All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 12, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:31
December 12, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You know what I'm thinking of doing?
The GOP seismic debate just began in Des Moines.
I'm thinking of jipping a little bit of it now and then when the moderator asks questions and then answering the questions as they should be answered.
Thing is, it's going to be tough to time this because our microphones are there.
I mean, it could be easily done.
Our microphones are everywhere.
We got an hour to play around with this, so we might give it a shot.
Greetings and welcome back, folks.
Nice to have you here.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number is 800-282-2882, and the email address is El Rushbo, a brand new one here, L. Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
If there's any doubt that Fred Thompson has placed his political fortunes on Iowa, all Republicans in a leadoff presidential state have to do is check out the contents of their mailbox.
In one of the most negative direct mail pieces sent out so far in the Republican campaign, voters get a brochure with a headline, Huckabee University, that notes illegals welcome and U.S. citizens need not apply.
The mailing is in reference to Mike Huckabee's support of in-state tuition and scholarship offerings for the children of illegal immigrants during his tenure as governor of Arkansas.
It comes courtesy of Fred Thompson, the former Tennessee senator who is reportedly folding his New Hampshire campaign operation and putting all his eggs into the January 3 Iowa caucus best.
He's also looking at South Carolina.
Thompson's mailer was sent out in the days leading up to today's debate, and it encourages people to open the doors to the fictional Huckabee University, where they learn that on the subject of immigration, Mike Huckabee talks like a Republican but governs like a Democrat.
Thompson, meanwhile, in the emailer, pledges no amnesty, increased border security to maximize efforts to prosecute and convict criminal alien gangs.
So now Thompson's going negative on Huckabee, which is understandable because Huckabee's leading the roost in Iowa.
This is, I didn't even go negative.
I mean, this is just Thompson, and what he thinks is an accurate portrayal of Huckabee's record as governor.
Have you heard about this?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has spent $16,000 on flowers since taking office.
One reason why she spent 63% more in her high-profile inaugural year than her low-key predecessor did last year.
Pelosi spent a little more than $3 million in the first nine months of 2007 compared to the $1.8 million that Denny Hastert spent during the same period in 2006.
And here's the pull quote of the piece.
When Speaker Pelosi took the gavel, it was an historic moment.
In the days since the Speaker has hosted leaders from across the country and around the world, opening the people's house to the people, discussing the work of the 110th Congress.
There are major new costs associated with setting up the new office of the new Speaker of the House.
That's her spokesman.
So the point of this, I think, is they justify spending your money on flowers because it was historic.
What are we supposed to be so grateful to have a woman cleaning house that they will pay whatever it takes?
You know, this is Illustration of the self-absorption these people have.
But let me find something here also, folks, because this whole situation with Pelosi and the opening up the doors of the house to the people's house and running around and meeting all these world leaders.
Yeah, look at what it's getting us.
I'll just tell you this.
If one more mind-numbed, lotus-eating, unrealistic American politician sucks up to Damascus like she did, there not might be, there might not be rather a single Syrian dissenter out of jail, and there might not be a country known as Lebanon.
The Baker-Hamilton agreement, remember, Iraq was going so bad to Baker-Hamilton.
We've got to bring Syria in.
We've got to get Syrian involved and we got to negotiate with them.
Then Madame Pelosi went there to charm him.
Obama wants to talk to him, which means that Mrs. Clinton is going to want to as well.
Even Connellezer Rice invited him to Annapolis.
Now, what's happened?
Syria rounded up more than 20 pro-Democratic activists and put them in jail.
Are Syrian jails better than Club Gitmo?
Do they get catered meals, closed-circuit TV, and new Korans when they get into a Syrian jail?
Today, a leading Lebanese Army general was killed in a car bombing, the ninth political assassination in Lebanon since their believed ex-Premier Rafiq al-Hariri was assassinated.
And of course, the ninth assassination that Syria will doubt that it had anything to do with.
You know, if the bomb doesn't fit, you must acquit.
If our diplomats want to talk to Syria, if Nancy Pelosi wants to talk to Syria, they better not get there through Lebanon.
They might not make it alive.
You know, the literal incompetence.
I've got a couple stories here basically illustrating that incompetence on the Democrat side.
Actually, it's pretty good news for our side as well.
First, in the New York Times, muscle flexing in Senate GOP defends strategy.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, operates with near-robotic efficiency when it comes to negotiating budget figures in public, consistently refusing to answer questions that would ever commit him to a specific number at the bargaining table.
So it was more than a little telling when Mr. McConnell laid down his mark in the current budget fight on Tuesday, informing the Capitol Hill press corps that he was ready to offer Democrats a deal, $70 billion in war financing with no strings attached, and a total budget identical to President Bush's proposal.
In other words, Republicans should get virtually everything they want.
He wasn't kidding.
And New York Times is outraged by this.
And so is Tom Brokaw, by the way.
Because Tom Brokaw's out there saying, I don't care what the idea is, liberal or conservative.
We just got to get solutions.
Well, we all care whether the idea is solved with liberalism or conservatism.
And so McConnell is saying, and why is he doing this?
Because Harry Reid is lifeless.
Harry Reid is pathetic.
Harry Reid can't get anything done in the Senate.
They have lost their AMT battle.
They've lost every Iraq resolution.
They haven't been able to accomplish anything of any significance.
And so Mitch is saying, well, take it on our terms or don't take it.
Chuck Schumer, who leads the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee, insists that the more Republicans block Democrats in Congress, the more seats Democrats will win next year.
The Republicans have to defend 23 Senate seats, nearly twice as many as Democrats, who have 12 to defend.
But the Republicans think that their strategy will win.
Here's what McConnell's saying.
I think we're being consistent here against higher taxes, consistently against greater regulation, consistently against creating new causes of action in bill after bill after bill.
It's a positive message of our vision of America.
We have pretty good sense.
The public has figured out they're not too happy with this new Congress.
And he's exactly right.
You know what he's basically doing?
He's telling Reed that Republicans should get everything they want.
And he's not kidding.
In essence, Mitch McConnell's insisting on a conservative outcome in this budget battle.
And he is focusing on the right things.
And Congress approval rating is at 22%.
Bush is up to 37.
Congress is still at 22, sometimes down at 20, sometimes up to 24.
And Schumer thinks that these guys on the Democrat side are forging a path to massive victories in November.
He's kidding himself.
So the Democrats then suggested cutting some home state projects, the earmarks.
McConnell said it was up to the Democrats to work things out, whether on spending or any other measure, in a way that Republicans would accept.
And here's why.
He knows.
Reed needs 60 votes, and he's not going to get them.
He needs 60 votes on any piece of legislation, and he's not going to get them.
Let's remember, folks, it was a Republican Congress that kept Clinton's spending in check and helped put that, you know, create that paper surplus.
This has all been lost to history during Bush's two terms, but now it's back.
I mean, the spending restraints were lost, but now they're back.
Now, let's go to the San Francisco Chronicle.
GOP not budging.
Democrats face need to cut spending.
Democrat leaders, this is a crybaby piece.
Democrat leaders say their only option is to slash $11 billion from the omnibus spending bill, which could mean cuts to cancer research, Homeland Security grants, community policing, education programs, as well as lawmakers' pet projects, which is a big deal, earmarks.
David Obey, Wisconsin, if we're going to lose, we might as well lose with clarity so that people understand who's responsible for those inadequate investments.
I'm telling you, these Democrats do not get it.
Spending taxes, taxes, taxes, immigration.
Congressional scholar Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution said that Democrats had little leverage from the start.
That's time to make excuses for them, see.
Little leverage from the start because of their narrow majority in Congress and because House Republicans agreed to stay united behind Bush's veto threats.
The White House has encouraged the battle with Democrats overspending.
Mann said, the amounts of money are irrelevant to the president.
For him, this is a purely symbolic battle designed to shore up a badly damaged reputation for responsible spending.
And then it says here in the Chronicle, Democrats also made a tactical error.
Really?
Democrats made a mistake?
Well, I didn't think they were capable of making a mistake.
Democrats were omnipotent and never wrong.
Yeah, but they made a tactical error waiting until the end of the year to provoke the budget showdown with the White House.
Bush has vetoed only one spending bill passed by Congress, the Labor HHS bill last month, and signed only one funding the Defense Department.
Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog bunch, said this would have been totally different if the Democrats had got some of their bills passed and vetoed.
You get a handful of bills, five or six bills vetoed.
You cast the president as an obstructionist.
Now they're going to have to do what the president says.
Their choice is to cave in or to do a continuing resolution.
And they are going to cave, like they have been caving since they took power.
In the politico today, Harry Reid finds real power elusive.
His title's impressive, but his power is a mirage, writes Jim Vandehey.
And John Harris, the Politico, the majority leader doesn't really run the Senate.
With a one-member cushion, he can at best see the possibilities of real power and at worst realize how illusory it really is.
The problem for Dingy Harry is this.
He has not always been the most artful climber.
He has stumbled a few times on the Senate floor, and on one prominent occasion, he landed with his foot in his mouth.
His power is a mirage.
They write that Dingy Harry can be impulsive, including in public settings.
He is quick to pop off, including declaring earlier this year the Iraq war was effectively lost.
He told the politico guys, I wish I hadn't used the word lost.
I bet he wishes he hadn't used the word lost, but that's only because it's working, not because he didn't mean it.
He meant it, and he wanted it to end up that way.
Brief, brief timeout, back after this.
Hey, little George Winston from December, the CD December thrown into our bumper rotation crop here.
800-282-2882, my good buddies.
You want to be on the program?
Many noted atmospheric experts and environmentalist wackos believe that as the globe continues to warm, hurricanes will become increasingly more powerful.
We've heard this over and over again.
By the way, the story from the Florida, South Florida Sun Sentinel today.
And in fact, we've got the story here about Max Mayfield was targeted by Henry Waxman.
He was forced to say things that weren't true.
He was forced to say that there was no connection between global warming and hurricanes.
And Max Mayfield said, nobody told me to say anything.
Again, one of these accusations that Bush told Mayfield when he ran the Hurricane Center, you make sure that you say what I want you to say.
And then Mayfield said, nobody told me to say a word.
So we've all heard, right, that global warming, they intensify hurricanes.
A couple scientists are throwing cold water on that concept now.
They found that as the Earth's atmosphere becomes hotter, hurricane intensity likely won't increase, and it might even deflate somewhat.
And the reason is heat acts to stabilize the upper atmosphere, which in turn hurts the storm's ability to build.
And I'm assuming this would have some effect on wind shear, which rips the tops off of those babies.
And once the wind comes along, the upper altitude winds rips the tops off of those babies, and you don't have a hurricane.
Nancy Pelosi, they get this headline.
It's in the Politico today.
Pelosi vows more civil approach next year.
Across the ideological spectrum, Nancy Pelosi has dashed expectations.
On the right, the hope was that Pelosi would be the tallest lightning rod in Washington, playing to type as a San Francisco liberal and handing the Republican minority all manner of ideological openings to exploit.
For the most part, that's not happened.
It hasn't.
On the left, the hope was that Pelosi would lead the newly empowered Democrats to hijack Bush's agenda on the issues that matter most to party activists, ending the Iraq war.
And to Pelosi's regret, that hasn't happened either.
Nothing's happened.
And thank you, you know, they're talking here about a government shutdown.
And I, you know, government shutdowns are a disaster, especially the Jellystone sleigh ride concession, but I just, when these guys are not around doing things, we're all better off.
A few members of either party, when speaking privately, argue that what Congress needs most is a change of party with a continuation of the highly partisan status quo.
In many ways, that's what Pelosi represents.
Yes, she has been highly partisan.
And the story goes on, she's so surprised.
She's been surprised by Democrats' inability to peel off GOP dissenters.
If that's true, then she's totally tone deaf.
She's been out there.
She's highly partisan.
She has been insulting.
And she's been surprised she hadn't been able to peel off Republicans.
She can't even keep the Democrat blue dogs in line.
These conservatives that were elected last November, who's next?
Where are we going next on the call roster?
Number one, good.
We'll go to Matt in Nashville.
Matt, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, Rush, Matt Nashville, longtime listener, first-time caller.
Thank you.
I always wanted to say that.
I'm nervous to be talking to the leader of the free world.
Well, you don't sound it.
Well, I was calling because I found it interesting when you were talking about the Harry Reid articles that the media's slant is always about how Harry Reid's hands are tied and he doesn't have the authority to do the things.
And that's kind of why America is unhappy with Congress.
But before, you know, before the election in 06, it was the Republicans working within the same constraints, needing 60 votes to get anything done, but you didn't get the same slant.
You got the Republicans.
Of course not.
Here's the, you know this.
The narrative or the template of the drive-by media when it comes to Democrats is that power is their birthright.
And that when they have power, they should be able to buy fiat, just executive fiat, do whatever they want to do.
And when they're interrupted, it's never their fault.
It's never their incompetence.
It's just a shame.
It's so sad for the country.
It's so sad for Harry Reid.
He's doing his best, but he just has such slim majority.
And the Republicans are so unforgiving and they're so intractable that Reed just can't get anything done.
Same thing with Hillary and Bill Clinton.
I mean, if you look at the stories every day in the Drive-By Media, campaign news, it's all oriented on what this Democrat has to do to win or that Democrat has to do to win.
The Republican stories are on how goofy and stupid and dangerous they all are.
Yeah, well, I wanted to make note of it before you did so I could take credit for it.
I wanted to say hi to my mom and dad down in Fort Myers, Florida.
You're doing a great job.
Thanks, Rush.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that, Matt.
And thank you for calling.
Fargo, North Dakota, is next.
This is Phil, and we welcome you, sir, to the EIB network.
Omega Ditto's Rush, and a very Merry Christmas to you.
Thank you, sir.
I just wanted to visit with you, go back a little bit on this organic conventional.
Absolutely.
Well, I've been 27 years working in agriculture and crop pest management.
I have a degree in entomology and have worked with conventional farmers as well as organic farmers.
And some of the earlier comments in the program, some of them were right on, especially from Chris from Las Cruces.
But this business about organic being better than conventional, I think this has been put to rest, just not very well publicized.
Hang on just a second.
I've got a couple of questions for you.
We get back.
All right, back to Phil in Fargo, North Dakota.
You said there's no difference in organic and whatever you call the alternative.
I'd say natural versus organic.
No, I call it conventional.
That's kind of the term we've used.
Okay, conventional.
What did the guy from Las Cruces say that was right?
You know, when you're starting to look at these chemicals, people argue with that, Dick, whether it's organic.
Oh, no.
Here I was right on the verge of getting proof, and we got a bad cell connection.
Are you still out there, Phil?
Oh, don't tell me that.
Rush, are you there?
That's how you sound it when you're answering the question.
It's just a cell connection.
It's no biggie.
But we'll just take it for granted you confirmed what I said.
Oh, I see.
Oh, yes.
Again, the chemical nature of these things is identical.
Well, okay.
What are people buying into that's wrong when they believe an organic is healthier?
Well, again, they've been sold on the issue that there's pesticide residues, and that's where the large emphasis has been.
And again, there's the potential for that, but it's so minuscule.
Even the studies that the USDA conducts, they find very, very low residues of these.
They usually complain about these products that maybe are not approved on a crop that show up in very minute residues, and they'll call those a violation of a use of a particular pesticide.
I see.
I see.
Well, so it's a marketing thing, and it's fine.
If people want to go organic and do that, that's fine.
As I said at the outset, I have no, no qualms about it.
You can do what you want.
You can drive your hybrid.
As I've always said, the thing that I've always been bothered by is I just hate people.
I hate the ease with which people can be turned into sheep using fear.
And it's, you know, people's ignorance is necessary for this to happen.
And you know me, the purpose of this show, we want a more informed, engaged, educated population participating in events that determine the country's future.
Let's see, Phil, you still there?
Yes, I'm still here.
Mr. Snerdley, who's big organic, wants me to ask you a question.
Sure.
Because, and it's a fair question, because the last one of the guys that called was actually an organic salesman.
So Mr. Snerdley wants to know if big food is paying you off to trash organic.
Well, I do work for a university, and universities do the studies, and they find that in blind taste tests, there's no difference.
Chemically, there's no difference.
So maybe I have been.
I don't know.
I certainly don't consider it.
That's a great answer.
You don't know.
So Clinton-esque.
I'm kidding about that.
Rush, rush, before you go.
When will you be back on the air in Fargo?
We sure missed you up.
Yeah, it's a technical problem with we've got a station.
It just can't having trouble getting.
I don't want to get too detailed about it, but you're under contractual agreements with another station and they won't let you out.
Well, that's just a time thing.
But we'll be in Fargo before you know it.
Thank you very much.
All right.
I appreciate it.
Thanks, Phil.
This organic business.
He said, you heard him say blind taste tests, no difference.
But see, people do think it tastes better.
Now, if their mind's making them think it tastes better, that's fine.
I have literally no qualms about that.
Listen to this story.
I want to try to put this story in perspective.
Let me ask you a question.
How can we ever hope, before giving to the details of the story, just set up with a question.
How can we ever hope to fix anything when liberals keep breaking anything that works?
If you listen to the liberals, you would think a Boy Scout meeting is a gathering of homophobes.
They are 12-year-old kids.
Even if they know what gay means, have they become homophobes?
Do they even care?
What happens to them in the Boy Scouts?
They learn values.
They learn public service.
Skills, crafts, teamwork, survival, discipline.
And the liberal answer to that is too bad.
They don't meet our politically correct standards.
Now, you basically say, Rush, what is this all about?
I'll tell you.
Three headlines.
Murder rate in Philadelphia skyrocketing, reports Bianca Salarzano.
So far this year, there have been 103 homicides more than New York.
That's from CBS News.
From the Christian Science Monitor, with more than triple the U.S. average of African-American homicides, Philadelphia is battling to protect kids from gunfire.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia had the highest murder rate among the nation's 10 largest cities last year.
From the New York Times, December 6th, Boy Scouts lose Philadelphia lease in gay rights fight.
For three years, the Philadelphia Council of Boy Scouts of America held its ground.
It resisted the city's request to change its discriminatory policy toward gay people despite threats that if it did not do so, the city would evict the group from a muni building, municipal building, where these scouts have resided practically rent-free since 1928.
Hailed as the birthplace of the Boy Scouts, the Beau Arts Building is the seat of the seventh largest chapter of the organization and the first of the more than 3,000 or 300 council service centers built by the scouts around the country over the past century.
So while the murder rate in Philadelphia skyrockets to the point that they are asking civilians to help the cops police neighborhoods, the Boy Scouts are being told to scram because they're homophobes.
And this is what I mean.
How can we hope to fix anything when liberals keep breaking everything that works?
And that is exactly and precisely what I meant to say.
They keep breaking everything that works because the things that work can be tied directly to the traditions and institutions of this country's history and founding.
And those traditions and institutions are under assault.
Anything that works has got to be broken.
Here is Steve in Naples, Florida.
Steve, I'm glad you waited.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Rush, what an honor.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
I just want to tell you that 12 years ago, I started listening to your show, and that was just about the time that you ran a series of shows motivating people to never give up despite some failure in their lives.
And you spurred me, actually, to start my own business back then, 12 years ago.
And after 12 years of hard work, I just want to thank you for the encouragement you give everyone.
Well, thank you.
You happier?
Oh, unbelievable.
What a difference between working for someone else.
You may have hassles, but they're not the same hassles as when you work for other people and you have no control over what they're doing.
And when you're smarter and more motivated and willing to work harder than they are, they can hold you back.
But that can't stop you in your own business.
As usual, you are absolutely correct.
And again, I just want to thank you.
You're welcome.
My question to you, sir, is the drive-bys think they seem to have something on Mr. Huckabee.
And it concerns me because even though I'm still weighing my options about the upcoming election, I do like Huckabee for his conservatism and his religious background.
But my question to you is, I guess, how closely do you think candidates are vetted at this point by the RNC?
Could they actually have something on him that they're waiting to pull out, or are they just fooling themselves into thinking that most of the people in the U.S. think like them and will reject someone who is religious?
Well, I don't know that what they think they've got is just strictly tied to the religious aspect of him.
When the Democrats put this stuff out, oh, yeah, we got all kinds of stuff on Huckabee.
But we're going to hold our fire until he gets the nomination because we hope he gets nomination because we can ruin him.
Now, the Democrat National Committee supposedly put that out.
Then somebody at the DNC said, no, it wasn't us.
That's Romney's camp doing it.
So now we've got this little contradiction.
I still think, you know, the DNC doesn't speak with one voice.
You've got plenty of people in there who will leak.
Every organization leaks.
So it probably did come from the DNC.
So now you've got to say, okay, what's the strategy?
Is the strategy to convince the Republicans, oh my gosh, the Democrats are going to destroy Huckabee's name?
Well, we can't have Huckabee.
So is it trying to, you really don't know.
And so you don't even know if what they're claiming to have they really have.
And then you don't know if they do have something, if it really is as damaging as they think, because they think the whole country agrees with them on issues like religion and whatever else.
So I think you have to look at this for what it is.
It's a strategic move by somebody in a campaign aimed at the current frontrunner in Iowa.
And that's Huckabee.
And the guy's also gaining nationally, right behind Rudy.
None of this was expected except by me.
And so I'd be hard-pressed to tell you what the real strategy is here, other than in most cases, you would have to say that the purpose of this is to harm Huckabee.
If the Democrats are doing it, because if they've got this stuff, why put it out?
You know, why say they've got it?
Well, they haven't said they've got it yet, have they?
Yes, they have.
Oh, I thought that was.
Oh, yeah, a couple days ago.
I thought that was just a leak, basically.
Well, they're denying it.
But the guy that they leaked to is, of course, standing by the source in the story.
It's high intrigue.
It's down now, it seems it's down now to Huckabee or Romney.
And they think that Romney's going to implode on the Latter-day Saints issue.
They think every Republic is going to implode.
But look at Republicans just won two seats in special elections yesterday, seats that they held, and the Democrats thought in one case that they were going to win one of those seats.
There's so much conventional wisdom out there that the Democrats are going to expand their majorities in both the House and the Senate, and they're going to, by fiat, automatically win the White House.
None of this is known.
These are all stories that people are telling themselves.
And with the drive-by media being, you know, the narrative is what the Democrats need to do to win, and how are Democrats doing it and so forth.
You get the wrong perspective.
You can't read the stitches on the fastball or read between the lines.
This is just, it's politics as usual.
It's intriguing.
And in time, the truth will out.
We will know who has what, on whom, and whether or not it's going to work.
And depending on what it is that they have on whom and how they use it, and if it offends and bothers me, then it isn't going to work.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
I just love this stuff.
I just love this music.
Mannheim steamroller.
Got a funny little audio sound right here as the liberals try to figure out why they love Bill Clinton.
It happened last night on Hard Ball with Chris Matthews.
Guests are Elizabeth Bumiller of the New York Times, a Houston Chronicle's Julie Mason.
Matthews says, Elizabeth Bill Clinton says that Hillary did not follow him to Arkansas because he looked like a political winner.
He had nothing to do with her calculation.
This is where he said.
In fact, grab number nine.
Grab number because this is then he's talking about me here when he says somebody.
Grab number nine, then we'll go to number 10.
This is what Clinton said that they're reacting to.
When she came down here and we got married, I was a defeated candidate for Congress with a $26,000 salary and a $42,000 campaign debt.
Now, if she were half as calculating as somebody says, that's a really great way to run for president someday.
I think I'll go to a state I've barely see and marry some failed politician with a $26,000 salary and a $42,000 debt.
Had he been a failed politician yet when they moved to Arkansas?
I have to check time.
That's not a big deal, but he's talking about me there.
So now, you know, Matthews asks his guests here: Bill Clinton says Hillary didn't follow him to Arkansas because he looked like a political winner.
It had nothing to do with her calculation.
Why does he say things like that?
Chris, the answer is because he's got me on the brain.
Because I'm out there saying this whole relationship is a calculation on her part to take over when he gets where he's going.
And she's admitted it.
And you're in the media.
You don't even know it.
The only reason he brought this up is because he's getting bugged that I keep saying it.
Of course, these clowns don't know that.
So now they've got to get a little discussion about why they love Bill Clinton.
What do you expect him to say?
Nothing.
Tell the truth.
Shut up.
That's not for a concept.
Why does he keep saying stuff that show up transparently ridiculous?
Of course, she loves the guy.
Nobody's questioned that.
But she thought he was a winner.
She told everybody he's a winner.
He's also a charming person.
He's a charming man.
That's not the point.
She talks about how he looked like a Viking.
Why did she say that she thought he was this loser making it as if 45 wasn't a good salary back and then it's always a good salary?
Why is he out there?
Julie, help me here.
You're laughing.
Why does Bill Clinton keep saying the incredible?
I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
You know, I was against the war in Iraq from the beginning.
Why does he keep laying on this malarkey?
I don't know if he's southern.
He's getting away with it.
Because he's getting away with it.
Amen, bro.
Western Massachusetts.
Pam, nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Lonely Republican greetings from Kennedy-Kerry Country.
Yeah, I can imagine.
Thank you.
I just, and while we're on the subject of Massachusetts, I just want to say that Romney is everything that he appears to be.
He took our state, which was in debt with our Democratic Congress, and he put it into the black in three years, not in four years, but in three years.
And he did it by eliminating bureaucracies, by combining administrations.
And he reduced the size of our state government.
He reduced our taxes.
He did everything he said he would do.
And he brought some of the representation, the taxation closer to the government.
I don't mean to interrupt you.
But I thought you were going to talk about Obama.
Oh, I have something to say about that, too.
But I just wanted to say that Romney is everything that he appears to be.
He's wonderful.
But Obama, yeah, I'll tell you, Obama's appeal, unfortunately, to the masses is that he says absolutely nothing, and that's what the masses understand.
His campaign slogan, his domestic policy is together we can, and his foreign policy is we are better.
He has said absolutely nothing.
It's sort of like you fill in the blanks with whatever it is you want to hear, and that's his policy.
Well, they are saying some specific things on health care, but even that's somewhat vague.
You're right.
I agree with you about this.
Obama is running almost a messianic campaign.
He's the Messiah.
He has been brought forth in the midst of the partisan rancor.
And with the power of his appealing charismatic personality, he's going to heal the wounds of a broken nation.
With what?
Nobody cares.
Because the Oprah doesn't care.
It just matters.
That he's charismatic.
So, empty suits.
They're all empty suits.
Well, the fastest three hours in media have zipped by, ladies and gentlemen.
But there's more tomorrow.
It's already going to be Thursday tomorrow.
Looking forward to being back with you then.
▲
Export Selection