All Episodes
Previous Next
March 27, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:44
March 27, 2009, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
So it was just yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, we learned that the California Air Resources Board is going to require by 2012 that no black cars be allowed on the road.
We learned today that California officials have decided to require automobile repair shops to check tire pressure.
A move they say will save millions of gallons of gasoline.
Reminds me of the old pressure gauge idea from Obama.
But if this works, if we save millions of gallons of gasoline in California, just means your gas taxes are going to go up out there, folks.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Now, for those of you who are new to the EIB network, and we know there are millions of you who are new to the program.
And we're we're delighted that you're here.
We do something different on Friday.
From our normal program Monday through Thursday.
Sometimes you can't tell a difference, but it's still a big difference.
You see, Monday through Thursday, you have to look at me to understand this as a benevolent dictator.
There is no First Amendment on this program, other than for me.
Not everybody who calls, for example, gets on the air.
That's up to the official screener of calls.
Uh one Mr. Bo Snerdly.
And Monday through Thursday, we only take calls from people who want to talk about things I care about, because it would serve no purpose for me to sit here and be bored.
I don't talk about things I don't care about because that would be boring to you and boring to me, and that wouldn't work.
But on Friday, I rescind those rules.
And we call it Open Line Friday, and uh this is one of the greatest risks, career risks taken by a major media person in broadcasting ever.
Because when we go to the phones on Friday, I will allow people to discuss whatever they want, whether I care about it or not.
I will fake it.
And this gives the audience an opportunity to discuss things that they think I may have missed.
I don't miss anything, I just ignore a lot of stuff.
So the telephone number is 800-282-2882.
And startly shaking his head, you're really doing a good job of holding on to these new listeners who think you're an arrogant pompous SOB in the first place.
Well, I'm just telling them the way it is.
I already no, I don't need to apologize for yesterday.
I apologized yesterday for yesterday.
That's right.
Some if if you were listening, uh ladies and gentlemen to yesterday's program, the very last comment.
Uh I I sincerely apologize for it.
I uh it's just one of those things.
I love stereotypical humor, and I I have a belief that all good comedy requires an element of truth.
And while my closing comment yesterday was certainly uh a comment containing a large element of truth, it still perhaps was inappropriate.
And so for that.
I apologize.
Here's the telephone number if you want to be on the program 800.
Well, no, I'm not gonna repeat the comment.
What would what would be the point of apologizing if I repeat the comment?
800.
I'd have to apologize all over again.
And then people then they then they would say it was just a trick.
So the apology is sincere, and I I uh do not need to repeat the comment.
Uh it was nothing profane or obscene, don't misunderstand it was in in terms of language, it was perfect.
Uh however, it it just did it this is something I felt the need for apologize for, and I did so uh immediately.
All right, telephone numbers open line on open line Friday is 800-282-2882, and the email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
You know you can tell, ladies and gentlemen, when the drive-bys don't know what to write.
Because they go back to one of their old cliches, one of their old templates.
This is a McClatchy news story.
It is just funny.
Let me for those of you new to the program.
Let me explain why this is funny.
And for those of you who have been regular listeners for many, many moons here, uh little Indian lingo there.
Um Please indulge me.
The old joke is this God is watching the Oprah Winfrey show.
And he's just had it.
He's he figures the human race.
And then he heard about Obama being invited to commencement speech at Notre Dame.
And he said, that's just a Notre Dame is inviting somebody who believes in infanticide to give the commencement speech.
The most anti-life president in the history of the country, and Notre Dame extends a commencement invite.
God watching that, and the Oprah show says it's over.
Humanity has failed.
I have to step in.
I'm going to end the world.
So God needs to get the word out.
So he calls the New York Times, the Washington Post, and USA Today.
Wall Street Journal, Wall Street Journal.
So he calls the New York Times first, and he gets all the reporters and says, Hi, this is God.
And the human race is over.
I'm ending the world in a couple days, and I want you to know about it.
I need you to spread the word.
New York Times reporter says, Can I have an exclusive on this?
God says, no, no exclusives on this.
I'm going to make sure the word gets out.
He next calls USA Today and tells them that the world is going to end tomorrow because of the Oprah show and the Notre Dame invitation to Obama to do the commencement address.
Then he calls the Washington Post, and then he calls the uh what uh Wall Street Journal.
The next day, the papers report the story.
In the New York Times, it is on Section C page 20, God says world to end tomorrow.
Wall Street Journal front pages it.
God says world to end tomorrow, markets to close early.
USA Today headlines it on the front section of the life section, not the front page of the newspaper, but on the entertainment section.
We're gone.
The Washington Post puts it on the front page, the headline of Washington Post, God says world to end tomorrow, women and minorities hardest hit.
It's a joke, but it's a true joke, and the reason why it's funny is because it's true because it's a template in the drive-by media, and lo and behold, here we have a McClatchy news story with this headline Women Minorities fear being left out of stimulus projects.
Non-union contact contractors and minority and female workers fear that they could miss out on major construction projects.
Have you heard about the construction project in Ohio in Columbus?
The stimulus plan is going to build something on a bridge to keep people from committing suicide jumping off the bridge.
This is part of the stimulus plan.
That's rebuilding America.
I have I have details of this coming up as the program unfolds before your very eyes.
Senate Budget Committee.
Sorry, they need to rename themselves.
The Senate screw the budget committee.
The Senate screw the budget committee passed a spending bill that will triple our national debt.
And they know they are doing it.
And Warren Buffett, I hold you responsible.
Paul Volker, you too.
Lawrence Summers, Christine Roomer, your names are going to go down in history.
A spending bill that will triple our national debt, and you say nothing.
Of course, what can they say?
Viva just following ordinance.
Shame on all of you.
Shame on every economist who does not speak out.
Shame on every journalist who doesn't report the obvious.
Shame on every citizen whose kids are going to get stuck with this knife in the heart of responsible government.
I mean, the very idea, folks.
The very idea in the United States of America, anyone could suggest a plan so irresponsible, let alone vote for it.
This could never have happened in our nation's first 232 years.
Big deficits traditionally come as surprises.
Things that you don't factor a war, floods, famines, acts of God.
But this budget is acts of man.
This budget is acts of men and acts of men and women.
Now look, it's one thing for Obama to vote for Obama, one thing to root for Obama, but to go along with this hopelessly irresponsible scheme is nothing less than a national tragedy.
And folks, don't be suckered.
Don't get suckered in by the storyline here that we have to do this.
We have to do this because of the economic slowdown.
Because the dirty little secret is the truth.
This idea was hatched long before this slowdown started.
This is who Obama and the American left are.
This plan has no relationship to the realities on the ground in the American economy today.
This plan is being ram rotted through this this this irresponsible budget with total disregard for the practical realities based on current circumstances.
Obama spoke of alternative energy before the slowdown.
He spoke of universal health care before the slowdown.
Obama spoke of federalizing education before the slowdown.
He spoke of home mortgages, income redistribution, all of these things before the slowdown.
Now, some of you out there are moved by stories of predatory lenders.
You get all upset about all the stories of all the greed that takes place in the private sector, and yet all of you are being taken in by predatory politicians.
We keep hearing about toxic assets on Wall Street.
Let me tell you where the real toxicity is if I can borrow the term from John Armor today.
The real toxicity is in the U.S. Congress.
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, for example, just the name two, are toxic Congressmen.
They are toxic.
They are poison members of our government.
If the war, for example, cost 700 billion, and of course, that was outrageous spending, they said we can't irresponsible.
This spending spree of Obama's will add 10 to 12 times that amount to our national debt.
I ask myself as I watch all this, can this can this really be happening?
And it is.
And then I ask myself, can this be stopped?
Well, there aren't enough Republicans, nor responsible blue dog Democrats to stop this.
We don't have any checks and balances.
We have no mainstream journalists to report reality.
We can't even count on late-night comedians to get this right.
Because everybody is in thrall to Obama for whatever reason.
The only real check and balance we have right now is the ChICOMS.
Folks, I'm telling you the truth.
We've got we have such an and the European Union.
Do you read Judd Gregg said it yesterday?
We, with our level of debt based on this budget, could not even be admitted to the European Union, which is the focal point of Western socialism today.
We couldn't be admitted.
Our debt ratios and leverage are so high we couldn't qualify for admission to the European Union.
So the only real check and balance we now have is the ChICOMS.
And you might what are you talking about?
Well, the Chinese hold all of our debt.
And the Chicoms are going along with this notion of a single currency because they think that we might do something to devalue our dollar even more.
I mean, every time Geithner opens his mouth, folks, I mean it's an earthquake in the financial markets.
So the ChICOMs, the question is, will they pick up the tab for all the trillions we are spending but don't have?
They've already said they're wary of it, and uh if if they say they won't, then that's uh do you believe the one check and balance we don't have a check and balance in the Senate.
We don't have a check and balance in the in the House of Representatives.
We don't have a check and balance set up in the media.
The ChICOMs.
The ChICOMs are our last hope.
Yes, I realize what I'm saying, snurtly, which is why I'm saying it.
And by the way, for this, I will not apologize.
The only check and balance we have on all of this, purposeful irresponsibility is the communist Chinese.
Because if they refuse to keep buying debt, then maybe something can change this.
I have warned you and warned you again.
If President Obama succeeds with this, our nation fails.
Our nation is unalterably changed for generations.
Here are the names of the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary or the Budget Committee who voted in favor of this.
Patty Murray of Washington, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Bobby Byrd, West Virginia, Bill Nelson of Florida, Debbie Stabenau of Michigan, Robert Menendez, New Jersey, the Lout, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Benjamin Carton, Maryland, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Sheldon White House from Rhode Island, Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, and Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat Virginia.
The Chicoms remain our lone hope for a check and balance to this absolutely irresponsible, purposely irresponsible spending in echoing the Obama 3.6 trillion dollar budget on top of all this other printing of money spending that we are doing.
And in the meantime, and I'm going to get into this more as Obama's announces new Afghanistan policy.
We have inept, an inept Secretary of State running around the world begging, wait till you hear the audio coming up, begging the North Koreans to call her.
She is begging the Mexicans that mean that these both big-time communists and small-time communists are on the march and we are on the run.
And we are running around promising a new era of diplomacy.
We're sending videos to Iran.
All of this was part of the plan long before the budget slowdown happened.
This is what Obama wanted and intended to do all along during his campaign.
So it's open line Friday.
Rush Limbaugh with lots to do.
We'll take a brief timeout, be back after this.
Stay with us.
We have some Gallup poll information on public opinion regarding the Obama budget.
While lawmakers on Capitol Hill battle back and forth over the budget plan, America's viewers are holding steady.
Four in ten have a positive impression of the plan.
And just now, how is the to check that wording?
America's views are holding steady.
What does that mean?
And when you read that, what is whoo?
Americans are big on this.
And then you read four in ten have a positive impression of the plan.
Just over a quarter have a negative impression.
Hardly changed from views expressed a month ago.
A third still don't know enough about the budget to have formed an opinion.
People increasingly don't know enough.
In fact, more people say they don't know enough than in the last month.
I think this is just, I think this is denial.
Public support is steadily dropping.
It was 44%.
Now it's 39.
If you look deep in the story, public support is dropping.
It is not holding steady.
So I the this um there, I guess there's a an opportunity here, ladies and gentlemen, but there are no checks and balances in Washington.
Republicans don't have the votes to stop it.
Uh nobody in the Obama administration is going to stop it.
None of the uh big-time corporate titans who voted for Obama are uh are going to stop it.
In the New York Times today is a an interestingly detailed story about the announced new Afghanistan strategy this morning.
The headline, New Afghan strategy, Obama will add troops.
Now get this.
In imposing conditions on the Afghans and the Pakistanis, Obama is replicating a strategy used in Iraq two years ago, both to justify a deeper American commitment and prod governments in the region to take more responsibility for quelling the insurgency.
So what do we have here?
We have Obama on television this morning announcing that he's ramping up the troop presence and civilian presence in Afghanistan.
The Afghanistan government's corrupt.
We've got to go in there and we got to rebuild the state.
Now, there were two factions on this vying for Obama's favor.
On one side, you had Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrook, who are believe me, did nothing to recommend anything they suggest.
However, joining them was David Petraeus, the architect of the surge and the success in Iraq.
On the other side, vying for Obama's attention was the Vice President Joe Biden and others.
Biden didn't want any military presence, wants to pull out of there, well, he doesn't want to pull out.
He just doesn't want to ramp up.
He wants to use the military in a in a in a perhaps never-ending involvement just to keep the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan and keep them from reforming in Afghanistan.
The Obama plan basically says, okay, we want to we want to send some troops in there, some civilians in there, and rebuild Afghanistan like we did Iraq.
I've been to Afghanistan on another troop visit some years ago.
And I have some insight on this.
There are there are things about this that I find fascinating.
I'll share them with you after the break coming up here.
But all of this, despite my in-depth analysis upcoming, is just a fake.
A feint.
I'll explain when we get back.
It's open line Friday.
We try to get the phone calls earlier on Friday than we do Monday through Thursday.
We don't always succeed, but we try.
Obama ordering more troops to Afghanistan.
Now, this is something he said he was going to do during the campaign.
But don't be fooled by this.
He's doing this on the cheap.
He's not committing nearly enough troops, nor enough civilians, to do what he wants to do.
This is...
He's trying to do as little as possible so as not to offend the rest of the world with our foreign policy.
More on that in a second.
When I want to tell you about Afghanistan, again, these two options, at least as it's reported, that were presented to Obama.
Don't ramp up troops, just keep the troops that are there there, rotate them in and out, and have a constant, never-ending battle with Al Qaeda and the Mullahs of the Taliban, which are going back and forth between the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan just to keep them from establishing a new base in Afghanistan.
Now, one of the why did Obama I'm sorry, why did Osama bin Laden go to Afghanistan in the first place?
This is key to understand.
Our big mistake was after helping the Mujahideen to route the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 80s.
Big mistake was pulling out.
Because the Mujahideen were at their base, they were Islamists, and some of them uh were militant, terrorist-type Islamists.
This led to a civil war in Afghanistan, which destroyed the country.
There was no government.
There was no state, per se.
If you wanted to talk to the head of state in Afghanistan, you didn't know there wasn't one.
Bin Laden seized on the stateless nature of Afghanistan to move in there.
So Al Qaeda and the Taliban were set up as affect the government, and they did not, you know, Hitler and Mussolini and uh and and uh Saddam Hussein needed active functioning nations and governments to pull off what they pulled off.
Bin Laden didn't care about that.
He needed a stateless regime.
He could bring his terrorists in to rule by terror and keep the population scared to death as a result of terror acts and so forth.
And that's how the Taliban ended up running Afghanistan.
And so this plan Of David Petraeus, essentially, is to prevent Afghanistan from becoming another stateless regime.
If it does, then bin Laden or whoever's running the show can move back in and take the country over, and everything we've done there would be a lost cause.
That's why the Biden plan was rejected.
So we're going to send some troops in there to make sure that Afghanistan remains a government, a functioning government with the the so many problems there, the poppy fields that uh are patrolled by warlords that earn just countless amounts of dollars that no there is no other natural resource in that country that can come close to producing any kind of a national income or a wealth of a nation.
So it's a big, big, big problem.
The people there do live.
You you you think we've got poverty here.
You have no idea.
Even in the capital city of Kabul.
I mean, there are people in this country who would not put up with the living conditions there.
And they're living conditions that people haven't seen.
It's not just the seventh century.
I mean, it's it's it's that plus more.
Although there have been vast improvements since we went in uh in in 2002.
Now, what the administration is doing is developing specific benchmarks for Afghanistan and Pakistan that would be the most explicit demands ever presented to the governments in Kabul and Islamabad, which is a mistake.
They think benchmarks made the difference in Iraq, and they're wrong.
It was Petraeus and the best military from the best country on the planet that made the difference.
It wasn't benchmarks.
The benchmarks in Iraq were set up by members of Congress.
They were impossible benchmarks to meet, and when the benchmarks were not met, Congress and the Democrats able to go out and say, C C Iraq's failing.
This war is lost.
Now the political component to this, I'm wondering what the American left thinks when the president they elected is ramping up troop levels.
By the way, it's not the war on terror anymore, even though we're fighting terrorists.
It's what is it being called?
International contingency or some such beat?
So here's here's the bottom line about all this.
Oh, one more, one more line from the New York Times.
The goals that Mr. Obama has settled on may be elusive and according to some critics, even naive.
Among other things, officials said that Obama planned to recast the Afghan war as a regional issue involving not only Pakistan, but India, Russia, China, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, the Central Asia.
Well, good luck with that.
Nobody wants any part of this.
Our allies of NATO don't want any part of this.
If it weren't for the Turks, the Turkish military, we wouldn't have a staunch military allied presence there throughout the period of time from 2002 to now.
So the the uh victories in in Iraq were naive.
This is the New York Times can't let go of it.
Now, here's the truth about all this, sadly, ladies and gentlemen.
While Obama is doing this, and you have to do it his in his mind, everything he does, he does with a global vision.
And by that I mean the analysis I just gave you about Afghanistan is not his, and it's not the reason why he's doing this.
He's doing this for two reasons.
One, he's keeping a campaign promise.
He promised to elevate troop levels.
The second thing he's doing, when he looks at the Afghanistan problem through his global prism, he looks at his policies from the standpoint of what will the world think of my policies.
And that is key to understand.
And when you understand that, you realize that Obama, while ramping up ostensibly, 4,000 troops is not ramping up.
Not in that country.
Civilians, we've got civilians there.
U.S. aid, AID, the Agency for International Development, they're there.
They have built buildings, schools for women to elevate their status in this culture, and it's worked.
There have been tremendous cultural improvements in Afghanistan.
Now, I don't know what's happened since I was there, all this corruption he's talking about, but I can tell you that whatever number of civilians and troops that he's adding are that he's doing it on the cheap.
Because while he's Doing all this, he's cutting defense spending.
I'm telling you, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are disasters.
Russia, China, third world communist countries are all on the move.
And we're doing nothing other than begging them to talk to us by telling them it's a new era of diplomacy.
Obama's agenda, his ideology, requires him to look at things globally.
How we can constrain ourselves so as not to offend others or threaten others.
See, Obama's goal is to be part of the whole.
That's why Geithner goes out there, so yeah, worldwide currency.
Yeah, we're open to that.
Oh, yeah.
UN wants us to get involved in a new Kyoto that will break our bank even more on global warming hoax.
Oh, yeah, we'll get involved in that.
Obama looks at things globally.
His goal is to be part of the whole.
Barack Obama's goal is not to preserve our capitalist system, our republic.
He is destroying it.
He's in the process of tearing it apart from within.
We don't need the communists to do it anymore.
We don't need to worry about infiltration from foreign enemies.
It's being done from the White House.
The very strictures, the blocks of the foundation that built this country are being dismantled.
The mansions, if you will of the United States of America's Library of Freedom, are being dismantled, door jam by door jammed, door by door, brick by brick, floorboard by floorboard.
He wants to be part of the world, and he thinks that the world resents us for too big.
He's going to take care of that.
So while announcing this big head fake of the brand new ramp it up policy in Afghanistan, he cuts the defense budget and continues to destruct deconstruct the United States of America from within.
If you watch Hillary, she traveling the world, she is apologizing for our country in the guise of apologizing for Bush policies.
She goes to Mexico.
Blame us.
Another apology for America.
Obama has envoys traveling to the worst regimes in the world, telling them it's a new day for diplomacy.
I want you to listen to something.
This is striking.
Last night, on the record, Greta Van Suster in the Fox News Channel.
She interviewed the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
And Greta said, What are we going to do about North Korea?
I sent word that we would like to have our special envoy for North Korean policy go to Pyongyang.
They didn't want him to come.
So we're working hard.
And if they're watching you, I'm sure that uh since you were there, you made a big impression, went to a karaoke bar in Pyongyang.
They probably still remember you.
If they're watching, if anybody from North Korea is watching this uh program with me now, karaoke.
I bet, you know, we'd love for them to uh begin to talk about what we can do together to fulfill the framework of the six-party talks.
This is just unbelievable.
This is beyond tacky.
Here is the Secretary of State on the Fox News Channel at 10 o'clock on Thursday night, and she says, if anybody is watching in North Korea, would you please call us?
We really love to talk to you and get the six-party talks back on.
And by the way, we wanted to send our envoy over there to ping pong and talk to you about this, but you wouldn't let our envoy into ping pong.
Pyongyang, whatever.
Now, if the North Koreans reply, it's great news for Greta.
She's got an audience there in a nation with no electricity, so it means they're making special effort.
But uh to happen, hey, hey hey!
Hey, you potbellied little pig, but what did Kim Jong-if you're watching me here on Greta, we really want to talk to you.
Now that happened last night before we announced the big Afghanistan policy.
This is after Hillary Clinton goes to Mexico, blames the United States for the violence that is taking place there.
Here's another statement from Mrs. Clinton in Mexico.
She monterey this before returning to the United States, she held a press conference.
This partnership that you have created here between the public and the private sector is a model that we and others will look towards.
What?
Mexico's goal for emission reduction and for meeting a sizable portion of your electricity needs through renewable energy is another model of how nations can move toward a low-carbon energy future, clean energy jobs as well.
Just unbelievable.
The Secretary of State of the United States goes to Mexico and says we have a lot to learn from you environmentally.
After blaming her own country, so the Obama foreign policy, blame America first, a global vision, come up with policies that will not advance U.S. interests, but rather will please the world, including our enemies.
Hey, if you're North Korean, you're watching me here on Greta, give me a call.
You know how to reach me.
We want to send our envoy in there, get the six-party talks going.
And then go to Mexico and praise them on their environmental progress and their public private sector partnership.
What private sector public the pfft.
It's like every other country with an authoritarian public sector, the private sector didn't have much choice in what they're doing down there.
We'll be back after this.
Welcome back.
It's Rush Limbaugh, open line Friday, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
By the way, well, I'll tell you what's really scary about U.S. foreign policy right now is that Hillary Clinton is incompetent.
I mean incompetent.
Going to Mexico joking about don't drink the water and then praising them on their environmental advancements, and then on Greta, begging the North Korean communists to call her.
The scary thing is she's twice the man Obama is.
And that illustrates just how precarious our circumstance is.
Here listen.
Oh, and how about this guy from down in Brazil?
You know Brazil.
People love Brazil, Rio de Janeiro and so forth.
Well, if this guy's president Lulu.
President Lulu says that white people with blue eyes cause the financial crisis.
Let's me off the hook, my eyes are hazel.
White people with blue eyes is a racist comment, ladies and gentlemen.
White people with blue eyes caused the financial crisis.
Here's Obama.
You'll see uh this is his uh explanation of why he's doing what he's doing in Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda and its allies.
The terrorists who planned and supported the 9-11 attacks are in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that Al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan.
I knew it.
And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows Al Qaeda to go unchallenged, that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.
That's I told you this is exactly this is why it's it's on paper, it's a good plan.
You can't let Afghanistan fall.
It'll become a base again as it once was.
Is there a or some I somebody asked me, is this a political decision he's gonna make tomorrow to announce it, or is it uh something else?
What's the politics of this?
This, I don't know that this is so much political.
This is intel.
The last thing he needs is an attack on Americans by terrorists, right?
That kind of chaos he does not want while he's tearing down capitalism.
He doesn't want that kind of chaos.
So I'm sure there's some intel here that they believe that's pretty serious.
So he just talked about terrorists, did he not?
Listen to this next bite.
We have a clear and focused goal to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda and Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.
That's the goal that must be achieved.
That is a cause that could not be more just.
And to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same.
We will defeat you.
A campaign against extremism will not succeed with bullets or bombs alone.
Al-Qaeda offers the people of Pakistan nothing but destruction.
So he's talking about terrorists in these two bites.
And then he calls this a campaign against extremism.
Not the war on terror, a campaign against extremism.
I've got one more bite, but because of the constraints of the programming format, I haven't time.
So let me tease you with what it is.
It's from February of now, wait a minute.
I thought it was February 2008.
But my Q sheet says 2007.
Regardless, it was during the campaign.
We have aired this before.
And it is Obama speaking to a group called Caucus for Priorities.
A campaign that set out to recruit 10,000 Iowa caucus attendees to pledge support for Obama.
And in this bite that you will hear soon, he details how he's going to dismantle United States defense structure.
Back, and he's doing it.
Back after this.
Say, look, if Hillary can go on Greta and ask the North Koreans in ping pong to call her, I can do it, too.
Somebody in the White House listening, if you're listening to me right now, Noida, would you please call 800-282-2882?
I want to talk to you about the budget.
How you're destroying the country and ripping apart the foundation building blocks.
We're trying to reach you, but you won't talk to us.
Would you please call me here?
800-280.
▲
Export Selection