All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 15, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:28
November 15, 2007, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
And welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the era of limbaugh.
So stated by Daily Variety, the era of limbaugh.
You know, the last time there was an era of anything, the most previous era, you know what it is called?
And do you know when it was?
I looked this up.
It was the era of good feelings, and it was from 85 1815 to 1824.
And I guess that's when partisan bickering took a timeout.
The era of good feelings.
1815 to 1824.
Now, well, I think we've had eras of good feeling since then, but I think the era of limbaugh is actually the second era of uh of good feeling.
And if the left and the far left and the far far left and the lunatic fringe left would only join me and all of us in the uh in the good feeling so-called center, we could really end this bickering by the left.
Greetings, my friends.
Great to have you with us, the Rush Limbaugh program and the EIB network.
Uh revved up, ready to go for three straight hours.
Telephone number if you want to join us today, 800-282-288-2.
Uh and the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
Now you heard that Governor Spitzer gave up on the illegal driver's license thing for illegal immigrants uh uh yesterday.
But did you also know?
He also gave up, he dropped his internet tax idea that we talked about yesterday on this program.
Marsha Kramer at CBS2 HD in New York reported that the governor reversed course on two major issues in one day: immigrant driver's licenses and the internet sales tax.
Uh Snerdley, you may not have heard me talking about this because you were you were screening calls, but he's going to up the sales tax on internet purchases starting in December for the Christmas season.
Uh and so uh two up and two down, ladies and gentlemen, uh, thanks to us here at the EIB network.
Now let's talk about Mrs. Clinton for just a second here because we got the big debate tonight uh out in Las Vegas.
And what I understand, the first hour is going to be Wolf Blitzer uh running the thing.
The second hour is going to be questions posed by registered independent voters uh with uh guidance provided by Suzanne Malvaux.
I'm wondering how many of those are going to be planted.
Uh you know, last time you uh did a little research on this back in 2000 for a Senate debate that Hillary was having that CNN ran in Wolf Blitzer, uh they did it at some university, I forget which, and the students were gonna be participating and asking questions.
And they submitted their questions a day in advance to CNN.
Remember this in CNN and went through the questions, decided which ones were going to get asked.
Nobody knows if uh Mrs. Clinton was uh given a heads up uh as to uh what questions were coming.
Uh but you know I remember talking about at the time and the same thing with his YouTube stuff that they tried earlier this season.
You gotta screen these things.
You can't just you can't you can't put rank amateurs up there.
Uh there's a there's a ratings component to this as well as everything else.
So I'm not surprised that CNN would be uh screening it.
Carol Simpson, what about Carol Carol Simpson?
She was the moderator at the ponytail guy debate uh between George H.W. Bush, uh H. Ross Perot, and uh and Bill Clinton.
Well, I know there would have always been questions about about how these particular independent voters or members of the public get in there and uh what questions that they are asked.
Speaking of which, uh this is from the nation, which is one of these lunatic fringe left-wing publications.
The editor there is uh is Hurricane Katrina Vandenhoov.
As Hillary Clinton aims to regain momentum in tonight's presidential debate, new videos have surfaced on YouTube with young voters asking her questions that are similar to the fake question posed by a Grinnell college student last week.
Now there's no direct indication that the new footage, apparently taken from October 16th of Enda Hat Scruel in Salem, New Hampshire, demonstrates any concerted effort with a Clinton campaign to plant questions.
But in an era where web videos can spread fast and shape the views of activists and voters, the clips may feed the narrative that Clinton's tightly run campaign is shielding her from voters' scrutiny.
One way for the Clinton campaign to address questions about the new clips would be to release the original list of fake questions.
Ha ha ha ha ha.
Then voters could see for themselves what other topics were proposed for planting, and confirmed that last week's plants were an isolated incident.
Ah, this is just great.
This is just not going away, ladies and gentlemen.
Now Mrs. Clinton's latest position on driver's licenses and illegals is also an admission.
All the BS that came out this past week, all the stuff from the war room and from Clinton Inc., all the phony accusations are being piled on, the pathetic use of the gender card.
You remember Mrs. Clinton said, This is uh to Tim, this is this is a gotcha moment.
Well, we know what gotcha means, and we know what it's always meant.
Gotcha means Hillary's caught trying not to be a leader, trying not to take a stand.
Now she's been caught making phony accusations, phony, because she was forced to admit that she was the problem, not Russert, not Dodd, not Edwards, not Obama, nor the press.
Hillary got pushed into a corner that she wasn't expecting to get pushed into.
She wasn't expecting the question.
Thank you, America.
We forced it here, and she was forced into taking a position.
And so she flip-flopped during the during the debate.
She went to that corner, kicking, screaming, making false accusations about the debate moderator, other Democrats running for president.
Then the Slickmeister came into the fray saying the boys were getting tough with her, but that she could handle it.
But she can't.
You know, that's the bottom line.
She didn't, after getting pummeled in the press in the poll, she capitulated.
And how did she capitulate?
She capitulated by taking a position that was more popular than her original statement at the debate.
and her original statement supporting Spitzer's plan to the Nashua New Hampshire newspaper editorial board.
It's a good thing she won't meet with our enemies.
God only knows what she'd give away within the course of one meeting.
This driver's license thing is a big blunder on several levels.
There are now David Broder, the Dean of Washington Punditry, has written a piece that's just scathing the Democrats here and warning them on their untenable position on illegal immigration.
Uh, and a couple other things.
All this coming up in great detail on the program, by the way.
And Anne Kornblut in the uh Washington Post has has uh uh d for her.
Uh here's the headline.
And it's on a blog.
Uh it's not in the it's not in the paper, but it's on a blog.
Spitzer drops license plan, but damage to Democrats is done.
The damage being uh that it is illegal immigration.
The issue they hope to stay away from that they hope would divide the Republicans, is now tormenting them.
Broder's piece is headlined, the icebergs ahead for the Democrats.
So anyway, Hillary Clinton is like a child of the sixties.
Her answers are blowing in the wind, and there might there might be a parody song in there.
Uh Tim Russert has to be smiling.
I hope he is.
He may be the first guy in the drive-by's that got smeared by a Clinton and emerged the clear victor in just a matter of days.
And in that, he joins me.
Because I too have been smeared by Clinton Inc.
and Harry Reed Inc., and have emerged victorious and shining.
Uh and am now the Johnny Appleseed of American politics, planting seeds of truth that are growing and sprouting throughout our glorious country.
Anyway, I got to take a brief time out.
There's a devastating poll for the Democrats today, too, from Gallup.
Americans widely disappointed with Democrats in Congress.
Majority more displeased and content with the handling of seven issues.
All of that and much more straight ahead right after this.
This just cannot be great news for the Democrats.
It's a major drive my media organization and its poll, the Gallup poll, amidst a swirl of public dissatisfaction about the Iraq war, the economy, government corruption, and with President Bush more generally.
Americans went to the polls in November 2006, voted enough Republicans out of office to give the Democrats majority control of Congress a year later.
Americans are as negative about the job Congress is doing as they were leading up to the 2006 midterm elections.
And according to recent Gallup polling Americans are distinctly negative about the Democrats' handling of several front burner policy issues.
The latest Gallup panel survey was conducted October 25th to the 28th.
Asked Americans to say whether they are pleased, neutral, or disappointed, or angry about the way Democrats in Congress have been dealing with seven major issues confronting the nation.
Here's a question.
As you may know, the Democrat Party gained majority control of Congress in January.
How do you feel about the job the Democrats in Congress are doing on each of the following issues?
Pleased, neutral, disappointed, or angry.
On terrorism, 17% are pleased, 35% neutral, 31% disappointed, 16% angry.
You add the last two, you get 47% angry.
On the economy, you add the last two, and you get 53% disappointed or angry at the Democrats on government reform.
You add the last two, disappointed and angry, and you get 45% who are 55%, sorry, 55% angry on government reform on health care.
You add disappointed and angry 43 and 17, and you get what?
You get 60% angry at the Democrats on health care on Iraq.
You add 43 and 25, you get 68% either disappointed or angry with the Democrats on Iraq on immigration.
You add 39 and 26, and you get 65% angry at the Democrats.
Ha!
And they thought those numbers would be reserved for Republicans.
On the federal budget deficit, you add the last two, disappointed and angry, and you get 50.
Sorry, you get 60% angry.
These are not numbers that Dingy Harry and Nancy Pelosi are going to appreciate.
But do they not dove folks?
Don't doubt me.
I have been assuring you that this was going to be the case with these people.
They are not universally loved.
The drive-by media is not succeeding in persuading a majority of Americans.
It's a Democrats are doing so wonderful.
If it just weren't for Bush, they could be doing all kinds of great things.
And I think part and parcel of these numbers is the fact that the Democrats just don't present themselves as likable people either.
When they uh when they go on deep dingy Harry, Nancy Pelosi, whoever they trot out there, uh, they're not likable.
They s and the people that speak for them say these mean and just outrageous, enraged, lunatic, insane things.
Uh, and it's taking it's taking its toll.
Now, interesting take on this poll.
This is from Mark Tapscott.
Mark Tapscott is the editorial page editor of the Washington Examiner.
And he's gone through the same numbers here that I just shared with you, and he said, Look, before Republicans get too happy about seeing the Democrats' abysmal failure, I suggest the root of these numbers isn't simply a dissatisfaction with policy failures, but rather an indication of a deeper disappointment born of the widespread failure of big government.
We have created a federal leviathan that promises to deliver something for Everybody, with its regulations and taxation directly or directing virtually every corner of daily life.
There is no way that government can do that, so failures are inevitable.
But over a period of time, as the failures in particular arenas multiply, there comes a point when the many specific failures merge into one general mood of dissatisfaction.
This widespread dissatisfaction with the inability of big government to deliver on its promises presents conservatives with an historic opportunity to refocus public debate to redefine what is expected of government, to slim it down to more manageable proportions so that it can deliver on the most important things.
Mr. Tapscott is dead on.
And it would shortly after Hurricane Katrina and immigration reform and the amnesty bill that failed.
One of the things that I tried and tried point out continuously.
I didn't try, I did do it.
This is big government at work, and people are seeing this.
They're seeing, especially in the immigration debate.
And I said, this is going to cross party lines.
They are seeing the ineffectiveness of it.
Not only did I say they're seeing the ineffectiveness, they're seeing the sleaze.
The amnesty bill was put together behind closed doors.
It was it was uh fast tracked.
There wasn't going to be any debate, there weren't going to be any committee hearings.
The last thing that the architects of the amnesty will wanted is for anybody to know what it was about.
They didn't want anybody to know the details.
Uh and the the details broke.
Uh there were some senators in there, Jeff Sessions that did tremendous work in uh in in making sure that the word got out.
Uh a lot of people did, and so the attempt failed, as you all know.
What that episode illustrated, quite quite obviously, is when government gets that big, it gets arrogant, it gets elitist.
Look at Governor Spitzer.
You know what really is is uh the guiding force with Governor Spitzer's mistakes here?
It's not that they're immune, it's not that they don't hear what the public says, it's that they don't care.
They are a different class of people in their mind.
You are Rubs, you are Hayseed Hicks, you are not sufficiently educated, nor are you sufficiently sophisticated to understand these complexities that the brilliant elitists among have to deal with.
And it's so complex, and it's so difficult, and we are all so so unsophisticated that they're not even going to take the time to try to tell us because it's a waste of time in their minds.
We don't have the uh brain power to understand it.
That also is what you get with an out-of-control federal government, people with that kind of attitude in it.
That they're better than everybody else, and that they're smarter than everybody.
So Tapscott here is right on the money.
Everything that's been happening recently is a great illustration of the size of government, way too big, and how becomes grossly inefficient and incompetent.
And in light of this, given how we've seen all these other issues handled from Hurricane Katrina to uh what uh the amnesty bill and the DREAM Act, all the efforts to get it uh ram rotted through without our knowing about it, any number of things.
Why would anybody how about this how about the State Department botching up people's summer vacations because of the delay in issuing passports?
These the people you want running health care.
It is just constantly amazed me that there are people out there who will turn over something that's the size of one-seventh of the U.S. economy to the same people that botch everything else they have to do in life from the DMV on up.
But the the way it happens, I think is psychologically.
The uh people in government, candidates promising this uh single payer health care plan have convinced people it's going to be free.
It's not gonna cost them anything, and so they're willing to put up, they think, with whatever uh bureaucratic inefficiencies there are.
But in a common sense way, why would anybody want to have this government run anything that's percolating fine in the private sector?
In short, back to Mr. Tapscott here, the coming decade could be the greatest opportunity this generation is likely to see to make the case for a rejuvenated federalism of limited government.
We simply have to find new ways to speak the timeless message of Ronald Reagan's first inaugural.
Listen to this.
What Reagan said.
It's my intention to curb the size and influence of the federal establishment to demand recognition of the distinction between the powers granted to the federal government and those reserved to the states and to the people.
All of us need to be reminded the federal government didn't create the states.
The states created the federal government.
Now, so there'll be no misunderstanding.
It's not my intention to do away with government.
It is rather to make it work.
Work with us, not over us, to stand by our side, not ride on our back.
Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it.
Foster productivity, not stifle it.
That's Reagan, first inaugural.
One more lesson of importance here for conservatives, writes Tap Scott, and one that ought to give us heart.
When your political power depends as it does for our liberal friends on promising more and more.
But doing so assures that you'll be able to actually deliver less and less.
You sow the seeds of your own downfall.
Now, I do have an observation about that when we come back.
Yeah, you need it up to at least 800 decibels, ladies and gentlemen, so that you do not miss one dulcet tone from me.
The all-knowing, all caring, all feeling, all sensing, maha Roshnishi.
800 two eight two two eight eight two.
Now, Mark Temp Scott writes, and by the it's a great premise.
Uh big government faces paralysis by promise, the inability to deliver on what everybody expects.
And he concludes his analysis of the Gallup poll this way when your political power depends, as it does for our liberal friends on promising more and more, but doing so assures that you'll be able to actually deliver less and less, you sow the seeds of your own downfall.
Now, theoretically, I think that's valid, but in a practical application, can you think of a group of people that have been voting Democrat for decades, expecting and expecting and expecting, and being disappointed and disappointed and disappointed, and not receiving what they think they're going to expect.
Yes, you can.
The African American community in this country, when it comes to voting for Democrat presidents, does so at 90 to 93% every four years.
And they've been doing it since the 60s.
And they continue to have all this hope held out.
The Democrats are going to get even with these people discriminating against you.
We're going to get even with the racists and the bigots.
We're going to make sure that you're not in jail.
We're going to make sure that all this economic good stuff happens.
And they still complain.
They still complain, and they st and and and you took you guy like Bill Clinton, who did nothing for them in the 90s, and all they they proclaim him the first black president.
And so, while the theory would seem to work in practical application, at least for one voting block, the idea that promising more and more, but failing to deliver less and less will sow the seeds of your downfall.
It has not sown the scenes of the Democrat Party's downfall with black voters and presidential racism.
Through the phones will start in Fort Worth, Texas.
Billy, I'm glad you called, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Hey, how are you doing, Mr. Mrs. Lumba?
I'm fine, sir.
Thank you.
Well, listen, I think y'all do an overkill on Mrs. Clinton because uh hey, what would have I turn on you and Sean Hannity and other talk shows y'all talk about?
I hear hate, hate, hate, Ms. Clinton.
You know, and hey, I'm not for Ms. Clinton I am a Democrat.
I'm a and I'm uh uh uh a Christian.
And what I hear from you guys is hate.
And then later they got on TV and talking with um Mr. McCain, talking about how can we stop, you know, the lady with the B-word.
I mean, I can believe they will say that.
She was said it.
Um that's that's hate, and I don't think Christians are about hate.
And it looked, I think you guys go Miss Clinton win by what you guys are doing.
I don't think Christians uh is about hate.
All I hear is hate, hate, hate, hate, hate.
And I think that's wrong.
That's overkey.
Uh Billy, I love Mrs. Clinton.
I've uh I've met Mrs. I don't hate her.
You know, I don't I don't hate anybody.
I do like to point out when people in politics who are uh given these vast grand images of greatness prove that they are false.
Uh but I disagree with Mrs. Clinton on policy matters almost across the board, and that's what This is about.
But you know, you raise an interesting point, Billy, because as a Democrat, you you say you were undecided about voting for Mrs. Clinton.
No, I I never been for Mrs. Clinton.
I'm I I like uh uh Edwards and Thai.
But now you're stereo you're you find yourself sympathizing with Mrs. Clinton, right?
Because of all this so-called hate that you hear out there.
So you're thinking of supporting her with the first chance you get, right?
If she's a if she'd be the Democratic nominee, I will.
Well, of course you will, Bill.
You're a Democrat.
You're gonna support whoever the Democrats nominate.
How you know that?
You don't know that.
Well, I got the law of averages on my side.
You're a democratic.
You do not know that.
You're a Democrat.
And I think and I think you take it anything for granted.
No, you have black people ain't like that, fella.
Billy, you are getting contentious with me for no reason.
I have done nothing but show you calm, reasoned respect.
And I've asked you questions, desiring your opinion.
And here you are lashing out in it.
You sound like you're filled with hate today, calling me.
No, no, I'm not.
I'm just looking.
I hey, I I would I l I uh I wouldn't mind voting for Ms. Newt Rotman if you you know, but uh you're not gonna I'm looking at Ba.
You're not gonna vote for Mitt Romney.
How do you know?
Well, bec.
How do you know?
I don't know, but I'm just guessing I think pretty good.
Just unless you guys always said Mr. Jackson and other things.
Billy, you gotta guys don't know that.
You gotta stop I'm 57 years old and you guys don't know that.
You gotta stop with this all you guys business.
I am one guy, I am the big guy.
It's the era of limbaugh.
Okay, but I think you can uh if if Mrs. Clinton gets elected, it'll be because of the uh people you and Sean Hennedy and the people on the right.
All this hate and y'all need to stop that hate.
You know, in a way, you you have a you you are you are you have a valid point uh about that, but not the way you're thinking.
And I've got a Kathleen Parker wrote a great column today about how the treatment of Mrs. Clinton could create sympathy for her.
And it's not by attacking her on her issues.
If people uh attack her appearance, attack the way she dresses, if they attack uh her looks, this sort of thing, that won't fly.
That will rally women to Mrs. Clinton more than anything possibly could.
You know that that B words are you know that the B word.
You you do the you so what you mean this guy that asked McCain the question and referred to Hillary as a B.I. itch.
But a lady, that was a lady.
It was a lady?
There was a lady.
Oh, well, then what's the problem?
Women can say whatever they want about women.
They're gonna rally people to her support, I'm telling you.
And I wish you win now because all of this hate and creature all you think.
Y'all need to stop that hated.
Wait, is I need to ask you a serious question here.
Yes.
Before you before you heard what you think is hate on the radio about Mrs. Clinton, you weren't prepared to vote for her.
You were you were looking at Edwards or did you say Obama or Biden?
Biden.
Well, that's really interesting.
So um what what what is it that you didn't like about Mrs. Clinton before you started hearing all this hate?
Why did uh what business I didn't like?
Well, the way her attitude is.
I really, you know, I look at a person and I don't really think she can well, she's not a Bill Clinton, okay.
I used to wait with Bill Clinton cousin there in Arkansas, and she's not a Bill Clinton, okay.
And and I and and and I don't know why people hate Bill Clinton either.
Do you ever stop to think uh that uh if Hillary gets elected, Bill's back in there and they're gonna have you know a co-presidency.
I I don't I don't know about that.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah, you're a people saying I don't know about that.
I know the Clintons like every square inch of my glorious naked body, Billy, and I can tell you it's gonna be a um co-president.
But I gotta go back.
You you don't like Hillary's attitude, what but but but so you would actually end up voting for somebody you don't like just because you think a bunch of people are piling on her unfairly.
I sure will because of hate, and I'm a Christian.
Well, I don't think you're not gonna be able to do that.
That may be Challa.
That may be the vote.
I'm not sure.
You get the nominee.
But I hope she don't get to be the nominee.
You guys, let me tell you you guys on the left, Billy, are gonna have to re-examine the way you define hate, because the hate in our culture is coming from the Democrat Party and it's coming from the American left.
I don't hate anybody.
Sean Hannity didn't hate anybody.
We love the country, we Want the best country we can be.
We want people to be the best they can be.
We want people to reach their dreams, their wildest dreams and aspirations.
We have faith that they can do it if government gets out of their way.
We don't have hate for people.
Oh, we we want we would we love people, in fact, Billy, we love them to the point that we see the best in them.
And we see and they when we know that there's the best in everybody, but they're not inspired by enough people.
Their expectations are not high enough.
The hate in this culture is coming from the people in your party and further left in the uh in the lunatic fringe blogosphere.
Whatever you're hearing me discuss about Mrs. Clinton, it is not rooted in hate.
Maybe a little Schaden Freud, uh, but not hate.
Brief time out.
Thanks, Billy, we'll be right back.
Stay with us.
Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have the fastest three hours and the fastest week in media.
Here is Kathleen Parker's column regarding how, and of course, Kathleen Parker, you can uh correctly assume is a woman.
And this is her piece on uh, you know, how how to avoid criticizing Hillary in order to create sympathy.
You don't want to do want to do that.
Um women vote for Hillary Clinton only because she's a woman, that question keeps getting bounced around.
I've recently revised my answer from no to yes.
That is yes, women will vote for Clinton because she's a woman if men target her as a woman.
Translation, gentlemen, if you don't want another Clinton in the White House, don't say unkind things about her persona, her demeanor, her appearance, even if bullseye true.
Not even in your own kitchen with your own wife.
Women have radar for anti-woman sediments, and all guys have anti-woman sediments to some degree.
Blame mom if you haven't already.
And no one has benefited more from being a victim than the candidate formerly known as Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The truth is Clinton might not be a senator from New York if not for her victimization as first spouse.
How soon we forget the circumstances of her rise to power.
It may be arguable that Clinton is a good enough senator, but that's not the point.
It is inarguable that she won the office in 2000 because women rallied around her.
Overall, women voted for Clinton over Rick Lazio 60 to 39%.
In upstate New York, typically a Republican stronghold, women voted for Clinton 55 to 43%.
And it really had as much to do with Clinton the victim as Clinton the candidate.
But gentlemen, Hillary Clinton should lose the presidency for legitimate reasons, not because men find her unappealing.
Let men criticize Clinton personally, and a funny thing happens.
Contaminating the air is a slight whip of misogyny that women recognize and recoil against.
When men speak derogatorily about Clinton's looks, all women feel a little bit wounded.
What woman can withstand such scrutiny after all?
Women may attack each other, but when a man does it, something female kicks in among even the least girly of us.
Bottom line is this what women have in common with Hillary Clinton will always exceed what women have in common with men.
This is powder room wisdom.
Two women can disagree on the most controversial issues at the table, but when they head to the ladies' room inevitably together, they see eyeball to eyeball real fast over the most basic and ultimately most important matters, hair, for instance.
But all so seriously calm down that you you you you have you have problems with this.
The deeper Ken Starr cut into Bill Clinton's very private life, the more men felt sympathy for and align themselves with the president.
In the locker room, Schaden Freud has its limits.
Will women vote for Hillary just because she's a woman?
Only if men attack Hillary as a woman.
So be nice boys, you may end up may end up choking on the words Madam Presidents.
I'm wondering now, having read this, if I can no longer refer to Mrs. Clinton and there's ranting and screeching is reminding me of uh first and second ex-wives.
Um there is uh the the one thing in here that I snurdly is doubting all of this, but there's the one thing in here I think that uh that that makes sense is that you you you can go up to a woman snurdly try this and find the most beautiful woman that you see her and ask her, what does it feel like to feel beautiful?
And she'll tell you she doesn't know.
She doesn't feel beautiful.
They all think they got something wrong.
There's some flaw somewhere.
And so they rally around other women who are, especially if they are unattractive, and men start laughing about it, making jokes about it, then there will be this bonding, so to speak.
Uh that I think is a is a uh is a great point.
That it's true, Mrs. Clinton.
Look at I also think to go back and refight all that garbage in the 90s is a loser.
Mrs. Clinton and the future of America that she would make it is the issue here.
And that's essentially what uh Ms. Parker happens to be saying.
This is Nick in Daytona Beach, Florida.
Hi, Nick, nice to have you on the program.
Hey Rush, how are you?
I'm just fine, sir.
Thank you.
I've listened for so long it's unbelievable.
No, it's totally believable and appreciated.
Sure, listen, I can't help but feel more and more optimistic every day.
You know, if you think about it, the Democrats would have won a lot of seats in the House in the Congress altogether anyway, because that's what normally happens in a presidency, second term, yada yada yada.
We've talked about that.
But what I cannot believe is the capital that they wasted fighting the war, which we have now won and are closing the deal on, fighting the president tooth and nail on every single thing for what?
To gain one or two seats to control a Congress here and there.
And I mean, they even turned against Joe Lieberman.
The amount of capital that they spent to win a war naturally won anyway.
This is all true.
So why do you think they blew it?
I think they blew it because they got what they wanted.
What they've blown is a chance to really compete for the presidency.
If they had been there with you and me for the last eight years and the Sean Hannities and everybody else, they could stand up and say, we've won.
Let's hug each other, and now let's deal with the tough issue.
We're never gonna do that.
These people are obsessed, as if you're a longtime listener, I don't want to have to be redundant here, but they're obsessed with rage and hatred at Bush for having stolen the election from them.
They actually think the election was stolen.
They think he's a Supreme Court elected president.
They haven't they still haven't gotten over it.
Kerry thinks that he could have won in uh Ohio if they hadn't uh messed around there with the voting machines.
These people are they have become irrational.
You're you're demanding rational behavior and understanding from them, and they are totally irrational.
I mean, what is rational about running against George W. Bush in the 2008 election?
He's not on the ballot.
He will not be on the ballot.
Uh what is rational about their arrogance and their condescension?
The answer to my question, why do you think they behave this way?
They're arrogance.
They believe power is their birthright.
They believe whether people like them, love them or not, that people are going to end up behaving and the and and acting the way Democrats want them to.
They had 40 years of this kind of power.
They had no opposition.
They had no opposition in the media, they had no opposition from the Republican Party.
I'm talking about in Congress, where spending bills originate and so forth, uh Republicans had the Senate now and then, but the Democrats ran the House for 40 years.
They ran the town.
Uh that's that's why they hated Reagan.
There was an eight-year interruption in that.
They hated Reagan.
Personally despised Reagan because he took their power away from them.
Uh and they've they've just you have that kind of arrogance and condescension to people where you think you can't do wrong, that people, even if they don't understand you will end up supporting you because you're Democrats.
Why, we're Democrats.
Why, we own the country.
Power is our birthright, yada yada yada.
Uh so it's their it's their attitude that's presenting them uh presenting them problems here.
Brief time out here, thanks for the call out there, Nick.
I appreciate it.
Don't go away.
Before we go to the break, folks, I want you to think about something.
Since 1969, I, as a red-blooded American male, have been told that all women want us to be equal.
They want to be equal.
They want equal pay, they want equal this, equal opportunity, they want to be equal.
Want to join the military, fight in the foxholes.
And during these 40 years, I can, as a man, I have to sit up and put up with all the fun being made the way I look.
Obama has to put up with Maureen Dowd making fun of his big ears.
▲
Export Selection