And greetings, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, and the distinguished and prestigious Limbo Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It's great to be with you.
Here's the phone number if you'd like to join us.
It's 800-282-2882.
And the email address is LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
We have an audio soundbite roster yet to go.
And gone through all this horrible rotten news about the Republicans and their prospects.
Let me expand on something here.
If we've got to, in fact, let me do some.
I'm going to take a phone call here in the monologue segment.
Let's go to line two.
This is Lauren, one of my all-time top 10 favorite female names.
Lauren is in Carson City, Nevada.
Lauren, nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Kittos, Rush.
Thank you.
The reason I'm calling is because you're saying that you want to be proactive and everything, and I'm wondering why we don't have an Operation Shove It.
Why on a certain day we don't call for all conservative Republicans to leave the party and go libertarian?
Because I don't think that's, I'm not looking at that as a solution.
I don't think third party is the way to go here.
But you, you know, your question is really larger than that.
Your question is, Rush, why don't you do something?
Exactly.
Why don't you have us do something?
National Review Magazine, back in what year was this, Snerdley?
1992?
Something on 1992, maybe 93, they had a cover story, national review, on me as the leader of the opposition.
You obviously think that that's still true today, right, Lauren?
Obviously, from Operation Chaos, I think, you know, Rush, I couldn't vote for John McCain if Jesus Christ himself was his running mate.
But I don't know what to do.
And it is so frustrating from my point of view because I honestly have always prided myself on voting for the president and being able to vote.
And I just, I'm sick about it.
Have you always been conservative, always been Republican?
Yes, and I'm a homosexual as well.
So I'm very, very rare as far as that goes.
But I just, it just makes me sick to have to think that I literally would have to plug my nose.
Look, I understand the frustration, and I'm hearing it everywhere.
And I'm even hearing it.
We had a call from a woman in Michigan about an hour and a half ago, hour and 20 minutes ago, who was a Reagan Democrat.
I mean, she was converted to conservatism back in the 80s by Ronald Reagan, and she felt like her life had opened up.
She'd had an awakening.
She felt happier about herself and her country than she had in a long time.
Now she thinks party's a banner.
She doesn't know what to do either.
And this is what's really tragic about this.
And so, you know, what I was going to say before I took your call, and I'm glad you called, I'm sitting here, folks, and I know that you, many of you said, do something.
Tell these guys to do something.
There is a fine line.
I have an attitude sitting here.
I don't think these guys, I certainly know McCain isn't going to listen to anybody.
John Boehner the other day was talking about perhaps a conservative manifesto.
He's the minority leader in the house.
And I like these guys.
You know, there's some really, really good ones there.
Mike Pence from Indiana in the House of Representatives, who is just fabulous.
But these guys are in the minority.
And the problem is that when the leader of the party, and give you an example, I'm sorry to be hopscotching all around here, but this is admittedly as frustrating for me as it is for you.
You know, I'm watching, who was it?
Romney was on TV earlier today.
And who was it that was, who was it that I saw on TV that was trying to oh, George Allen might have been on Hannity's show on Fox, Hannity and Colbs.
George Allen was on the day McCain gave his global warming speech, and he was just struggling to support it, to say good things about it, to say good things about McCain.
And I got instant message flashes and email flashes from friends of mine who happened to also be watching.
And they said, what's he doing?
George Allen selling out?
And I wrote them all back and I said, you have to understand if he wants a future in the Republican Party, he cannot break away here.
The party apparatus will shun him.
This is the problem when the leader of the party is not either a conservative or in some cases, not even a Republican.
So the Republicans down the stream from the, and the presidential candidate is the putative head of the party.
The president is the head of the party, but that starts to wane as the campaign season gets closer to the general.
So you have the time-honored history of falling in line with the party.
The party comes first.
If you have the top of the party taking it in a direction that people don't want it to go and you are elected and you're in the House, for example, you've got to run for re-election, you've got to tie yourself to the top of the ticket.
As the news stories today said, these Republicans are looking at McCain as their savior.
They're not looking at themselves as their savior.
When I read that story that House Republicans, well, McCain's brand is better than our brand right now.
We're going to attach ourselves to him.
It said that spoke volumes.
It said the primary purpose is to get re-elected.
But then it also said they haven't the slightest clue how to do it.
We have lost three seats, three special elections, and two of them.
We're in safe seat districts, districts where Ronald Reagan, or I'm sorry, George Bush had run by 20 points.
Now, I know in this Mississippi race, what happened was that the Democrats went into black churches and they passed out a pamphlet saying that our guy, Greg Davis, was a member to KKK.
They did that the Sunday before the election.
And it might have been a factor.
Probably was.
How long have we known that this is what Democrats are going to do?
To be blindsided by something like this.
You know, we've gotten to the point where this should have so outraged the party rather than depressed them.
It should have so outraged them that somebody in this party, preferably our nominee, would stand up and decry all of this.
The Democrat Party is the party of 150 years of racism and segregation and Jim Crow.
The Democrat Party is the Democrat Party stood in the way of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The larger percentage of Republicans in the Senate voted for that than Democrats, enabling it to pass.
But there's such fear.
And when fear is the thing that guides your decision-making, the odds are you're going to make the wrong decision well over half the time.
I don't know what can be—I mean, I don't want to say I don't know what can be done.
But I think if it's not in these guys' hearts, if it's not in their minds, nobody can put it there.
Try to inspire these people to do the right thing, to understand what kind of success awaits them.
And you would think that they would see it.
You would think that it would be as obvious as the sky is blue why they lost in 06, what they have to do to avoid losing in 08.
But I maintain to you, and I've said this way too many times, I think Washington poisons people.
You go there after a while, you lose the worldview that you had before you got there.
And the whole social and political structure, media importance in Washington takes over, and your instincts tell you to do things enable you to survive there rather than do what's necessary to keep getting elected and advance an agenda.
To us outside Washington, this seems so simple.
And we don't understand why they can't see it, especially when they used to, because we remember how they campaigned, remember what they said, remember the way they used to govern.
What happened?
And this is sort of what's inexplicable.
So we start searching for answers.
We throw our hands up and say, I don't know, it doesn't make any sense.
I don't understand it.
What's happening is very simple.
The Republican Party has long been constituted by people who resented conservatism, resented Ronald Reagan, resented the whole notion.
I've been through this.
They are embarrassed at certain elements of the conservative movement being in the Republican Party.
They are from the Northeast.
They have this Northeast, Washington, Boston axis and corridor mentality.
Government's the answer to everything.
Government is power, and they seek it.
Whereas conservatives don't want anything to do with government except to get it out of our lives, make it smaller, and make it as invisible as it can be in our daily lives.
But even Republicans have the desire and notion to be a part of it because of the power that's involved and so forth.
So I think that there's a combination of efforts here on the part of both parties to rid the influence of conservatism.
What's frustrating about this, obviously, is that we look at Republicans, we say, don't you see history?
Can't you see where we have been predominantly successful, overwhelmingly landslide proportion successful?
Didn't you see what it took to get the American people on our side and advancing the country forward?
And all of that past is simply discarded.
And now, for whatever reason, more Republicans than ever seem to think that the way to power is the same route the Democrats take.
Big government and offer more of it to more people.
Conservatism is something that embarrasses them, and they just wanted to discard and have it be as irrelevant as they can be.
The problem for us as conservatives, and the conservative movement's a great thing, but it needs, in our political system, you need a political party to advance the ideas.
So the effort that we face here, the objective is to make sure that we don't lose control of the Republican Party.
And I'm not talking about this year.
I mean, take a look at the possibilities here.
In terms of conservatism, if we really believe that conservatism is the answer, is the best thing to hold on to this country as we've known it and loved it.
That it is the best way to organize ourselves under capitalistic free market principles, liberty, justice, and all that, pursuit of happiness, your kids, your grandkids, and so forth.
Then this is something you fight for life.
This is something you endeavor to support and see to the end.
Knowing full well we're going to have ups and down cycles like this.
I mean, if I wanted to, and I could pretend I'm a National Honor Society candidate.
I could say, look where we were back in the 60s compared to where we are now.
We're far better than we were when the 60s.
We were getting shellacked.
But people don't want to hear that because the down cycle is what we're in the midst of, and they want to reverse the down cycle.
Now, don't tell me about that stuff in the past.
We got way past that, and now we're giving it back.
I understand.
May have to give a lot of it back.
So let me give you a couple scenarios.
Barack Obama wins the White House, has a 70-seat majority in the House of Representatives, a seven-seat majority in the Senate, gets pretty much everything he wants, and we end up with Jimmy Carter too, and the country goes to hell in a handbasket.
And who gets the blame?
Well, it can't be us.
It can't be conservative, even though the drive-bys will try to lay it at our feet.
We'll have no power.
Same scenario, but with John McCain in the White House, a Republican, and the country goes to hell in a handbasket, because what's going to, this lofty agenda that McCain spoke about today is not going to happen because he's not going to get any support for it, and they're not going to bend over forwards and let McCain have whatever he wants.
He's going to have to get things done, as he says, on the basis of a liberal Democrat agenda.
And of course, he's done that on many occasions, issue by issue by issue.
So we get Jimmy Carter II with John McCain and the Democrats running the show.
But the party in power is the Republican Party.
And they get the blame.
The Republican Party takes the heat for whatever rotten things happen in those four years.
Which of those two scenarios is better for the future of conservatism?
Brief timeout back after this.
Welcome back.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Okay, while Senator McCain's out there playing nice, get this.
Just off the House floor today, the blog at thepolitico.com called A Crypt overheard the House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two other people, we're closing in on Rove.
Somebody's got to kick his ass.
Asked a few minutes later for more official explanation, Conyers told us that Rove has a week to appear before his committee, and if he doesn't, we'll do what any self-respecting committee would do.
We're going to hold him in contempt, either that or go and have him arrested.
Conyers said the committee wants Rove to testify about his role in the imprisonment of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, among other things, based on a fraudulent 60-minute story.
We want him for so many things, it's hard to keep track.
So, Senator McCain's out there playing nice.
We're going to get rid of this partisanship.
It's tearing us all apart.
This has got to stop.
We're all friends.
We're all compatriots.
We're all Americans.
We're not from different countries.
We're all friends.
And we can argue.
At the end of the day, we're all Americans.
Carl Rove works at Fox News.
Carl Rove works at Newsweek.
Carl Rove works at the Wall Street Journal.
Carl Rove is not even in Washington.
Well, he's not even in the White House.
And the Democrats want to kick his ass.
They want to go get Karl Rove and arrest him.
And they want to put Karl Rove in jail.
And we're running around singing, kumbaya.
Our nominee is.
Now, I want to, folks, I want to blind.
Well, I want to hit you between the eyes here.
I keep hearing from people who say, Rush, we're screwed.
We are screwed no matter what happens here.
Whatever scenario you just announced, we're screwed.
McCain is the president, big-time Democrat majorities in the House and Senate.
We're screwed.
Obama the president, big time majorities in the House and Senate, we're screwed.
I don't think we're screwed.
If I thought we were screwed, I would retire.
What would be the point here?
Friend of mine runs a business.
In this business, he's got a lot of egos.
He's got a lot of prima donnas, a lot of divas, a lot of people who think the world revolves around them and they aren't getting enough attention.
Sent a memo out.
I hate negative people.
Negative people make positive people sick.
Don't think I'm not talking about you, he said.
I don't know what the end result of that was, but I assume it shaped a lot of people up.
I don't like negative people either.
I used to be one.
I used to look, you know, the typical glass half empty when I got a massage.
Two minutes in, I'd say, ah, darn it, this is going to end.
And I'd spend the rest of the 58 minutes in anticipation of it ending and being disappointed rather than sitting there and being enjoying it.
If I bought a new car, I'd sit there and think, you know, yes, it's great, but someday this new car smells not going to be here.
Used to do this.
I don't anymore for a host of reasons.
But I can't stand being around negative people.
I can't stand being around fatalists.
I can't stand being around defeatists.
I understand it, but at some point I lose my ability to respond to them.
How many times can you say, I'm sorry you feel that way?
And what does that accomplish?
And I don't want to say, yeah, we're screwed.
Damn it, we're really screwed.
Yeah, you're right.
We are so screwed.
Bend over forward, backwards, grab the ankle.
We're screwed.
And then what do you do?
I'll never forget Ronald Reagan.
Soviet Union has been around since the end of World War II.
I kept asking Reagan, what are you going to do about it?
He said, if we just wait them out, they'll fail.
They will collapse of their own immorality.
He gave him a little nudge, but they did collapse of their own immorality.
I don't think conservatism's finished.
People in the Republican Party who are not conservative running for re-election deserve to lose.
Let's get rid of the dead weight, start over, screw them.
Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh with talent on loan from God.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is not a commercial.
I wanted to, as you know, some of you may not know, but it's true, Chevrolet, General Motors, big advertisers here on the EIB network.
And at present, we are driving around one of their new hybrid Chevrolet Tahos, the Tahoe Hybrid.
I mean, there's an argument here among the staff over here who gets to use it.
Great gas mileage and all this stuff.
And it's a genuine SUV.
And I was at General Motors a year ago and I saw it.
Bob Lutz show it to me.
It was inside the building in the design stage.
They were very proud of it.
I know you've heard me say hybrids, this, hybrids, but this is an SUV.
And this is a hog hybrid.
This is not an anti-global warming car.
This is somebody who wants to spend a little bit less on gasoline.
And it does.
Anyway, here's the point.
The environmentalist wackos have been after the auto companies.
That's right, Mr. Limbaugh.
We have because they've been polluting and destroying the planet with these big gas gufflers.
And we want to improve hybrid cars and vehicles so that people will not destroy the planet.
That's right.
That's the voice of the new Castrati.
Okay, so General Motors has done it.
And the Boston Globe today with a hit piece on the General Motors Chevy Tahoe hybrid.
Just how green should you feel driving the new Chevy Tahoe hybrid sport utility vehicle?
The eight-passenger vehicle is plastered with hybrid labels.
So I thought you people in the drive-by and all of you stupid, limp-wristed, linguini-spined liberals loved hybrid this and hybrid that.
So it's plastered with hybrid labels.
An automobile magazine panel that included the executive director of the Sierra Club named it the green car of the year.
But the Tahoe only gets a woman, wrote the story about Beth Daly.
Not that she's a woman, she's a sweetie.
But the Tahoe gets only about 20 miles per gallon, not much better than the non-hybrid Honda Pilot SUV, which also seats eight.
The celebrated Toyota Prius, which is not an SUV, this is missing the point.
This car, this SUV, got down here to South Florida from Orlando on less than of a quarter of a tank.
It doesn't use gasoline all the time.
It goes back and forth, the battery, the gasoline, a little gadget in there where you can see this.
The point, let me go to the end of the article here.
As for the Tahoe hybrid, Don Butler, executive director for truck marketing for Chevrolet, said the vehicle is for people who are going to buy plus-size SUVs anyway.
But now he said they have an option to get much better gas mileage on par with others.
It's not like this is a one silver bullet.
Companies working on many other energy-efficient vehicles, he said.
Ron Kogan, president and CEO of Green Car Journal at greencar.com, which declared the Tahoe the green car of the year, said the vehicle was chosen in part because the technology the company used would have reverberations throughout the industry.
The point of my telling you this is you've got these people who are restricting liberty and freedom and handcuffing the free market, demanding all these things, and they get it, and it's never enough.
And this is the same with all of liberalism.
Whatever you give them, it won't be enough.
So when McCain, if he's elected president, and he's working with 70 Democrat majority in the House and a seven Senate majority in the Senate, and he's going to work with them, because we're all Americans, we're all friends.
We're not from different countries, my friends.
We're all Americans.
So he's going to give them what they want.
It's never enough.
It is never enough.
These busybuddies who ought to mind their own business, have their heads shoved up an orifice that the sun doesn't shine into, get the hell out of everybody's life.
America is not destroying anything.
We are saving the planet and will do more so if you just leave us alone.
We're already capitulating here and capitulating there and it still isn't enough for these people whose job, apparently their reason for living is to just hassle and bother everybody else.
Yes, I'm in a great mood today, Sterling.
I mean, absolutely I am.
James, in the United Arab Emirates, we got a call from the UAE.
Sir Rush, sons of Conservative Commander-in-Chief, Strengthen Honor, Megadittos.
Thank you, sir, very much.
Hey, I'm a 24-year Air Force veteran, 18-year listener, first-time caller, and I am proud of President Bush, our Commander-in-Chief.
He threw a true stun grenade today into the Obama-Hussein campaign, and now they're running around trying to defend him.
That's my first point.
Good on the president.
My second point is: let's start winning the Republican campaign today.
I nominate you to run the campaign.
You're the best thing we got out there to run a conservative campaign.
I was looking for McCain to talk about what our platform is, to talk about lower taxes, smaller government, life, liberty, freedom, and the free market.
But I really didn't hear it.
It was easy.
He did his speech.
We didn't play all the sound bites, but in the portion of the speech where he went forward to look backward 13 years and describe what the last four years of America would be, the first four years of his first term, he didn't get specific on how, but he said tax rates are lower.
We're going to have a flat tax, one or two pages to fill out your tax form.
He was describing this utopian set of circumstances.
The problem is, you know, he can announce all that, but there was no philosophical underpinning for how it's going to get done.
It's one thing, I mean, this is a typical Hollywood trick.
You know, Hollywood trick is to do a movie four years in advance and show what would have happened if you weren't around or show what did happen when you were around.
But to make those things happen is going to take specific objectives, philosophies, and goals and strategies because the people opposed to that are going to have the most numbers in the House and the Senate.
So it would be helpful if Senator McCain would tell us how he's going to get this done rather than run some magic speech creating this utopian picture where it has gotten done.
Exactly.
You run a campaign against the enemy, and we've got two enemies, foreign and domestic.
Our domestic enemy is the liberal social democrats.
I don't want any social democrats on our cabinet when we win this.
I don't want a Pelosi or a Reed or a Kucinich there.
They should be in jail.
They went out and met with foreign enemies during wartime.
I want conservatives on there so that we can lead this country the way it needs to be led through conservatism and back to our basics of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Okay, let me propose a hypothetical for you, and you tell me what you think would happen.
I hear this too.
Rush, you need to have a secret meeting with McCain.
Nobody needs to know what ever happened.
You need to have a secret meeting with McCain, and you need to tell him these things.
Now, James, where in the Emirates are you?
Can you say?
Abu Dhabi.
You're an Abu Dhabi.
Oh, the Emir of Abu Dhabi.
Happens to be very pro-American.
Yeah.
At any rate.
If you're going to live anywhere, Abu Dhabi is the place to live here in the Middle East.
Not Dubai?
It's too busy there.
Yeah.
Okay.
Sort of like the difference between Vegas and New York.
Yeah, exactly.
Without the casinos.
Well, that you can see.
Anyway.
Anyway, so imagine McCain and I have this meeting.
Whoever sets it up, nobody knows about it.
And I say, Senator McCain, really, if you want to win big and you want to be two terms and if you want to own, here's what you got to do, ABC, D, and E. What do you think the result of the meeting would be?
John McCain 70 years old now.
What do you think the little hint?
What do you think the.
My hope would be that he would listen because he says that he's going to listen to everybody.
He'd listen.
No, I don't think he'd be rude.
He'd listen.
But I don't.
I think he's made it very clear the people he's closer to, closest to, and listens to most are people on the other side of the aisle.
Well, but that's the problem.
He needs to get some conservatives on his side, like Newts, Newt Gingrich, and his plan for winning the future.
Start with a conservative plan so he's got a base to excite to get out there and get the vote out for him.
If he doesn't get our base excited, we're going to lose it.
Let me ask you.
And those two things you talked about earlier are the nightmare.
James, I mean, yeah, well, yeah, but one of them's better for conservatism than the other.
The question is which one?
On Obama president?
Weevils.
I don't know.
Sadly, yeah, I know people are getting tired of voting for the lesser two evils, too.
They want to vote for somebody.
And that's something that makes them mad this time.
Does nobody vote for?
It's a crap shoot.
You roll the dice.
Okay, who's going to harm us the least so we have the less to rebuild?
But no, here's my next question to you.
Let's say that McCain does hold true on his tax cuts, and he tries to do that.
And let's say that he does really try to rein in federal spending.
And let's say that there's a third thing that people say he might, the judges, the judges, the spending and the tax cuts.
Then he embraces every liberal socialist he can find to advance his global warming agenda, the cap and trade agenda, the expansion of government, putting taxes on the use of carbon.
Does that ameliorate the things you would support him for on the other three?
Oh, he just canceled out the other three because this bogus about global warming is, you know, he's lost his mind.
I don't know where he's thinking.
Again, he needs to surround himself with good people.
A good leader surrounds himself with good, sound people and values, and that's what he needs to do.
He's lost his mind on this global warming thing, in my mind.
Okay.
See, I don't think he's lost his mind.
He might have left a little bit of himself in that prison cell in Hanoi.
I don't mean that in a critical way.
I mean, that habit.
I respect the senator.
He's a great American and an American hero.
But I just think he's dead wrong on the global warming issue.
It's obvious, isn't it?
But if it's obvious to us, it's not obvious to him what's going on.
Nobody's going to change his mind on that, James.
I mean, he's out there now.
I mean, he went to Oregon.
He went to the belly of the environmental beast.
He stood next to a Democrat governor.
There's no talking him out of that.
The only hope is he's lying to everybody and going to do diddly squat about it once he gets elected president.
He's just saying this stuff, you know, to align up his independent and Democrat votes here.
You know, you hate to have to count on that kind of stuff, too.
Anyway, James, I appreciate the call.
He's calling from Abu Dhabi.
I'm a little long.
A quick timeout.
We'll be back after this.
Your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, discrimination, gay marriage being legalized in California.
Oh, just got this.
Get this.
There's a press release here from the ACLU, but it's from Panama City, Florida, which is up there in the Riviera.
After a two-day trial in which a Florida Haskruel principal testified that he believed clothing or stickers featuring rainbows would make students automatically picture gay people having sex, a federal judge today ruled that the school violated students' First Amendment rights.
The case was brought to the ACLU on behalf of a junior at the Haskruel who had been forbidden by her principal to wear any sort of clothing, stickers, buttons, or symbols to show her support for equal rights for gay people.
Standing up to my school was really hard to do, but I'm so happy I did because the First Amendment's a big deal to everybody.
Said Heather Gilman, a junior at Ponce de Leon High School and the plaintiff in the case.
So a federal judge has ruled that students cannot be barred from expressing support for gay people in the Haskrule.
Judicial activism, anyone?
Here is William, Falls Church, Virginia.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Rush, how are you?
Pretty good, sir.
I'm a long-term listener, one-time talker with you.
We agreed on something, which is nice.
I got to tell you this, you've had today one of the, I think, most important shows I've ever heard.
And you really stuck us with these two options.
I'm in favor of option one.
And the reason for that is we're going to have to get rid of most of the leadership of the Republican Party as currently said.
And I'll give you a perfect example.
And you mentioned it earlier, and that's George Allen.
He was a shoe-in for re-election here.
I'm in Virginia.
And I'm a political junkie.
He was a shoe-in for it, and he ran a campaign just like he did the other night, where he said absolutely nothing.
He did not have the guts to come up and say, I think John McCain is just dead wrong in this global warming.
He said nothing, and he got beat by a guy who started out, Jim Webb, at about 15% or so.
And I know people who voted for Webb because he was a fighter, even though they didn't like what he stood for.
Don't forget the Macau thing.
He spent 35 times a day apologizing for something stupid.
He could have won by using that.
And he showed pictures of his family, which were lovely, and he did the Republican thing about offend no one, and no one voted for him.
And he doesn't have a future.
So it's not preserving one.
He's a lovely guy, and he was a nominee potentially for the presidency.
But he was a classic example of the Republican Party today.
Offend no one, stand for nothing.
And you saw it demonstrated the other night.
Now, the reason for my call is George Bush's speech stunned me as the guy referred to a stun grenade.
He described his foreign policy to a T.
We have done nothing but appease around the world.
We have a State Department that, because of the circumstances, is, I think, easily the most dangerous we've ever had.
We are in deep doo-doo all over the world because we have done absolutely nothing but appease every bad government.
I'd be happy to go through detail, which you don't want, but start with Korea, Iran, in four years of a wasted defensive war, which the surge proved in a matter of about three or four months.
As Major General Kelly said, we finally took the fight to the enemy for the first time in four years.
Bush tried to win political wins and ignore the military.
We did the military solution.
We did the same thing in the Palestinian thing.
The roadmap for peace called for eliminating Arafat and disarming the terrorists.
That was the precondition for us getting in and setting up a Palestinian government and state and supporting it.
And Colin Powell just trashed that one entirely.
Lebanon, the same thing.
They had that resolution 1775 or something after that.
Yeah, but you know, all the stuff you're right about, but a lot of people claim they don't care about motivation or explanation.
I do, and I think there is this pervasive notion that America's guilty.
No.
Has just succumbed.
You don't think that's what's causing this?
Not the people.
No, I'm talking about the big department.
I'm going to start off about the losers that we have had leading this country, and that's what happened in 2006.
It wasn't just the spending.
No, that's what I'm saying.
I'm not talking to the American people.
I'm the American.
You took the State Department, Colin Palbott.
They think we're guilty.
Yeah, they're liberals.
James Baker, he goes way back.
He's been running the State Department personally in a lot of things, and also through his progeny.
He was this major sponsor of Powell, and he ran the realists, which run the State Department.
It's his group that came up with that NIE finding that took George Bush off the hook about not leaving office with Iran having a bomb.
So they came up and announced there wasn't one.
That was stupid.
Everybody knows that was.
I mean, it's a typical baker.
I'm sadly, I'm out of time.
So they can leave office with Iran not having a bomb because they simply said with the NIE report, they don't have one.
They'll have one.
So we don't have to worry about it.
I wish I had more time, but we don't.
I got to go be back and close it out right after this.
Yeah, remember this, too.
In 1972, I was in Pittsburgh.
Wildflowers, the group.
There's a song, Skylark, isn't it?
Anyway, we're out of here, but Open Line Friday tomorrow.