All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 11, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:32
September 11, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, that's one of the funniest headlines I have ever seen.
It's a story about Larry Craig.
You want to hear the headline.
This is uh from the politico.com's uh website.
Craig wide legal stance leaves wiggle room.
When you stop and think of what people think of the poor guy.
Craig wide legal stance leaves wiggle room.
Greetings, and welcome, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Nice to have you back, folks.
Telephone number is 800 282-2882, and the email address rush at EIBNet.com.
Interesting story here.
Stunned, this is from the French news agency, and let's see.
Let's just see if this finds its way into the drive-by media in the United States, despite daunting challenges posed by global warming, water, energy, unemployment, and terrorism.
The world faces a brighter future with fewer wars, higher life expectancy, and improved literacy.
According to a report released yesterday.
Although great human tragedies like Iraq and Darfur dominate the news, the vast majority of the world is living in peace.
Conflicts actually decreased over the past decades, says the 2007 State of the Future report published by the American Council for the Tokyo based United Nations University.
A global think tank.
It noted the number of African conflicts fell from a peak of 16 in 2002 to five in 2005, and that the number of refugees around the world is falling.
HIV and AIDS in Africa has begun to level off, could begin to actually decrease over the next few years, although it continues to spread rapidly in eastern Europe and in central and south Asia.
Among the other global bright spots, the report cited higher life expectancy, lower infant mortality, increased literacy, and increases in gross domestic products per capita and in the number of internet users.
On the negative side, it pointed to increases in CO2 emissions, terrorism, corruption, global warming, and unemployment, and a decrease in percentage of voting populations.
But nevertheless, uh they have concluded that the future is bright.
If you watch these hearings, the Petraeus hearings, uh isn't it finally clear, ladies and gentlemen, that we are going to have to win this war without Democrats.
We're not going to be able to win the and I'm not talking just about Iraq, until the whole you know, there's a whole war on terror in which we are engaged.
The Petraeus report is what it is, and it's uh it's of course generating a lot of focus on Iraq only because that's the political focus of the Democrats, and the Democrats drive the agenda because of the drive-by media being their willing accomplices.
But you know, there's a there's a whole worldwide war on terror.
I don't know how many of you have seen.
We talked about it on this program a number of times, the the movie Obsession.
It's out on DVD, which chronicles documents with footage produced by militant Islamists in their own countries, what their intentions are.
This is something that the American people are not being confronted with.
This is something the American people are not being told about, well, being told about it in some quarters, but it's not something that we're dealing with.
We don't have to yet in our minds.
We're free and so fat, dumb, and happy affluent that we can bury our heads and pretend that what's going on out there is not going to affect us, is not going to come back to our shores and so forth because it hasn't been here in uh in six years.
But uh, you know, when you look when you look at these hearings and you listen to the Democrats, as though they're auditioning for the next Osama tape.
As though they have no rec no recognition that their words have consequences.
The one thing that is not on the table being discussed, and I don't I don't care whether you're a Republican or Democrat, I don't care whether you support Bush or not, support the war or not, the one thing that isn't being discussed here, except when General Petraeus gets to throw some things in about it now and then is victory.
We're all watching hearings here, obsessed, As Democrats are obsessed with defeat.
We're Americans.
This is the United States of America.
We don't lose these things.
But the Democrats are angling and pushing for that.
They simply have no decency.
Their vulgarity on this is striking.
And so, with so many large issues facing us, and so many threats in the world, we are ignoring it.
All for the sake of a political pursuit by the Democrat Party to upset and oust and destroy a sitting administration in the process, the country.
People say, what do they why do they hate so much?
I don't know.
You know, and I've gotten to the point where I don't care.
The fact is they do.
And that has to be dealt with.
I mean, you can analyze why they hate.
We've done it countless times on this program.
And you can go back, I don't know how many years you could start a you could you can find a starting point anywhere.
You can go back to 2000, where they think an election they tried to steal was stolen from them.
Make no mistake, they tried to steal the 2000 election right here in South Florida, the EIB Southern Command.
They tried to steal it.
And they had a rogue Florida Supreme Court that was helping them along the way.
It was a Democrats tried to steal that election.
They didn't get away with it.
And now they run around saying the election was stolen from them because they couldn't steal it.
This is what I mean about them being a bunch of elites.
Birthright is power to them.
That is their birthright.
And nobody's allowed to take it away from them.
And the people that do take it away from them, i.e.
you, the voters, if they had their way, wouldn't get the chance to vote anymore because you're not doing it right.
You're not competent, you're not capable.
So that could be a reason for their rage.
I think they're angry because they're constantly outsmarted and outwitted by a guy they think is a dimwit.
George W. Bush.
But I also think they're just miserable in general.
It's what liberalism does to you.
Liberalism makes you unhappy.
You have to be unhappy.
You have to be angry in order to be a liberal.
You can't be happy.
Because if there's one thing that you see that makes you unhappy, then nothing else counts.
It overrides everything else.
They are also enraged because they no longer have a monopolistic control of the country.
They used to.
Starting in 1988, they lost it.
They're not going to get it back.
They're enraged about that.
Uh these are pompous, arrogant, elitist people with no decency whatsoever.
And they cannot accept the fact that they do not run the show.
And even after they win elections, they can't get anything done.
In fact, there's a story in the snack here today that uh the Democrat leadership, Pelosi, has decided to delay, perhaps postpone the contempt of Congress citations for Josh Bolton and Harriet Myers.
They decided it may not be the time to do it.
And for whatever reason, they decided, and the Kook Fringe is outraged by this.
The move on.orgs and the Daily Causes and the whole lunatric blogosphere is simply outraged by it.
Then you've got Dennis Kucinich.
Do you know where Dennis Kucinich is?
Or was he in Syria?
He may still be there, I don't know.
Uh he's a Democrat presidential candidate, folks.
He didn't have a snowball's chance in hell, but he nevertheless is a Democrat presidential candidate.
And he went on Syrian television, blasting George Bush's illegal occupation of Iraq.
Somebody needs to ask these people, have you no decency?
You know sense of shame?
Um...
Have you no idea the consequences of your actions and your words, sir?
Could ask that to Pelosi, you could ask it to Boxer.
You could ask it to John Kerry, you could ask it to Harry Reed, Dick Durbin, Joe Biden.
You can ask it at a whole Democrat presidential roster.
You could ask it of Hillary Clinton.
You could ask it of uh Barack Obama.
You could ask it of virtually every elected Democrat who's taking these public positions.
Public positions that sound exactly like they are auditioning for the next Osama tape.
All right, guys, we're gonna go back to the phones here.
Rush Limbaugh emitting vocal vibrations uh coast to coast and nationwide.
Uh your uh highly rated and well known radio raccour, general all-around good guy, a harmless uh lovable little fuzzball.
We'll start in Morristown, Tennessee.
This is Heather.
Heather, as your name is one of my all-time top ten favorite female names.
Fantastic.
Yes.
Rush, I absolutely love you.
I've been listening to you since I was a little girl, and we can thank my father, because I used to get up early in the morning before school and watch your TV show, and I can remember distinctly you having when the Clintons were in off well, the Clintons, I should say uh the one, but it's usually both.
Um having day three hundred and fifty of being held hostage by the Clintons.
Yeah, day three fifty, and we started that the first day of their term.
Oh, yes, I remember that.
So you're you are a uh you're a rush baby.
Absolutely.
Good.
I'm 29, almost 30, and I've been listening to you for years.
So I appreciate that.
Thank you very much.
My question is this.
We know that the liberals hate this country, but what is the benefit do they have to destroy this nation socially, economically?
What makes them think that they can have a monopoly again if they win an election?
Well, um here's here's the the answer to that question is actually to be found in the uh in the comprehensive destroy the Republican Party Act of 2007, otherwise known as the illegal immigration reform act.
Uh-huh.
Um what was the purpose of that?
See, the Democrats are running out of victims.
The affluence in this country is good.
We had the poverty statistics last week.
Uh it's it's poverty in this country is not what it was.
The Democrats need uneducated, unmotivated voters.
They need people to depend on them.
They're gonna have to create them.
Now, so the way they're going to do this, if they're th to say that they destroy the country, we've got to define that because we have to be very careful here.
This is an important point, uh, and it's accurate, but you when you say destroy the country, it can cause people to be turned off and not listen to what you say.
Uh they want to remake the country.
They don't like capitalism.
They don't like freedom because that's when they lose elections.
When people are economically prosperous, the last thing they need is government.
When they are economically prosperous and growing, the last thing they need is government programs of any kind.
The Democrats are desperate to have as many people dependent on government as possible because government is the engine of their control and view of the country.
That's why they're trying to come up with all of these stealth health care plans and things to get as many people as possible depending on the government for a need.
Uh now I happen to think health care is not a need.
I think it's a desire, but that's an argument for a different day.
You know, we all have wants and needs.
The Democrats are trying to persuade as many people as possible, let them be in charge of supplying their needs.
They and the Democrats know that they cannot do that in a means of prosperity for everybody, so everybody will end up being in a situation of increased need without being educated or trained in order to provide for it themselves.
This it's about it's about control of the population as a means of attaining total power that they can't lose, because at that point they'll never be voted out.
Too many people be dependent on them.
Look at the black vote, 90% every year.
Why?
Looks what they're trying to do with the Hispanic vote.
Look at the union vote.
Look at the union money that comes in.
You can look at their various constituency groups and find out how they plan to do it for the whole country.
So it's not that they're trying to destroy it.
They don't want America to stop being America.
They just want it to change the way it's structured.
The way I put it is that they want to uh uh destroy the traditions and institutions that define this country's greatness because they don't include liberals.
It's just pretty pathetic.
Well, that's what they're trying to do.
It's what they've been trying to do for years.
They it's this is really nothing new.
I just I'm appalled by them.
And it's it's embarrassing as an American to have to have them want to take over this country this way and to take away our rights and our freedoms and our national.
Well, it's one of the big differences.
People have to understand what liberalism is.
Liberalism, socialism, communism.
You have to understand what it is versus conservatism.
Conservatism uh puts total faith and confidence in the individual.
You go you go up, go out there, Pal, do the best you can.
We want to set up circumstances that make you make it possible for you to be the best you can be, and we do that by getting government and regulation and obstacles out of your way.
The Democrats want total control of government for the purposes of securing their power.
Now, Republicans and some Republicans like that too.
That's why I'm not saying Republicans and Democrats here.
I'm saying conservatives and liberals.
Correct.
So uh I and and there are many liberals that that that you know they're just they're just tagalongs.
They're liberals because it makes them feel good.
They're probably outraged and shocked I'm saying this because it doesn't describe them.
They're being duped.
Um just like they're being duped in the global warming hoax.
Uh that's that's a joke.
Well it is, but but you wouldn't believe a number of them really, you know, they they they they they unplug their chargers at home.
They think I I I love telling I love telling these liberals what my carbon footprint is.
They go bonkers.
When I describe it, I don't I have the uh uh the manners and character in class not to describe it for you publicly on the air because people would think I'm bragging and being self-absorbed.
But like I I told this I thought there's one liberal once, she was uh she was getting all upset with me uh about about you know the the lack of concern for energy and all this, and I said, Well, what do you drive?
She said, I refuse to drive a car with any more than six cylinders.
Okay.
I said, well, okay, fine.
I mean, if if that makes you happy, I know we all want to matter, and everybody thinks that they want to do something to make a difference.
Just keep in mind Hitler made a difference.
You gotta be careful with that phrase.
I said, but I understand, you know, I I said when the fuel prices started rising, I ordered my pilots to uh throttle back to no more than four hundred and eighty-five miles an hour ground speed is saying, and you just could see them fuming.
And I I said to this person, I said the one thing you've got to realize, you're not saving the environment, driving your little lawnmowers, and I'm not destroying it.
Uh the the these a lot of these liberals think that they're really genuinely good people.
I'm talking about the people that run that show, who are working in government, running for elections, trying to get more people entrenched in the bureaucracies and that kind of thing.
There are a lot of liberal dupes.
I how do you explain you know, liberalism is you talk about mind-numbed robots, those people are total sponges.
And how is it that some issue like global warming has a has an ideological divide?
Because it's it's it's just the latest liberal attempt to get control of people's lives under the guise, under the camouflage under the mask of doing something to save the planet.
And of course, who wants to destroy the planet?
Well, we can't anyway, is the bottom line.
But so you gotta be real careful when you talk about how they want to destroy the nation.
I'll uh although I I will tell you this, I want to remind you, Heather and everybody else, it is patently obvious now that we are going to have to defend and protect this country from foreign enemies without the Democrats.
Without liberals, without the Democrat Party, we're gonna have to win the war in Iraq and the larger war on terror without Democrats.
They aren't interested.
They can't be counted on, and in fact, not only are we going to have to win the war without them, we're gonna have to defeat them right along with defeating our external enemies.
That is a sobering, chilling thought.
But it is the it's it's a gospel truth.
Bob in uh in Lusby, Maryland, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey Rush, um, I'm honored.
Um super mega, I'm so sick of the Democrats involving our enemies ditto.
Uh I can't stand them anymore.
But the point I wanted to make with you is I listened to Evan Bye speak a little bit ago, and I heard your clip from Boxer talking about that tired talking point where um us being in Iraq has led to additional terrorists being recruited around the world.
Well, in World War II, when we were in North of Africa and Italy and Normandy and in the Pacific, I'm sure the Japanese and the Germans increased their armies dramatically to fight us and increase their um bringing people in to help their cause.
But you know what?
They even created kamikaze.
And according to the Democrat today, I guess we should have run and ran tail because we were uh leading to the remote.
You know, I uh if if if uh if Evan Bye said it, along with Barbara Boxer, that what that tells me is there's a talking point memo that's gone out for these Democrats, and this is one of the things that they're all going to accuse betray us of.
But this is nothing new.
This is something they've been saying uh For years, at least three or four, and it's pure sophistry that we are creating new terrorists.
Uh not just your excellent explanation for why, but the fact we didn't create them in the first place.
We're minding our own business, not bothering these people other than our support for Israel, which they don't like.
They've been blowing people up all over the world, hijacking airplanes long before 9-11, long before we went into Iraq.
This is what I mean.
They these people are irresponsible.
They have no decency.
They are being entirely vulgar on this, and their words do have consequences.
They are uttering words that are sympathetic to the cause of the enemy and demoralizing to our own troops and the people in this country.
And it's it's just it's an outrage what they are engaging in.
Your guiding light, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, national treasure profit, and general all-round good guy.
All right, back to the audio sound bites, the drive-bys on 9-11 today, want to know.
They are demanding to know why we do not have Usama bin Laden.
Good morning.
Breaking news.
Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appears in a new video this morning on the sixth anniversary of 9-11.
Osama bin Laden was out with a new tape on this September 11th.
Today, Osama bin Laden released another tape.
In a new tape out this morning, the voice of Osama bin Laden can be heard over a searing graphic of ground zero.
And they went on to discuss and have guests.
Why did we not have Osama bin Laden?
Ladies and gentlemen, I am going to uh give you the answer.
Why we do not have Usama Bin Laden.
For those of you obsessed with why he's still free if he's still breathing.
Let's go back to February of 2002.
This is former President Clinton, and I believe this is some meeting out on Long Island.
This tape is internet quality, furnished to us by our buddies at Newsmax.
Mr. Bin Laden used to live in Sudan.
He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in'91 and he went to Sudan.
We didn't even wanted America to start dealing with them again.
They released him at the time.
He had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no wish to hold him.
So we knew he wanted to get crime against America.
So the Saudi's attack him, because they could have, but they thought it was a hard to say that they didn't have against them.
Um, we've we've had numerous reports that the president was presented by Sudan, uh Osama bin Laden's head on a silver platter two or three times and refused to take him.
And again, this is the uh one of the drawbacks, one of the shortcomings of fighting a war with lawyers, and fighting a war with the Justice Department.
Say that bin Laden had not been involved for crying out loud, this is he was he was involved with hatching these uh these uh uh uh flights over the Pacific, I believe, from the Philippines that he had plans detonate over the uh over the Pacific Ocean.
Clinton just Clinton did not want to deal with it, folks.
And uh uh if you want to know why we don't have bin Laden, um, in addition to whatever shortcomings you want to blame on the administration since 9-11, uh you cannot exempt uh errand and mistakes of the previous Administration.
Uh Clinton immediately after 9-11, he he knew for his own legacy, had to go out there and do damage control.
He knew.
So it's September 3rd of 2002.
He's on Larry King Alive.
King says, You remember what you were thinking, Mr. President?
What would go through the mind of the immediate former president watching 9-11 happen?
I remember exactly what happened.
Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, my God, a second plane has hit the tower, second tower.
And I said, Bin Laden did this.
That's the first thing I said.
Right.
Yeah.
He said, How can you be sure?
I said, because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up a network to do this.
And they wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets.
Bin Laden did.
Did you also think at the same time we came pretty close to getting them?
Yeah.
I thought uh that my virtual obsession with him was well faced, and I was full of regret that I didn't get him.
I mean, I immediately thought that he had done it.
Bill Clinton describing his virtual obsession.
Can we go back and play audio soundbite number six again?
Uh This is from February of 2002.
This was September.
The Larry King show bite was September of 2002.
So what?
Seven or eight months prior.
After telling Larry King, or before telling Larry King, I had this virtual obsession.
I thought my virtual obsession with him was well faced.
Well placed.
I was full of regrets.
I didn't get him.
Really?
Full of regret?
Let's listen again.
He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in'91, and he went to Chicago.
We didn't assume he wanted Americans to start dealing with them again.
They leave them.
He committed no against America, so I don't know when he's here because we had a wish of hold.
We knew he wanted to.
So I wish it was they could have, but they thought it was a lot of men.
I thought it wanted Afghanistan.
It's not entirely how he ended up in Afghanistan.
He ended up in Afghanistan because Afghanistan had been taking over the Taliban.
They were a stateless regime, which is exactly what Al-Qaeda attempts to do is take over stateless regimes and run them.
So and then, of course, it's uh uh just seven or eight months later that Clinton got to do damage control.
I had this virtual obsession.
My virtual obsession uh with uh with Clinton with uh bin Laden was well-faced.
But I was full of regret.
I didn't get him.
I mean, I immediately thought he'd I knew he had done it.
I knew he did.
Really.
It's all about the Clintons, and it always will be about the Clintons.
All right, this morning at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, General Petraeus is delivering his opening statement.
General?
Mr. He's not obviously 300 about the people.
That will not be a good idea.
The uh police will clear the uh Carl.
I was a U.S. diplomat resigned in opposition to the war in Iraq three and a half years ago, and it's no better.
If I mr. Luger, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide my assessment of the security situation in Iraq.
For the second day in a row, Code Pink in uniform gets into a congressional hearing.
Do we think, ladies and gentlemen, that this is an accident?
No way is this an accident.
Senate staffers had to have given these people liberal Democrats, Senate staffers had to give them admission tickets and get in there.
You don't just show up and get into these places.
I mean, there may be a line, but it's not just like trying to get into a courthouse.
There aren't uh uh uh uh uh yeah, uh the courtroom.
I mean, there's there aren't that many seats for the public in there.
And these people show up in uniform.
Now, yesterday, Ike Skelton and all the Democrats were out.
Well, Ike Skelton was outraged.
That code Pink goes, we're gonna prosecute these people in full force of Title 13, Section 405, Section 69.
Well, whatever he said.
We're gonna go after these people with a full force of the law, and they're back.
They're back today doing it again, disrupting this.
These are your Democrats of today, exhibiting the indecency which is becoming inseparable from them.
Chuck Hagel, who I think actually, you know, he announced that he's not gonna run for re-election from Nebraska as senator.
He also said he's not going to seek the Republican presidential nomination.
Um I think the great way to characterize this is to say that Senator Hagel is a victim of the surge.
Surge is working.
Senator Hagel, as you know, became known as a maverick Republican.
He was uh known as a maverick with John McCain.
Now, may I, in a political observation, point out to you people what happens to Republicans who be called mavericks by the drive-by media?
What happened to Senator McCain's presidential candidacy?
What happened to Senator Hagel's presidential candidacy, rumored, and his re-election bid.
Pft.
Maverick Republican.
You ever heard of a Maverick Democrat, by the way?
You ever heard the drive-byers describe some Democrat as a maverick?
Meaning someone that uh Goes off the reservation and attacks their own party.
I mean, I it doesn't happen much, but even if it does, they don't call them mavericks.
But I'll tell you the death knell for a Republican who wants national office is to be called a maverick by the drive-by media, and yet they're out there, some of them are actively seeking it.
Such is the aphrodisiac, my friends, of love and adoration from the drive-by media.
If you live in Washington, here is Chuck Hagel questioning General Petraeus.
As you each have responsibilities, we are elected by the people of our states.
To question strategy is not unpatriotic.
I've always found that you want an honest evaluation.
Not through charts, not through the White House evaluations.
You ask a sergeant or a corporal what they think.
I'll bet on them every time.
We've got too many disconnects here, General.
Way too many disconnects.
Come on.
Our National Intelligence Report earlier this year said we're in a civil war.
It's sectarian violence.
You gave us a great inventory of what a brutal bloody dictator Saddam was.
Well, we know that.
That's not the issue here.
Are we going to continue to invest American blood and treasure at the same rate we are doing now?
For what?
President said let's buy time.
By time for what?
So there's uh Hegel uh ranting uh patriotically, uh, mind you, at Petraeus, and Ambassador Crocker asking what the troops are dying for.
For what?
For what?
No concept of victory.
Uh which is what's missing in these hearings.
I was I'm gonna tell you this again.
Uh regardless what you hear these people say, what your reaction is.
I want you to understand that the main focus here from all of these elected officials, the on the left and uh the Republicans that join them, is not victory.
And Hagel can't get it out of his mind this is a civil war.
You know, this to me uh go talk to a corporal or a sergeant.
They just call Petraeus a liar.
He just called Petraeus a Republican is now called Petraeus a liar.
Bring him up on charges, Senator Hagel.
Court martial him.
He's lying to the Senate.
He's lying to Congress.
And go get a sergeant, go get a corporal and bring them in there if you want what you think the truth is.
And it hits just keep on coming, ladies and gentlemen, from the Senate foreign relations committee hearing this morning.
Here is the haughty John Kerry.
Not you may ask, what business is Barbara Boxer have preaching to General Petraeus?
Well, she's elected.
It's like what Ted Kennedy can preach to Bork.
He's elected as but uh even I, when it comes to John Kerry preaching to some highly decorated military person with his track record in Vietnam, and you know what he used his time for?
To discuss Vietnam.
Almost half the names that found their way to the Vietnam Wall after that testimony found their way there when our leaders had acknowledged in retrospect that they knew the policy was not working and would not work.
And all you have to do is go back and read Defense Secretary McNamara's books and other histories of that period.
Our troops are owed a policy that is worthy of their sacrifice, and our country is owed a policy that meets our needs, our national interest, and that can ultimately get the job done.
Stop the take.
Is it except I want to know what your national interests are?
You know, it's one thing to come around here and say that the country is owed a policy of X, Y, and Z, that the troops are owed a policy of their sacrifice.
What are the country's needs, Senator?
In your view, sounds to me like we need to lose this.
In fact, it sounds to me like you think we already have.
What are our national interests, Senator Kerry?
I wish you liberals would enunciate.
You know, I'm getting tired of having to tell people what you stand for.
I wish you'd do it.
I mean, you've you've admitted that you're invested in defeat.
We know you want to lose this.
We know we're gonna have to win the war on terror without you.
In fact, we're gonna have to beat you as well as bin Laden's boys in order to win the war on terrorists.
I'd like to know from Senator Kerry what are this country's national interests.
What are our needs as defined by you?
We never seem to hear this, do we?
Not in understandable lingo.
Barbara Boxer tells Petraeus, we had the whole world at our hands after 9-11, and now the world hates us.
I get letter after letter asking me how long we'll be in Iraq.
I tell them it depends on who the president is and how many votes there are in the Congress to change course.
And as for my own views, I tell them this war is the biggest foreign policy mistake ever.
It took our eye off defeating the terrorists led by Osama bin Laden who killed our people six years ago today.
The greatest mistake because it strained our military, our National Guard in California, gentlemen, we are short 50% in our equipment to respond to an earthquake, and the Secretary of the Army said we'd be in trouble if there was a major earthquake.
Greatest mistake because we've lost so many of our own and so many are wounded, who we will be dealing with for years and years.
It breaks our hearts, all of our hearts.
The biggest mistake because we've lost the support of the world.
Well, we had the whole world in our hand after 9-11.
Really?
Now see, that is quite telling.
The biggest mistake, and she saved it for last.
The biggest mistake is that the world doesn't love us anymore.
We had the we had the whole world in our hands.
We had the whole wide world.
In our hand, we had a whole world in our hands.
And that's what the bugs her the most.
That now the whole world's not in our hands.
The world doesn't love us anymore.
It just doesn't love us.
And of course, this is this is psychobabel.
What does that matter when U.S. national security interests are at stake?
And of course, ladies and gentlemen, uh we can't handle an earthquake in uh California now because of a war in Iraq.
Yeah, right.
Go ahead, Miss Bucks.
We'll take a brief time out here.
You want to hear one more?
This is this is uh well, actually I'm gonna wait.
Because I need to play these four in a row.
Bob Wexler yesterday, Robert Wexler from uh down here at Fort Lauderdale or Boca, um just was was uh lecturing four star General Petraeus in the house yesterday.
It's great to hear because Petraeus fired right back, decimated a guy.
Let's go to the phones.
Jill in uh in Fort Worth, Texas, welcome to our program.
Rush.
Hi.
Hi.
I need your help real bad.
My seventeen-year-old son is in still in school, and he has this uh liberal teacher telling him that we're over there for oil.
Can you help me explain to him that she's lying?
Uh I know you said it many times.
Uh he believes this.
Yeah.
That's what you said that we are we are in Iraq for oil.
Exactly.
And I tried to tell him, but he kept comes back with these liberal stupid comments.
And I need help because I can't remember the stuff you've told me.
Yeah.
Help.
Um of the things you could tell your son is that if who do who does he think is after the oil?
Does he think Bush and Cheney and Halliburton are after the oil?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Of course.
Obviously, you you know what would concern you more than this?
Is the little literal dingleberry he's got for a teacher?
Exactly.
I mean, this this is just you know, uh you're you're you you th this teacher's an absolute imbecile.
Yeah.
An absolute imbecile.
Uh here's what you need to tell him.
What what's his what's his first name?
Brandy.
What was that?
Randy.
Randy.
You need to say, Randy, uh, if we were in the Middle East and in Iraq for oil, why don't we have it yet?
We're the United States of America.
Why are we worried about killing people?
Why don't we just go take the oil fields over there and take them?
Why didn't Halliburton own them?
Why didn't Bush own them?
Why didn't Bush quit?
Why do we have to go to war, Randy, to get the oil in Iraq when we have military forces in Qatar or Qatar and Saudi Arabia?
Why don't we just tell them, hey gang, your oil is ours?
What are they going to do to stop us?
Why don't we tell the Kuwaitis who love us right?
Hey, you know Saddam wanted your oil, guess what?
We're taking it.
If we were really that kind of country, Randy, we would be doing this all over the world.
We'd be going everywhere.
If we want the oil so bad, how come we can't drill for our own in Alaska or in the Gulf of Mexico?
And then I would say to him, and I'm not a parrot, and you are, and I would say to him, Randy, I understand you're 17, but you are really disappointing me.
You are smarter than this.
And say, Randy, our number one supplier of oil in the world is Canada.
And they don't have a military can defeat us.
Why don't we just go get theirs?
But tell him he's disappointing you, and you have nothing more to do with it until he gets his mind right.
▲
Export Selection