All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 26, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:22
November 26, 2007, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Oh, I forgot you're going to be here, Ed.
That's right, the broadcast engineer Mamon on vacation.
So Ed Robinson's here.
We expect no screw-ups.
I appreciate that.
He just told me I'll have no screw-ups.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
Rush Limbaugh, the all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing, all-feeling, all-concerned, maha-rushy.
And the EIB network, something really big has happened, but nobody, and I mean nobody is talking about it other than me, ladies and gentlemen.
And that is the Democrats have already been proven wrong about the war in Iraq.
They've already demonstrated that they were wrong about what we should do there.
They were wrong about what we can do there and will do there.
They've already been shown to be wrong about their predictions.
They've already been shown to be wrong about surrendering and denying funds and opposing the surge.
Does this not demonstrate that they are unqualified to lead this nation?
We can't.
And by the way, speaking of that, Barack Obama is on a tear.
Now, I guess he did an interview for Nightline.
And I'll get you an exact quote in just a second, but paraphrasing what he says, look, I'm sure that the president, President Clinton and Hillary had a lot of conversations, just like Michelle and I do.
But just because my wife talks to me about things going on in the Senate doesn't make her qualified to be a senator.
Meaning, just because Hillary is talking to her husband, who happened to be the president, doesn't make her qualified.
This is getting fun.
The time is right.
We're past all the Labor Day Thanksgiving stuff now, and it's going to really, really heat up.
Oprah is going to hit the campaign trail for Barack Obama.
Not just endorse, but she's going to go out there on the campaign trail.
This will no doubt lead to a phone call from Don Vito Clinton Leone to Oprah.
And maybe Hillary will be on the call, too.
What will they say to the Oprah about her campaigning actively and aggressively for Barack Obama?
But back to the Democrats here, folks.
They have shown to be wrong about their predictions.
They have been shown already, right now, to be wrong about surrendering, denying funds, opposing the surge.
This demonstrates, does it not, that they are unqualified to lead the nation.
And we cannot allow them off the hook on this.
We cannot allow history to be rewritten.
We got books full of their predictions and defeatist comments.
We have audio soundbites from our archives that do the same thing.
This is not ancient history.
It is today's facts.
And you know, another thing, all these retired generals that have been on television for the past two years.
Yeah, this will never work.
We don't have the troop strength.
We really can't pull this off.
It was an ill-fated, misguided mission.
Have not all these retired generals been proven wrong as well?
People streaming back to Baghdad and Iraq in droves.
And here we go, a couple of Rush C I told you sos, the New York Times today, Patrick Healy.
As Democrats see security gains in Iraq, tone shifts.
As violence declines in Baghdad, the leading Democrat presidential candidates undertaking a new and challenging balancing act on Iraq, acknowledging that success, trying to shift the focus to the lack of political progress there and highlighting more domestic concerns like healthcare and the economy.
I told you, I told you, elections about the future.
They're not going to be about the Iraq war.
The future of the country is what's going to be a dominant issue in the presidential race next year.
But here's a piece in the New York Times.
Oh, what are the Democrats going to do to massage this?
You notice every piece, every drive-by story is not about, boy, Democrats blew it.
Democrats wrong.
Democrats unqualified.
Democrats have demonstrated that they can't be trusted.
Democrats have demonstrated X, Y, all the things I just went through.
No, it's what do the Democrats have to do now?
It's a delicate balancing act.
The Democrats have to find some way of saying they were right when they were wrong and saying that Bush was wrong when he was right and then change the subject after that.
They have to say how they'll surrender and not lose the war.
The tonal shift is to hammer political gains over military success or the lack of them.
And that's really nothing new either.
Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a supporter of Mrs. Clinton's and a proponent of the military buildup, said the politics of Iraq are going to change dramatically in the general election, assuming Iraq continues to show some hopefulness.
If Iraq looks at least partly salvageable, it'll be important to explain as a candidate how you would salvage it, how you would get our troops out and not lose the war.
So the Democrats are there.
They're worried here now that the progress is underway.
And what the Democrats are on record as having said, we can't win.
We're not winning.
In fact, we are losing.
And we've got to get the troops out of there.
If they do that and Iraq looks promising and then we end up losing it, then what?
He says the Democrats need to be very careful with what they say and not hem themselves in.
Can I remind you of something too, ladies and gentlemen?
I forget how long ago this was, maybe two months.
Remember this little story, and everybody blew a gasket over it, but the president apparently had a private conversation with Mrs. Clinton and said, look, and this is when she started changing her tone on the war, by the way, and got a lot of grief from the anti-war kook fringe of the Democrat Party.
He said, look, you better start thinking about how you're going to deal with this if you're president and not a candidate.
Because it's a much, much different situation when you're sitting at this desk, the Oval Office in the White House, than when you're out there on the campaign trail.
And he did that because this is serious and this matters, and he understands its politics, his politics, and campaigning is campaigning.
And ever since then, Mrs. Clinton has pulled back.
The Associated Press, Charles Babington, another rush.
See, I told you so.
Now that violence in Iraq is abating and other issues are consuming more of the presidential debates, political activists are wondering if the war will prove to be the defining issue that Democrats have long assumed.
No, it won't.
And they know it now.
I told you this weeks ago, maybe months ago.
You couldn't understand it when I said that, H.R.
Yeah.
HR, trusted chief of staff, now speaking to me on the IFB as though you people aren't even here, suggests, I thought you lost your mind when you said that.
I couldn't believe that you would go out of the limb and say that.
Don't doubt me.
I say it.
You believe it.
That's the rule here.
And it's now, you know, they've got to figure out what to do.
Some Democrats say frustrated voters have given up on altering President Bush's handling of the war and will make Republicans pay in 2008.
Others say Democrat candidates are stubbornly, dangerously out of step with an improving situation, and their most promising campaign issue may prove far less potent by next November.
Democrat Party has become emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq, reluctant to acknowledge the progress our troops are now achieving.
That's from Joe Lieberman.
Many Democrats reject that notion.
It is highly unlikely that Iraq will be significantly more stable next fall, they say, and millions of voters will have made their final judgments about Bush and the war.
Ram Emmanuel actually said, quote unquote, George Bush is on the ballot in 2008.
Rahm, you're not stupid.
You may be a liberal, but you're not stupid.
And he's not going to be on the ballot, and you're not going to be able to make people think that he is.
It is, it's funny.
It is actually funny to watch this.
Candidates ponder voters' view of Iraq.
No, not candidates, Democrats.
And note the message here.
Democrats.
What do the voters think?
What do the polls say?
Not what's best for the country, not what's right, but what can they do to cement power for themselves?
By the way, folks, I was watching television finally yesterday.
What a blowout at my house from Wednesday through Saturday night.
But I finally got a chance to exhale, and I'm watching some television, and I haven't seen a story yet.
I haven't seen one story on all the travel nightmares this weekend.
I haven't seen one.
Apparently, it went amazingly well.
Is it just me?
Or did overall travel this weekend just happen smooth as glass?
Yours was smooth.
HR was smooth.
Went out to the frozen tundra of Wisconsin.
I haven't seen any stories anywhere.
Now, think back to last Tuesday and Wednesday about the buildup, Monday of last week, even.
You shouldn't even go, folks.
It's going to be a nightmare.
It's going to be a disaster.
You're going to be late.
It's going to be weathered.
Big storm system is going to slop everything and slow it down.
Just went smooth as it could be.
And another thing, the Black Friday and all of the disaster predictions about what was ahead for retailers, everything, everything they forecast and predicted was wrong about shopping and the strength of the economy.
All that.
Much more coming up as the EIB network gets back in gear.
Here, stay with us.
I know, I know, I know Trent Lott's resigning, retiring, whatever he announced it today.
Everybody's upset.
Rush, Rush, how can we hold the Senate?
I mean, Trent Lott's retiring.
What is going?
Folks, this is not a bad thing.
Trent Lott was from the old leadership days that, you know, it's an opportunity here.
Let me just put it that way.
It's an opportunity to go out and find a good candidate.
It is what it is.
No whining or bellyaching or anything like that.
Look at it as an opportunity.
One more Iraq war story, also from the AP.
The Democrats' flagship proposal on Iraq is aimed at bringing most troops home.
Yet, if enacted, the law would still allow for tens of thousands of U.S. troops to stay deployed for years to come.
Another rush.
See, I told you so.
That even though the Democrats plan, they've got their wacko base thinking they're going to pull everybody out of there if they ever get the chance.
It ain't happening, ladies and gentlemen.
And particularly if the Democrats win and if the search continues to work and if the victory is at hand, they are not going to secure defeat on their own watch.
I want to talk about the drive-by media and economic reporting.
I have a few stories here.
First from the AP.
Retailers buoyed by strong holiday start.
The nation's shoppers set aside worries about higher gas prices and a slumping housing market improve their resilience over the Thanksgiving weekend, giving what the nation's merchants wished for, a strong start to the holiday shopping season.
How does this pro who wrote this?
Ann De Inocenzio?
How does she know that the shoppers set aside worries about higher gas prices and a slumping housing market?
Were you all at home on Thursday or at the relatives' place, wherever you were on Thanksgiving, and then Black Friday shows up and you say, you know what?
Gas prices are high out there and the subprime market's collapsing.
But Mabel, I think we ought to put all that aside and head to the mall.
This is not how people play.
We're going to go to the mall all along.
They were going to go shopping all along.
Why?
It's Christmas.
There's a tradition here, an American tradition, and they're going to go.
And yet the drive-bys tried to create this impression of people hunkering down, cowering in the corners, waiting for the bank to come foreclose on them, steal everything they've got, and have to go out and find a soup kitchen.
But funny thing happened.
Consumers put all that aside and decided to go do what consumers do.
Live their lives, try to be joyful, try to have a good time.
It's the Thanksgiving weekend.
The New York Times and Reuters, however, while reporting the good news, have to still slant it a bit.
The headline in the New York Times, retail sales rise, but stores relied on discounts.
Really?
When do they not rely on discounts?
With stores dangling steep discounts and consumers worried about the economy, retail sales surged on the day after Thanksgiving, yet the amount of money each shopper spent fell according to two reports released yesterday.
The reports suggest that jittery consumers are flocking to rock bottom prices and a little else.
A boon for discount stores like Walmart and Best Buy and trouble for high-end.
You know, this is just, it's mind-boggling.
No matter what, if only the rich go out, that's a problem.
That's a disaster.
If the middle class able to go out there and spend like crazy because there are stores that cater to them, but the rich don't show up, why, that's a disaster.
Sales rose 8.3% on Friday compared with last year, the biggest increase in three years according to Shoppers Track, or Shopper Track, a research company.
Higher gas prices and a reluctance to drive to stores may be behind a big rise in the percentage of people who shopped online.
How about convenience?
Rising gas prices and a reluctance to drive to store.
Come on, and maybe avoid crowds.
So what?
They're shopping.
What does it matter where?
And then CNN, although deep discounts brought out much bigger crowds of holiday bargain hunters, a major retail trade group said Sunday that shoppers actually spent less money this year over the crucial Thanksgiving weekend.
See how news is made here?
You got some group.
They got a fax machine.
They say they're experts in tracking sales.
So they put out a press release.
Reuters picks it up.
New York Times picks it up.
Why?
Because it fit the template.
Well, yeah, the weekend was pretty good, but they didn't spend as much.
And they went to discount places.
Well, here's my take on all this, folks.
I think after reading these stories, I have learned where the super rich go shopping.
I know where they go.
I am the all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing Maharashi.
And I know the shopping habits of the super rich, the winners in the lottery of life, the only group surviving the worst economy in history, if you read the media.
And I tell you what, the rich, the rich went out and droves on Black Friday to Walmart, Sears, Target.
And they spent 8% more than last year's event.
Now, super rich, super rich go elsewhere.
The rich go to Walmart, they go to Sears, and they go to Target.
And I have a, I have, not trying to kid anybody, I have a reason for saying this.
We are not poor.
We are not a destitute country.
We are not a bunch of meager wage earners who can barely scrape by.
The super rich and the rich.
We are a wealthy nation.
Look at they spent 8% more than last year.
Now, how can this be?
Every headline in every economic story is dismal.
Doom, gloom, foreclosures, weak dollar, weaker America, downsizing, globalization, lower middle class panicked, middle class panicked, upper middle class panicked, top 1% have all the money.
I mean, that's the theme in all these news stories about the economy in recent weeks.
But I repeat, Black Friday this year was 8% greater than Black Friday last year.
Calendar said Black Friday, the drive-by said bleak Friday in advance.
Now, if you follow drive-by news, you'd expect sales down 8%.
Would you not?
And that's for the optimists.
The news has been so negative, Black Friday sales should have been too small to measure.
I mean, if the drive-bys genuinely had all this power to create panic and doom and gloom, and they have some, I'm not denying it, people should have gone nowhere.
There should have been sales of such infinitesimal significance they couldn't be measured.
But they went up 8%.
Now, as I have said from time to time, it's very easy being a liberal.
Most gutless choice you can make, actually, but it's not that easy being a realistic liberal.
To them, if it sounds good, it is good.
And in election season, if it sounds bad, it's even better.
Take the subprime problem, for example, folks.
Home prices are softening.
Ooh, play the disaster card.
Home prices are softening.
Liberals hit you with this.
Seniors who retire sell their homes will have less to live on, less for retirement, less for dog food for themselves.
But when those same home prices are rising, ladies and gentlemen, the doom is this.
Young couples can't afford startup homes.
America unfair.
So in either event, house prices falling, which is a good sign for young couples wanting to get in the market, why it's bad news for the seasoned citizens.
House prices go up, bad news for young couples.
Up is a disaster.
Down is a disaster.
There is no economic news that's not a disaster with the drive-by media.
We hear gloom and doom stories that home prices could drop 5%, 10%, maybe 20%.
That damn George Bush.
But wait a minute.
If housing prices went up, say, 100% and dropped, say, 10%, tell me exactly where the hardship is.
If the doom and gloom left gets you to repeat this mantra, Black Friday this year was 8% greater than Black Friday last year.
Black Friday this year, 8% greater than Black Friday last year.
That's the mantra.
The drive-bys hide it by portraying all the news as having a big downside like it was hardest on minorities this year.
And we are back having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, Rush Limbaugh meeting, and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Now, what are Democrats going to do about this economy business?
All they can do is go back to old pages in their playbook and try to recycle them and sell them again.
Listen to James Carville, who was on Meet the Press yesterday.
Tim Russert said, assess subjectively the Republican race right now as you see it, James.
Well, first of all, I think the Republican Party is just disconnected with America.
Every time that I see them talk about this is the best economy ever, I just, I know that we're typing that.
I think the anger and angst in this country is at a level that I've never seen it.
The Gallup Post says the economic insecurity is the highest it's been since 1991.
Really?
The economic insecurity is the highest it's been since 1991.
Anything magical about that year, ladies and gentlemen?
That happened to be the year prior to the Clinton Gore campaign, in which their theme then was the worst economy in the last 50 years.
So now this apparently are going to set up as the worst economy in the last 16 years.
All it is is going back to the playbook.
But I just saw some videotaped people showing up.
You know, 14%, some story up there, 14.3% of consumers hit the stores at midnight, Thanksgiving night.
Now you can say, let me put this in perspective.
I've got a story here.
This Brian DePalma movie has bombed at the box office.
It has bombed big time Soda Net Big Thing with what's your name, Streep.
Redford and Cruz, another anti-Iraq war movie.
All these anti-war movies are failing big time.
The New York Times and other drive-by newspapers are also failing.
Katie Couric is getting her butt handed to her every night.
The economy is chugging along.
The war is progressing positively.
People are starting to understand the tax issue and they get the illegal immigration issue.
The University of Missouri beat the Jayhawks.
The Democrat Congress is unprecedentedly unpopular.
People are starting to get wise to Hillary and her gang, and we're supposed to sit here and believe that the Democrats are a lock and a sure win in 2008.
We're supposed to sit here and believe that?
Not high, ladies and gentlemen.
Nothing's a lock.
And the conventional wisdom is almost always wrong.
To the phones, Debbie in Columbia, Missouri.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Oh, Rush.
Hi.
What about our Missouri Tigers?
Yeah, how about your Missouri Tigers?
Yeah, did you watch the game right now?
Yeah, I tried to.
Yes, I did.
We had, I must have had, it must have been 40 people in my house Saturday night to watch the game.
We put up a sports bar menu in the big media room and in my library, and people were going back and forth.
Yeah, we watched it all 60 minutes plus of it.
Boy, as a Missouri boy, you must be proud.
It's exciting.
They're number one in the BCS rankings, number one in AP.
The Coach's poll has West Virginia number one.
But look, you know, it's great right now to be number one.
You want to be number one last game of the season.
You've got a big game coming up Saturday with Oklahoma, and you already lost Oklahoma.
I know.
So I'm not trying to pour cold water on things here.
Season isn't over yet.
I know, but it sure is exciting for us Missouri fans.
We're so thrilled.
And it's an honor to speak to you, Rush.
Well, thank you.
I appreciate that.
You're going to keep watching, right?
Oh, yeah.
Okay.
I'm just nervous talking to you.
I didn't think I would ever get through because I tried to call you before the game.
Right and see.
You probably don't think the Republicans have a chance of winning in 08 either, but look.
Oh, no.
I love the Republicans.
Well, yeah.
And I think the economy is great, too.
Good for you.
Debbie, I appreciate it.
Thanks much.
Well, thank you so much, Rush.
It's an honor to talk to you.
Merry Christmas.
Same to you.
By the way, speaking of Merry Christmas, Rasmussen has done an extensive poll.
As the holiday season begins, 67% of American adults like stores, retail stores, to use the phrase Merry Christmas in their advertising rather than happy holidays.
A Rasmussen Reports National Telephone Survey found that just 26% prefer the happy holidays line.
There's no gender gap on the question, and there are few demographic differences.
From a politically partisan perspective, 88% of Republicans prefer Merry Christmas, while just 57% of Democrats did.
That is just, it's a national holiday for crying out loud.
I mean, everything have to be political with these people?
Yes.
Only 57% say they prefer.
And why is this?
You know, because they're afraid it's going to offend somebody.
Even if it doesn't offend them, they're afraid that it's going to offend somebody.
Heading into Thanksgiving week, only 27% say they begun their Christmas or holiday shopping.
Consumer confidence has been sliding in recent months, giving retailers a cloudy profit forecast in 2007.
But we now know, ladies and gentlemen, that the retailers...
See, now what the retailers are worried about, or no, what the drive-bys are telling us the retailers are worried about is these people went out early and now everybody's finished.
And they're not going to be shopping for the rest of the month.
And they're spending less than they did last year.
They need to splurge and they didn't splurge.
The narrative must be disaster.
And the drive-bys can take whatever aspect of any economic story there is and turn it into a disaster for someone.
And they will.
You know, as a highly trained broadcast specialist, ladies and gentlemen, I am presented with few broadcast challenges.
Very few.
Because as a highly trained broadcast specialist, I can pretty much deal with whatever crosses the transom, hits the desk, or what have you.
But I have a story here from Gannett, Wisconsin newspapers from November 17th.
And it presents an interesting challenge for a highly trained broadcast specialist.
The headline is seemingly innocuous.
Charges dropped against local men in disappearance.
The case against a Sheboygan man accused of abducting a 17-year-old Oshkosh girl was dismissed last week after the teen admitted she lied about her two-week disappearance.
Angelina Lohr initially claimed that this is where the challenge begins because the name coming next is if I'm not careful with this, not only will I offend you, but I might get myself in trouble.
It only adds to the irony that the man is a convicted sex offender.
Let me spell both names to give you an idea of what I face.
First name, P-H-E-U-K.
Last name, K-U-E.
Now, I know probably some of you don't have time to write this down.
Let me go through this again.
The first name, P-H-E-U-K, the last name K-U-E.
I have checked with phonetics experts before I, and some say, why don't you just ignore the guy's name?
I said, no, I can't do that.
I'm a broadcast professional.
The man's name's in the story, and the newspaper printed it here.
So here's how I would read the story to you.
Angelina Lohr initially claimed that Fu Q, 37, a convicted sex offender, took her to Green Bay against her will in September, held her there until she was able to escape about two weeks later.
But in an email earlier this month to Fu Q's lawyer, Laura acknowledged that she made up the story because she feared her parents' reaction to her running off with an older man, in this case, Fu Q. Brief timeout, ladies and gentlemen.
Stay with us.
Don't go away.
We'll be right back.
You want Christmas?
You want Merry Christmas?
We got Christmas.
We've got Mannheim Steamroller now being integrated into our bump rotation here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Keep it up, Ed.
Keep it up.
Keep it at the bottom, I don't know if you heard about this.
This happened on Friday.
The Paris Prosecutor's Office dismissed a lawsuit against Donald Rumsfeld, accusing him of accusing him of torture.
The human rights groups who brought the case said on Friday, the plaintiffs who included the French-based International Federation of Human Rights Leagues and the U.S. Center for Constitutional Rights said Rumsfeld had authorized interrogation techniques that led to rights abuses.
I told you when this happened, a suit was going to be thrown out.
It was thrown out on Friday, but I doubt that it was reported much, if at all, by the drive-by media.
Sedalia, Missouri.
Charlie, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, how are you doing, sir?
Just fine, sir.
Well, I've got a favor to ask of you.
I work for a small radio station here in Sedalia, Missouri, and I'm going to be going over to embed with our troops, our National Guard troops here from Missouri over to Iraq.
And I was wondering, since you're of good Missouri stock and, of course, the rock star of radio, if you might prepare just a very short address that I could carry over with me to play for the guys over there.
Oh, you want me to record something that you are going?
You want me to say something?
You're going to record and then take it over.
When do you leave, Charlie?
I leave on Thursday, not a week from this Thursday.
And how long are you going to be there?
I'm going to be embedded for 10 days.
Wow.
Yeah, it's the 35th Engineering Brigade out of Fort Leonard Wood here.
And it's a pretty exciting time.
And by the way, for the Cindy Sheehans of the world, you should sit up and take note of this overwhelming outpouring from the people here.
We've probably got a ton, at least a ton of stuff we'll be shipping over to the guys, and I'll carry as much as I can carry.
But I'm going to be sending back positive reports back here.
Wait a minute, Charlie.
You're a reporter, and that means that you're going to be telling the truth, which means you're not a reporter.
You got that absolutely correct.
But they're doing great things from the engineering brigade there.
And I met with the governor.
He gave me an address, and I'm going to take over.
And both our U.S. senators are going to do a conference call while I'm there.
Good for you.
Is it the 35th or the 135th engineering?
No, it's the 35th.
The 35th.
Okay, you got your recorder ready to go?
Well, no, sir.
I'm not in a position to do that here at the moment.
But I thought maybe in your studio, if you had time, you could make an MP3 and zip it over to me or tell you what.
I know we have your phone number.
Let me see what I can do.
Because I always appreciate the opportunity to send a positive message to the troops, especially.
I know they would be delighted to hear from you.
Well, good.
Well, thank you, Charlie.
I appreciate that.
Glad you called.
Now, hang on.
Mr. Snerdley here.
We'll see if we can make some sort of arrangement on this.
Want to go to the audio soundbites?
This is pretty classic.
This morning in Laura Ingram's radio show, she talked to former NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw.
Brokaw's got a new book.
And she says to him, you mentioned Rush Limbaugh in the book, but you kind of throw away a line about Limbaugh, and it's in the drug section.
And without a doubt, Rush Limbaugh is the most influential boomer, I think, in the media today.
There's no person who has had more of a profound impact on the way people think about politics than Limbaugh.
And he gets a line, you know, the drug thing, which I thought, I just don't think that's right, Tom.
My problem with the whole spectrum is that there is not, you know what Rush is, what his whole drill is.
He doesn't want to hear another point of view except his.
Oh, I disagree.
He talks to all sorts of people.
Well, he doesn't interview people like I do.
I mean, I have guests on, and he.
He doesn't interview people, and he mocks people.
But he's not an objective.
He's not an objective person.
He doesn't say he is.
That's the difference between him and anchors on some of our networks who have a political agenda, but then pretend that they're objective.
Well, Laura, we're never going to resolve this.
You know, you have your point of view, and I have mine.
Which is the, you know, but what's funny about that is that Brokaw's lamenting that we can't all come together, that the civil discourse has vanished, and it's all talk radio's fault.
Well, Laura, you have your view and I have mine, and we're never going to come together on this.
Well, Tom, compromise.
Compromise.
Why don't you compromise, Tom?
Why don't you change what you think if you want civility?
So then Ingram says, well, or Ingram says, look, but that's a point.
That's the thing.
I'm trying to, you know, I like you, but I'm trying to get to this point.
60s is all about, you know, free speech.
Everybody has their opinions.
But then when you have this really successful movement called Talk Radio, people get their opinions out.
And then you're saying, oh, it's getting kind of nasty.
My problem with talk radio is that they only want to hear one note.
They mock anybody else's point of view.
And they do it often in a mindless fashion.
And you know that as well as I do because it's a hot button for the choir that's listening to them and it works for them commercially.
There are very few programs like you, like yours, in which you'll interview people across the political spectrum.
It's mostly.
They're they go out there and hit the hot button all day long.
Now, what's Tom Brokaw really upset about, ladies and gentlemen?
What is he really upset about?
It's what I've always told you.
He's upset they have lost their monopoly.
Tom Brokaw no longer gets to set the agenda for the news the American people are treated to each and every day, be it in print or in broadcast.
And he is just jealous, demanding all the, we like the more opinions, the better.
Well, we want diversity.
But when talk radio comes along, somehow we in talk radio mock people as though people in the drive-by media have not mocked George W. Bush.
But the thing is, this is an old saw that talk radio mocks and makes fun of people.
We do tell jokes about liberals here.
We do mock what they believe.
It is totally mockable.
They are just not used to this.
When they had their monopoly, ladies and gentlemen, they got to set the agenda and they were never challenged and they were never made fun of.
They could tell jokes and still do about NASCAR people, about evangelicals, any number of people.
Brokaw can tell jokes about my drug addiction.
That's not mocking.
No, He's justified in his mind because he thinks that's all I do, which means he doesn't listen and probably never has taken the time.
And there's a studied little technique.
I don't know if you noticed it in this answer.
My problem with talk radio is they only want to hear one note.
They mock anybody else's point of view.
They do it often in a mindless fashion.
And you know that as well as I do, he said to Laura Ingram.
You know that as well as I do.
That is a way to shut people up and to make them think, look, you're just as bright as I am.
But the bottom line is this, Tom.
I do three hours a day.
I do that five days a week.
We don't do 40-second sound bites.
We don't do one and a half-minute little stories.
We go in depth here.
I spend more time in depth in one hour of this program than in three days of the nightly news.
And by the way, Tom, you say that I don't get the liberal point of view out.
You say it's not heard on this program.
Tom, you know what you're missing about talk radio?
We teach people.
We inform people.
Practically every time I explain conservatism or the conservative slant on an issue, I explain the liberal side.
I do a better and more honest job, Tom, of explaining liberalism than you people do who are liberal, because you're in the business of hiding it.
You're in the business of hiding behind the pretense of objectivity, when in fact you are as liberal as anybody who is liberal is.
But you never explained that.
You never admit it, and you will never explain what liberalism is really all about.
I do.
Just like I'm explaining who you are now.
Tom, I don't need you on the program to tell people who you are and what you think and react to what you said about me.
I don't need you here.
I can do a better job of explaining you to people than you will be, than you can do explaining yourself to people because you won't be honest with them.
Yeah, I actually think Tom Brokaw blew it when he titled his new book on the 60s and baby boomers.
He should have called it the lamest generation.
There's something else about Brokaw and all these other guys in the drive-by folks.
They're just jealous as they can be of me and a lot of other people.
I, ladies and gentlemen, could buy Montana.
▲
Export Selection