All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 7, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
December 7, 2007, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, I just I I I really I kept this Microsoft Santa Claus story here on the top of the stack.
I just, I can't stop laughing about this.
I just...
I'm thinking of these perverted minds at Microsoft with anyway, greetings.
Welcome, uh ladies and gentlemen.
Open Line Friday is uh in an hour two.
Let's go.
Live from a Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday!
Yay!
You know the drill.
We go to the phones and the program's all yours.
The uh telephone number is 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIB net.com.
I want to go back.
I want to go back to this uh uh some of the lib reaction to a uh Mitt Romney, a passage in Mitt Romney's speech yesterday, just has the libs up in arms.
I want to start in fact, let's go back and uh Ed grab Soundbite five.
Let's just start at the top here.
Uh this is worth hearing again.
Uh this this is Romney from the speech yesterday in College Station, Texas, and he is quoting one of the founders, John Adams.
In John Adams' words, we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.
Our Constitution, he said, was made for a moral and religious people.
Freedom requires religion.
Just as religion requires freedom.
Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God.
Freedom and religion endure together or perish alone.
That that one, that that that last line, uh well, that not just that, but the uh uh freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom.
That that's just got a lot of libs today turned upside down.
Here's Sally Quinn, uh wife of Ben Bradley, social doyen, ex-social doyen, this is not much social going on in Washington, of Washington, D.C. I was absolutely stunned by how exclusive it was that uh I expected him to be much more inclusive.
The line that I was just uh absolutely shocked by was when he said freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom, and then went on to say freedom and religion endure together or perish alone.
And uh that sounded to me like he was basically recommending a theocracy.
And it it sounded as though he was excluding anybody who might be a doubter, an agnostic, an atheist, uh a free thinker, even a seeker.
It was as though he were saying, you know, if you believe in God, then that's the American way.
And it it seemed to me that it was exactly the opposite, the antithesis of the American way, which is we are all Americans, and whether we're believers or not, I include everyone.
Sally uh I'm it's it's it's you know it's embarrassing how profound your ignorance on the founding of this country is.
All and the rest of you libs who might, you know, have this paranoid belief he was leaving out the atheists, and he was leaving out the agnostics.
It was exclusive.
Uh he was encapsulating what the founding fathers said in the Declaration of Independence.
They pointed a natural law and the creator.
I am convinced these liberals have no more understanding of the founding of this country and the tradition behind it than people who have never been live born here or live here.
I don't think they have the s well, then if they do, then they just can't stand it.
Whatever it is, either they don't know and they've forgotten or they do know and they can't stand it, whatever they're doing, uh they want to change it.
They don't like it.
The fact that our country, this is, I guess You're probably right because this is what grates them.
When you get right down to the bottom line, what really grates on them is that our country was founded on the belief in God.
And natural law does not compel every future citizen to believe in God.
But it does mean that for our society, for our society to survive, the founding principles must be embraced by most of us.
Otherwise, what do we have here?
Who are we?
What is this place?
It will cease to be America.
It is, it is why I ask the question over and over again.
Have you ever stopped to wonder why in the course of all human history?
Nations, civilizations, thousands of years before we came into existence, we dwarf them.
In every which way for good, economics, technological advancement, freedom, civil rights, human dignity, all of these things, quality of life, standard of living.
How did it happen?
It is not an accident.
It is not a coincidence.
It's directly traceable to our founding.
It's what he was talking about yesterday.
He was encapsulating what the founding fathers said in the Declaration of Independence.
And if we lose this tradition, if we lose the roots to our founding, we are not going to be the America that we are today that we've always been.
And I'm really frightened that that's what some libs want to do is destroy and eliminate as best they can.
The court system is their primary route, because they're insulated from elections there to totally destroy the link to the roots that make this country what it is, because there is a genuine fear.
I said it yesterday, I must say it again because I firmly believe it.
I think in a lot of liberals, a lot of leftists, there is a genuine fear of people who have faith in God.
Liberals want people to have faith in them and their institutions, which is government.
And they are frightened by the fact that people who have faith in something larger than themselves can't be controlled.
Which is what liberalism must do in order to thrive.
It must control people.
Nobody is required to believe in God, but it does mean that for our society to survive, I must say this again, the founding principles must be embraced by most of us.
Otherwise, who are we?
If you accept the founding had a religious aspect, then you also have to respect accept what comes with it.
If you don't want to accept that, then you want to deny.
How about that?
You're a founding denier.
Yeah.
Those of us that don't buy the global warming hoax, we're called global warming deniers.
Well, those of you who want to destroy or deny the truth about the founding of this nation are founding deniers.
So there's dissent in this country.
There are different views, but most of us believe in God, and most of us believe in natural law.
Most of us do.
And that look at the Passion of the Christ.
Look how well that did and how inflamed the liberals were over it, particularly out in Hollywood.
That is the American tradition.
It is our founding.
That most of us believe in God and natural law.
Now, I am sorry to report this to Sally Quinn and even Christopher Hitchens and others, but our country was not founded by atheists.
Our country was not founded by agnostics.
Our country was not founded by deists.
Our country was founded by religious people.
You have to go way, way, way out of line to deny it.
You can't read any of George Washington's speeches, first Thanksgiving proclamation, farewell address, the inaugural.
Everything.
The first Thanksgiving was thanks to God.
We tell the story each year here.
Atheists had nothing to do with founding this country.
Dissenters, yes, but not atheists.
There is a it's called the Judeo-Christian ethic.
And that Judeo-Christian ethic and principles undergird the society.
They provide the foundation, the building blocks from which this great nation rose.
There is no other answer for this.
And this is precisely why our society is so tolerant.
There was nothing intolerant in Mitt Romney's speech.
But they are scared to death of it.
Nonetheless, they just don't get it.
Here, listen to John Meacham.
John Mecham is Newsweek editor.
MSNBC Live yesterday afternoon, Nora O'Donnell said, What do you make of the phrase when he said freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom?
He's half right.
The second part is true.
The first part is not.
And I'm curious about that.
It's interesting you you focused on it.
It literally made me start when I saw it.
Freedom doesn't require religion.
As an empirical matter, in the United States, the fight for freedom has been informed by American religion.
That is a fact.
But the idea that somehow or another you have to have religion in order to have human freedom is actually not true, I think.
Yeah, okay, so he an editor at Newsweek here is now a qualified expert to tell us that John Adams was full of it.
One of our founders.
Yes, exactly right.
The arrogance and the condescension, the elitism.
Adams, you know what he's talking about.
I'm the editor of Newsweek.
I know what I'm talking about.
Yeah, John Adams, who the hell was he anyway?
He doesn't know what he's talking about.
But back in just a second.
It is open line Friday.
I am Rush Limbaugh, serving humanity.
Simply by showing up.
So you got the Sally Quinns of the world and all these uh uh the John Meachams, this expert at Newsweek who's able to proclaim that uh John Adams is half right.
Why should we listen to Adams?
We have John Meachum at uh at Newsweek.
These same people, uh, my friends are the uh people that gave us this uh willowy phrase, the Constitution is a living and breathing document.
Uh the founding of liberalism is based on moral relativism.
The main threat to that view is the originalist view of our nation and the Constitution.
So the founding and the original intent of the Constitution are considered threats to liberalism by liberals.
And they have to be dealt with.
And so, well, the Constitution, a living, breathing uh document that must change and adapt to the evolving mores of our corrupted perverted society on which we will make no judgment, say the liberals.
And then um the founding fathers had no clue.
Well, they were half right until the editor of Newsweek comes along and sets us straight on this.
You know, I find it always useful to go back and read the words of former communists, because like it or not, leftists in this country are far more comfortable with the lines from Karl Marx than they are with some of the lines in the Constitution of the United States of America or the Declaration of Independence.
They think the Constitution and a declaration like Romney's speech are exclusionary, non-inclusive, not tolerant enough.
They can read Karl Marx and salivate.
They can read Karl Marx and tears of dreamy wonderment.
Read the Constitution, they get panicked.
Second Amendment.
What were those racist white guys that we gotta change that?
It's the way they look at things.
I love to go back to former communists who have seen the light.
Uh Lisek Kolakowski, he is a Polish historian of Marxist revolutions in Eastern Europe.
And this quote of his is on the importance of Christianity in the development of the free society.
It's from an essay he wrote, and it's very famous among we intellectuals, us intellectuals, uh called the Idolatry of Politics.
I want you to listen to this.
One may reasonably argue that modern liberal doctrines were historically rooted in the biblical belief that in a basic sense All human beings are equal and equally precious.
However, tortuous and self-contradictory was the path from the religious to the political meaning of this insight.
However, often it was strewn with conflicts and struggles, it was historically real.
It has largely been forgotten now.
And you know, forgetting is a luxury we don't have.
And there are too many people not only trying to make those who know it forget it.
There are too many people trying to never have it been taught or be taught what is happening, uh what what was the truth of our founding.
All right, back to the phones.
It's open line Friday, and this is uh Joanne in Queen Creek, Arizona.
I never heard of that, but it sounds like a place I would love to go.
Well, we're we're here.
Come on down.
I knew I could wrangle an invitation.
Uh having been raised by a mother who was just a little bit to the right of the John Burke Society.
I'm very conservative in my thinking, but I won't forget history because there is no saying about forgetting history, we'll repeat it.
But Neville Chamberlain came back with a paper signed by Hitler that says, peace in our time, and look what happened.
And now we're we're listening to uh Iran saying, oh well, everything is okay, nothing's really happening, we're not doing anything.
But people also forget that the Japanese were in Washington, D.C. at a peace conference with our president when they bombed Pearl Harbor.
Yes, that's true.
And we What are you saying?
That the Iranians are somehow in the State Department.
All I'm saying is that we need to listen to what they're saying and not take a word of it that's truth.
We need to actually figure it out for ourselves so that we're not caught with our shorts down.
Well, I have to I have to tell you there's th there's a lot of people that are that are that are not satisfied uh with uh with this whole thing.
Uh some conservatives in Washington want a review of uh Iran intelligence to be sought.
The move is the first official challenge, but it comes amid growing backlash from conservatives and neoconservatives.
This is the Washington Post, of course, unhappy with the assessment that Iran halted a clandestine nuclear weapons program four years ago.
It reflects how quickly the NIE has become politicized, with critics even going after the analysts who wrote it and shows a split among Republicans.
Uh how politicized the NIE's become, how politicized opposition to George W. Bush has become, is the right way to put it.
But if you go to the LA Times, you get a whole different take.
Doves find fault with Iran report, too.
The new U.S. intelligence uh report that says Iran Holt and its nuclear weapons program in 2003 suddenly raising concerns among the political center and left.
Moderate and liberal foreign policy experts said the U.S. intelligence agencies, possibly eager to demonstrate independence from White House political pressure, may have produced an NIE that is more reassuring than it should be on the potential risks of the Iranian nuclear program.
Gary Samore, who was a top's arms control top arms control official in the Clinton White House, agreed the NIE did not adequately emphasize Iran's continuing efforts to enrich uranium and build missiles.
Even former Clintonistas are suspicious of this.
And this whole story, the LA Times basically is uh uh quoting a bunch of liberals uh who suspect that anti-Bush politics drove the NIE conclusions.
A bunch of liberals.
I mean, this is Shazam time.
And the uh the the Israelis are uh, you know, they're not happy about this either.
They want the Israeli defense forces are I guess the chairman of the Joint Chiefs are going to make a trip to Israel.
They don't go there very much, he's gonna go there.
And the uh IDF and the Mossad are going to say, okay, you don't think they're doing nukes, let's show you what we've got.
The Israelis and even the French, and even some of the U.S., you know, we're we're we're not quite this conf convinced on this.
So this isn't over.
This is this is not over.
Uh Right now it's uh it's hamstrung everybody uh in the administration from doing anything, which I think was the intent.
And there's some people.
There's some people, ladies and gentlemen.
You know, when this kind of stuff happens, is this is a 180.
Nobody is ever in the last five years, six years, nobody has said they're not doing it.
This is the first time.
And so all kinds of theories are popping up.
One of the theories is that this is the first step to open genuine diplomatic negotiations with Iran to make a deal.
And that this is actually what the Bush administration wants, so that we can uh lower the wall of resistance.
It's a theory I'm hearing being banded about back in a second.
Yes, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have meeting and surpassing all audience expectations daily.
Guess what?
There's even more fallout than we knew.
From the latest national intelligence estimate.
The one concluding that Iran discontinued its nuclear weapons program four years ago has claimed yet another casualty.
CNN has postponed a speculative documentary.
We were warned Iran Goes Nuclear.
It was a two-hour special.
Slated for December twelfth under the CNN presents banner.
It was set partially in the future, featuring a what if scenario as a former government officials playing fictional cabinet members debate how to deal with the Iranian threat.
Said CNN Veep for senior exec production Mark Nelson, noting that the surprising NIE report changed everything.
No, it doesn't.
I can't believe CNN's caving on this just because of the NIE.
They still could do it.
They may have already ramped back up.
The NIE's not sure.
But I guess anything that actually it's probably a good thing because I I I would imagine that the CNN approach to this is thank God Iran finally got nukes, so that there's a balance of power out there.
United States, yeah, Madeline Aldwright or her character in there.
Yeah, it's bad.
It's really bad that we're the lone superpower here, and this'll set this this will this will provide stability and balance of the Middle East, and it's a good thing that uh Iran is finally gone nuclear.
That's probably would be if I mean CNN that I know.
Uh that would be the angle.
By the way, the left.
You heard about the CIA destroying some tapes?
Harsh techniques.
Abu Zubaida, friend of bin Laden, 2003, was that what it was?
When this uh when this happened, 2004, not sure.
At any rate.
The left is fit to be tied.
CIA destroyed tapes.
New York Times is upset.
Somebody could have leaked us those.
And you destroyed them.
The uh announcement made by the uh director of Central Intelligence uh Hayden yesterday.
Here's a montage of uh Wolf Blitz, John Roberts, Barbastar, Kieran Chetry, that's all from CNN, Chris Kumo from ABC, Russ Mitchell CBS, Robin Roberts, ABC, David Schuster from PMS, NBC.
Secret CIA videotapes of interrogations destroyed.
Two years ago, the CIA destroyed videotapes of the interrogations.
Dramatic disclosure from the CIA.
This morning the spy agency is admitting it destroyed tapes that showed extreme measures being used in the interrogation of two Al-Qaeda operatives.
The agency admitted it destroyed two video tapes.
The CIA is admitting this morning that it destroyed video tapes destroyed those tapes.
They admit it.
Destroying video tapes of severe interrogations.
Why do they have to destroy a video because they fear oh no, it's because they keep secrets, you idiots.
It's the CIA for CR.
What are we talking?
Are they a video production company for you people?
I'm sorry to rant.
I I really am.
I know my voice rises.
It's not as bad as Mrs. Clinton's, but it's the CIA.
They are supposed to keep secrets.
What do they expect the CIA to make these tapes available?
Yes, they do, because they're not interested in national security.
They just want to go after the people who are protecting us.
When what I don't think it's ever going to happen.
These are people that would kill you as soon as look at you.
They do it in the most vicious and brutal ways.
We're dealing with a new breed of human debris here.
Anne in Brooklyn.
I'm glad you waited.
You're up next at Open Line Friday.
Hi.
Oh, this is the best moment of my day, maybe my year.
Thank you so much.
It's my pleasure.
I actually called to make a remark about Hillary, but can I please slip in a little thing on religion and freedom?
Sure.
Because religion without freedom is exactly what radical Islam is.
It's tyranny.
There is strong religion, but no freedom, whereas freedom without religion is anarchy and total hedonism, which is the modern liberal party.
Uh yes.
That's a great way of illustrating John Adams being correct on this.
And you are so profound.
Your prof programs get deeper and better every single week.
It's just something new and wonderful.
Well, thank you very much.
But the remark I wanted to make about Hillary.
I actually think they get better by the day, but I'm gonna join you there.
You do.
Um I was listening to Hillary sobbing about the hostage crisis in New Hampshire, and she provided perfect cannonball fodder for the Republican Party when she said in the face of a small hostage crisis, that she was bewildered and confused and angry.
Listen, if one hostage in an office can do this, what would an A bomb do to her?
Uh or a bunch of American hostages in an embassy in another country.
Sure.
She would be absolutely please forgive me, wetting her table.
That is a brilliant observation, Ann, and it's perfectly illustrative of our times.
Mrs. Clinton was probably none of that.
She thought it important to say that because that's what would resonate with our feelings obsessed culture.
Mm-hmm.
Again, back to the hedonism.
Right, exactly right.
This is about this is about letting people know that she knows how they feel.
Does she feel their pain?
Ha ha.
Yeah, well.
I don't know about that, but she's gonna cause a lot if she gets a chance.
Just keep uh keep on uh entertaining and informing and teaching us every day.
Well, that's you're so sweet.
You you just so n I appreciate that.
Take care.
Thanks, Anne.
Bye bye.
Here's Ed in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
Nice to have you with us on Open Line Friday.
Hello.
Rush, I read again this morning.
It seems like it comes about every every second day.
An AP writer saying that uh Kyoto and the climate change folks, the United States is the only country in the world that's all screwed up and we're wrong and everybody else is right.
And it made me think that you know, these folks are the modern equivalent of the Barbary Pirate 200 years ago when we stood for principle, and the rest of the world just said, no, we'll just keep paying them.
That's a good point.
But I think these this this is the you know the Barbary Pirates did not operate on a global scale.
This is a this is a global operation here going on.
In fact, you know what interesting point.
Did you hear what happened to Australians?
Well, yeah, and that was completely not mentioned in the AP article I read.
Of course not.
Hasn't made it out of uh out of Australia yet.
AP's in the tank for socialism, AP's in the tank for the UN running the world, AP's in a tank.
And the point the point is that the they elect this big new Prime Minister over there, some big socialist, and one of his first proclamations we are going to sign on to the new Kyoto Treaty and we're gonna send a delegation to Bali and we're gonna get it done.
And they go there, and they find out that to take their emissions levels back to nineteen ninety, which is impossible, by the way, that would destroy any country that tried to do it.
Uh or even that succeeded.
What they found out was that the electricity producing uh conglomerates in Australia said if you do this, Mr. Prime Minister, electricity rates in a few short years are gonna go up thirty to forty percent.
And we w uh we're we're we're not gonna be able to do it any other way, and and you're gonna shut down our economy.
Well, he's always really well I'm not gonna put the I just got elected.
I'm not gonna see electricity prices go up thirty percent on my watch, and so they backed out of it.
Now the point is, nobody can come to these accords uh these these these led 1990 uh emissions levels.
So what'll happen is fines and fines res of nations, and the fines are paid by what?
Tax increase.
It's just a giant fleece.
Well, yeah, and you're exactly right.
And you know, that's uh the Bible pirates, we said, you know, uh millions for defense and not a cent for tribute.
And this whole Kyoto thing is nothing but a as you've pointed out, a wealth redistribution tax and fine pay tribute to these wackos kind of scheme.
And uh, you know, American exceptionalism is what it is.
And we should be proud that we're standing alone on this and facing it honestly and truthfully instead of just knuckling under to public opinion.
Well, I want you to listen to something with me then.
Uh, because I agree with you.
We're gonna go grab soundbite number eight there, Ed.
This is yesterday on the floor of the house, and it's Nancy Pelosi.
And uh here's here's proof that liberalism is in and of itself a religion.
If you believe, as do I, and I think all of us do, that this is God's creation, and we have a moral responsibility to preserve it.
That's why we have strong support from the religious and angelical and uh including the evangelical community, then I hope that you will take this act of faith today to make history and to make progress for the American people.
This is the energy bill.
Uh the d the liberal Democrat energy bill is an act of faith, as far as she is concerned.
By the way, I don't know about you, Ed, but I thought that uh that was very exclusionary.
She didn't include the atheists here uh in that speech as having any role in saving the uh the planet.
Uh and they're atheists in Congress, too.
Were they not in uh invited to participate in this along with the agnostics and the atheists as well?
So turn the tables on them.
But I mean, this is this is I I I have to ask you, um, would you consider taking your show international for an hour a day?
Because I think this message needs to get out.
There are thousands and thousands of names of English speaking people around the world who would love to hear what you're saying.
And uh who knows, maybe you could do for shortwave what you did for AM.
Um that's uh well I can't I I don't want to say too much.
We're always thinking of wider areas of distribution.
Um some of it's already happening on the internet, of course, but that's not wide.
Uh that's uh subscription through the uh to the website.
But uh the big challenge would be finding affiliates, uh, like in the great in Great Britain, where are you gonna go?
The BBC.
You have even.
You can cross boundaries, I think.
Oh, short wave.
Right short wave.
Uh well, you know, we once were on a short wave station back in the early days, a little outfit out of New Orleans.
Uh, and uh it was program was revolutionary in so many ways.
And loved us in New Zealand all over, they really did.
Ha, welcome back.
Nice to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, open line Friday from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Mrs. Clinton can't do anything right.
They have a live for every occasion.
Get this.
Campaigning in a ski lodge in Guilford, New Hampshire, Hillary Rodham Clinton reminisced about her early approach to the slopes.
She said, Yeah, I just get to the top and I just go straight down.
Sort of like her campaign, folks.
Yeah, I never I never took a lesson.
I just got to the top and just go straight down.
I thought it was a great skier because I was just rolling down that hill.
She was at the Gunstock ski area, where she was uh joined by Olympic medalist Penny Pete.
Is that how you pronounce it?
I don't want to mispronounce a champion's name.
Uh I learned to ski in New Hampshire too, Clinton told Petou, who grew up in New Hampshire.
Somehow I didn't turn out the way you did.
I didn't get much further advanced than just trying to get myself vertical.
Yeah, and she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, too.
Well, I know that's that's why the two have a working marriage.
That's why it's great.
She's trying to get vertical, Bill's trying to get horizontal.
They both succeed.
Now tell you what, that separate house thing, too, that also works for a marriage.
The House Chapacar, one in Washington.
Um, normally we get news stories in which minorities are hardest hit.
But we've got one today.
Minorities have been hardest helped.
Scientists have the first evidence that those reprogrammed stem cells that made headlines last month really have the potential to treat disease.
They use skin from the tails of sick mice to cure the rodents of sickle cell anemia.
At issue is turning adult stem cells into ones that mimic embryonic stem cells, uh, master cells that can turn into any type of tissue.
And they pulled this off with out needing any embryos in the left is just shocked.
Michael Kinsley wrote that issue will not go away.
Sickle cell anemia uh afflicts the majority of uh blacks, African Americans, minorities.
Hardest helped here by the stem cell story.
Get this.
Hugo Chavez's ex-wife said yesterday she's proposing a constitutional amendment to shorten presidential terms, saying the president has been in office long enough.
Ha!
Ha!
You people know how much I love this.
We all have ex-wives.
Ha!
They never like Obama, Barack Obama.
I was very disciplined what I just did.
Uh Barack Obama.
Where's that Microsoft perverted Santa Claus story?
Distract people.
Barack Obama, you are being kneecapped.
Folks, listen to this.
Barack Obama, the presidential hopeful, has scheduled two highly anticipated rallies in Iowa tomorrow with the Oprah.
It's the double O show.
Obama and Oprah.
But Dingy Harry.
Poor Obama.
I'm starting to feel sorry for the guy.
Dingy Harry said that he may have to schedule a procedural vote Saturday on a major energy bill, one that would sharply increase the production of ethanol and biodiesel, an important industry in Iowa.
As you know, the Hawkeye called our January 3rd.
Polls indicated tight three-way contest there.
Obama slightly ahead or within the margin of error.
Reed's office.
Dingy Harry's office told reporters yesterday that if votes were scheduled Saturday, they would happen mid-morning, which would give Obama time to fly from Washington to Des Moines, where he was to appear with the Oprah in the afternoon.
Obama, do you of course Obama's got a jet?
Oprah's got a jet opera.
Fleet of them.
That's not a problem.
The problem is the votes never happen when they say they're going to happen.
A mid-morning vote will happen right.
The vote will happen right when Obama's supposed to be on stage with the Oprah, and he can't, he can't miss this vote because it's about ethanol and stuff that's important to Iowans.
Do you think that the telephone in Dingy Harry's office rang recently?
And he picked it up.
And on the other end, he heard, hey Harry, how you doing, buddy?
It's been a long time since I said, I see you said you want to do some cartwheels down that uh center center aisle there.
Well, I got something better for you to do.
You know, we got this big Obama and Oprah thing coming up Saturday.
That energy bill, far more important than that.
And I think what you really think about doing is important for Iowans to make sure they know that ethanol and biodiesel programs are going to continue.
And that Hillary is firmly behind that.
If she's trying to stay vertical, she's going to stay stay vertical on this.
And I think you need as many Democrats in the Senate staying in there.
I knew that vote needs to happen on Saturday.
Dingy Harry.
You understand?
I mean, you got the name Bob Torselli.
You remember old Torchia Andrew Corbett.
I really uh could not, could not thank you enough.
You look at you've been in a lot of trouble lately.
Limbaugh made a fool of you.
You can't get hang done with Bush.
This is uh this is a way to straighten this out.
Schedule that vote for Saturday afternoon, Harry.
Bye.
From Investors Business Daily, some Capitol Hill insiders think that Reed himself may find his Senate leadership challenged in the Senate over his actions on Peru trade by more ambitious Democrats in 2009, including Barack Obama, has let it known he might want to be Senate leader.
Maybe Dingy Harry didn't even need a phone call.
▲
Export Selection