All Episodes
Previous Next
June 19, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:11
June 19, 2008, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, I hope to keep that string unbroken, and it's a pleasure to be with you today on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Jason Lewis from Minneapolis Way will be with you tomorrow, and Rush will be back on Monday after what I hope is a good weekend for all of you.
Meanwhile, it has been a fascinating week.
A lot of news just pouring out of the Obama world, whether it's the Muslim women shunted out of view at the podium in Detroit on Monday, or Michelle Obama on the view, the show, and we got some audio from that, or whether Senator Obama's decision to forego public financing is smart or not in the world of campaign finance.
Or what would Senator Obama's advisors say?
What would their spin be in view of this noxious and horrible Supreme Court ruling involving habeas corpus for terrorists detained at Guantanamo?
What might their view be of if we were to actually capture Osama bin Laden and bring him back and detain him in the United States?
Would he too be able to avail himself of this rabble of federal judges who would suddenly have the authority that currently is securely within the bounds of the people who are running Guantanamo?
The wonderful Bill Salmon, who has written no fewer than four New York Times bestsellers, My Favorite At Any Cost, How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election, but also grab copies of Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the White House, or misunderestimated or strategy, or just read them all the time in the Washington Examiner.
It's always a pleasure to welcome Bill Salmon, especially into the rarefied atmosphere of Club Limbaugh.
Hi, Bill.
How are you doing?
I'm doing great, Mark.
Thank you so much for having me.
It is a pleasure, and I know Rush is glad that you're on the show as well.
And I doubly am because I wanted to ask you about this article I'm looking at right now.
Obama advisors say bin Laden can appeal to U.S. courts.
How would that go?
Well, first of all, I was stunned when I asked John Kerry and Richard Clark, the former White House Clowner Terrorism Czar, to answer that question.
I was stunned that they actually did, that they sort of bit and kind of rose to the bait.
And I said, look, if Osama bin Laden is captured, brought to Gitmo, should he get habeas corpus?
In other words, should he be able to appeal his military confinement to the civilian court system?
And they both said yes.
And I think that opened up a huge opportunity politically for McCain's campaign to jump in and say, wait a minute, you know, what kind of nightmare scenario are we talking about?
We're talking about having Osama bin Laden appealing to some district court here in Washington, some liberal judge.
And what are we going to figure out whether the guy had his Miranda rights read to him by the soldiers over in Afghanistan or Pakistan?
And if not, will we throw that out?
So it opens a whole Pandora's box of a nightmare scenario.
And what really, the reason surprised me is because John Kerry, of all people, was on the receiving end of this kind of criticism in the 2004 cycle when he favored more of a civilian approach to prosecution of terrorists versus Bush's military approach.
And here we are right back in that same argument.
When you were telling me about your level of surprise at the way they answered it, I wonder if they really had a choice, because that is what this horrible Supreme Court decision actually says.
This is the groundwork that the justices themselves have laid.
So I wonder really how they could have answered any differently.
Well, that's a great point because the law of the land now is the Supreme Court ruling.
And the technical answer to the question is, well, yeah, if we brought him to Gitmo, he would be Offered the same privileges that we're now giving to the rest of the terrorism suspects at Gitmo, thanks to this Supreme Court ruling.
But the politically astute answer would have been to dodge that question.
And believe me, I've been in this game long enough that I thought that this was just going to get a, you know, this is going to elicit a Dodge answer.
And so politically, not from a legalistic sense, but politically to say, well, yeah, of course we have to give him these rights, et cetera, et cetera, it just gives this huge opening to McCain.
And if McCain's smart, he will continue to exploit it.
Let's work our way through some other things you've been writing about.
Taking a look at examiner.com right now, or you can find the work of Bill Salmon.
Bush quietly advising Hillary Clinton and top Democrats, says new book.
What?
Well, you know, I've been doing a series of books on the historic Bush presidency, and in the most recent one, he did tell me that early on, you know, months and months ago, he began quietly giving advice behind the scenes to not just Hillary, but to Barack Obama.
And he also was giving advice to the various Republican candidates before we got to John McCain and presumably is still doing so.
And I asked him, why are you doing this?
I mean, you know, you're talking about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
And he said, look, I have an obligation.
Forget about politics for a minute.
Forget about, you know, obviously I'd like a Republican to succeed me, but, you know, I have to be open to the possibility that that won't happen.
And there's something more important here, and that's our national security.
And I have to start to bring these people into the loop and give them some behind-the-scenes guidance.
And what he was saying to the Democrats at that time was, look, you know, you may want to give yourself a little wiggle room in all of your anti-war rhetoric.
You're kind of painting yourself into a corner here by saying you're going to just pull out our troops as soon as you take office.
You know, when you see some of the information that I have access to, you may want to fudge that a little bit because you're going to find yourself in a real pickle on January 20th.
And sure enough, after he started saying this, I noticed that in some of these debates, Hillary and Barack Obama would say, well, I can't necessarily promise that I'd have Mountain by 2013, et cetera, et cetera.
So I think they were actually starting to take his advice.
And it was really interesting that Bush felt that way about it.
It was, again, bigger than politics.
It was about our national security.
Now, you wrote that article about advice to Hillary back in September.
And, of course, a million things have happened since then, and she's just not the nominee.
And if indeed you have something in the pipeline that deals with how the Bush years will be viewed in history, let's spend our last couple of minutes looking at that.
I hope I'm not just seeing things through my political glasses.
I mean, we all have no choice but to see things through our political lens.
But I have this part of me that just really tries hard to objectively say that history will be kinder to President Bush than the current political wins.
And I have a feeling you're probably going to conclude the same.
So help me bolster that.
Okay.
First of all, you're right because that's not saying much.
I mean, he is universally looked at by there was a poll out from the historians the other day that said that, you know, I don't know, 99% said he's the worst president in history.
But let's look at the objective facts.
When all the noise clears away and all the smoke settles, and we get some time and some clarity and look at the presidency of George W. Bush.
Liberated 50 million Muslims.
Eradicated two of the worst despotic regimes on the face of the planet.
Inherited a recession, turned it into an expansion that has not stopped yet, even though it slowed down, and that was by cutting taxes, not once, not twice, but three times.
Appointing two solid conservatives to the Supreme Court, and their decisions will impact American society for a generation.
You know, deploying the first president to deploy, to begin to deploy a missile defense shield.
We've had people talking about this since the days of Ronald Reagan.
Bush finally got off the dime and started getting this thing going.
So, I mean, you go down the list, and we can all talk about, well, he's the worst president in history, blah, But these are demonstrably true facts and accomplishments that will loom larger as the seminal accomplishments of the Bush presidency as we begin to get some clarity to it.
I think it's clear to you, and it's clear to me, and it's clear to probably a lot of the listeners today.
But if you look at the mainstream media, this is heresy to say these kinds of things to my brethren in the mainstream media.
Bill Salmon-Lewis from the Washington Examiner.
I'm fond of weaving a little story in which I get into a time tunnel and go back to September 12th, 2001, anywhere in America.
And I land, I step out of the HG Wells time machine, and I say, I'll tell you what I'm going to do.
Come with me six, seven years in the future.
America will not have been attacked again.
The economy will have remained amazingly strong, you know, up till about the middle of 2008.
But generally speaking, the markets will do great.
The unemployment will do great.
Inflation will do just simply great by any measure, not just post-9-11.
And oh, by the way, you'll get two fantastic strict constructionist justices.
Now, come on with me.
Let's go up to 2008.
I would expect anyone making that trip with me, what they would expect upon emerging, is the big push for the constitutional amendment to allow a third Bush term.
Yeah, and yet it's universally accepted today that when the Democrats talk about, well, it's a third Bush term, that that's a bad thing, that it's been a failed presidency.
And you hit on one of the accomplishments that I meant to, which is one of the biggest, and that is the fact that everyone expected us to get hit again quickly.
And here we are seven years later, and we haven't gotten hit.
So, yeah, I think that, and I was with President Bush on September 11th, and I saw how his presidency was transformed, and I saw how it galvanized the country, and we were all sort of with him.
And it's completely turned around now.
But I think we've been lulled into this false sense of security because we haven't been hit.
In other words, Bush is the victim of his own success.
You have well circulated among your colleagues in agreement and disagreement sometimes.
It's been an interesting gig for you, the Washington Times, now the Examiner.
I am guessing, though, you mentioned your Washington colleagues and such.
I'm guessing that there was not a phone or a pager that could be answered or that no one was reachable yesterday because everyone was at the Russian service or the memorial.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, it's just, I mean, this is the closest thing we've had to a state funeral since Ronald Reagan or Gerald Ford passed away.
I mean, this guy was a big deal.
He brought this city to a standstill and really has over the last week with people paying tribute.
I thought the funniest line yesterday was from Tom Broklaw saying at the memorial service that the largest contingent of people here are those who think that they're going to replace Tim Russell Press.
People like David Gregory, et cetera.
Yeah, I think Chris Matthews was there, I believe, in his best suit as well.
Absolutely.
Oh, man.
And Luke, his son, his wonderful son, had a great line to at the end.
He said, I'll tell you what, says we part company this coming Sunday morning, just imagine special edition of Meet the Press beyond St. Peter's Gates, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Byrd debating for the full hour.
It doesn't get any better.
And it doesn't get any better than Bill Salmon on the pages of The Examiner and the pages of his many books.
Thank you, Bill.
A pleasure to have you on the Rush Limbaugh show.
And I look forward to talking to you nationally or locally sometime very soon.
Thank you, Mark.
That is Bill Salmon, S-A-M-M-O-N.
If you're Googling him, which he would like you to do, and which you'll enjoy doing because his stuff is just great.
All right, he gave us some things to chew on, and I've got more, including the, it's funny, this is not so much Michelle Obama audio.
It is the moment from the view yesterday that was, for me, the most shameless attempt to sugarcoat Michelle Obama.
That's coming up next, and so are your calls at 1-800-282-2882.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Davis down here in Texas at WBAP Dallas-Fort Worth.
In for Rush Limbaugh today, Jason Lewis tomorrow from Minnesota.
But no matter who's doing it, it's the EIB network, and we'll be right back.
It's never really Thursday until you hear some Earth, Wind, and Fire.
So there we are.
It's now official.
Hi, Mark Davis, in for Rush Limbaugh on the EIB network.
All right, we've got calls gathering on a number of things.
I'm going to get right to them.
This will take like a minute, but I know you crave it, and I've been plugging it like forever.
So here it is.
Michelle Obama on The View actually did a thoroughly passable, but she did a fine job.
What was driving me nuts on The View, other than the fact that I was watching The View, was the first of all, you start with Barbara Walters and she couches these questions, the phraseology she used.
First of all, the issue, of course, is Michelle Obama's now infamous quote: that her ascendancy of her husband, that that is the cause for her being really proud of her country for the first time, which is an insult to every American who thinks about it, who actually thinks about it.
What an incredible back of the hand to this great country to say that only her husband's ascendancy has made her really proud.
Now, you notice I said really proud because that is what she said.
Really proud.
Whoopi Goldberg goes off on this in the audio excerpt that I'll play here in a moment.
But before we get to that, Barbara Walters asked her why she felt, why she, Michelle Obama, felt that she was the subject of attacks like this.
Attacks once again, as Rush has chronicled for you many times, and anybody who does what we do for a living has done many, many times.
Only in the liberal world is it considered an attack to actually hold people accountable for what they actually say.
It is an attack to put up in front of a Democrat's face an actual quote from that actual Democrat and make him explain himself.
Well, that's an attack.
No, it's not.
It's an attempt at accountability.
It's an attempt to get at what makes someone really tick.
It's an attempt to get a magnifying glass to that person's soul.
So here's Whoopee Goldberg.
Within this clip, you will hear Michelle Obama's offending words, but they weren't offensive to Whoopee.
Oh, duh, of course not.
But the reason Whoopi would like for it to be non-offensive to all of us is she feels that there's an exculpatory word in there, one word that Michelle uses that really makes it all okay.
And we've all gone needlessly nuts about a thoroughly innocuous quote.
And then Whoopi does something, I don't know how much in character it is, but she just absolutely flat-out lies.
Let's enjoy.
I wanted to clear up that quote because one of the things that's happened with that quote is it has been word, a word, a very important word, even for me, because I'd never seen the original of the quote.
Can we run it right quick?
Because I think it has a different feel once you hear it.
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country.
For the first time, I'm really proud.
This is not the first time you're proud of your country.
This is the first time you're really proud.
I just wanted to point out.
Oh, how wrong we've all been.
Oh, stop the presses.
She said, really.
She didn't say ever proud to any degree.
She said, really.
Now, this is kind of funny.
Listen as Joy Behar and Barbara and everybody are just kind of knocked completely off the track as their wheels shoot straight off because they just, I don't know if they consider Whoopee's assertion to be as preposterous as I do, but they truly just don't quite know what to say.
That way.
Yeah.
Well, we like to say it because it's always been taken out.
Now there's the lie.
What?
And you know, Whoopee, you've made some okay movies.
Not lately, but you have.
And your stand-up was pretty diverting back in the day.
But that's just a damnable lie.
No one has redacted or edited out Michelle Obama saying, really.
The quote is as bad as it is, even with really in there.
First time I'm really proud of my country.
Well, silly, stupid me.
Maybe it's just a white man thing, but I was really proud when the Soviet Union was defeated.
I was really proud when the Berlin Wall fell.
And let's take it beyond my limited white man purview.
I'm going to guess that out there in America, there are a bunch of people, a bunch of people of color and a bunch of people who are female, incredibly proud of the strides this country made for women and minorities in the 80s and 90s, otherwise known as Michelle Obama's adult life.
I mean, seriously, we talk about what it would be like to be black or be a woman in 1920 or 1880.
I got to tell you, it was wildly different being a woman or being black in 1978.
I mean, even post-Civil Rights Act, even there was a ton of enlightenment that happened from the beginning of the 60s to the end of the 60s, a ton.
But it was a continuum.
It continued, as continuums are wont to do, through the 80s and even through the 90s.
I mean, this is a sea change in American enlightenment that is without peer in human history.
But apparently, that doesn't rise to the level to make Michelle Obama, excuse me, not proud, really proud, because that modifier is so very, very important.
Well, what is very, very important is that neither Michelle Obama nor her husband dares refer to the America of the recent past as a good and decent place.
You know why?
Because America of the recent past, pick a year, a Republican is probably president.
Obviously, you got eight years of Bill Clinton in there, where the economy even did well, but that was the second year of the second decade of the Reagan boom.
But whether it's the Reagan years, the Bush 41 years, or the Bush years, America must be portrayed as a horrible, unlivable, demonic place that only the Obamas can save us from.
Mark Davis in for Rush.
Be right back.
1-800-282-2882.
Let's dive into some calls, see what's going on.
It's going to be you and me for the back end of this hour.
And then at the beginning of the next, fresh from the White House, Ed Gillespie, trusted advisor, former RNC chairman.
It was said when Ed ascended to this post about summer about a year ago that he was sort of taken, sort of filling part of the Karl Rove shoes.
He is, of course, the immediate successor to the wonderful Dan Bartlett.
But these are interesting times to be sort of a pitch man for this White House.
And I don't say that.
That's not a term of derision.
That's one of the most noble callings you can have is to be the deliverer of a White House's message, whether it's one I agree with or don't agree with.
That is a fascinating science and art.
And Ed Gillespie is just a neat guy.
So we'll talk to him about drill here, drill now, various campaign 08 things, and whatever else Ed and I want to talk about.
That'll be the beginning of next hour, Ed Gillespie here on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
I'm Mark Davis, joining you from Texas at WBAP, Dallas-Fort Worth.
Let's see who has called us at 1-800-282-2882 in Crofton, Maryland.
John, hi, Mark Davis.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Nice to have you.
Hello.
Thank you, Mark.
I'm a little bit worried about the Supreme Court decision.
Of course, any court relies on legal precedents.
They follow the previous case law, and apparently the whole history of the United States over 200 years of case law wouldn't allow this decision that they made as far as giving constitutional rights to the people at Guantanamo.
And so they didn't look behind in the past, and they didn't look forward to see how this thing's going to be implemented.
And what it does, and Rush mentioned this yesterday, is that it presumes that these people are innocent until proven guilty.
And the ironic thing, it's just paradoxical that our guys that are in uniform that are trying to oppose these terrorists, they don't have the same rights as the people that they're risking their lives to protect us from.
Now, people at Guantanamo who would kill you and me as soon as they'd say hello will now get a better treatment in the wheels of justice than the U.S. Marines got in the Haditha story.
Well, the thing is, there's a parallel system of justice.
And when you join the military, ironically, you say that you pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, but it doesn't apply to you in full strength.
What you have is an implementation of the Constitution modified for the military called the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
And you don't have a trial by jury, a trial by your peers.
You have three judges sitting up there.
And you don't get the best lawyers in the world, I'm sorry to say.
And I think you're probably guilty until proven innocent, because when you get in trouble criminally in the service, you usually end up in the stockade or the brig.
So here we're giving these guys the best treatment in the world.
Now we're saying that you guys can get free if you get a good ACLU lawyer.
You're innocent until proven guilty.
The burden of proof is on us, on the prosecutors.
And all that is reversed for our guys, our servicemen.
Correct.
Therein lies the incredible danger of this court ruling.
John Fanks, excellent points.
1-800-282-2882.
Here's where the presumption innocence point is extremely vital.
In American justice, wouldn't you agree with me?
And I think this is a fairly popular old adage, we'd rather a few guilty people go free than one innocent person be improperly imprisoned.
Haven't you said that?
I don't know.
It's kind of funny lately.
I don't know if I mean it as much, but we've all said that.
We'd rather some guilty folks go free than have one.
The notion of an innocent person imprisoned is so antithetical to the way we look at jurisprudence that that is probably woven through the American fabric.
When you are dealing with combatants plucked from the field of battle being detained while the war is still going on, the opposite is true.
Then, and pardon me, and I'll run this out the flagpole and see if you folks want to salute or condemn me for it.
I'd rather have some innocent folks at Guantanamo.
I'd rather find that maybe seven or eight of them are as pure as the driven snow.
And I'd be very sorry about that, but I'd rather have that than to have one of these animals go free to kill my family or yours.
The presumption of innocence is something that is in that wonderful gift pack that comes from the moment of your birth as an American.
None of us did anything to earn it.
It is by pure accident of birth.
We're born in this country and not some other country where our rights are probably not as vast.
So in view of that, there are certain benefits that we derive, and among them are constitutional protections.
These constitutional protections are not to be conferred onto Geneva Convention protections, by the way, onto combatants plucked from the field of battle during an ongoing war.
Amazing.
And I think, I mean, Newt Gingrich is right.
A lot of people said that this was shock talk when he said, you know what?
This is a Supreme Court ruling that could cost us a city.
I'm not saying it will, and Newt's not saying it will.
But that's exactly how high the stakes are.
Let's go just a few miles to my east, right here in the old hometown.
We're in Dallas.
Hey, Kevin, Mark Davis, how you doing?
I'm doing fine.
How are you today?
I'm good, boy.
Just beaten to death with five hours of me today, local show, limb law show.
Lord, you should be tired, buddy.
I'm a truck driver, so I enjoy you.
Thank you.
The bounty that is on Osama bin Laden, is that dead or alive?
Do you know?
Either.
Either.
There will be a sizable sum that goes into the bank account of whoever contributes to his killing or capture.
So how is the Supreme Court justify us being able to put a death warrant out on the man, then if he's captured instead, still give him all these rights if he's brought to Kitmo?
Well, because it's okay, there's an answer to that, because it's not a death warrant.
A death warrant is what happens after someone is adjudicated guilty and given the death penalty, and that is the method of execution.
This is another important way in which this is not like an old West sheriff, even though that wanted dead or alive imagery exists, and it's not an American criminal case.
This is a time of war, and President Bush and others talking about, I mean, issuing the bounty out there in the Middle East is saying, essentially, you kill him or you help us catch him, and we've got cold hard cash for you.
That's not anything, I don't believe until they try, that the Supreme Court could constrain.
Okay.
And I have one other comment.
I've found a bipartisan way to cure global warming and the immigration issues that we're facing.
Oh, do I sense listener humor?
Yes, we're going to go.
Okay, I press.
500 carbon credits for every illegal alien you turn in.
Wow, how kinky Friedman of you.
Okay.
Now, for those who need that reference, explain.
Kinky Friedman, famous writer, okay, famous around here anyway.
Writer, author, songwriter, and just interesting guy, author of magnificent songs like They Don't Make Jews Like Jesus Anymore.
The cigar chomping Kinky Friedman had an idea when he was running for governor.
And of course, he didn't even come close to winning.
But this one idea did make some people go, hmm.
And I mention it only because it has nationwide significance along our entire southern border.
But what he suggested we should do for border protection between Texas and Mexico is take five very high-ranking Mexican officials, generals, if you will, five of them, and just place them equidistant along the board, give them each a region, just a one-fifth of the border stretch between Texas and Mexico, and give them each $10 million and withdraw a dollar or two or five or $10, whatever you want to do,
withdraw from their account every time an illegal alien crosses from Mexico into Texas.
He was serious about this.
And you know, when you think about it, is the guest worker program really, really any more wacky?
1-800-282-2882.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Davis in for Rush Limbaugh.
Let us head to Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Lori, Mark Davis.
Hi, you're on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Nice to have you.
Hi, Mark.
How are you today?
I'm sorry, Lori, go ahead.
I said, how are you today?
I'm doing great.
My family lives in Stephenville, and so we discuss kinky occasionally.
Very cool.
I called today to tell Mary, I think she was your caller right before Bill Salmon.
From Massachusetts.
Right.
You said she was going to pack up and leave if Obama won.
Right.
She needs to stiffen her spine and not leave because what we need to do as the American people is realize that our politicians are not representing our views.
And I think we showed a whole bunch of power in the immigration issue.
I think we're beginning to coalesce around this drilling issue.
And I think we need to show the world that it is not the politicians who represent America, but it is Americans who represent America.
And I think Mary needs to get on the phone and spend at least one hour a day or however much time she has calling her state, local, her Senate deterters and from Washington and let her voice be heard.
And if we all did that and overwhelmed them, just like we did with the immigration issue, we would show them the power that the people have.
We are tired of them not having a spine, but apparently we have also lost ours.
And I would say, Lori, pick up the phone.
And couldn't agree more.
Lori, great pep talk.
Thank you.
One year or two into a hypothetical Obama presidency, which is the only kind there will be, by the way, at least this year, a whole bunch of America may find that, I mean, if Obama should win, if I'm just dead wrong about this and Obama actually wins, boy, am I interested in the congressional elections of 2010.
Because once everybody gets a snootful of what this guy is really about, and I'm not talking about the Muslim conversion, just none of that email inbox nonsense.
I mean just the radical liberalism, the softness on terror, the jacking your taxes to the moon, the real guy that I say without a shred of racism or derision or whatever.
It's just what the guy has in his bag.
Soft on terror, unbelievable radical liberalism as measured by the National Journal, which cited him as the most liberal senator, more than Hillary, more than Ted Kennedy.
And then when you throw all that in and then put taxes as high as he would try to do, there may be a lot of discontent very soon after the Obama inauguration.
But again, that's all moot because he's not going to win.
Mark Davis in for Rush, 1-800-282-2882.
And more of you are next on the EIB network.
I will not take this personally, the maniac bumper music.
I don't think this is some kind of surreptitious message from Mike or Kidd or anybody.
The wonderful Kit Carson and Mike Mamone running things from EIB Central.
As Rush ordinarily joins you from the EIB Southern Command, his palace in Florida, we are here in Dallas, Fort Worth, Texas at WBAP.
I'm Mark Davis, host of the show that immediately precedes Rush, sticking it out for a few more hours to actually guest host Rush.
What an honor.
Jason Lewis will be doing so from Minneapolis tomorrow.
Enjoy him, please.
And then enjoy your weekend because Rush is back on Monday.
1-800-282-2882.
We are in Austin, Texas.
Steve, Mark Davis, in for Rush.
How are you?
Hey, Mark.
It's a pleasure talking to you.
Been listening to you since Florida 2000.
Thank you so much.
I was watching the Fox News channel with Britt Hume last night, and they were running a video clip of the Michelle Obama tape, and where she said, I am not proud.
This is the first time I've been proud of my country.
So they didn't use the word really.
It wasn't an edited thing.
Was a video and it was dated February 18th.
So not only, so not only was Whoopi Goldberg just flat out lying when she said they edited it out, but she was also ignorant of the fact that Michelle Obama delivered that speech a number of times, including twice that same day, February 18th, 2008, one in Madison, one in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
And yes, in one of them, she says, for the first time, I'm really proud of my country, but that really modifier is not there in the other speech.
You are correct.
That is correct, sir.
Would you like audio evidence?
Thanks, Steve.
Let me get everybody else up to speed on this.
And here we go.
First, we'll have it without the really, and then we'll have it with the really.
Whoopee, I hope you're listening.
For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.
No really there.
But here it comes.
Let me tell you something.
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country.
And not just because Barack has done well.
This is funny.
I suppose we are starting to enter the suburbs of not the beating of a dead horse, but just the making of a point for the 934th time.
And I guess that this will happen sometimes.
That the reason that you're hearing this quote that won't die, the reason it won't die, is because there are partisans, lying, deceptive partisans who are out there in the Obama camp trying to make you believe that she didn't say it or she didn't mean it when she absolutely said it and absolutely meant it.
In Lancaster, PA, Eric, Mark Davis, in for Rush, how are you?
Hi, Mark.
Thanks for having me.
My pleasure.
Proud citizen.
And your whole adult life, I'm guessing.
Thank you, man.
I just wanted to say I want to chime in since we were talking about George Bush.
I did not vote for him and wasn't really partial to him at all, but I'm really in support of the way he's tried to step up and protect the country.
And under all the circumstances, think he did the best he could do, which was get busy and start kicking some butt.
I'm intrigued.
What was it then in 2000 and or 2004 that led you not to vote for him?
Did you not vote for him in 2000, but you did in 04?
Or how old are you?
Or how does that all work out?
I'm 38, and I haven't been particularly a voter.
I kind of have that lesser of two evils curse thing going on.
Oh, well.
But I've definitely been eight years of change for me, that's for sure.
Have you become more confident?
Have you sort of become a Republican as you've grown older?
As many people, I think that's the case.
Yes.
The reason I asked, and I got to skew here for time, but Eric, thank you.
The reason I ask is I just know, you know, I just know that there are people in this country who don't agree with Republicans about anything or don't agree with me, don't agree with Rush, don't agree with President Bush.
You think the government can be bigger, taxes can be higher, that the Al Gore global warming nonsense is true, and you're a liberal as much as the word means anything.
But doggone it, you know, President Bush is right about the war, and you thank him as I do for keeping your family safe.
I know you exist.
Is Joe Lieberman the only one of you with the courage to say so?
Mark Davis, in for Rush.
Be right back.
Is moshing actually allowed during the Rush Limbaugh show, even during a guest host?
I don't know.
I don't know.
I'm Mark Davis, In for Rush.
One more hour.
Jason Lewis with you from Minneapolis tomorrow.
Listen, we got like 30 seconds before.
I got to scoot.
So Daniel in Pennsylvania, hang on.
He's got an interesting point about where maybe the Gitmo terrorists ought to be sent elsewhere.
I'm a huge fan of Guantanamo.
Don't want to be a name dropper, but I've visited it and have much to say about it.
Maybe I'll share some of that next hour, but we'll also visit with Ed Gillespie, close advisor to the president.
Talk a little drill here, drill now, pay less.
But as we close this hour, having invoked Haditha, the very unfortunate story in which marine after marine after marine after marine is being cleared or the charges dropped, is there anything recorded in audio history that's more despicable than Jack Murtha's derision of them as cold-blooded killers before the evidence even came in?
And I say that not because he agrees or disagrees with me.
Somebody could say, Clinton's a great president, or I love Roe v. Wade.
Okay, you're entitled to that.
You are not entitled to slander our troops that way, Congressman Murtha.
Shame on you.
▲
Export Selection