All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 6, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:20
December 6, 2007, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
What a headline.
What a headline.
It's on a blog at thedailymail.com, War40, Congress 20.
It's about approval ratings.
Greetings, my good friends, and welcome back.
You are tuned to the radio program that meets and surpasses all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Yeah, Don Serber, war is twice as popular as Congress under Democrat leadership.
The 110th Congress is the least popular Congress since pollsters began measuring this.
Various polls pegged the disapproval at various numbers at various times, but one thing doesn't change.
It's the worst Congress ever.
Democrat apologists say that this is because Congress has failed to end the war.
Well, it may explain the low marks on the Democrat side, but the 63 votes so far this year on the war obviously are turning off independents and Republicans.
Let's review.
In November, Gallup pegged congressional job approval at 20% with 69% disapproval.
In December, same poll.
40% of Americans think the surge is working, 39% say it isn't working.
And while 57% now say going into Iraq was a mistake, 41% say it wasn't.
Apparently 69% say electing this Congress was a mistake.
Only 20% apparently believe this Congress was not a mistake.
Well, obviously the questions are slightly different.
The pollster is the same.
It's Gallup.
Maybe Congress needs to redeploy to Okinawa and not the troops.
War 40, Congress 20.
69% say electing this Congress was a mistake.
Speaking of this Congress, each day lately, the Democrats inch closer to giving President Bush more money for the war in Iraq without any serious mandates for withdrawing U.S. troops.
Democrat leaders are loath to acknowledge that they've backed off.
But lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, as well as congressional aid, say the Democrats are trying to find a way to provide continued troop funding while searching for some compromises that show they're still intent on challenging the president on the war.
According to one senior Democrat lawmaker, there's a growing discomfort among pro-defense Democrats about linking a $50 billion Iraq measure to troop withdrawal.
The lawmakers said, we have to come off this lack of funding for the military operations.
We have to continue that.
The funding, we don't want to look like we're against troop funding.
We should separate the funding discussions from the rest of the war.
Additionally, lawmakers who represent areas with large military bases fear that layoff notices could go out to civilian military employees just a week before Christmas if the Pentagon has to pull money from other accounts to pay for the war.
That's another thing that's driving the fear here.
Layoff notices civilian workers at the Pentagon one week before Christmas.
I mean, the question must be asked here, folks, how in the world will these civilian workers who are laid off afford the sleigh ride at Jellystone National Park?
Well, no, that's a reference to the last government shutdown.
Everybody got paid, but the Jellystone sleigh ride operator got laid off.
He called it, well, he called Larry King.
He was on Larry King first.
He called in here to, he had a beef with me.
He wanted to set me straight on this.
So poor Democrats.
War 40, Congress 20, 69% thinking electing this Congress was a mistake.
They've had 63 resolutions and votes to try to end the war and get the troops out.
They've failed in every one of them with a lame duck president in the last year.
And now they're trying to figure out how they can give the money and have their stupid idiot base not realize they're doing it.
And now the layoff.
This is the Pentagon.
Excuse me, folks.
I just.
I just love seeing these people implode.
They're imploding all over.
But Mrs. Clinton, some chairwoman of hers in Iowa, sends out this email accusing Obama being a Muslim, a stealth Muslim who's going to take over the country and turn it into Sharia law or something.
And so a woman gets fired.
And Hillary, of course, didn't know anything about this.
She can't do anything right.
Mrs. Clinton cannot do anything right.
And she doesn't even know what's going on in her own campaign in Iowa until after the fact.
Oh, no, she had no idea whatsoever.
You know, I'm seeing pictures and actually hearing the video and excerpts of JFK's Catholic speech back in 1960.
And we played a little excerpt of it in the previous hour here as a preview to excerpts from Mitt Romney's speech this morning.
Excuse me, folks, I have got to chug some fruit too.
Oh, here because all the laughing has parched my throat.
Now, I'm only slurping because to avoid dead air, I'm not doing it because I have no manners.
Radio's theater of the mind, never forget that.
If you say, I'm going to take a swig of something, you don't hear anything, you will doubt that I'm swigging something.
So at any rate, it's all about how Jack Kennedy was facing bigotry because he was a Catholic.
You know, if JFK, and of course, a big if, if JFK were alive today and if JFK had remained consistent throughout his life, you know, he would be, they wouldn't let him into a Democrat convention.
They wouldn't let him in.
He would be accused of being a conservative demagogue.
Tax cuts?
Hell no.
Fighting the commies?
Hell no.
Anybody want to talk about secret wiretaps?
Wink wink?
JFK?
His old brother Bobby out there wiretapping Martin Luther King?
It's an illustration of just how drastically far to the left the Democrat Party has moved.
All right, let's go to the audio soundbites.
I mentioned the first hour that I was called on the carpet and criticized last night at PMS NBC for my take on the NIE.
Dan Abrams, all upset that I am attacking the bureaucrats who wrote the NIE, because suddenly now, see, when the intelligence comes out and it fits their worldview, fits their political view, what they want things to be, then it's unquestionably accurate.
And it's just not right to assail it.
Here's a portion of Dan Abrams and my take on the NIE.
So upset by the finding of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies and knowing how much that undermines the administration's credibility and the case for war against Iran, there's now a growing chorus from the right attacking the messenger.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board cites an anonymous official who criticized the three former State Department officials who co-authored the National Intelligence Estimate as hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials.
Rush Limbaugh saying, you got to examine motives and the intent of the people at the NIE.
And conservative commentator Norman Pothoritz wrote, it's calculated to undermine George W. Bush.
Okay, so how is Abrams going to deal with this?
How is Dan Abrams of PMS NBC going to deal with this building controversy?
Well, he went out and invited on his show well-known defense strategist and intelligence expert, Arianna Huffington, to whom he asked, some of these far-right wingers seem to be saying, oh, well, you know what?
We just can't trust the NIE at all.
It is absolutely unbelievable, Dan, because here you have 16 agencies.
This is not just one isolated individual.
These are the agencies that comprise our main intelligence apparatus.
And the Wall Street Journal, of course, refers to them constantly as bureaucracies, because that immediately implies that they are wrong.
To attack them in that way is simply unbelievable.
I needed a Greek translator for some of that.
Really?
Sound like Green Acres?
Oh, Jaja Gabor.
Oh, that's right.
Okay, it did something.
We're watching Green Acres.
That's right, Eddie Albert and the pitchfork.
Exactly right.
Well, anyway, that's noted intelligence expert Ariana Huffington explaining away the far-right-wing doubts of this.
And now here is Abrams back in another excerpt.
Here's what Rush, speaking of unreality, here's what Rush Limbaugh said about it today.
Exactly what a number of people have suspected is certainly true here.
You have some disgruntled State Department people, one of them actively pursuing a program of allowing the Iranians to enrich uranium, sabotage, unhappy with the Bush administration.
It's exactly the kind of thing that I suspected and feared yesterday.
Unreality, he said.
We know who the three people that wrote the NIE are.
You can check on their activities.
One of them has a grudge, particularly that his Iranian recommendations haven't been listened to.
Unreality?
This is what you get on a show with an audience of 180,000.
One more soundbite.
Ladies and gentlemen on the EIB network here from Live with Dan Abrams last night.
It was during a roundtable on PMSNBC.
Spoke with Cliff May, who is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Cliff May also contributes at National Review Online.
And Abrams said, see, Cliff, this to me is where we get the difference between honest conservatives and dishonest conservatives, okay?
To me, you can have a consistent position, which is, you know what, I believe the NIE when we went into Iraq.
I believe the evidence that we've gathered, et cetera, to me, the dishonest ones are the ones who pick and choose what they like and what they don't like.
But before I play Mr. May's answer, do you realize the hypocrisy contained in the question?
I believed the NIE when we went into Iraq.
Do you still, Mr. Abrams?
You believe the weapons of mass destruction intelligence back then, but now that we've learned there wasn't any to speak of to be found in Iraq anyway, you still believe it?
You have no reason to be.
Excuse me, just a second, folks.
Is it getting worse in there for Snerdley?
I told you, you know in five seconds if it's going to work or not.
Don't argue with them.
Just zap them and move on to the next call.
And he's taken off the jacket.
Now it's getting serious in there.
Poor guy.
I knew when the subject of religion came up what was going to...
Don't argue with him.
It isn't worth it.
Just say thanks.
Hang up and move on to the next.
Ladies, I'm sorry to have to conduct the behind-the-scenes aspect of the program on your time.
We need a ditto cam on Snerdley so people could see this.
It's impossible to hook up.
All right.
I have not lost my place.
That's good.
Just keep drinking the water and don't answer the phone for a couple minutes.
I can handle it in here.
He believed the NIE when it said where were weapons of mass destruction.
Now we've been told that there were no weapons of mass destruction, at least in Iraq.
Does he still believe the NIE?
He wants to say he's consistent because he believed it then and he believes it now.
But they were wrong once, way back.
And by the way, after that, that's when Bush became a liar.
And that's when Bush and Cheney were cooking the books.
And in fact, it wasn't the NIE's fault at all.
It was Bush and Cheney, those dastardly snidely whiplashes who were out there making these brilliant, brave, and courageous intelligence people lie.
Here's what Cliff May said in response to Dan Abrams' question.
Let me make a position.
You tell me if it's honest or dishonest.
The intelligence community was wrong about the nuclear weapons programs so far of Iraq, of North Korea, of Libya, also of Syria.
So maybe, maybe they're wrong on this.
I am worried that once again, we're getting this wrong.
And I don't want to be complacent about the worst regime getting nuclear weapons.
I'm more worried about Ahmadinejad than President Bush.
I'm a minority in this crowd.
I'm very worried about Ahmad Dinijad.
And Ariana, to me, that's not the question, though.
I'm worried about Ahmad Dinejad.
I don't know.
I would assume that you would say that you are too.
I view him as a threat to this country.
Why?
He just shut down his nuclear program, Jajah.
Why in the world are you worried about him?
And Abrams, why are you worried?
They just shut down a nuclear program and you believe the NIE.
Why are you worried about Ahmadinejad?
He just, this little guy needs a stepladder to get to the Uranal.
Who could he possibly threaten?
He does get a little country over there just trying to survive in the Israeli, U.S.-infested Zionist world.
Everybody's putting out on him contracts and hits and so forth.
Just this little guy trying to bring his little nation from the third world into modernity.
I mean, why do you fear Ahmadinejad?
See, Abrams caught him.
Look at you guys.
I'm more worried about Ahmadinejad.
Oh, whoa, whoa, yeah.
We are too.
We are too.
I'm wrong about the audience of 180,000.
The audience, Abrams, shows 15, five of whom are family members.
Catherine in Jin, Ohio, welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, Rush.
How are you?
Fine, thank you.
Good.
You guys are a national treasure, and I think Mr. Snerdley is possibly one of the most delightful people I've ever spoken with.
Well, I'm sure he thinks the same thing of you today.
I hope so.
Rush, I wanted to talk about Mitt Romney's speech.
Yeah.
And I just wanted to respectfully disagree and hopefully bring up a dialogue, a dynamic of this that perhaps not everyone is looking at.
Disagree with Mitt or with me?
With your assessment of the speech.
Okay, this is very risky.
Yeah, I understand.
And I may need to clarify some things because I don't want to wrongfully accuse you of anything.
Don't worry.
It won't be the first time.
You know, this whole thing about his religion, it annoys me because from the get-go, it seems like that's been the focus.
Has he made it the focus?
I believe so.
Oh, you think he's made it the focus?
Well, did he make it the focus or is just the fact that he's a Mormon make it the focus in and of itself?
I don't know.
You know, when I asked him.
That's an important question.
Well, we need to find out.
I mean, if it originates from the campaign or from, you know, I really don't know.
My problem is, whenever I bring up what I believe is a valid criticism of his past governance, I get a blanket accusation of bigotry.
And that's unfair.
Oh, so you may disagree with his flip-flops and abortion or his healthcare plan in Boston or whatever in Massachusetts.
And then people say you're just anti-Mormon.
Exactly.
Oh, his supporters say that.
Well, supporters, or I've written a campaign twice and back, I get, well, Mormons believe this.
Okay, well, I didn't ask you that.
I wanted to know specifics on subject A, B, and C.
And you know what?
I could be wrong.
They might be valid.
I don't know.
But all I get back is, well, you just must be a bigot.
That's unfortunate.
I haven't heard that, but I don't run around asking people questions like that.
I know the answers already.
But it's unfortunate.
But if people in his campaign that are telling you this, you call him up on the phone or you run into him in personal appearance.
I said, where does this happen?
Well, I've left messages, but when I email the website, I've got that back twice.
That you're a bigot?
No, no, they're not outright calling me a bigot.
More so, his supporters do that than his campaign.
Well, I want to be clear here.
What do you get back when you ask a policy question in a website?
Well, Mormons believe that this and this.
If I ask something specific about, you know, and I don't want to get into it.
Okay, wait a minute.
Now, I'm getting, it's getting a little murky.
You'll send a question via the website on a policy question.
Yes.
And somebody will write back, Mormons believe that X.
Yes, in the context of the answer.
And it kind of skirts around what I want to know.
Does that make sense?
If that's really happening, that's amazing.
That's I can't.
Are you sure you're getting hold of MIT's site, not some fake site that somebody set up like Hillary?
Well, I'll, you know, I'll go back to the next one.
But you realize Mormons.
He's been trying to make, until today, when he finally had to address it because it's been ripped to shreds over it, he's been trying to say that it didn't downplay its relevancy at all.
I don't know.
Rush, it's just all this drama is really like nails on the head.
Catherine, who's your preferred Republican nominee or candidate right now?
I don't have one.
Really?
That's correct.
So now you're not working for anybody else.
No, I'm not.
All right.
But, you know, I just, I wanted to put out there that we're not all bigots.
If we have valid questions.
I understand.
But this is the first I've heard that anybody is on our side, back in a sec.
That's right, a man, a living legend, a national treasure, a prophet, a harmless, lovable little fuzzball.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB network.
Let me take another stab at this Romney business.
And again, at the outset, as I have said repeatedly over the course of many previous years of service to America behind this, a golden EIB microphone, I endorse no candidate during the primaries unless somebody comes along and just you just know.
And it hasn't happened.
So keep that in mind.
As I say this, this speech today by Romney is being ripped to shreds, some of the most specious manners and techniques and some of the craziest analysis by conservatives.
And a lot of conservatives out there in the media and otherwise have already chosen sides.
You can get your Rudy Camp, you got your Mitt Camp, you have your Huckabee Camp, you got the McCain camp out there.
You got the Fred Thompson camp.
I'm looking at some of this stuff, and I really, it's politics.
Wouldn't be surprised if some campaigns are behind this.
Because this speech, this speech is the kind of stuff.
The kind of stuff he said today is the kind of stuff I have been dreaming of hearing in a presidential campaign in a long time in terms of what this country is and where we're headed.
Do you realize how long it has been since a political person, a presidential candidate of either party, spoke extensively of the founding of this country and how crucial everybody's understanding of that is to maintaining American exceptionalism?
Mitt Romney took the long view of this country from its founding to its future, farther than we can see.
And he described what it is that binds us together and defines us as Americans.
And it is crucially important people understand this.
This was a speech of the long view, a speech of leadership and of vision.
It didn't attack anybody.
It was optimistic.
It was positive.
It had reinforcement of American traditions and values.
And so the criticism I'm hearing of this really does a disservice, I think, to the critics and the whole process here.
Now politics is dirty.
I understand that.
But this speech today that he gave was, I spend, when I do speeches, when I do the Rush to Excellence Tour, you know, I go out, I'll do two hours.
Sometimes our 45 minutes depends on whether I run out of water.
But that's a theme of every one of them.
American exceptionalism, American greatness.
How do we get here?
Why are we here?
Why are we who we are?
What defines us?
Why are we as human beings so much more advanced in any way you can imagine than other human beings?
We're all human beings on this planet.
What is it about us?
DNA is not special.
It's not better.
We're not any brighter, smarter than anybody else.
But there is an answer to the question.
And I've given the answer on this program.
It's very simple.
Freedom.
But it is the understanding and the documentation in our founding documents by our founding fathers that our freedom is bestowed by our creation, our creator.
It is the natural yearning of the human being to be free.
Now, you can destroy that.
You can imprison a human being so many years they won't know what to do when they get out of the cage.
But until such time, the natural yearning of each human being is to be free.
I don't care what liberal, some, some people just want to be controlled.
No, they can be conditioned to be controlled.
Trade their freedom for security, trade their freedom for a welfare check, whatever.
They can be conditioned to that, but that's not the natural yearning of the human spirit.
All Romney was doing today was answering all these charges and criticisms that his religion makes him unfit to lead.
And he was trying to, I thought, did a bang-up job of defining this country.
He gave a brilliant analysis of what he thinks the country is and where we're headed as a country, filled with optimism.
It's been sorely lacking on the campaign.
This was not a speech that was designed to say to various members of the audience, okay, you want health care, I'm going to give it to you, and here's my plan.
And my religion's not going to get in the way.
And you worried about the environment?
Don't worry.
I'm going to make sure we cut our CO2 emissions.
And by the way, my Mormonism is not going to get in the way.
And you worried about these forest fires and the lead and the toys from the Checka.
I'm going to make sure there's no lead and the toys in the Chikoms.
And I'm going to make sure my Mormonism, that's not what it was about today.
It's not what he was doing.
It was grander than that.
All these other things, when you get right down to it, are distractions in a genuinely good presidential campaign.
And I think that to me, it was a welcome speech.
And some of the criticism now that's being levied at this just doesn't fit the moment, which is why I think some campaigns are behind this, which is understandable.
It is a presidential race, and it's dog-eat-dog out there, and it is to be expected.
But when it happens, I, El Rushbo, will comment on it and analyze it as I see it.
This is Mary Ellen in Massachusetts.
Welcome to the program, Mary Ellen.
Nice to have you with us.
Merry Christmas, Rush.
Thank you.
Same to you.
I don't need anything else for Christmas.
My one and only thought for Santa Claus was that I would get to speak to you before the end of the year, and I must have been a very good girl this year.
I'm sure you are every year.
I could just tell in your voice.
Well, you know, I feel so inspired today.
For the first time in about six years, I am actually getting excited about somebody who claims to be a Republican.
In Romney's speech today, I didn't see him looking down at notes, a la Hillary Clinton.
I saw a man who was proud to be who he was.
I did not see it as a speech about religion.
I saw it as a speech about a man who understood what the founding fathers and the constitutional writers understood this country to be.
And I want to say, hoorah, I'm from Massachusetts.
I've had him as my governor.
I never, ever heard him or anybody in certainly in my town, have any doubts about his religious beliefs getting in the way.
So, you know, to have it all of a sudden be a problem as a president, I was rather surprised.
And I have to say, up to this point, I was not a Romney supporter.
But you're inching that way?
I don't know.
I don't know enough.
I'm still worried about, you know, how he's going to handle the borders.
And I don't want him to be a compassionate conservative.
You know, I want him to stick to his guns and stick with the Constitution.
And he will, if he follows what I heard today, what the founding fathers intended for our president to be, then I think I could get behind this man.
And I'm very surprised about it.
Well, that's interesting.
I'm glad to get your input on this, Mary Ellen.
Thank you so much.
And Merry Christmas.
I'm used to being a present to a lot of people, but be a Christmas present to you.
That's something special.
I appreciate you saying that.
Well, you are a true blessing.
My sister Lori and my sister Annie and I came to your show, your TV show, with my dad before he died more than 10 years ago.
And it was one of the happiest days we spent.
And it was a tribute.
It was a tribute to you.
My dad never left and he never went anywhere.
But for you, he believed you to be.
And as a World War II veteran, as he was, he called you a hero.
And I have to agree.
Well, I can't tell you how much I appreciate that.
You're so sweet to say that, and I'm truly humbled by it.
I want you to know that.
Well, you make my day.
So thank you very much, Rush.
God bless you.
Same to you, Mary Ellen.
We'll take a quick timeout here.
Folks, be back and continue with broadcast excellence right after this.
It's Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, Thursday afternoon, at least on the East Coast, still in the morning out on the left coast.
Let me say one more thing here about Mitt Romney.
What Mitt Romney did today was raise the bar.
Mitt Romney raised the bar today in the process of laying out his own personal views on his religion.
I think he raised the entire level of political discourse to things that matter, to things that are important in determining the kind of country we shall be in the future.
And this is exactly what I have been hoping would happen in a presidential campaign.
What Mitt Romney said today, I don't care what you think of it, it doesn't matter.
If you disagree, if you were threatened by it, it doesn't matter to me.
But what he said today is important because he was right about what he said the way this country was founded and how crucial that is to this country staying who and what it is.
What Barack Obama thought in kindergarten is not important.
That Mrs. Clinton flew on trips to China with President Clinton and therefore is qualified to foreign policy is not important.
That Mrs. Clinton has fought for children for 35 years is not important, nor is it qualifying.
What Romney said today is important.
And I think that's why everybody's so scared about it.
I think that's why a lot of people are so scared by it, including people on the conservative side of the aisle.
You know, and I've stress again here, I am not endorsing anybody that hasn't changed.
I analyze this stuff day to day as it goes.
Look, it may not be morning in America again, but we are sure a long way from midnight now if this keeps up.
Who's next on this?
Oh, good.
We got Greg from Texas City, Texas back.
We ran out of time with Greg yesterday.
He was our last call.
He lived in Iran.
He was making some points about the NIE.
And we just, I felt very bad that we ran out of time.
Why don't you start at the beginning of the point you wanted to make because we have a little bit more time now than we did yesterday?
Thank you very much, Rush, and I appreciate you taking my call.
And I agree with what you just said and the lady about Romney, by the way.
I think it was a very patriotic rallying of the American people.
And that's one thing I wanted to talk about.
Sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees.
And this NIE report, like the intelligence lady so eloquently explained yesterday, is just a short snippet of what it may really say.
And talk about how they stopped their program in 2003.
And that's only because we rightly labeled them as part of an axis of evil.
We invaded Afghanistan at the same time.
AQ Khan's clandestine nuclear activities were exposed.
His cooperation with our enemies.
Then we invaded Iraq.
Maybe in retrospect, it should have been Iran.
We do have a way out of this, though, and that's for people like yourself, patriots, who have the public platform to get into the history of the fact that Iran has been at war with us since 1979.
And this nuclear weapon thing is kind of a secondary thing.
They're going to conduct warfare on us anyway, anytime, any place they can, which they have proven from being behind supporting of Hezbollah, Hamas, et cetera, et cetera, embassy bombings.
And that is to prove with real information, which is possible to do, the connection that Iran actually has to Osama bin Laden.
I believe, you might think I'm nuts and I don't hear anybody talking about this, but I don't believe Osama bin Laden is living in a cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan.
Admittedly, in 2003, Iran, they admitted they were holding high-level al-Qaeda members, some of which were bin Laden's sons and wives and children.
We do know Abu Musab Zaqwari came through Iran to Iraq.
Their goal is a caliphate.
And, you know, they're Persians.
They're not Arabs.
And if we don't wake up as American people and quit just changing seats on the Titanic, we're going to find ourselves in that sea of isolation and desperation and chaos.
And we're there.
And we have to understand that this is deeper than a nuclear weapon or not.
Iran knows that we can destroy them nuclear-wise.
They are trying to develop that nuclear weapon for Israel and to further the threat of the caliphate.
And I just don't understand our lack and our leaders' lack of presenting these things.
There is one intelligence analyst who I've heard, Mansouri-e-Jazz, who went on Fox News one night and stated that he had information that Osama bin Laden was being protected in Iran.
And if you don't think that that's the case, look at Hek Makti or Gulbadin, who was the former prime minister of Afghanistan, who publicly has been supported and propped up and protected by Iran since the 1970s.
He publicly announced that he was going back to Afghanistan to help the Taliban.
And since then, there's been this so-called resurgence.
I just don't get why the American people don't see the real threat.
Well, let me answer that for you.
Despite the talk of the economy being bad and down in the dump and so forth, by the way, forecast sees no U.S. recession in 2008, despite housing woes.
More on that in the next hour.
We are a very affluent country, Greg, and we have a tremendous amount of freedom.
And we have the ability, if we want to, to ignore any of this.
We in America can ignore the unpleasant.
We have that luxury because of our affluence, because of our freedom and our economic opportunity.
We can ignore it until such time that we no longer can.
Now, what that might be, who knows?
Another attack, the Iranians lighting off a nuke down the years just to show that they can do it.
But right now, we don't have to.
We haven't been in attack since 9-11.
The Democrat Party is doing its best to make everybody forget that there was a 9-11.
The Democrat Party has tried to convince as many people in this country as possible.
A real enemy that this country faces is George W. Bush, not the people who visited us on 9-11 and killed nearly 3,000 of us.
So we've got – and by the way, there's something distinctly – I don't mean this in a totally negative way.
I'm not trying to sound like a parent preaching to a spoiled child.
There's something amazing about a country that has the ability.
People in a country have the ability to ignore.
It doesn't affect their lives, they don't think.
Why do you have to get up every day and worry about Iran?
Got enough to worry about.
I don't want to worry about that.
His little nut job on television, big deal.
He's on TV.
Comes to Columbia, everybody laughs at him.
But we still have an amazing number of Americans, despite all these luxuries, who volunteer to go face these threats in person, armed up, United States military.
And I never can praise them enough.
We take them for granted at our peril.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Well, look at this, folks.
Another defeat for moveon.org's puppets.
In Congress, they have dropped the hate crimes bill that the Senate passed, Senator Kennedy's bill.
They don't have the votes for it in the House.
Another Democrat failure.
▲
Export Selection