're great in your own ways.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
And the email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
Well, all of Washington is a buzz-bizz because there's a new Osama tape coming, ladies and gentlemen.
The new Osama tape will be greeted eagerly by the drive-by media and the allies of Osama bin Laden, the Democrat Party in the United States, the American left.
And this tape supposedly will have a testament, the final testament of one of the 19 hijackers on 9-11.
You may think, ladies and gentlemen, that you know the actual translation of the Osama tape from last week, which, you know, we got preliminary reports on this, how he was, it was basically mouthing the talking points of the Democrat Party.
It's worse than you think.
You have that standing by, Mike.
We have, we did this ourselves, folks.
We went to our own Arab interpreters.
We have the official transcript of the relevant portions of Osama's tape from last week.
The following is an official transcript of the Osama bin Laden video.
Democrats of America, the world is waiting for you to end this war.
Praise Allah.
But you Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning.
Soros has kept me informed of your inept attempts to wield power in your newly gained majorities in the House and Senate.
Have the power to end this, but do nothing.
Harry Reid, you make me long for the good old days of Tom Dash.
May his name be cursed forever.
And though Pelosi is pretty hot for an infidel, what am I thinking?
I have been in this cave for far too long.
You know, I do all I can from here, but how can we win if you don't hold up your end of the bargain?
Don't forget, we're a team.
We need each other to win the game, except for Kerry, that is.
He's a loser.
Don't you remember?
He was a disaster.
We might as well put Mirtha in charge.
I tire of Cold Goat and Flatbread.
Hurry up already.
The following points may help you in your appeal to the American people.
In regards to the mortgage mess, tell the people that in Islam, we have no high-interest home mortgage loans.
In fact, we do not charge interest in Islam and therefore have nothing decent to live in.
So it's a toss-up, I guess.
We also have no taxes either.
But we can still agree to disagree on that one.
Yes, Al Gore is right.
The world is getting warmer by the minute.
So I must switch locations at this time.
Thank you for your gift of the Grecian formula.
Yours always.
Osama Osama.
You, ladies and gentlemen, can trust us at the EIB network to get it right.
Also, Washington is a buzz.
The drive-by media, even though they know what he's going to say, they're abuzz with the testimony on Capitol Hill of General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker.
And of course, New York Times yesterday ran an ad purchased by moveon.org in which Senator Petraeus was referred, or General Petraeus referred to as General Betraeus.
It's today it's running.
It's today it's okay.
Then I became aware of it last night.
I thought it was in yesterday's paper.
Regardless, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to have a stirring monologue coming up on all of this, but I'm going to first precede it with relevant soundbites from Democrats on television over the weekend.
But before I even get to that, I want to make a point.
Logic says that last week was the moment for Al-Qaeda to stage a slaughter in Iraq in advance of this report being released and announced today to scare the American people and the American left into forcing a withdrawal and a defeat.
They didn't do this.
You know, the old TED offensive, we've been hearing that they're going to do their TED Offensive, and it's going to precede this report.
It didn't happen.
They may be weaker.
Al-Qaeda may be weaker than we actually think.
And the polls that are out today might give comfort to the anti-war amateurs and the cut-and-run demagogues in Congress.
But the wise men in the Democrat Party, if there are any, and the wise men on the left have to be a tad sick today.
The internals of the polls that have been announced today are very encouraging for the president and for the mission.
Now, the New York Times asked a question, is the latest troop surge making the situation in Iraq better or worse?
Two weeks ago, 19% said better.
Today, 35% said better.
So 35% as a standalone number, I mean, nothing to cheer about, but 35% up from 19% in two weeks is good news for the troops, good news for our leaders, a potential nightmare for the schemers on the left.
Let me explain why this is the case.
For the first time in years, the good news is leaking out.
The surge is working.
And it's leaking out not just to you, the great Americans in this audience, but it's leaking out to America at large.
The surge is working.
New York Times has a poll says the American people want the military to solve this problem and come up with a strategy for victory, not the president or Congress or Congress or Congress or Congress.
The left has cause to worry, I think.
I mean, really, really worry.
They don't want poll questions like, should we win or should we quit?
So those questions are not asked.
The left does want questions like, should we leave now?
Should we leave in a few months or a year?
So those are the questions that were asked as if the war is a stay at a hotel.
Should we stay?
Should we check out?
But it's a war, and we are starting to win.
And our left is starting to lose.
Now, they may not know it yet because of their arrogance and haughtiness.
And if you don't know what haughty means, just think John Kerry, who served in Vietnam.
That's haughty, arrogant, elitism, smarter than everybody else in the room when you're actually a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance, a blithering idiot.
I'm going to take a brief time out here, folks.
We're going to come back.
I'm going to start with the audio soundbites, followed by a stirring monologue on all this.
You don't want to miss it.
We'll be back after this, so sit tight.
Hi, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh here on the cutting edge of societal evolution already having more fun than a human being.
Should be allowed to have one quick correction.
The New York Times poll.
I misread it earlier.
Not 19% in May.
It was 29%.
The surge is working at 29% up to 35.
So the 35 number is what's relevant.
Still up six points.
And it is a standalone number.
It doesn't mean much, but it's up.
Despite all the efforts of the drive-bys and the Democrat Party to depress the American people's mood about it, there is progress being shown.
Now, I want to go to the audio soundbites, and I'm just going to play these bang-bang-bang here with not much commentary because I have a stirring monologue to follow.
First, in his press conference on Friday, Harry Reid called General Petraeus a liar.
He's made a number of statements over the years that have not proven to be factual.
I have every belief that this good man, General Petraeus, will give us what he feels is the right thing to do in this report.
That is now not his report.
It's President Bush's report.
You know, it's tough to play these things and not comment.
I mean, we're dealing with treason here.
We're literally dealing with the Democrat Party aligned with its kook fundraisers and supporters to ensure defeat, to attack a man they all voted to confirm.
Now, perhaps they might say in private that they voted to confirm Petraeus because they thought he was going to preside over defeat.
Who the hell knows?
But regardless, the situation on the ground is what it is, and it's improving.
And here, these guys have gone so far over the cliff they can't come back.
They cannot get on the side of the American people being victorious.
They cannot join us, nor the military, in victory.
They have to now tar and feather everybody involved.
Who are they?
What recommends Harry Reid as a great military expert and strategist?
Same thing with Dianne Feinstein.
Same thing with Dick Durbin.
Who are these people?
On the basis of what is their assessment accepted over the experts?
The left relies on experts all the time, and their experts are always wrong, from measuring the economy to other things.
Speaking of, I don't want to get sidetracked.
But there's a new hurricane forecast out now.
La Nina is back, and that explains why.
Never mind.
I don't want to get soundtracked.
Let's go to Dick Durbin.
This is last Friday in Washington, the Center for National Policy.
By carefully manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report will try to persuade us that violence in Iraq is decreasing and the surge is working.
Even if the figures are right, the conclusion's wrong.
Really?
This is the way Evan Thomas of Newsweek analyzed the Duke La Crosse rape case.
Well, he said, yeah, the narrative was right, but the facts were not.
What do you mean?
The facts may be right, but the conclusion is wrong.
The figures are right, but the conclusion is wrong.
Dick Durbin manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report.
Let's go back to August 8th, 2007.
CNN's American Morning, the host said to Senator Durbin, these two scholars from Brookings, they were in Iraq recently.
They wrote an editorial.
The New York Times, they said, yes, there's progress.
The progress is significant enough that U.S. troops should stay on the ground at least till the beginning of 2008.
Do you see any progress that they were talking about, Senator Durbin?
As we are seeing military progress, the political scene is very discouraging.
We have seen this al-Maliki government, which was once branded a government of national unity, coming apart.
But hold on, let me back you up there.
You said you did see military progress?
Well, what we find is that the surge has troops going into areas where for four and a half years we have not seen our military in action.
And naturally, they are routing out the al-Qaeda in those areas.
That's a good thing.
But there is no evidence of the government of Iraq in these areas.
There are no Iraqi policemen, no Iraqi soldiers.
I understand all of that, but Senator Durbin, everybody in the Democratic Party is saying that the surge has failed.
Practically a month ago, just a little over a month ago, Durbin went on television and said it's working.
Friday, he comes out and says that Petraeus is a liar manipulating the statistics.
Let's not forget who Dick Durbin is.
Here is a portion of his remarks on the floor of the Senate, June 14th, 2005.
If I read this to you and didn't tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have happened by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime, Paul Potter, others, that had no concern for human beings.
Sadly, that's not the case.
This was the action of Americans in treatment of their own prisoners.
Let me ask you a question here, folks.
Why in the hell should we listen to this man and what he says or any of these Democrats?
I mean, Dick Durbin's all over the place, nothing more than a partisan political hack here, which is fine.
I mean, he's a Democrat and he's a liberal.
But this is about U.S. national security, and this is about the truth.
And this is about people like Durbin trying to convince as many Americans as possible that the truth isn't the truth.
And it's going to bite them.
It's going to come back to haunt them.
Now we move on to the haughty John Kerry last Wednesday on the floor of the Senate, where he decided he had to agree with Senator Schemer about the war.
It's really important that people in quick visits to Iraq don't get sidetracked by what's really at stake here.
Anbar province is Sunni violence by al-Qaeda against, it was originally al-Qaeda.
And the Sunni sheikhs decided they were tired of seeing their daughters raped and their sons beheaded and violence in their villages.
So they took advantage of this moment and they've decided to cooperate with us in order to protect Sunni within their essentially Sunni province.
Now let's go listen to Schumer from last Wednesday on the floor of the Senate, the thing that got everybody all worked up because you just heard John Kerry essentially agree with him.
Let me be clear.
The violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge.
The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al-Qaeda said to these tribes, we have to fight al-Qaeda ourselves.
It wasn't that the surge brought peace here.
It was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here.
Well, isn't this great?
So we got Kerry and we've got Schumer on the same side that is defeat.
The American military is incompetent.
Senator Biden also on Petraeus saying that he is dead wrong.
The surge didn't work.
He was on Meet the Press yesterday.
And Tim Russert said, General Petraeus said in a letter to his troops, we've not had the political reconciliation we thought we would have at this time, been much slower, but there's some hope.
Then he added this, my sense is we've achieved tactical momentum, and we have wrested the initiative from our enemies in a number of areas of Iraq.
We are insured a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball.
We're driving down the field.
Is that what you expect him to say tomorrow?
I think he's dead flat wrong.
The fact of the matter is that there is that this idea of the security gains we made have had no impact on the underlying sectarian dynamic.
None.
None whatsoever.
All right.
Look, I'm sure that you are as enraged as I listening to all this.
So let's turn the tables a little bit here, folks.
Did Joe Biden ever serve in the military?
Why then does his word trump that of General Petraeus even before General Petraeus has testified?
Calling a man a liar before he even testifies under oath.
That's extreme.
Did Diane Feinstein ever serve in the military?
Why then does her word mean more than General Petraeus's?
Exactly which active service commanders are advising the Democrats.
Not the discredited retired Clinton generals who said nothing before 9-11 and who said nothing when Clinton was slashing the military.
Where do the Democrats go for their expertise?
I want to know.
Since their assertions are being treated as fact and their assertions are being used to undermine a report that has yet to be released, who are their experts?
I really want to know what military people they're talking to.
And maybe with their hubris, they're talking to no military people, and I wouldn't doubt it.
This is purely political on their part.
The Democrats are given a free ride on this.
And we need to take this a step further here, folks.
The Democrats getting this free ride, just assume that Joe Biden, whose only job has been elected office, first on the Wilmington City Council, then to the Senate, is a top expert in the military.
Why is this assumption made?
Well, we know why.
Because the drive-by media is a bunch of Democrats and liberals, as is Senator Biden.
And they are allied and united in their sheer irrational hatred for George W. Bush and their desire to destroy this presidency in the hopes that it will launch them to presidential power.
It's assumed, by the way, that Senator Feinstein, who was on the San Francisco City Council and then mayor and then senator, and who has reaped millions from this war thanks to her husband's business dealings, is an expert on the military.
How does this happen?
Are they automatically anointed experts?
All they have to do is come out and say before a general testifies he's a liar, and the drive-bys go, ha, ha, ha, all right, all right, exactly what we wanted to hear.
Where are the investigative journalists on this?
Where are the reporters trying to find out just what the hell is motivating and paying for this action of the Democrat Party?
These are citizen legislators.
They are not military experts.
They may know how to get elected to office, but they don't know how to fight a war.
And that, my friends, I can assure you of.
They haven't the slightest idea how to fight one, nor how to win one.
Thank you, and welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
You got to hear a couple more audio soundbites here from John Kerry.
First up, on this week, in fact, they're both from this week with George Stephanopoulos.
Question in the first bite here.
Do you trust General Petraeus to deliver a credible and honest report?
None of us should be fooled.
Not the American people, not you in the media, not us in Congress.
We should not be fooled into this tactical success debate.
That's not what this is about.
Front page of the New York Times today, an important story about the real tensions in the streets and what is really happening there.
I think that they're courting disaster.
I think there is sort of an illusion being put forward, and you can take a tactical success and misread it as we did in Vietnam.
Yeah, with you in charge, with you in charge of taking over U.S. military operations, a man who's done his best to undermine his comrades in Vietnam.
This frosts me, folks.
This whole series of soundbites I have played for you today have steam coming out both of my ear cavities.
And it just make, I can't describe for you how outraged I am in civil language.
And so I shall not go further.
You get the point.
Next question to the haughty John Kerry.
Let me turn to that Osama bin Laden tape.
I want to show it.
He seemed to be taunting Democrats for not stopping the war.
He said the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning.
On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions of dollars to continue the killing in the war there.
Now, is it true that there are more troops in Iraq today than when Democrats were elected last November to control Congress?
Is that a failure?
Now, listen, he is being asked to respond to Osama bin Laden.
He is being asked to respond to bin Laden's claim that Democrats have failed.
Do you understand this?
A United States senator is being asked to explain himself to Osama bin Laden.
And by God, if Kerry doesn't do it.
We don't have 60 votes, George.
No, I don't think it's a failure.
We have changed the policy.
We've already changed direction.
We've had these reevaluations taking place.
We've had an accountability that never existed in the last years.
And obviously, that's what election's about in 2008 will be about.
Osama bin Laden's tape is testimony to one thing, the failure of this administration to capture and kill him, the failure at Tora Bora and the failure subsequently.
I'll tell you, this is just amazing, getting defensive about what bin Laden says.
Well, we don't have 60 votes out there.
George, we're doing everything we can.
It's Bush's fault because we haven't captured bin Laden or anybody of any import.
Just unbelievable.
Here we have citizen legislators, not military experts.
They know how to get elected to office.
They know how to fight a war.
And yet they're being treated as these strategic geniuses out there by the drive-by media, military experts and such, when in fact they're simply politicians putting their party and the 2008 election before all else.
Why is it that neither their expertise or their motives are questioned, folks?
These people get free reign on television.
I don't care what the show is.
And their announcements, their statements are considered to be from on high.
They are never, ever questioned.
They're never made to prove it, to explain it.
Petraeus, they say, is a Bush mouthpiece in so many words.
What are they?
What the hell are they?
Who are they?
What are their motives?
We hear none of this.
Who's pulling their strings?
We know who it is.
Daily Cause, moveon.org, George Soros, Osama bin Laden is pulling their strings.
Norman Shu is pulling their strings.
Oprah Winfrey is pulling their strings.
This is unbelievable, lady, who it is that we need to know is behind them.
They can sit there and say that Petraeus is a Bush puppet.
Well, they're nothing more than puppets.
These Democrats, they huddle with moveon.org.
They hollow with Daily Cause and the other hard-left anti-war activists.
Why isn't this repeated in the drive-by media?
Why is their interest in the number of meetings and phone conferences that go on between the Democrat leadership and these groups not reported?
Why is it not reported, folks?
Why isn't there any kind of interest in George Soros as there was in Richard Scaffe?
It's not enough here to say that the media are liberal, by the way, folks.
We know that.
And we know we're rooting for the Democrats and they're rooting for defeat.
We know all of that.
But we have to demand some facts here.
We have to demand an honest debate, regardless of whether the Democrats and media want one.
We have to demand it so the public knows what's actually going on here.
This is outrageous.
It makes me wish I were on that Senate committee right there that is going to interview Petraeus and get his testimony along with Ryan Crocker because I know what's going to happen here.
The Democrats are going to stand up and they're going to ask all these pointed, tough questions and there will be innuendo behind the questions.
I would love to be a Republican on this committee today and stand up and excoriate the Democrats for what they're doing and everybody go, you can't do that.
The sense of the House, you can't criticize them.
Fine, I quit, but I'm not quitting before I have to say what I have to say.
And I would say this is the most shameful moment in my life as an American to watch the dissent of a once great party fall into basically an ally with enemies of this country and have elected officials carry that agenda in front of decent, honest men, proclaim them as liars before they even testify up on Capitol Hill.
Who's going to question Joe Biden?
Who's going to question Dianne Feinstein and Dick Durbin, all the other liberal Democrats about their positions on Iraq over the last 12 months?
They have been all over the board.
Some of them are saying the surge is working and then they come back and say, Petraeus is a liar.
Who in the world, ladies and gentlemen, is going to point out to them that they sought to derail the surge, which has been working?
Who is going to make them pay?
Who is going to hold them accountable for their investment of defeat?
Who is going to point out to them that they sought to slow bleed the military over the last several months by their efforts to deny them funding?
Who is going to point out that they've done their best to destroy the morale of the U.S. military over the same timeframe?
Who is going to point out to them that they have used media appearances after media appearance to smear the troops?
They have sought to demoralize the military and the public.
Who's going to point out to them, ladies and gentlemen, their beloved Bill Clinton and them have so undermined the military during eight years of his presidency, it's taken years just to rebuild it in the middle of a war?
And who is going to point out to them that they plotted before the release of this report to have other reports issued in hopes of watering down whatever Petraeus has to say?
And who's going to point out to them that they have no plan for winning in Iraq or winning the war on terrorism?
Well, I'm doing it, folks, because the drive-by media will not hold them accountable.
The drive-by media will not remind them of their contradictions.
The drive-by media will not ask them, why do you want to lose?
The drive-by media will not say, why are you actively seeking the defeat of your country in the war on terror?
The drive-bys will not ask them this, nor any of the other questions I have just posed, but they damn well need to be asked.
Let me be clear about this, ladies and gentlemen.
Liberals and the media do not get to determine what reality is.
They don't get to define it.
It is what it is.
A phrase that I live by today.
Reality is what it is.
And they don't get to demand all the answers.
We get to demand answers from them as well.
Nobody is demanding answers from them.
And it's about time somebody did.
And we get to hold them to account as well.
And whether the drive-by media does it or not, we will continue to do so here at the EIB network.
Here's another example.
Norman Shu.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a huge scandal.
It reaches into the depths of the Democrat establishment.
It touches very deeply their presidential frontrunner to the core.
And the broadcast media have done everything possible to downplay it or ignore it.
The same media that focused on what shoes Fred Thompson was wearing in Iowa.
Hey, they were Gucci's.
I wear them too.
Way to go, Fred.
Screw you, elitists.
What the hell are you drinking and eating behind closed doors?
And what the hell kind of diamonds and jewelry and shoes are you wearing?
Phony baloney plastic banana, good time rock and roller rear-end orifices.
You people have, I've just, I've had it.
I have literally had it with these people.
They're hunting down every Fred Thompson client, every Rudy Giuliani client ever represented in hopes of finding an embarrassing association.
They've got to look no further than down the end of their own noses to find Norman Shu.
And there is ample evidence that this is standard practice.
This is the way business is conducted with the Clintons, going all the way back to Clinton's days as governor in Arkansas.
And yet, where, my friends, are the investigative reporters?
Where is our old buddy Brian Ross who couldn't wait to unload the details on Mark Foley?
Where is Brian Ross?
Why don't we know where Norman Shu's money came from?
A guy was bankrupt just a few weeks ago.
Where's his money coming from?
And the people he's bundling money for.
These poor paw people, a poor family out there in California.
Lots of pets, no money.
The mail carrier donating $244,000 over three years to the Democrat Party.
How the hell is this possible?
Where's this money coming from?
I thought that the media, the drive-by media, the Democrats, were all concerned about campaign finance reform.
Here we have a consistent, consistent pattern of Clinton and the Democrats taking money funneled from Asia to help fund their campaigns, people who have fled the country before they could be questioned.
I mean, Shu himself was a convicted crook.
He jumped bail.
He reestablished himself in New York, became a huge Democrat donor.
He was on a lamb for 15 years on charges in California while raising money for Democrats.
He's caught.
He jumps bail again.
Now he's hospitalized under still uncertain circumstances, quote, unquote.
And what do the media want to talk about?
Anything but Norman Shu.
Oh, no, no.
Can't embarrass the Clintons.
Can't do anything to derail that candidacy.
Clinton campaign gets a couple questions thrown at him about it.
No media frenzy, no persistent aggressive follow-up.
And the Clintons into a, surprised as I could be.
Well, you could have knocked me over with a feather.
I found out that guy was on a lamp like I did.
And Mrs. Clinton's just surprised about everything.
She doesn't know diddly squat about anything.
And Clinton isn't alone, folks.
Remember that small left-wing weekly out there in the Bay Area broke a story a few months ago about how Diane Feinstein, chairman of an important subcommittee overseeing military contracts, made millions through her husband's investment in certain companies during the war?
The article describes extraordinary efforts by Feinstein using her official position to inquire into certain contracts, suggest certain directions the Pentagon should go with their contracts and so forth.
Where's the follow-up to this?
You better believe if this were Cheney and Halliburton, every reporter in the Beltway would be on this story, but it's died.
It's gone away.
No investigations, no hearings, no nothing, no ethics committee looking into it.
This is very serious stuff.
It really is.
For all the talk about congressional oversight, the Democrats protect their own.
There hadn't been a single hearing on shoe by Leahy, Conyers, or Waxman.
In the meantime, Republicans are eager to throw everybody on their own side overboard and under the bus.
There hasn't been a single hearing on Feinstein and her husband by Pat Leahy, John Conyers, or Henry Waxman.
And there won't be either, folks.
There won't be any editorials demanding these hearings either.
They want to protect these liberals.
They want to help them with their mantra about the Republicans' culture of corruption.
And it burns me up.
I am beside myself.
What I just predicted 20 minutes ago just happened.
And if I were sitting on that committee today, I would stand up when it's my turn and I would lambaste and I would lash out and then I'd have to resign for violating House rules.
Tom Lantos, who is co-chairing the committee today, he's from California, just told Petraeus, I'm going to have to paraphrase this, just told Petraeus that he knows, he, Lantos, and the whole Congress knows that Petraeus and Crocker have been sent up there today to convince the Congress and the American people that victory is at hand.
Lantos says, I don't buy it.
Who the hell is Tom Lantos?
This is before the Petraeus report has been made public.
He has just told General Petraeus, we're not going to believe a damn word you say here, general.
He did say, by the way, nothing personal.
We know it's the Bush administration, as I'm paraphrasing here.
We know you've been sent up here to lie.
It's what he said.
You've been sent up here to try to convince us that victory is at hand.
I don't buy it, said Congressman Lantos.
And I will guarantee you, when this is all over today, you know where the media is going to go?
They'll go to Lantos.
That was a very courageous thing you said to General Petraeus.
What's your thought on this?
Oh, he'll repeat it and they'll marvel and they'll go to Petraeus.
What do you think about what Lantos said?
They won't ask Petraeus about what he said.
And if they do, it'll be under the auspices of, is this really what you think?
Or is this what Bush told you to say?
Here is Danny in, what is this?
Foremanton, Minnesota.
Hi, Dan.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hey, Rush, thanks for taking my call.
I appreciate it.
I'm going to start off by saying that my son is a Purple Heart recipient, and he received a Purple Heart on his first tour.
And he's on his third tour in Iraq right now.
He's a scout sniper, Marine Scout sniper.
And I don't know what else to say, except I just, I can't, I've had it.
I've completely had it.
Let me tell you something.
I know how you feel.
Believe me, I know exactly how you feel.
I don't know that you're as angry as I am.
You ought to be.
I bet you're a little bit.
Rush, let me tell you, I just don't.
I just, you know, I just wish I had a radio talk show like you just be able to tell these people.
And thank you for telling them for me because if you wouldn't be saying it for me, I probably went crazy a long time ago.
Well, thank you.
But I'm going to make you madder.
You ever wonder when you watch a guy like Lantos or when you hear me say what he just said, which is in concert with all the rest of the other Democrats, do you wonder why?
Well, Rush, I'm pretty much completely convinced that they would sell their soul to the devil for political gain.
Exactly right.
This is a pure political calculation, but I'm going to tell you what it really means.
It means that to people like Tom Lantos, despite what he said in his opening ceremony, opening remarks here, The votes of people like you are irrelevant because there are only 2 million of you.
And they don't care about military families.
They feel like they can throw you under the bus, and every one of you can vote against them, and they can still win.
Duncan Hunter is taking it to Tom Lantos right now on the embarrassment of his opening statement to General Petraeus.
We're working feverishly on these soundbites, ladies and gentlemen.
We'll have them for you as quickly as we can get.
We got Lantos.
▲
Export Selection