All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 2, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:09
October 2, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings to you, thrill seekers, music lovers, and conversationalists all across the bountiful fruited plane, Rush Limbaugh on the fastest three hours in media and the fastest week in media.
Already, we are at Wednesday.
It's great to have you with us.
The telephone number, if you'd like to join us, 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
For those of you watching on the DittoCam, during the top-of-the-hour break, we placed a plaque here with an American eagle writing atop the stars and stripes, the American flag.
And I did this for a reason, because I want to play for you an audio soundbite from Monday on Capitol Hill.
Cybercast News Service interviewed Senator Warner of Virginia, Senator John Warner, about the phony soldier remark, the Jesse Macbeth story.
This is what Senator Warner said.
I've met Rush Nimba.
I find him to be, to the extent there's any clear definition of patriot, I think he would fall in within the various definitions of being a patriot.
And I don't think about this incident.
I don't think he could do anything to malign the men and women in the armed forces.
That's my own view.
Now, let me tell you why Senator Warner said that, and it is because of this award here.
This award is given annually by the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, of which I have been a member of the board.
I have raised lots of money.
You have donated lots of money to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.
And I have donated my share as well.
Every year, they offer this award to someone special.
It is the Johnny Mike Spam Award.
It is the Memorial Semper Fidelis Award presented by the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.
This was presented to me in March of 2003 at the Plaza Hotel at their annual dinner.
In attendance every year is the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
That year, Senator Warner presented this award to me.
Johnny Mike Spam, of course, a CIA agent killed in Afghanistan.
He was the first.
And we have this.
And I don't have very many of the awards I've been given.
I'm not a big award guy anyway, but I don't have them at home.
If you were to walk into my home, you'd see a couple pictures, but that's it.
And you'd see that American flag.
If I took you upstairs in my library, you'd see the American flag flown in my honor, unbeknownst to me, during the original invasion of Iraq on five different aircraft in a Ziploc bag, folded flawlessly.
I got home one day, and that flag was in a FedEx box with certificates authenticating and pictures of the aircraft, authenticating those flights when they happened, the pilots, and a letter on yellow legal pad from Mark Hassara, whose nickname is Sluggo.
He's become a very good friend of mine since he organized this.
We've talked about Taz, the man who called us from the control tower at Baghdad International, threw the cheap quality French refrigerator off the top.
Taz was part of the group that flew the flag in my honor, unbeknownst to me.
That is on display, framed, the flag unfolded in the certificates.
But you have to go upstairs to see it.
I don't put this stuff on display often.
I don't talk about it much.
This award and most of the awards that I've won are here, the Marconi's and so forth, was I went and got from our living room area here of our broadcast complex.
I asked Brian to bring this in because it is heavy.
But I wanted this to be on display because it was presented to me by Senator Warner in the spring of 2003.
This award every year is given in honor and recognition of somebody who has done a lot to support the Marine Corps, the Law Enforcement Foundation, which, by the way, raises money for the children of Marines killed in action.
It is basically a college scholarship program.
The reason it's called the Law Enforcement Foundation is because in certain disasters, the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation also extends college scholarships to other branches of the military as well as other law enforcement agencies of the United States government, such as Customs, the Coast Guard, the FBI.
For example, they went into gear during the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing.
Of course, in the Mura building, there were a number of federal law enforcement agencies represented who were killed, who had children.
So we at the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation went into gear and raised significant amounts of money for the children.
And this is an ongoing effort.
And there's a new recipient of this award each and every year.
I can't tell you that they spare no expense on this.
This is as heavy as it looks.
Let me scoot it out of the way so I have access to my mic.
In fact, let me move it, just get a shot of it here.
For those of you watching on the DittoCam, give me an idea.
That's what the eagle looks like.
And you can see compared to me how large this is.
I, my friends, am not Tiny Tim sitting here.
This is a quite, by the way, speaking of Tiny Tim, have you seen, I saw Barack Obama a moment ago on television looking depressed as he could be because these fundraising numbers are out.
And Mrs. Clinton, queen of the quarter, she crushed Obama in SEP in a surprise fundraising surge.
What are the numbers?
30 some odd 27 million for Mrs. Clinton, 19 million for Barack Obama.
And everybody said, wow, how did this happen, folks?
It's easily understandable.
There are 1 billion Chinese.
1 billion Chinese.
It's not difficult to come up with 27 million, even if one of your chief bundlers, Norman Shu, and Winkle Paw can't make bail or can't be found.
One other thing to mention.
The Adopt a Soldier program here on this program, because of the negative press coverage that was in abundance during the early years, well,
through most of the years of this current conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, we would hear from soldiers and say, we only get one hour of you of Armed Forces Radio, which, by the way, is one of the real targets of Harry Reid and Tom Arkin's actions on the Senate floor is to try again to get this program taken off Armed Forces Radio.
Harkin did it once before a few years ago.
So what we did, we started the Adopt a Soldier program, and there are tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel with complimentary access to RushLimbaugh.com so that they can listen to this program via streaming if they are able to connect to a server that permits it.
And that was a caller suggestion, by the way.
And we've had since that started numerous emails from soldiers who have thanked us for keeping the flow of positive news 24-7 their way.
So just wanted to mention these two things and explain Senator Warner's comments.
From the Washington Times today, most in poll want war funding cut.
Bush's approval rating ties all-time low.
So the liberals out there keep running this poll ploy.
Two yards in a cloud of dust.
They can't even gain three yards with it.
You see, Democrats, the public wants you to cut off the funds, it says here.
So do it.
I mean, if the public wants the funds to be cut, why haven't you guys done it?
I mean, this is if it's so obvious according to these polls, how come all of your resolutions here have failed?
By the way, also in this story is a little conflicting poll data.
And it is that the Bush plan on Iraq is preferred over the Congress plan at 52%.
Now, I don't know how this can be.
How can you get a poll that says a majority want the funding for the war cut, and yet 52% prefer the Bush plan over the Congressional plan to get us out of the war?
It doesn't make any sense.
Here's the paragraph in question: as a broader public agreement on how Congress should approach war funding.
About a quarter of adults want Congress to fund fully the administration's $190 billion request.
70% want the proposed allocation reduced.
46% wanting it cut sharply or entirely.
About 7 in 10 independents want Congress to cut back funds allocated for the war effort, as do nearly 9 in 10 Democrats.
Forty-six percent of Republicans agree, yet 52 percent prefer that there are – prefer the Bush plan.
Now, there was a story yesterday in the stack.
We didn't get to, but it's this: the number of American troops and Iraqi civilians killed in the war fell in September to levels not seen in more than a year.
The U.S. military said the lower count was at least partly a result of new strategies and 30,000 additional forces deployed this year, i.e., the surge is working.
Also in the stack yesterday, locals are building cities up with oil revenue, as Bush said was happening.
There has been a 40% decline in deaths, citizen deaths in Iraq during Ramadan.
So the news continues to be good out of Iraq.
Another reason why the Democrats have to change the subject, change it to me, in the process of a smear on the floor of the Senate in order to placate their continually loony, lunatic fringe base, who is beside itself now when they have heard all the top-tier Democrat presidential candidates say, Well, I can't commit to getting out of there by the end of my first term if I'm elected.
I can't commit.
So they're throwing up their hands in total frustration.
When that happens, you have to give the rabble something to eat.
They've thrown me at them in order to distract attention from their own failures.
Democrat leadership failures in the House and the Senate.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair, utilizing talent on loan from God.
Interesting headline here: E.J. Deion Jr., a column in the Washington Post: Biden's clarity on Iraq stands apart.
Now, what does that mean?
I'm not even going to read the column to you.
It doesn't matter.
It's just easy to plug in Biden here.
If Biden's clarity on Iraq stands apart, it means that all the other Democrat leaders are unclear and confused and confusing on the top issue of the day, the year, the decade.
And the importance of this is that the Democrats in the drive-by media are just, they're just, everybody was frustrated with the Democrats.
On their side of the aisle, everybody's frustrated.
We've got to go to Joe Biden to find clarity on Iraq.
Not good.
have a sexual harassment update, ladies and gentlemen.
Frankie Valley, minus the four treasons.
My hands explored you.
There you have it, our sexual harassment update theme.
It kind of goes back and forth.
We rotated with another Frankie Valley tune, Can't Take My Hands Off You, which was a big heart melter.
By the way, that song I was 16 or 17 when that song came out.
Yeah, the high school girls' hearts just melted.
They just, they started crying when that song came because they were the ones pretending about marriage, fantasizing and so forth back then.
At any rate, Isaiah Thomas found guilty of sexual harassment.
This was not a surprise because the jury sent a note to the judge yesterday asking about punitive damages.
They've gotten that far.
They're not supposed to get that far till they've come to a verdict.
He's out there saying he's going to demand he's going to appeal this.
I haven't seen, I haven't had a chance to spend much time watching television, but I haven't seen any information on whatever amount is involved.
I don't even remember what she was suing for, what the amount was.
But this was a woman at work at Madison Square Garden.
They have also been found liable in this.
To the phones, we go to George, South Windsor, Connecticut.
George, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Nice to have you here, sir.
Yes, Rush.
Four or six inch above the waist bouncing dittos.
Thank you, sir.
Appreciate that.
If you ever had a best of show, that was one of the funniest segments.
But anyway, the reason I called is, I know why the Democrats are doing this.
If you remember before the 06 election, the whole Michael J. Fox thing that the media totally took out of context about stem cell research, they did affect that election to their standards anyway.
They think they affected it.
So they're thinking if they do the same thing, same playbook, same play, that they can affect negatively against the Republicans.
And I think they've totally misunderestimated themselves on this one.
Well, because you have the facts behind you.
You are a huge advocate for the troops.
Always have been, always will.
They're dead wrong.
Yeah, it'll backfire on them.
I think it's in the process of backfiring on them now.
But whether they're trying to use this to secure the, well, look, you're right.
In one sense, you're actually dead on right because the origin of this is Media Matters for America.
Who started Media Matters for America?
Well, let's listen.
Go back to August 6th of this show to listen to Mrs. Clinton.
This is Hillary Clinton.
We have several soundbites here.
We are certainly better prepared and more focused on taking our arguments and making them effective and disseminating them widely and really putting together a network in the blogosphere in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure institutions that I helped to start and support, like Media Matters and Center for American Progress.
Whoa, there you have it.
Media Matters for America has now been officially claimed as a Hillary Clinton startup by Hillary Clinton.
So to that extent, anybody in media on any side of the aisle ought to now understand that anything coming out of Media Matters for America is designed to take issue, destroy, harm, whatever, anyone who gets in Mrs. Clinton's way in her quest for the White House.
So in that sense, yes, this is purely political, trying to affect an election, much like Dan Rather did with his forged documents.
So with Mrs. Clinton having admitted this, that she helped start and that she supports Media Matters.
I've had a lot of people say, you keep saying, I think it's George Soros, Rush.
Well, Soros' money goes in there, but not directly.
Soros has this, forget the name of it, but there's this shell operation.
The money goes in there, and then that organization distributes it so that Soros and his bunch have direct, plausible deniability.
In fact, if you talk to Soros' people, they'll probably say, well, yeah, we're really upset about what Media Matters are doing and a little bit over the line, which is all BS.
But the bottom line, it's Mrs. Clinton's organization, and so anything it does is designed to help her.
By helping her, they try to impede anybody getting in her way, destroy or what have you.
Hence, this smear of me.
And I said yesterday or the day before, by the way, I said earlier this is Wednesday.
It feels like Wednesday because we've been talking about last week when all the, you know, the firestorm hit, and it hit on a Wednesday.
And this is a Wednesday in my mind.
So I know it's only Tuesday here.
Still the fastest week in media.
So fast on Tuesday seems like Wednesday.
But nevertheless, the purpose here is to illustrate what their playbook is going to be.
It's only going to get worse.
There's another aspect of this, folks, that I think you ought to understand too: that what Media Matters is attempting to do with this smear is not just smear me.
But in the process of smearing me, they want, they hope, to discredit me as somebody the mainstream media would reference or discuss as the election moves forward.
But they chose a horrible example, a horrible instance, because all they've done is discredit themselves.
And they have really opened the blinds and everybody see who they are.
With Mrs. Clinton admitting she started the organization and supports it.
So any drive-by media outlet that relies on Media Matters in the future has got to admit that they're relying on a Hillary Clinton front group for news.
From the Chicago Sun-Times, a story about Oak Lawn, Illinois schools, so long Halloween parade, and farewell Santa's gift shop.
Now, we've been discussing just this kind of thing in relation to the separation of church and state and how anybody who's offended can get something banned that has a traditional holiday aspect to it in this country.
The holiday traditions are facing elimination in some Oak Lawn scruels this year after complaints the activities are offensive, particularly to Muslim students.
Final decisions on which of the festivities will be axed will fall to the principles at each of Reginald and School District's 122's five schools.
Parents expect that the announcement is going to add to the tension that's been building since officials agreed earlier this month to change a lunch menu to exclude items containing pork to accommodate Muslim students.
News that jello was struck from the menu caused such a stir that officials have agreed to bring it back.
Gelatin, often made with tissue or bones of pigs or other animals.
The controversy now appears to have been dwarfed by the holiday debate, which became so acrimonious last Wednesday that the police were called to Columbus Manor Scruel to intervene in a shouting match among parents.
It's difficult when you change the school's culture, said Columbus Manor principal Sandy Robertson.
Elizabeth Zoddan, a mother of three students, says she took her concerns to the school board this month, not because she wanted to do away with the traditions, but rather to make them more inclusive.
I only wanted them modified to represent everybody.
Nixing them isn't the response she was looking for.
Now the kids are not going to be educated about other people.
There's just not time in the six-hour scruple day to celebrate every holiday, said Smith, who sent the message to principals and need to tone down the activities that he sees as eating too much into instruction time.
We have to think about our purpose.
Saw story that saucer the other day.
Oh, can't remember the details.
But I remember my reaction to it was so long, Britain.
It was something the schools are doing regarding getting rid of some traditions over there so as not to offend religious groups among the Muslims.
I can't remember what it is, so I'd better not hazard a guess.
Well, the reaction was good by Britain.
So, and this is the kind of thing that liberals support.
ACLU joins in this kind of stuff.
They are about tearing down traditions, institutions that define the country.
Kathy and Reno, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi, Rush.
It's a pleasure to speak with you today.
Thank you.
I'm calling about Harry Reid because I am from Nevada.
And in his last election, the people of Nevada, including a lot of Republicans, voted for him because they thought he would be good for Nevada.
He was set to, he was a senior senator, set to move into a powerful position.
And so people thought that will be good for Nevada.
But I think that Harry Reid knows that his political future in Nevada is toast.
And so he has nothing to lose.
I think that he knows his constituents can't hold his feet to the fire because we are going to toss him out in the next election.
He's going to be like Tom Daschell.
So he has nothing to lose, and he says the outrageous things he says, even though people back home do not like him.
You know, I haven't seen any polling data on Senator Reed and how he's doing out there, so I'll just accept your word for it.
But you're right.
The Dashel analogy holds.
Dashel's a Senate majority leader and was not articulating positions and leading in a way that represented his constituents, and he paid the price.
And I have predicted what you just said, the same thing is going to happen to Harry Reid in Nevada.
It's a long shot, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does happen.
I appreciate the call, Kathy.
Thank you much.
St. Joseph, Missouri.
This is Sarah.
Glad you waited.
You're next in the big program.
Nice to have you here.
Thank you, Rush.
How are you?
Good.
Never better.
I have a son in Afghanistan, a son-in-law in Iraq, and these phony soldiers.
And by that, I mean these guys that were not men enough to cut basic or to get through basic.
They make me sick.
They make me.
I'm so angry.
I'm shaking.
And Harry Reid to get up there and make us think he cares one whit about our guys, our family members, our loved ones, it's just so wrong.
And isn't censorship comes from the government, right?
Right.
And Harry Reid being the leader of the Senate, isn't he coming close to censoring you?
Trying to.
Via intimidation.
In ways I really don't want to mention, but yeah, you're very perceptive.
And because, you know, my son and son-in-law are going through things that these, I'm not going to even call them men because they don't deserve to be called men.
They have no idea.
And they're doing it because they love this country.
They love us.
My son and son-in-law would be the men that would give their life for you regardless of whether they were on the battlefield or not.
And for Harry Reid to denigrate them like this and to denigrate you because you have done so much for our soldiers.
I'm sorry, I'm getting emotional now.
So am I. We're in it together.
And, you know, I'm just so angry.
And he has no right to do this.
And, you know, the things that him and Dick Durbin, the things that they have said about our guys, and I'm sorry, I'm just aggravating.
I know what you mean.
Durbin called the soldiers that run the prisons Nazi gulags, Soviet gulags, Nazi assassins, and Pol Pots murderers.
He had to do a quasi-apology for that because there was an outraged reaction to it.
You know, Sarah, when you say that your sons would die for me on or off the battlefield, you render me speechless.
Those of us in this country who have a great and deep appreciation for what people like your son and your son-in-law do know full well they volunteer to lose their lives in the battlefield for the country.
It's why we are so offended when their service is impugned or their character is impugned or when they're demoralized or when leaders of their government attempt to sabotage their mission.
I think that the country has a debt of gratitude to you and your family members who serve that they can never repay.
I know I can't.
You don't owe me anything.
Not that we owe you anything.
It's just a simple form of gratitude and wanting to show it.
And sometimes it's difficult beyond words, charitable donations, this kind of thing, to do so.
And so the support for what they do, particularly in light of the criticism they get, is something we embrace eagerly.
It's a great honor to have such members of our population and country as your son and son-in-law.
I just ask that people pray for them.
That's all I ask.
Well, I guarantee you that'll happen.
What are their names?
My son's name is Vance, and my son-in-law's name is Kevin.
Vance and Kevin?
Yes, and I love them very much.
How old are they?
Kevin is almost 25, and Vance is 20.
And they've been gone how long?
Kevin has been gone since the middle of January.
I might add about three weeks after his son was born.
My son has been in Afghanistan since April, and I don't even know where he's at.
He's an airborne trooper.
He's airborne.
I'm not exactly sure where he's at.
How often do you hear from either of them?
Infrequently.
But I send them packages and letters often.
Every time I do, I tell them how proud I am of them.
My son was disheartened after the November election because he felt like the people, he said he didn't care about the politicians.
He didn't expect any more from them.
But he felt like the people were turning their back on him.
And he wants to know why people pretend that they're not in Afghanistan.
And, you know, that's a good point.
The critics say we ought to be in Afghanistan.
We've diverted to Iraq.
We ought to be in.
That is an excellent.
We are in Afghanistan, and we're in combat missions in Afghanistan.
And we are engaged in successful combat missions, routing out warlords in the Taliban there.
So that's an excellent point.
You know, when I was there on the troop visit, it was pretty quiet.
In the eastern parts, there were some skirmishes.
I mean, I heard the gunfire when I was on the base there.
But it was pretty quiet.
The questions I got in the troops are, how come nobody's talking about us in the media?
How come it's all the way about Iraq?
And I said, because you guys are succeeding here.
Right.
There's no trouble to report here, so you guys are being ignored right now.
It may not be as quiet there now.
No, it's not.
It's not.
Taliban's trying to move back in via Pakistan with bin Laden and his buddies.
Right.
And he's on blackout quite frequently, which means, you know, no contact.
But we live our lives one day at a time.
We have to.
Because if I let the fear and worry overtake me, I would be in a ball in the corner talking to an imaginary.
Well, that's, I know, and this is what we all know.
It's perhaps an unfortunate thing to say, but the strategy, the political strategy behind the Democrat Party's anti-war movement is that when it comes to elections, there aren't that many members of this population who are military or military family, maybe two to three million.
And so their attitude is, well, we can lose them.
We'll pick it up some other group and still win the election.
Remember, this is the bunch that tried to not count military absentee ballots in Florida in 2000.
It's got to be tough.
I mean, your son and son-in-law volunteer.
It's always been something valorous and admirable to be a member of the U.S. military.
And now, all of a sudden, for the first time in American history, well, it got bad in Vietnam for a while, but never to the extent that I've seen it here.
Now, all of a sudden, there's a whole political movement out there designed to secure defeat, wave the white flag of surrender for the whole country, and in the process, impugn the character and integrity of people like your son and son-in-law who volunteered to do this.
And I will never vote Democrat again, ever.
I don't care who the person is.
They will never get my vote.
Well, if it's Joe Lieberman someday, you can vote for him.
No, because he's part of Democrat.
Well, he's an integrated person.
They tried to drum him out of this.
Yes, I know.
That's what they do.
And I've had it with them.
They are less than zero to me.
Sarah, I have to go, but I've really enjoyed talking to you.
Thank you so much, and God bless you and your family and your son and son-in-law from all of us, okay?
Okay, thank you, Rush.
You bet.
We'll be back, folks.
Continue after this.
Ha, how are you?
Welcome back.
Get the.
Oh, by the way, folks, that last call from Sarah is a great illustration of what I was talking about in an opening monologue of this program, and that is how the Democrat Party, led by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, moveon.org, Media Matters for America.
That's why it's so upsetting.
The continued use by Hillary's groups and the liberals in Congress of the troops for political game self-aggrandizement is just more of the abuse of our armed forces.
You heard this mother describe what it has been like listening to Democrats while her son and son-in-law are in Afghanistan.
It's just abuse.
It's just plain.
We owe them respect.
And a lot of Democrats can't even do that.
Just stunning.
By the way, there has been a Republican in the House of Representatives sign on the Democrat resolution condemning me.
The Republican's name is Walter Jones, and he is from North Carolina.
He told Fox News late yesterday that I, quote, went too far, unquote, and that he will sign on to Utah's resolution Tuesday morning.
He's one of the two Republican House members who have consistently supported anti-war legislation.
So he's fallen for the hoax, the smear, and so forth.
But Walter Jones is right.
Mostly been voting with the anti-war left in the Democrat Party.
He's been taking a lot of heat for it in North Carolina.
So he throws in with the liars and the hacks because he's looking for cover.
He wants to pretend he's standing up for the troops in attacking me because he's been throwing in against them all this time.
The fastest way to make himself look like he's standing for the troops when he doesn't is to throw in with this smear of me.
She ought to be ashamed of himself.
Okay, we've talked today about some of the media that's not gotten this right.
CNN yesterday, Wolf Blitzer.
I was disappointed.
Wolf's a good journalist.
I still maintain that.
But Wolf fell hook, line, and sinker for the Media Matters premise and started with that premise as established and then took a report.
Well, Limbaugh is saying something else.
Well, but Limbaugh, of course, would say something else.
But there have been people who have stood up.
O'Reilly last night on the O'Reilly Factor with Brian Maloney from the Radio Equalizer blog, which we post at rushlimbaugh.com now and then, did a great segment on Media Matters and its funding and who's behind it.
This morning on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough had a couple of guests on, Willie Geist and a news babe there, Mika Brzezinski.
And Scarborough says, you know, the Democrats are so funny this way.
They're always a step behind.
So now they're going after Rush Limbaugh saying, and he claimed that if you're against the war, you're a phony soldier.
But really, it's really not the case, is it?
Well, he was talking to a caller on his show, and they were talking about people from the left who have attacked the war.
And he said, Limbaugh said, they tried out these, quote, phony soldiers.
Now, he says he's referring to this guy, Jesse Macbeth, who is in fact a phony soldier.
He's a phony soldier.
But people like Tom Harkin came out the other day and said, quote, maybe he's on drugs again.
Rush.
Okay.
Well, I don't know.
Maybe.
Yeah, that wasn't nice.
Mika Brzezinski wearing in there.
And then weighing in, then there was correspondent, Courtney Hazlett.
And Geist Senator, Courtney, before we let you go, I want to ask you quickly about this Rush Limbaugh situation, a phony soldier quote that we're hearing.
The phony soldier quote, completely taken out of context.
But I have to say, when I immediately heard it as well, when all you had was the Media Matters context to look at it in, it did on paper look really, really badly.
And when you have a radio show and you're talking for hours and hours, pulling something out of context, of course, is going to create issues.
But I think it's just so interesting that Media Matters, because it's their sole job to look at everything under such a microscope, they seem to have this new right now to really trash people in the press.
So I just think it's interesting that they've got this type of leverage and nobody is looking at the big picture and saying that, you know what, maybe Media Matters should take a step back a little bit and we should give everyone a little bit more of a shot.
At some point, you have to look at these watchdog organizations and say, okay, how seriously are we going to take them the minute after they publish something?
More time should have to elapse.
Unbelievable.
The most brilliant, reasonable comment we have heard in the drive-by media about these watchdog groups, that's Courtney Hazlett, a reporter for MSNBC on Joe Scarborough's show this morning.
And getting it right, radio people.
But this, this was not even, I mean, this was that they purposely smeared and took it out of context and lied about it on purpose.
But the magnifying glass is now on them, folks.
Let's not forget what this was or is.
Media Matters for America took two words that I uttered and used hundreds and thousands of words to create a lie and a smear out of two words that I uttered.
See you tomorrow, folks.
▲
Export Selection