All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 9, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
October 9, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No, I am not going to address it.
I can't believe people are serious about this.
Oh, geez.
This is unbelievable.
Oh, man.
Well, anyway, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limbaugh here, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, and a second of three hours of broadcast excellence now officially underway.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
I was out in Snerdley's office here during the break at the top of the hour.
And if you're just joining us, we had a first call today.
Took a long time to get where he was going.
Only a seasoned and highly trained broadcast specialist such as I could have made this call work.
His name was Eric.
He was in Charlotte, Virginia.
We finally got him to get to the point.
His point was, I have a duty to run for president and save the country because nobody in the Republican field is capable of winning and doing it.
And of course, I don't know what some of you think of me, but believe me, that idea to me is absurd.
It embarrasses me.
So I'm dealt with the call as I felt I should and moved on.
Finished the rest of the hour.
Go back and talk to Snerdley.
He said he got lots of calls from people after that guy.
He didn't put any of them up.
But a lot of them said that you do.
You on the national scene.
You're the most prominent conservative and you have a duty to put country first here.
So I, you know, my eyes crossed and glazed over in there, and I'm thinking, gee, how in the world do I address this?
I don't know how to address it now.
I don't know.
Don't know what to say.
See, one of these, this is even.
You don't understand, Snerdley.
of these callers actually told Snerdly that Washington did it, Washington put the country first, that Thomas Jefferson put the country first, that Abraham Lincoln put, you're lumping me in with the founding fathers.
Now, come on, let's get real here.
Well, I know I run the country.
You know it.
I know it.
But do you know how this embarrasses me to be lumped in with that group of men?
And to take that seriously?
It's interesting to me that people have the view that they have.
That's more interesting to me than the way it affects me because of what it says about the hunger for real leadership that's out there on our side.
What are you mouthing, Dawn?
What do you go ahead?
Tell me.
She said, we have the largest turnout ever.
I am not even a candidate, and you see how they're trying to destroy me.
Can you imagine if I actually, this is absurd.
This is ridiculous.
I don't want people to even think I'm entertaining this.
There are already people think my head's too big for this room.
And if they only knew the truth about it, they would laugh at that whole notion.
I know Washington was a farmer.
I was out in Mount Vernon that line.
No, he was a distiller.
And he gave it all up.
But please, would you please stop this?
This is a radio show.
Snerdley is still shouting at me.
They were ordinary people making good livings and they still.
Yes, I know all that.
I know all that.
Let me get on with the stack of stuff here.
But I wanted to address this because Snerdley says he's lots of them.
I did address it.
I addressed it with the first call.
I've always addressed it when people suggest I should run for office.
I don't want the pay cut.
I've addressed it.
I don't know how many times.
I'm doing what I was born to do.
And I love what I'm doing.
And I love the way I do it.
And I'm probably accomplishing more here than if I were a candidate because I have to give up this radio show and I would lose this microphone.
And I wouldn't have nearly the opportunity or access to respond to all the anal exam attacks that I would get that I'm getting now.
So I'm sorry about this, ladies and gentlemen, but I had to address it because it caused me to open this hour in a little bit of a frustrated frame of mind.
Now I want to move on because I've got some stacks here, some stories in the stack about Mrs. Clinton.
We're going to get to your phone calls here rather quickly too, because it looks like there's some interesting ones out there from our buddies at Worldnetdaily.com.
It's official, terrorists have endorsed Hillary in 08.
On the record, Mideast jihadi leaders say she is the best hope for victory in Iraq.
With presidential primaries approaching the race for the White House heating up, Muslim terrorist leaders in the Middle East have offered their endorsement for America's highest office, stating in a new book, they hope Senator Hillary Clinton is victorious in 2008.
They love the Hilster.
Here are some of the quotes, senators Ali Sanakra blah blah, chief of a terrorist group, says I hope Hillary is elected in order to have the occasion to carry out all the promises she is giving regarding Iraq.
What?
There's a bumper sticker for the Republican Party right there.
I hope.
Hillary's elected and in quote the terrorist leader Abu Hamed Blah blah, whatever his last name is.
Hillary and the Democrats call for withdrawal.
Her popularity shows that the resistance is winning and that the occupation is losing.
We just hope that she will go until the end and change the American policy, which is based on oppressing poor and innocent people.
All Americans must vote Democrat, stated Jihad Jara blah blah, an exiled member of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade terrorist groups.
All Americans must vote Democrat.
Now, this isn't new, this is just official.
These guys have written a book and they have personally endorsed Hillary and they're explaining why.
And it's all about.
They know or think that she will guarantee them victory, not only in Iraq but wherever else, and they know that about any of the Democrat candidates.
When Bin Laden releases a tape, when Zawahiri releases a tape, when Ahmadinezad speaks anywhere, they parrot Democrat Party talking points.
And something tells me in my wise mind and big beating heart, boom, that average ordinary Americans are offended and outraged When these kinds of radical Islamo-fascist terrorists are spouting the lingo of the Democrat Party and when they're now endorsing Mrs. Clinton, a lot of them may not know about it, but we will spread the word and more will find out about it.
All Americans must vote Democrats, stated Jihad Jara, an exiled member of the Al-Aqsa Martyr Brigade's terror group.
If that's not enough, try this.
Jim Garrity sent me this today from his blog at the National Review Online.
Hillary's chief strategist and pollster, Mark Penn, told a British magazine last week that illegal immigrants may be the most powerful political force in the country.
In an interview with the Spectator magazine, Mark Penn said, quote, the most powerful political force in America, the most important voting bloc in the upcoming elections, may not even be able to vote, but their cousins can, and they may make all the difference.
Interviewer Matthew DeAncona also noted the radicalization of illegal migrants to America, according to Penn, could determine the next presidential election because their grievances will encourage their legally settled relatives to register and vote.
Here's what Penn wrote in a recent book called Micro Trends.
Just look at what has happened in the U.S. to illegal immigrants.
A few years ago, they were the forgotten Americans.
He's talking about illegal immigrants.
They were forgotten Americans hiding from daylight on the authorities.
Today, they are holding political rallies.
And given where they and their legal voting relatives live, they may turn out to be the new soccer moms.
Militant immigrants fed up with a broken immigration system just may be the most important voters in the next presidential election, distributed in the key southwest states that are becoming the new battleground areas.
Well, hubba-hubba.
Thank you, Mr. Penn, for confirming what we've all suspected was the impetus in the Senate, led by Democrats, for the amnesty bill that was beaten back.
It's all about finding new voters, whether they're legal or not.
And now, Mark Penn, Hillary's prime number one strategerist, is pretty much telegraphing one of the areas they are going to go.
So the battle continues.
I've got a quick timeout.
We'll take it and be back right after this and move on.
Stay with us.
On a cutting edge of societal evolution, Rush Limbaugh, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, living legend, a prophet, according to some.
Just a general all-round good guy.
This is Roseanne in Reidsville, North Carolina.
Hi, Roseanne.
Nice to have you on the program.
Hi, Rush.
I want to tell you what Senator Waxman's representative told me.
And then I would like to tell you what I told him when he said something about the tone of the internet.
He told me that the senator's position was not being represented correctly, that what the senator actually believed and what was being reported weren't the same thing, which puts him in the same position you are in, doesn't it?
You mean Congressman Waxman?
You called his office after you heard the report that he has assigned investigators to monitor me and Hannity and Levin and our shows for irregularities.
I called him this morning and I asked him how he could make an attack on the conservative talk show hosts who aren't telling me what to think, but instead they're simply representing what I already think.
And before I could say anything more, he interrupted me and told me that the Congressman's position was being misrepresented.
Congressman's position is being misrepresented.
Yes.
Well, and so your point is, well, they misrepresented my position, so the Congress and I are pretty much on the same, Congressman and I are pretty much on the same page.
Yes, but there was an oddity about the call.
I was told to stick to the point, but I think this is kind of the point.
There was an oddity to the call.
I wanted to further explain.
I wanted to hear an explanation.
I wanted more, but the man was very pleasant and he was very kind, but he kept cutting me off.
He didn't explain anything.
And when he said something about the tone of the Internet, and then it was odd because I felt like the call was being led.
The tone of the Internet.
Yes, sir.
And then I hung up, and then I called back after I reflected on it, and I said to him, I said, do you realize when you say tone of the Internet, do you realize you can't or shouldn't regulate tone?
And I said, do you realize that Hillary Clinton has always, as long as I can remember, attacked everything that I love and I believe in?
If she had her own way, she'd wipe me and my kind off the face of the earth.
And, sir, tone, passion, it's one and the same.
And I asked him to explain that to Mr. Waxman, that tone and passion, and that if somebody's trying to bring you to extinction, you're not going to be, I mean, you're going to have passion.
Well, you know, I don't know how many people call Waxman's office.
Yesterday, I couldn't get through.
Yeah, I'm sure.
And I'm sure these guys had to devise a response.
And they probably are tired, by the way, of taking all these calls.
And that might have been why the representative working for Congressman Waxman was a little testy.
No, he wasn't.
He was very nice.
Yeah, but he said he kept cutting you off and trying to make his points and so forth, because I'm sure he wanted to get on to the next call.
But it's interesting.
The interesting thing that you point out, that they say Congressman Waxman's remarks were misrepresented.
He didn't deny it, huh?
Did the guy deny it, Roseanne?
He didn't explain, Rush.
He just left it at that.
He just left it at the misrepresented it.
And the point that I asked him if he would please make to the congressman was, I didn't say it this way, but I'll say it this way to you.
Rush, I'm an honoree woman.
You can't put a thought in my head if I don't already have it.
And no, you know that about women because you've made that very clear.
You don't put thoughts in my head.
I have my thoughts.
You voice my thoughts, and you make me feel like there's a tomorrow.
The secret to this program is that I validate what people already think.
You are not the mind-numbed robots in our society.
It's the Democrats who are mind-numbed robots in the kook fringe base.
They're the ones that don't want to think.
They're the ones that don't think.
They're the ones that don't want to be challenged on their preconceived little worldview for their own security.
You're exactly right.
And when you last week, when Harry Reid took you out of context, my nine-year-old screamed from his 360, that's not what Rush said.
My nine-year-old knew how to put it in the middle of the morning.
That's where they miscalculated.
To attack me as being anti-military was a strategical blunder.
Total strategy.
And evidence here is a nine-year-old knew it.
A rush baby.
Well, thanks, Roseanne.
I appreciate it.
Here's the problem.
This is the first call we've had from somebody who talked to somebody in Congressman Waxman's office.
So this is the first time I've heard that Congressman Waxman's office is saying that the comments that Congressman Waxman made were misrepresented.
But I got to tell you, I can't afford to not take this seriously.
This is, I don't want to be dramatic here, but this is really dangerous.
This guy has 50 people, I'm told, on his staff to do all kinds of investigations.
It's what he lives to do, but this is a committee.
The Government Oversight Committee, which is supposed to monitor irregularities elsewhere in the government, to train these investigators on a private citizen and then call in somebody from a federal regulatory agency, the FCC, to discuss the fairness doctrine while monitoring hours and hours of broadcasts and transcripts for irregularities.
This is something we have to take very seriously.
You know, this could end up if it actually happens to Congressman Waxman taking action that would interrupt my ability to make a living to fulfill contractual obligations that I have, which would make him subject to legal action.
You know, we're not just going to sit here and cower in fear over this.
We're going to alert as many people as possible that this is what is coming on a grand scale if these people prevail victorious in 2008 from the White House on down.
This is how they deal with it.
It's in Saul Alinsky's book, Hillary's Mentor.
This is how they suppress the opposition.
They don't debate the opposition.
They don't try to win in the arena of ideas.
They suppress opposing ideas, destroy the people who are good at spreading the ideas and expressing them.
And that's what's happening now.
But when the full force, you know, it's often been said that if the federal government takes you to court, you have no prayer but to settle because they've got unlimited money.
If they want to, if some U.S. attorney wants to take you somewhere in a legal action, you can't compete with them financially.
Well, it's the same thing here.
The full force and power of the federal government, in this case, a single United States congressman.
So it has to be taken seriously.
Can't just slough this.
Oh, he said it was misquoted.
Oh, misrepresented.
Oh, okay, good.
Good.
Would like to be able to do that, but it would not be was and was, I am.
Kim in St. Louis, thank you for calling your next on the program.
Great to have you here.
Hi.
Megan Dilla from St. Louis, Missouri.
I was actually, we have media in classes in school.
I'm an international relations major at one of the most liberal universities in the state, I think.
But when we were told to look at the media and how to pull sources from the media, we're told to look at unbiased, very discredible sources.
And we're told to stay encouraged to stay away from like Fox News and stick to the CNN, MSNBC, and actually Al Jazeera is one of the big sources that we pull for.
Wait just a second.
Wait, wait, wait just a second.
I'm experiencing some tinnitus today in my ear, which is a, in my case, no, no, it's a low-level hum, and it makes you and every caller sound muffled like that.
So I'm not, you say that you're a college student at present, right?
Yes, I'm my senior year last semester.
Senior year.
And you've been assigned to watch only credible, non-biased, objective media.
Yes.
And on that list is Al Jazeera.
Yes.
Several of my classes, Al Jazeera.
I do the same thing.
I laugh.
I'm like, yeah, okay.
How many of the students, I've got to ask some questions about this, but I don't have time to do it right now.
Can you hang on through the break?
Sure.
All right, dude, I will be back.
I know what university, too, when you say one of the most liberal, I know which one it is.
I know St. Louis.
I know Missouri.
I'm from there.
Serving humanity, folks, simply by being here behind a golden EIB microphone back to Kim in St. Louis, a senior international relations major at a major American liberal university, which could be 99% of American universities.
You know, the university today, we were talking about this yesterday, Kim, is one of the most closed societies Institutions of any in the country today.
It lives under this myth that it's for curiosity and investigation, inspection, the open and free discussion of ideas, exploration, reaching for the stars intellectually, blah, blah, blah.
Instead, it's nothing but an indoctrination center anymore as the instruction you got from your professor to only watch certain media because that media was objective, fair, balanced, and unbiased.
And Al Jazeera is on the list.
Al Jazeera is on the list for the international.
How does the world view America?
Because you can't trust like BBC or anything else like that.
So Al Jazeera is pretty key in most of my classes.
Wait, I didn't catch that.
They said you can't trust ABC BBC British News for international stuff.
Wait, Hang on.
I apologize.
This is my hearing.
Your professor told you that you cannot trust BBC for international news on a view of America.
No, because it's pretty biased.
Uh, this is absurd.
The BBC is one of the biggest hate American news organizations out there.
I can't believe they would not be put on the list with Al Jazeera.
Well, anyway, you said you left.
What about the rest of the students in your class?
Well, I'm one of five self-proclaimed conservatives on campus.
So they all beat this up and go about their way and sit around and talk about it at Starbucks.
And I don't even pay attention.
But I was saying, I was making a comparison or just writing up this paper.
When I was looking at media sources, I was using, you know, when I look up your name on internet sources, it comes up conservative radio talk show host and political commentary.
Okay.
And then if I go to like The View and look up what they do, it's classified as the show is like a bunch of girlfriends sitting around chatting.
The show opens each day with hot topics in which the co-hosts provide commentary on the day's top headlines in politics.
And my point I was trying to make in class is that you, sir, can say something about Nancy Pelosi, and you can be hung in the media for it.
However, The View can invite Nancy Pelosi on their show and her husband and make lewd comments about her and doing her husband, and it's considered entertainment.
And I was trying to show, I guess, in class, how is that any different from you making a comment to Whippy Goldberg making a comment?
Or who's ever on there?
Are you asking the professor this?
Yeah, I'm going to.
I'm going to bring it up.
I wrote it in a paper and I turned it in, so it'll be interesting if you put it in a paper.
Yeah.
Very brave, Kim.
Very courageous.
And don't change.
Don't, you know, this is a great learning opportunity for you.
And I'm so proud of you because you are not going for the grade.
You're actually challenging the premise of some of the stuff the professor is saying.
And it's a great way for you to hone your skills in expressing your point of view and being able to persuade people with it.
So I applaud you.
What else?
It says you wanted to ask one other question.
Oh, I do.
I have one other question.
Media Matters said it was founded by Hillary Clinton.
Is that right?
She helped start it by her own admission, yes.
Well, I didn't know if that was true, or it was kind of like an algorithmed the internet thing.
No, it's true.
Okay.
Well, that's true.
We all put that in class.
Starting media matters is a little bit less complicated than starting the internet, than inventing the internet.
No, that's not a myth.
That's not a wives tale.
She was instrumental in its founding, along with money that's circuitously rooted to it from George Soros.
Kim, thanks much.
Go to Fairfield, California.
Kate, nice to have you back.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Well, hello, Rush, dear.
How are you?
Never better.
You know who Hillary needs to be afraid of here?
Who?
I'll tell you who.
Kim, who just called, and the gal who called before her.
That's who she needs to be afraid of.
You know, that's right.
These are.
I'm so proud of those women.
I'm just going, you go, girl.
Two women who will not vote for Hillary Clinton because.
And here's number three right here.
Okay, and there's a lot of you out there.
There is a lot of you.
There are a lot that decide this myth that she's going to collect the majority of the women's vote.
Can't wait for that one to be blown up.
It's just not true, Rush.
But what I called to say, and I want to get right to the point, first of all, thank you for your humility because you are a very humble guy because you tell the truth.
You're absolutely right.
You're the truth detector, and the left hates the truth.
They hate it.
They'll do anything they can to destroy it, and that includes destroying you.
So I am very glad to know that you're taking these threats seriously and that you're not brushing them off and you're not ignoring them, first of all.
And second of all, the base, and you know, I'm as Republican-based as there is, we're just waiting for a candidate, a Republican candidate, who will tell the truth, even if he doesn't agree with me on something, you know?
What do you mean by that?
Waiting for a Republican candidate to tell the truth about what?
Well, about everything, about his stance on moral issues, economic issues, social issues, cultural issues, whatever.
Just tell the truth.
Tell the truth.
What do you think they're not?
I think they're, you know, as they always do, I think they try and couch things.
They try and spin things.
They try and make everything palatable to everyone.
And by doing that, they're making it palatable to no one.
It's kind of like, you know, fast food or whatever.
I mean, you get it if you have to, but if you really want something good, you go to a good place that feeds you real food.
You know what I'm saying?
Yeah, there's a one word that describes your complaint about them, and that's equivocation.
Equivocation, thank you.
You bet.
That's why I'm hosting your caller.
That's exactly right.
Although we go back 21 years.
I know.
She used to call me all the time in Sacramento when I was out there.
But anyway, I'm just very, very grateful to you for all that you do and for your humility and for your, and I do not want you to run for president.
What would I do between 9 and noon every day?
And it's all about me, don't you know?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Yes, I appreciate that.
That's not bad.
That's not bad.
That's self-interest, not selfishness.
There's a big difference in the two.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Kate, thanks for the call.
I appreciate it.
By the way, folks, I think that some of the drive-by media are now starting a new push on Mrs. Clinton.
Here's a headline in the Boston Herald, a Boston Globe today.
Many warming unexpectedly to Clinton.
Don Schwartz, who describes himself as a superdeniac progressive type, decided to back Hillary Clinton, whose centrist views, he concedes, do not necessarily match his own, for a simple reason.
He wanted finally to be with a winner.
When Schwartz, the vice chairman of the Londonderry Democrat committee, started to contact his neighbors with a goal of reaching 100 people per week, he thought he would have to appeal to their respect for her rather than their affection.
But I was actually surprised how many people said they were for Hillary.
Now they're getting to know her and they're starting to like her.
She's a nice person.
They get as a source here the vice chairman of the Londonderry Democrat Committee who's talking to 100 people.
He's calling and he's telling the Boston Globe how surprised he is that people are starting to like Hillary.
Drudge has a great picture accompanying this story on his website.
It's Hillary wearing a witch hat with a black dress or something on.
Just a great, great picture.
What a put-up job.
What an amazing source for the Boston Globe, the Londonderry Democrat Committee vice chair, who now says he's be stunned at how many people actually are warming up to Hillary.
Well, you know, it's a national trend.
We're going to be seeing this story will be echoed throughout the drive-by media in due course.
And the reason for it is just the opposite's true.
She's not making in.
She just had this snappy kerfuffle with a voter in Iowa where she basically accused him of being a setup and a plant.
It was quite testy because she got a question she didn't want to deal with or didn't want to have to answer.
And so right on the heels of that, we get a story of many warming unexpectedly.
This is what I mean.
People are outraged the media.
This is just, this is not journalism.
This is advocacy, disguises journalism.
If they told us, if they just put a little box, this reporter plans on voting for Hillary, has voted Democrat, is doing everything she can to get, yep, female reporter.
Well, maybe Sasha isn't, could be a guy, doing everything possible to get her elected, then fine.
The story would be cool.
But that's not what they say.
They hide behind this pretense.
And so we've got a coordinated campaign now to tell people, just as there was a coordinated campaign to tell people they were against the war, now there's a coordinated campaign to tell people that Hillary is well-liked and is likable.
And it's a shock and it's a surprise.
Why is this a put-up job?
Her negatives are at 49%.
If I did run for president, I think my negatives would be lower than hers.
There's never anybody run for president with 49% negatives.
And she's got them.
So the drive-bys have to circle the wagons here and do stories that create an end result.
The way they hope this works is it's sort of like the way they report economic news.
It's really, really bad out there.
But individuals say, ah, I'm doing great, but it must be bad because everybody says it's bad.
So my neighbor must be hurting, but I don't want to hurt.
I don't want to do too well when my neighbor's doing so bad, so I won't say I'm doing too well.
So you create this whole myth that the economy is not well and people are not happy and that they're miserable.
And in fact, there's a story here where Hillary's out there saying that people are one pink slip away from the homeless soup line.
The middle class, one, I got it.
I'll get to it.
So the whole notion of presenting a negative picture, they did it in the war.
There was not massive public opinion polls supporting defeat and supporting losing and supporting getting out of a rock in a mess.
But they went out with four years of incessant coverage and created that mindset, or they tried to in the minds of the American people, but in truth, they didn't succeed because had they succeeded and there really were that many Americans who wanted us out of Iraq now, then they would have been able to pass at least one of the 55 resolutions in the House and Senate that they failed to pass.
But now they're trying to gin up another myth about Mrs. Clinton a couple days, three days after she has this blow-up with an average ordinary voter.
The other thing in this story that I just laughed about, Don Schwartz Says that Hillary's centrist views do not necessarily match his own.
And he's just after he's described himself a superdeniac progressive.
What is centrist about Howard Dean?
What's centrist about Hillary Clinton?
Absolutely zilch zero nada.
These people lie to themselves like I have never seen Back of the Sec.
Another story on Mrs. Clinton.
This is from the Boston Globe.
Clinton reaches out to middle-class voters who are one pink slip away from losing everything.
It is a replay of the campaign of 1992.
One paycheck away from being homeless in the most robust, successful country in the history of human civilization.
Mrs. Clinton persists, along with her liberal Democrat pals, of trying to convince as many of you as possible that your country is going to hell in a handbasket, that you aren't paying enough taxes, that the rich are getting away.
Oh, and speaking of the rich getting away with not paying enough taxes, in addition to the Democrats failing their base again by being ready to extend the wiretap powers to the president, to go ahead without warrants, to tap the phone calls of foreigners and people outside the country calling in, that's another cave to the base after all this hullabaloo about this, all the civil rights files, all the spying on Americans.
Now, all of a sudden, when the rubber meets the road, the Democrats in the Senate say, guess what?
We're going to let him go ahead and do it.
We're going to extend his power.
What the hell is that?
You people in the base have got to be scratching your head or kicking something in the corner.
Don't kick your dog or cat.
Draw the line there.
But you people have got to be livid.
You buy into all this stuff.
This is a destruction of civil liberties and civil rights.
He's spying on Americans.
I guess now we can throw the Democrats in that group, too, then, because they've authorized more spying on Americans, have they not?
Another thing.
Oh, I forgot to do what I predicted.
And I found that.
You people are aware that the Democrats are all for raising taxes on the rich, right?
And I'm sure that you are aware that the Democrats proposed a big tax increase above the capital gains rate of 15% on these hedge fund guys that went public and got all kinds of multiple billions of dollars.
They just can't stand.
I think it was Pat Leahy, whoever, a bunch of Democrats.
Guess what?
Dingy Harry has passed word that the Senate will not act on a tax increase on the hedge fund guys.
The hedge fund guys went out and spent $3.4 million lobbying Democrats.
And Dingy Harry has said, don't worry, it ain't going to happen.
He's told private equity firms in recent weeks that a tax increase proposal they've spent millions of dollars to defeat will not get through the Senate this year.
Reed's assurance all but ends the year's highest profile battle over a major tax increase.
They are getting nothing done that they promised their base.
And they're promising the base all these clichés that come right out of the identity of the Democrat Party.
Raise taxes on the rich.
Stop spying on innocent Americans.
They've just reauthorized spying on Americans.
They've just told these hedge fund gazillionaires, don't worry, pal, we're going to keep your tax rate at 15%.
So taxing the rich, none of it is going to happen.
The thing I predicted, I said to you, this is two weeks ago, maybe three now.
I said, by the time we get to the actual presidential campaign in 2008, the Iraq war will not be a major issue.
The Democrats can't win on it in their current iteration.
I said, what's going to be the primary subject matter in the presidential campaign will be the future of the country and where we are headed as a country.
It will not be Iraq.
Further alienating the base.
Further disappointing.
Now, they're not going to abandon the Democrats.
Don't misunderstand.
But it's not all sweetness and light out there.
Well, here we from the Politico today, a story by Martin, well, Katie, I think is what it says.
Fax copy didn't clear well.
Democrats turn to traditional issues, turning away from the Iraq issue.
With few Iraq votes expected in the next several weeks, a marked departure from the first nine months of this new Democrat-controlled Congress, Democrats are trying to build an agenda heavy on health care, community pricing, housing, tax reform, and other issues.
Iraq's always been the 800 guerrilla in the room, but there are other issues to deal with.
They are getting ready to abandon it as we get into the 08 election season because it's a loser, especially as they currently argue it, and they know it is a loser.
And since their candidates of Olsted, we're keeping the troops here until 2013, they've got to move on.
Future of the country is going to be what the campaign's about.
Mark my words.
Hillary has given up her idea of $5,000 for every baby born in America.
Now, everybody's going to get a government paid for 401k with a matching $1,000 annual contribution.
It's going to tax estates over $7 million to pay for it.
▲
Export Selection