All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 10, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:18
December 10, 2007, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Talent on loan from God.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I am your highly trained broadcast specialist, the most listened to radio talk show in America, over 600 fabulous and wonderful radio stations reaching you, the American people, and in the process meeting and surpassing all audience expectations daily.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, the email address is a new one, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
By the way, one thing more about this, the CIA and the tapes being destroyed.
It isn't just that Jay Rockefeller and Jane Harmon knew that they were going to be destroyed.
They didn't know when they were, but they knew they were going to be destroyed.
They didn't say anything about it.
At a conference in El Paso in mid-August, Representative Silvestre Reyes of Texas, the Democrat chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, heaped praise on a man whose exploits, he joked, had been the inspiration for the television show 24.
From fast cars to fine wines, Mr. Reyes said the appetites of the man, Jose Rodriguez Jr., are the stuff of legend.
And then turning serious, Mr. Reyes hailed Mr. Rodriguez's three decades of undercover work for the CIA, where he recently stepped down as head of its clandestine service and called Mr. Rodriguez an American hero.
Four months later, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Rodriguez's role in the destruction of hundreds of hours of videotape of harsh interrogations of two al-Qaeda operatives is at the center of an inquiry by Mr. Reyes' committee on Capitol Hill with a separate Justice Department inquiry could lead to a full criminal investigation into the matter.
The man who spent a career in the shadows has been thrust uneasily into the spotlight.
Well, the guy who destroyed the tapes was called an American hero, a la Jack Bauer, by a Dem Congressman, Representative Silvestre Reyes.
What did he know and when did he know it?
Back to the audio soundbites.
President Clinton this morning with Harry Smith on the early show at CBS.
Harry Smith said, when you were in Muscatine a week and a half or so ago, right, and said, I've always been against speaking about the Iraq war.
I've always been against it.
I did a little Googling last night, and the best I could tell you was you said the weapons inspectors should be allowed to do their jobs.
Look, I've said something like that a hundred times.
I supported threatening Saddam so we could do the inspections.
The mistake we made was not letting the inspections finish.
If they had, there would have been no war.
And I was always against doing it without the inspections.
Lying against.
As you pointed out, most of my speeches weren't getting covered by the press, and we didn't copy them or anything back then.
Why not?
We do have several records, including one six days before the invasion, where I said I don't think they should do this till the inspections finish.
That was the deal.
And if we'd done it, there would have been no war.
He's lying again.
Didn't keep his speeches.
Well, we did.
We have what Clinton said.
He wasn't against the war, as he's trying to say.
Let's go back to February 17th, 1998.
He was president.
And this is from his address to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon staff.
He said, if Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.
We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century.
They'll be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them.
We simply cannot allow that to happen.
There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein.
Bill Clinton, New York Daily News, April 16, 2003.
Saddam is gone and good riddance.
Former President Clinton said yesterday, Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.
Said the president, I don't think you can criticize the president for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock.
That is what I was always told.
May 18th, 2003, at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Mississippi, during commencement address.
I supported the president when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And my question is: Harry Smith, what the hell are you doing?
You can't find these things?
All you can find is something Clinton said about inspectors.
We're doing the job the mainstream media should be doing.
Time magazine, Bill Clinton, June 28, 2004.
So you're sitting there as president.
You're reeling in the aftermath of 9-11.
So, yeah, you want to go get bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that.
But you also have to say, well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material.
I got to do that.
That's why I supported the Iraq thing.
He just got away with lying again on the CBS early show because their researchers couldn't find anything other than Clinton talking about weapons inspectors when they Googled.
I just find it just breathtaking, folks.
I do at how incompetent the drive-by media is.
They can't do anything right, and they don't want to.
They don't want to get it right where the Clintons are concerned.
Other items in our stack of stuff.
This is from the Kansas City SCAR.
Found this after the program was over on Friday.
The end of employment-based health insurance isn't in sight yet, but a study released this morning raises the possibility of a tipping point that will cause employers to consider alternatives.
The Employee Benefit Research Institute said that if one larger company actually did drop its health benefits, others might follow for competitive reasons.
The report published this morning, Excellence Friday, said work-based health insurance benefits, which are held by the majority of Americans who have health insurance, are still a competitive reason to attract employees.
But the percentage of employees with employment-based insurance has fallen slightly since 2000, with 71% of workers now covered.
So if employees, if one big company or employer decided to drop it, others would have to for competitive reasons.
And I'll tell you this: employers, sad to say, would love nothing better than for the government to take this over for their own bottom lines, stock prices, expenses, and so forth.
Quick phone call here before the break.
This is Caesar in Richmond, Virginia.
Hi, Cesar.
Nice to have you with us on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
It's a pleasure speaking with you.
Sir.
Thank you very much.
Yes, sir.
I just want to know for the record, you know, I just say this.
I'm a six or three-year-old black male, and I've been listening to you for five years.
I was actually a Democrat when I started listening to you.
Since then, I've changed.
The Republicans have let me down also, but I'm no longer a Democrat.
And I just want to thank you for the information that you have provided.
I have learned more from you in the five years of listening to you than I've learned, quite frankly, in school.
And I appreciate it very much, sir.
Well, that's very nice.
Thank you so much.
And I thank you for your service because you do provide.
I'm a Vietnam veteran myself, but you provide a great service to the people of America if they would only listen.
And I appreciate you, sir.
Thank you very much.
Caesar, made my day.
I appreciate that.
This is exactly, Caesar, people like you, exactly what Tom Dasher was talking about after the 2002 midterms.
They did some, they had, quote-unquote, their experts analyze audiences of various talk shows, including this one and ratings and so forth.
And Dashel went public.
He said, we were surprised when our experts told us that Limbaugh is not just preaching to the choir, that there are Democrats that are listening to Limbaugh, and some of them are changing their minds.
And Caesar is one of them.
Back in a second.
All right, back to the phones.
We got the telephone number 800-282-2882.
Remember a new email address, LRushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
Terry, in Santa Rosa, California.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
Nice to have you on the program.
Yeah, hi, Rush.
Nice to talk to you.
Yeah.
I just wanted to wonder why you're not mentioning about Al Gordo there receiving his Nobel Peace Prize.
Well, I've got, in fact, I've got the audio soundbites coming right up here.
They're number 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19.
Okay, it's just because I know you said you were nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
I think that was just a joke from the very beginning.
Joke.
Who nominated you?
How can you say that nobody gets nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize as a joke, sir?
And I resent that.
They can never take that nomination away from me.
Who nominated you?
Landmark Legal Foundation.
Your buddy down the hall, right?
No, they're not down the hall.
What's his name?
Your lawyer buddy.
Why are you so contentious?
Yes, you are.
Your guy won the Nobel Peace Prize as a fraud and perpetrating a hoax.
You should be happy.
Well, no, I am happy.
I'm in a really good mood today.
And there's a lot of things I want to talk to you about.
I told Snurdy that I was a seminar caller because I figured I'd get on that way.
Well, you're actually not a seminar caller.
Well, you know, there's no such thing as a seminar.
No, seminar callers lie.
A seminar caller.
There's no seminars.
There's no more rush rooms.
There may have been seminars at one time, but not anymore.
There are seminar callers.
There are.
You know there's not seminars.
And there are rush rooms.
Listen, do me a favor.
Do me a favor.
Say hello to my friend Jim.
I know he's listening to you right now.
We're having lunch.
And he's over in his truck, I'm sure, listening to you, and he'd get a real kick out of that.
Your friend Jim is listening to me right now.
He's over in his truck listening, and he got a kick out of me saying hi to him.
Yeah, because he's your biggest fan in Santa Rosa.
Jim, what are you doing hanging around with this guy?
He's like that.
He's a good guy.
But, you know, I have to do my best to convince him that we are not, we liberals are not anti-American.
No, you're not anti-America per se.
You're anti-America tradition and institution.
You want to change America.
You want to keep America, but you want to change America.
No, don't we?
You want to hang George Bush?
You want to pin Bush with war crimes?
You want to get rid of some of the traditions and institutions that made the country great, but you want to keep America America.
I'm sure that George Bush is a real nice guy.
I'm sure you're a nice guy.
I don't agree with George Bush's policies, but as my father, when he was supporting John Kenny, when I was a kid, I asked him, I said, but what if the other guy wins?
He said, then he will be president and I will support him.
And he was, my father was a good Democrat.
Yeah.
And I believe that.
That's a long time ago.
If John F. Kennedy were alive today, he'd be called a conservative demagogue and would not be allowed to speak at the Democrat National Convention if he hadn't changed.
This guy was big on tax cuts.
He fought the commies.
And you want to talk about secret wiretaps?
It was during the JFK administration that we wiretapped Martin Luther King from the Justice Department.
All right.
Look, I'm glad you called out there, Terry.
Thanks so much.
Les in Williamsburg, Virginia.
Great to have you, sir.
Nice to have you on the program with us.
Hi there, Rush.
I just wanted to say real quick, if I can, that for 18, 20 years now, I wanted to thank you in person for the enlightenment that you bring to America.
And you are doing the job of the mainstream media.
Terry in Santa Rosa, the lack of evidence is not evidence.
Just because you don't know about seminars going on doesn't mean they're not happening.
And Caesar in Richmond, right up the street from us, gosh, that is just so heartfelt.
Anyway, I'll get to my thing real quick.
As a salesman with a business that I have run for 18 years selling car care products that are made in America, by the way, I understand that a very effective sales technique that is often used by liberals is to attempt to scare your prospects.
Al Gore works this to no end.
But one of the things in that soundbite that you played earlier in your show today that I thought was very interesting and wanted to get your comments on, Rush, was that in one sentence, he used the words imminent and reversible.
And I would argue that you can't have something imminent be reversible.
Exactly right.
You are exactly.
In fact, you know what?
This would be a great opportunity here to transition into the Al Gore soundbites from his crazy Nobel speech, a speech I should have been giving today.
But he gave it.
This morning in Oslo, we've got five of these.
I don't know how many I'll be able to get through, but here's the first one.
Seven years ago, tomorrow, I read my own political obituary in a judgment that seemed to me harsh and mistaken, if not premature.
But that unwelcome verdict also brought a precious, if painful gift, an opportunity to search for fresh new ways to serve my purpose.
Get this next bite in which the former vice president compares those who don't believe in his hoax to those that appeased the Nazis.
We, the human species, are confronting a planetary emergency, a threat to the survival of our civilization that is gathering ominous and destructive potential, even as we gather here.
However, despite a growing number of honorable exceptions, too many of the world's leaders are still best described in the words Winston Churchill applied to those who ignored Adolf Hitler's threat.
And I quote, they go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent.
Well, this is this and others.
Now, we're not just, we're deniers, and now we are being compared to the same people that appeased the Nazis, people that believe global warming is a hoax.
It's interesting.
Our buddies at Newsbacks released a story today on the very day that Gore walked to the podium to accept his peace prize.
As much of the United States is being blasted by vicious ice storms, a blockbuster report published in a prestigious scientific journal insists that the evidence shows that climate warming is both natural and unstoppable and that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
Please, would we please have some people use common sense and understand that this has to be true?
How can carbon dioxide be a pollutant when we exhale it?
Plants use it.
Writing in the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society, Professor David Douglas of the University of Rochester, Professor John Christie, University of Alabama, Benjamin Pearson, and Professor Fred Singer, University of Virginia, report that observed patterns of temperature changes, fingerprints, over the last 30 years disagree with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors such as solar variability.
The conclusion is that climate change is unstoppable, cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation.
On a related story, can I give you just an example?
Every day we get weirder and weirder examples of how over-the-top the hoaxers have become.
A West Australian medical expert wants families to pay a $5,000-plus baby levy at birth and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 a child.
Writing in today's Medical Journal of Australia, Associate Professor Barry Walters said every couple with more than two children should be taxed to pay for enough trees to offset the carbon emissions generated over each child's lifetime.
Professor Walters, clinical associate professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia Hospital in Perth, called for condoms and greenhouse-friendly services such as sterilization procedures to earn carbon credits.
And he implied the federal government should ditch the $4,133 baby bonus and consider population controls like those in China and India.
And if you read this, Professor Walters, clinical associate professor, blah, calls for condoms and greenhouse-friendly services such as sterilization procedures to earn carbon credits.
What he is saying is that human beings are now regarded as mere pollution to be abated like some toxic chemical by an obstetrician.
This is your global warming movement.
In action, don't buy it.
From the Los Angeles Times, some indications are that Senator Dingy Harry Reed, whom we see so much on national TV criticizing pretty much everything he's asked about and even more, is in some growing political difficulties back home in Nevada.
The job a Democratic Senate majority leader can be a dangerous one, as Tom Dashell, a puffster, found out when he lost a re-election bid for after his tour as majority leader, as the folks in South Dakota apparently came to think he wasn't playing enough or paying enough attention to his home state.
The bottom line is that two recent newspaper polls found that 49% and 51% of voters disapprove of Dingy Harry's job performance.
Only 39% and 32% gave him a favorable rating.
That's you're getting close to puffster territory, and this is something that we have predicted that would be happening to Dingy, although he's not up until 2010.
Teresa in Sumter, South Carolina.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the broadcast.
Hi, Rush.
Just wanted to say love you.
Love Mannheim Steamroller.
And I was one of the, I guess, 36,000 people yesterday at Williams Bryce Stadium for the Obama-Opra extravaganza.
Yes.
And I am a Republican, so don't, the whole reason was just to introduce my daughter to politics.
But I do feel that the introduction of Oprah, a lot of the people that I spoke with yesterday, they trust her judgment.
They think that she's a straight-on person.
Maybe Obama's going to give Hillary a run for her money because it just seems like maybe the tide is turning, so to speak.
The crowd was just all over him.
He seems like he's a genuine person.
And that's something so different from Hillary, you know.
And I'm almost, I wish that if a Democrat is going to win, because we Republicans can't seem to get ourselves together with one candidate, I hope it's him and not her so that there aren't lies being perpetrated on the American people anymore.
Okay, you're proving something that I said at the outset of the program.
Yes, sir.
And it is that the Hillary camp's biggest fear about Oprah is that she appears to white appeals to white women.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, the crowd was completely mixed.
It passed.
But now I'm talking about you.
Oh, oh, no, don't.
Don't try to weasel out now, sweetie.
Don't try to weasel out now.
You're not going to be able to do that.
I'm going to say Fred Thompson.
That's who I'm going to vote for.
Oh, you are.
In my primary, yes, sir.
Definitely.
But the fact that you're even thinking about which of these Democrats would be okay if our guys don't win.
Right.
And you think Obama seems...
See, this is fascinating.
Do you know one thing about Obama's policy?
Did he talk about any policy things yesterday?
Oh, he had plenty of stuff that he wants to do.
But my question is, where's that funding going to come from?
You know, all of these marvelous, he wants to increase the minimum wage annually so that it matches inflation.
Where's the dollars going to come?
He wants to build schools.
You and me.
It's called tax increases.
And every Democrat running is going to do it.
I know it.
There's not, in terms of policy, there is not a Smidgens bit of difference between Obama or Hillary or John Edwards.
No, but I think the perception, perception, because I talk to people, that's just my nature.
Among the people that I spoke with yesterday was that Obama is genuine.
Hillary is not.
Well, that's mostly Democrats showing up at this thing, right?
Oh, yeah.
That's what I felt like.
Oh, I just felt like at any moment someone was going to believe and ambush me.
I'll tell you what this also dovetails with, and that is a Zogby poll from last week in Iowa.
But nevertheless, they found that the electorate, and I say this every year, they say the electorate is just angry as it can be at politics in general, negative ads and this sort of thing, and that they're looking for somebody who's not going to get into the traditional mudslinging.
And Obama isn't.
No, he's not going to be able to do that.
Hillary's slinging all kinds of mud at him, but he's not responding in kind.
He's kind of responding in a lifeless way.
That's one thing I noticed yesterday.
As far as the.
You sure sound enthusiastic about this guy to be a Fred Thompson supporter.
I just have to observe that.
He's supposed to be talking to you.
It's just neat.
I love you, man.
Yesterday, they let Oprah make the digs on Hillary.
You know, now Obama attacked Republicans and the Bush administration, which I told my daughter, that's like singing to the choir because these people hate Bush already.
But they let Oprah make the digs against Philip about the age of 19.
You've also said something else about which I must comment, Teresa, and that is it's a sad and unfortunate reality.
In politics, perception is reality.
And you keep using that word, your perception of Obama, which means you don't have any clue, but you are perceiving.
And so when you perceive and you perceive positively, you're transferring positive qualities you want in somebody to Obama and then thinking he's got them.
A perception is not reality by definition.
But in politics, perception is reality.
You are relying more on your perception of Obama and his personality and all that than you are of your knowledge of his political and other things.
And of course, the Oprah is there too.
And this adds to people's perceptions, especially attracting white women, which is what Hillary desperately needs, not just for the primaries, but for the general.
But perceptions matter.
And your illustration of it here is important because you are now already beginning to think, you know, this Obama guy wouldn't be bad if Fred Thompson doesn't win it all.
Well, Hillary did have the less educated white women, but that was early on.
And they were, no, she had the highly educated white women.
It was the poor and uneducated that she was going for.
And hence, Oprah's in a campaign now to get the poor and the uneducated who've got time to watch television 53 hours a week to learn how their lives are miserable and they can't do any about it except to keep watching Oprah.
That's why Oprah's, that's what I'm telling you.
She's always had the highly educated elite women, the feminazis and this sort of.
It's the poor, uneducated women that Hillary was making a move for.
But of course, Hillary's not going to lower herself to act like she can relate to poor, uneducated people.
She'll lower herself to speak to blacks with their accent and dialect and so forth.
But that's what Oprah's for.
Who do you think the Oprah audience is for crying out loud?
Don't make me go any further in this.
You all know what I'm talking about here.
You know it and I know it.
Teresa, thanks.
Melody in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi, Rush.
I am glad to speak with you.
I'm a Rush baby.
My dad was the first caller from Albuquerque.
And some of my best memories are sitting in the car listening to you with my dad eating pizza.
Wow.
And I just wanted to thank you for those memories.
And now I'm a college student.
And every day before I go to class, I listen to you to prepare myself to go against my liberal teacher and my liberal classmates.
And being the only vocal conservative in my class, I speak out every day and tell them what's right and try to get these students to stop listening and just eating up and accepting everything these teachers tell them as fact.
I've been called Ann Coulter in my class, and I said, thank you.
And when my class was...
Well, you've got guts and courage.
Yeah.
Yes.
When my class was asked to identify a Republican, the only Republican they could think of was you.
So that's just how much you are getting out there and bugging the liberals.
And my teacher just got so upset, and he tried to discredit you.
And I said, hey, I'm a ditto head.
And I just started sticking up for you.
And he was trying to go back to your days as a dish jockey.
And I just kept coming up with stuff because my dad has always talked about you.
And I've listened to you, and I know about you.
And I just wanted to thank you.
And my teacher started, every time I would come up against him and try to say, no, that's not right.
You need to look at your sources because he uses such old information.
He would say, well, what are your sources?
And you have to start citing them.
So I started a whole binder on everything from global warming to Iraq to Iran, and I have so many things from you.
And I go to your show and take your information, and then I go and Google it and find the papers and the documents, and I bring them back to class, and I show my teacher, and he gets so upset, and I just love it, and everybody in my class gets angry, and I've been called some of the worst names, but that's the truth.
Yeah, they get mad at you.
Oh, yes.
That's because you're far more informed than they are, and you're making them look bad.
Exactly.
I said, you can't fight with logic.
It's not my fault that you guys aren't logical.
I mean, it's so logical to be a conservative.
And you have driven me to stand up for America.
I'm going to be a history teacher, and I hope that I can pass my ideology on to other students and get them to question all these other teachers because almost every single teacher I've ever had has been a liberal.
I mean, I get questions like, who lost the war in Iraq?
How can you lose a war that hasn't been, it's not over, you know?
It's just ridiculous.
Well, you are, you know what, you're me standing up here theoretically.
I can't stand because the microphone doesn't go with me, but I'd stand up and cheer you if I could.
And I know a lot of people out there egging you on because this is a kind of passion and enthusiasm and love for the country that people just love hearing.
And the fact that you want to go into the education system to try to take some young skulls full of mush and orient them in the right direction is honorable and admirable.
Thank you so much.
It's just going to be a dangerous battle for me.
Well, you know what?
It's going to be a dangerous battle for you, but you're armed for it already.
And you've got the passion for it.
You know, desire is 80% of achievement.
What?
Because of you and my father.
Well, whatever the reason, you've got it.
And desire is 80% of achievement because it's that desire that will force you to do everything you have to to get it done.
Get educated as you're doing, working hard and so forth and so on.
So you sounds like you found your passion, and I hope it never leaves you.
Thank you so much, Rush.
Thank you for the call.
We'll be right back after this, my good buddies.
Let's go back to this destruction of the CIA interrogation tape, shall we?
Friday afternoon on the floor of the Senate, a portion of remarks delivered by Senator Kennedy.
Those tapes were not shown to Congress.
They were not shown to any court.
They were not shown to the bipartisan 9-11 Commission.
Instead, they were destroyed.
What would cause the CIA to take this action?
The answer is obvious, cover-up.
The pattern is unmistakable.
The past six years, the Bush administration has run roughshod over our ideals and the rule of law.
Before those six years, the Republican Congress did little to hold the administration accountable.
Now, when the new Democratic Congress is demanding answers, the administration is feverishly covering up its tracks.
We haven't seen anything like this since the 18 and a half minute gap in the tapes of President Richard Nixon.
And once again, a prominent Democrat senator sides with the enemies of the United States of America.
Now, at the time that Senator Kennedy made these remarks on the floor of the Senate, I don't know if he was aware that Senator Jay Rockefeller knew of the tapes and knew they were going to be destroyed.
He's on the Intel Committee in the Senate.
He knew they were going to be destroyed.
He didn't say a word about it.
Now, he wasn't informed when they were destroyed, but he knew they were going to be destroyed.
And he didn't say anything about it.
So should he also be investigated as giving aid and comfort to the war criminal George W. Bush?
Face the Nation on Sunday, the host Bob Schieffer says to Senator Jay Rockefeller, CIA was asked by a federal judge if it had certain tapes of agents interrogating terrorist suspects.
The agency said no.
Now the agency has confirmed that not only there were tapes, but that it destroyed the tapes.
Why were the tapes destroyed, Senator, in your opinion?
Very good question.
And I think it, you know, you can speculate.
These particular tapes, I don't know why they were destroyed.
And I also don't know why we didn't find out about that until 2006.
You found out about it when you read it in the newspaper.
Yes.
Now, we have a legal blog today which says that Rockefeller knew and was told by the CIA the tapes were going to be destroyed.
And that Jane Harmon was told the same thing.
Jane Harmon at least wrote a letter objecting to the destruction of tapes, but Jay Rocky Rockefeller did not.
Senator Kennedy should speak to him about this.
So then Schieffer said, well, here's a story that's on the front page of the Washington Post today.
It says that Hill was briefed on waterboarding back in 2002.
Do you know if Hill leaders were briefed on this?
You're now the chairman of the Intel Committee.
You were not the chairman when these briefings were supposed to have taken place.
Can you tell us anything about that?
One of the unfortunate problems, but necessary problems of being one of the gang of four, the gang of eight, sir, the chairman of the House and Senate.
Vice Chairman is that you cannot talk about what you may or may not have been briefed on.
And in fact, you can't even talk about it to your chief of staff on the Intelligence Committee or to anybody else.
I couldn't even talk about it with Chuck.
So you can't say anything about this, even whether you were briefed or not.
Correct.
What a dance.
What a dance, because we know that Rockefeller wrote a memo back in 2002, 2003 suggesting ways to sabotage the Bush war policy based on information that he knew and how it was going to be playing out.
He knew about waterboarding.
Well, he knew about the tapes.
I don't know about the waterboarding, but Pelosi did, and they all asked if it was strict enough.
Bob in Miami, I'm glad you waited, sir.
You're next to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
Thank God you are on the air.
That's capital G, capital O, capital D. You're the watchman on the wall sounding the alarm.
Without you, God knows where this country would be.
Well, that's all that's appreciate that.
Hold on a second, Rush, please.
I accidentally hit the volume switch.
Hello.
I'm here.
Okay.
Rush, I've been around a long time since before World War II.
And I have seen our political system deteriorate to where it is today.
I have had it with these people.
I have really, really had it.
The Taxocrats, formerly known as the Democratic Party, which died years ago as far as I'm concerned, is now a conglomeration of liberals, socialists, communists, malcontents, anarchists, and traitors.
And I don't use the word traitor lightly.
I can hear that.
Okay.
Definition of treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war, punishable by death.
I think it is about time we stop playing nice-nice with these people and let them hide under freedom of speech under the First Amendment to commit treason.
I've had it.
I think it's time that we start arresting some of these people, try them for treason, and if they're found guilty, execute them.
This will stop this fashionable to trash your country and to trash everything else that this country stands for.
I have really had it.
I am angry as I, well, I'm just angry.
I can't describe it.
I can hear it.
We're not going to execute anybody.
Why not?
Well, because a lot of reasons.
Political correctness, we're just correctness to do it.
I don't even think we're going to charge anybody with treason.
And I'm not trying to be depressing here.
I think political correctness has changed so much today.
The answer, Bob, and I have total empathy for your feelings on this, but the answer is just cream them.
It's to just beat them.
I wish I had more time, but I really do, but I'm really up against it here.
I've got to run.
What a way to start the week.
I mean, what a bang-up way to start the week.
What a heck of a show.
They're all heck of a shows.
As will tomorrow's show be a heck of a show.
Can't wait.
We'll see you then, folks.
▲
Export Selection