All Episodes
Previous Next
April 21, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:03
April 21, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Are you ready to sizzle, folks, because it's time.
It's time for excellence in broadcasting.
Three hours straight ahead, hosted by America's real anchor man.
That would be me, Rush Limbaugh, also America's truth detector and the doctor of democracy, coming to you today, as always.
Because as long as I'm here, it doesn't matter where, here is the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Phone number, if you want to be on the program today, is 800-282-2882, the email address, lrushbo at EIBNet.com.
Well, this is hilarious.
So much of what's in the news today is hilarious.
David Axelrod, who is the Carl Rove of this administration, except that Axelrod is loved and adored by the drive-bys, responding to the somewhat overwrought critique that Obama did not properly stand up to hostile Latin American leaders during a trip to the region this past week, has accused critics, Axelrod has, of missing the point.
I think some people misinterpreted what happened this past weekend, said Axelrod.
I think the real message of what happened this past weekend with the Cuban regime's response to the president's decision on remittances or the overtures from President Java is, I think what's happened is that anti-Americanism isn't cool anymore.
Good grief.
It's just the opposite.
Anti-Americanism has never been more cool, especially at the White House, where it is now policy.
Yes, I said that.
Anti-Americanism is now policy.
It is cool at the White House, where it's policy now.
Anti-Americanism has never been cooler.
Look at the polling data from the left or of the left in this country.
Look at the smiling faces of Danielle Tega and Hugo Chavez and all the other leaders down there at the Summit of the Americas.
It was not refuted whatsoever.
The way they define anti-Americanism is just amazing.
And what do I mean by anti-Americanism?
Well, Tim Geithner today, the diminutive Treasury Sector, who I think they've told a man up out there, because he went down, he went before Congress today and he started to sound like an Arnold Schwarzenegger tough guy in his diminutive egghead Ivy League frame, started explaining the bailouts and the stress tests and so forth.
And he said that the health of banks will not be the only requirement for TARP money repayment.
This was a congressional oversight panel with Geithner.
And I have a question here from Representative Jeb Henserling of Texas.
If there are firms that wish to repay taxpayers their money, and if the taxpayer money is at risk, if their relevant regulator certifies it commensurate with safety and soundness of the financial institution, that they can return that capital, in other words, the bailout money.
If this is an accurate assessment of your position, why wouldn't you take the money back?
In those conditions, we would welcome it.
But I just want to underscore what's really important.
And I said this at the end of my testimony, but I want to underscore it again.
My basic obligation and our responsibility is to make sure that the system as a whole, as a whole, has the ability to provide the credit that recovery requires.
And so we need to make a careful judgment about what policies are going to best promote that objective.
Under the laws, the conditions established in the Recovery Act, the judgment about when institutions can repay is a judgment that the federal banking agencies have to make.
Wrong O!
It's totally up to him.
And he's the federal banking agencies.
The Treasury Secretary has total power.
So the bottom line is they're trying to construct a circumstance here where they don't want to take the TARP money back.
And there's a reason for that.
Obama wants control of the financial system.
And you've heard about these stress tests.
We never had stress tests before.
Stress tests have been created by Obama.
And I think there's a new name for them, possessed tests.
When the banks perform or have these stress tests performed on them and they don't show up as strong and as healthy as Obama would like, then he's just going to possess them.
Wall Street Journal has a great piece today that this is backdoor nationalization.
Backdoor nationalization will make Obama the owner of the financial system.
Common shares in banks have voting rights.
Preferred shares don't.
What Obama wants to do is convert the government's preferred shares to common shares, which magically help with stress test results by increasing capital on the bank's balance sheets.
Now, these stress tests were designed by Obama.
They never existed before.
They're creation of the man who stands to become an owner of the financial system.
You just heard Geithner say it.
The individual banks and their health is not what we're looking at here.
We're looking at the health of the overall system.
So if banks fail the stress test, Obama can then possess them.
All he has to do is convert preferred stock to common stock, and the government has voting rights in the way these banks operate.
The results of the tests will determine if Obama can possess certain banks.
Now, weak banks are not going to fail them.
They're going to be run by Obama, the possessed tests, and these results are coming soon.
And I have to think that Obama's new friend Hugo Chavez is going to be watching, hoping America will be a country like his.
Here's the next part of Geithner's testimony.
The question from Henscheling, just to understand then, there will be other considerations besides the institutional, the individual institutions' financial stability.
The critical thing we care about is whether the system as a whole is in a position where it has the capacity to support the credit the recovery requires.
That's the ultimate test.
There isn't any credit.
This is another thing that's going uncommented upon.
The banks are not extending credit.
Credit is in the process of being tightened.
All of this by design, all of this to create even more chaos, to promote economic uncertainty, to promote and prolong the economic recovery, because the chaos is what Obama needs.
He needs these banks to fail, these stress tests, so that they become possessed tests.
Now, at the same time this is happening, and this is crucial, ladies and gentlemen, at the same time all this is happening, the Obama crowd says they're probably going to need more bailout money, right?
Now, how logically can they claim and say that they need new bailout money when they won't accept the return of old bailout money?
What these hearings were about today was essentially Geithner telling the Congress that even if banks want to give back the money, it's not that simple because they don't want to take the money back.
They do not want to give up control over the U.S. financial system.
This is key to understand here.
If they say they need new bailout money and there's supposedly $135 billion left in TARP that has not been allocated yet, then why do they need new bailout money if they won't return or accept the return of the old bailout money?
And some of the banks that you have been told hate are lining up asking big government to take the TARP money back.
They're begging, they're pleading, take back the billions.
We're solid.
We don't need it anymore.
But Obama's bailout brigade says no.
And at the same time, Team Obama is setting up to spread around more bailout money.
It's clear as a bell to anybody who wants to admit what is happening with all of this.
And at the risk of repeating myself here, folks, I mean, I think this is because look, it dovetails right here with this axle rod comment that anti-Americanism is not cool anymore.
It's just the exact opposite.
I mean, you could say that anti-Americanism is a lot of things, but I'm going to tell you the government controlling the financial system and owning common stock in banks and the government having voting privileges in private sector banks, that's not American, as we have understood it.
Anti-Americanism is sprouting up all over the world, and it has been for a long time.
And the only different thing about it today is that we have an American president sympathetic to it, wants to understand it, probably agrees with half of the anti-Americanism out there, at least judging by his reaction to its expression at the summit for the Americas.
I think there's a method to this madness.
I really do believe that these stress tests are the forerunner of what I am calling possessed tests.
I think this whole damn thing has been orchestrated just like they orchestrate hits on other areas in the country in order to distract people.
See, you cannot have real change without a crisis.
That's a fact.
And these stress tests of the banks are meant to identify a bank in crisis as defined now by Obama and Geithner.
There's no crisis without the test.
The test is hypothetical information about a future economic downturn.
That's what the test is.
Now, the feds had extensive information on all those banks.
Geithner's been gathering it ever since TARP.
Loads of information.
The White House, the Treasury Department knew the test parameters.
I'm guessing they put together a test knowing in advance that some of these banks are going to fail.
An added bonus is that you get a stock market that sort of seesaws up and down and doesn't appear to gain any traction on the upward swing.
I know it sounds conspiratorial, but if it makes sense, you might bounce it off of some people you know or in the banking industry.
There's just been too much talk about these stress tests, and the drive-by media go, oh, the stress test.
We just love the stress test.
He really cares.
But too much turmoil has been caused here.
Why tip everybody off on the Sunday shows that these stress tests were coming and that they weren't sure of the results?
I mean, that was the administration's line on the Sunday shows a couple days ago.
They knew that would roil the markets, and it did.
They knew that would roil the public.
Why wasn't all this done in secret?
And now I think I know why Geithner was indispensable.
He's an insider on this.
You know, he's willing to play this game as ordered by the Obama administration.
And the Heritage Foundation, there's this, even the drive-by media yesterday on these $100 million budget cuts out of a $4,000 billion budget or debt or $8,000 billion new spending, debt, whatever you want to call it.
Heritage Foundation, we talk about that a lot, askheritage.org.
I'm a member.
It only costs $25 to become a member.
You can spend more if you want.
But I swear, folks, there are more things available at heritage.com, askheritage.com, or .org, than I see anywhere else.
And they have a great, great chart, a great visual effect today.
I'm going to show it to you on the DittoCam here, but you're not, you won't be able to make out because the resolution is not high enough.
You need really high definition to see this.
But what they've done here, they've got, imagine the sun, and the sun represents the $3.69 trillion 2010 proposed budget of Barack Obama.
And then inside the sun, you have the $787 billion Porculus bill and the $410 billion appropriations bill.
And up at the top, a microscopic dot that is about the size of Pluto compared to our sun, representing Obama's requested budget cuts of yesterday.
Now, let me zero in here.
And you're not, I can't focus, I can't focus on that when it's that close.
But there's the sun, and you can't see it, but right at the top of the orange globe is the tiniest little dot, smaller than a period on your computer page that represents the size of the budget cuts compared to the sun or the whole budget of 2010.
Everything here is just smoke and mirrors.
And even the drive-bys yesterday were all over this, kind of peppering that clown, Robert Gibbs, about all this.
We have the audio soundbites of that coming up.
Lots of corruption uncovered on Capitol Hill.
Diane Feinstein sending TARP, what was it, TARP money?
No, $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband's real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.
Big expose today in the Washington Times.
Janet Napolitano, illegal, and this is also from Heritage.
Illegal immigration is not a crime.
This from the director of the Department of Homeland Security.
Lots to do today.
Sit tight.
Oh, and the Somali pirate, the merchant marine organizer is in New York living it up.
The guy apparently loves New York.
And he's got an Islamist from Minnesota wants to represent if Ron Kooby, a New York-based civil rights lawyer, said he's been in discussion about forming a legal team to represent the Somali merchant marine organizer.
Ron Kuby said, I think in this particular case, there's a grave question as to whether America was in violation of principles of truce in warfare on the high seas.
This pirate seemed to come onto the Bainbridge under a flag of truce to negotiate.
He was then captured.
There's a question whether he is lawfully in American custody and serious questions as to whether he can be prosecuted because of his age.
The era of anti-Americanism is not cool.
Anti-Americanism isn't cool anymore, says Axelrod.
Anti-Americanism is the order of the day of today's liberal wing of the Democrat Party.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Here's more on the Obama budget cuts.
Show prep for the rest of the media.
That's what this program is.
Let's return to me.
Yesterday on this program, this is what I said about these budget cuts.
This gets back to the emotional connection.
This is what people want to hear.
They don't hear the amount.
Plus, $100 million sounds like a lot more than $8 trillion because $100 is bigger than $8.
$100 million sounds bigger than $4 trillion.
$4 trillion is the new spending in debt.
$100 million, what's a lot of money, people think.
People want to hear he's going to cut spending.
He's going to cut the budget.
And I'm sure they've got internal polling data that shows these tea parties are successful and these tea parties are a problem.
So they're responding to the tea parties here.
That's all this is.
And they're responding to the Tea Parties with chomp change with irrelevant numbers.
And so now we have a montage of a bunch of drive-bys repeating this essentially throughout the day.
Anybody who thinks Barack Obama is ignoring those Tea Party protests ought to look at what happened today when the president gathered his cabinet officers together and told them all to look for $100 million in savings.
It's a populist reaction to the Tea Parties.
Maybe President Obama was listening to the Tea Party protesters last week.
The White House also very concerned that Republicans are after them every day about profligate spending.
We saw those Tea Party reaction to the April 15th protests.
In response to the Tea Parties last week, the president is proposing a pathetic $100 million cut in the budget.
Larry Kudlow there on the tail end of the montage.
So you see, this program show prep for the rest of the media.
There's no question that the Tea Parties are upsetting.
Look at, folks, you got to understand these people.
They're running around.
They're telling everybody, you don't dare oppose Obama.
He's the most popular man in the world.
Obama's the most popular man ever.
He's the most popular man in the country.
He's the most popular man in the world.
In fact, did you notice that Michelle did not go to the summit of the Americas and show off another new classless wardrobe?
Why do you think she didn't go, snortly?
Give me two guesses.
Why did Michelle Mybel Obama not go to the Summit of the Americas?
And don't tell me she had attended a garden in the White House.
It is because she overwhelmed his popularity in Britain.
All the press was about Michelle, the new Jackie O, Michelle this, Michelle that, Michelle's wardrobe, Michelle here, Michelle all the other friendship with the queen, arm around the queen.
I'll guarantee you, this whole image of Obama as the Messiah is the one is predicated on the fact that nobody's more popular than he is and nobody has ever been more popular.
And you can't oppose Obama, they say to the Republicans, why, most popular man in the world.
You want to take him on?
Go right ahead.
And so here come the Tea Parties.
Here come the Tea Parties.
And the Tea Parties demonstrate he's not the most popular guy in the world.
He's not all that popular in this country.
He is among Democrats.
But the Gallup poll is out today.
They've got some interesting information.
Big government still viewed as a greater threat than big business.
In your opinion, which of the following will be the biggest threat to the country in the future?
Big business, big labor, or big government?
55% say that the big government is the greater threat to big business.
Only Democrats reverse and cite big business.
The rest of every other demographic holds firm.
In fact, independents view did not change much over the period.
Solid majorities in both polls saying big government is a greater threat.
80% of Republicans view big government as the biggest threat to the country, up from 68% December 2006.
At the same time, Democrats' perceptions of the greater threat are completely reversed.
In December 2006, 55% of Democrats said big government posed the greater threat.
32% said big business did in the latest poll.
A majority of Democrats now view big business as the greater threat, 52%, while only about one in three think big government is.
So the Democrats are in the minority when you break down the poll and they're in the minority in the general poll over what poses the bigger threat, government, big government, or big business.
And so in the midst of all this, this so-called never-before-seen popularity, here come the Tea Parties.
So Obama has to hustle together, put a phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock and roller mythical budget package, budget cut together, and that's what it was yesterday.
And we are back having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have Orlando, Florida.
As we go to the phones, Chris, thanks for the call.
Nice to have you here with us.
Hey, you almost got me fired.
Ditto's Rush.
How are you?
Almost got you fired.
How did that happen?
Listening to my show at work?
Sir?
Listening to my show at work?
Oh, no, no, no.
I'm a Baptist minister who used to be a professional wrestler, and I was going to try to do a Dan's Bank sale, and the St. Pete Times got a hold of it, and I found out how many Democrats I had in my church.
Oh, okay.
Yeah.
I loved you on Greta Van Sustran last night.
Absolutely loved you.
And no one else is putting the conservative views out there like you are.
Now, wait a minute.
I think that's not quite fair.
It's not quite fair.
The Drive-By Media has anointed the daughter of John McCain, Megan McCain, as the new voice of the Republican Party.
You've got to give Megan McCain credit here, Chris.
You can't leave her out here.
She cannot even hold your shoes, Rush.
She cannot even do that.
I was being facetious.
Well, my question for you.
You know what they ought to do?
They ought to make Megan McCain a judge at the next USA pageant, Miss USA, because she'd fit right in.
Ah, and she's blonde.
Yeah, that would work.
My question is, great Maharushi.
In the future, what will our relationship look like with Cuba and Venezuela and North Korea and China in one or two years under the Obama administration?
Well, I don't know that in one or two years there's going to be a perceptible change in the relationship.
I think what's, in fact, instead of answering this, you cited my appearance on Greta last night.
I was on for the first 18 minutes of the show.
I did a phone interview.
By the way, we have been trying for a year, and I've left this up to other people.
It would have been done in two weeks if I'd have done it myself.
But we've been trying for a year to get this studio wired to do TV out of the studio.
So I don't have to go to some cheap podunk little studio that can't handle the audio requirements I have over in West Palm Beach.
And I've left this up to other people.
We've been dragging on for a year over a stupid purchase order of $19,000.
And so eventually we're going to get this done, and I won't have to do telephone interviews next month.
Been hearing that for a year.
Been hearing next month for a year.
And then the testing will start, and it won't work for six weeks.
But nevertheless, I am not ragging on the staff.
I'm not ragging on the staff.
It's just another one.
It's just another one of these things where if you don't do it yourself, it just doesn't get done as quickly when you leave it up to a bureaucracy.
Has to go through 15 different departments of $19,000.
Has to go all these bureaucratic departments and people signing off on this and that and the other thing.
So at any rate, at some point, we're going to be able to do live TV out of this studio.
Well, why can't you just use the Ditto camera?
We might be able to use a Ditto camera.
We're probably going to upgrade the quality of the camera, but it's not the Ditto camera.
not the camera right now, it's the bandwidth necessary and the cabling that we are going to have to, it's the cabling that we're installing here.
At any rate, here about the foreign policy aspect.
Greta asked me last night, what do you think about the handshake between Obama and Yugo Chavez?
The handshake is just a symbol.
I mean, you almost have to do that if you're going to go into a room where Chavez is at one of these meetings.
You have to either say in advance, the planning people no handshakes, or I'm not going in there.
My biggest problem, and it's something that's very troubling to me, and I think it's very reckless.
President Obama is willingly putting himself in the presence of people who despise this country, who make no bones about it.
These people are dictators.
They are people who hold political prisoners.
They squash public dissent and so forth, but he's acting as though they are close associates and good friends.
He sits around and smiles when they trash and destroy and criticize and rip the United States of America, particularly Chavez and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua.
You know, if it were me, if I were president of the United States and I had to go to one of these things, knowing full well the den of thieves that I'm going to be sitting around, I'm not going to sit there and take it if somebody starts trashing my country.
When President Obama spoke after the 50-minute lunatic diatribe of Daniel Ortega and said, I'm just glad he didn't blame me for things that happened when I was only three months old, was all I needed to hear.
I think we're looking at a person with a God or messianic complex, certainly narcissistic, who looks at these trips, not just to Central America, South America, and the G20 in Europe, looks at all these trips as making it about him.
The United States was an immoral and unjust country until he was elected.
Now, all of a sudden, it's on a bright path to a bright future when millions, 55 million Americans who didn't vote for this, have just the opposite fear.
They have the concern that this country has seen its better days, and President Obama wants to tear apart the foundation that built this country into the greatest country in the world, American exceptionalism, and remake it in an image that's closer to something that would be approved of by Daniel Ortega and people like Hugo Chavez.
When Chavez gave him the book, I mean, this is a book that has, I think, blames the United States for virtually every evil under the sun, largely evils committed by the very people who've been running these countries into the ground.
Socialist dictators, Marxist dictators of one another.
And President Obama says, well, I like to read.
I like books and so forth.
I don't think he's going to find much in that book that is foreign to him.
I don't think he's going to find much in the book that's strange to him.
You know, his good friend William Ayres in November of 2006 went down to an education forum that was held in Caracas, Venezuela, and praised the socialist economic system of Hugo Chavez, which basically teaches that capitalism is slime, that America is slime and militaristic and responsible for the problems of the world.
The purpose of education is to teach religion, anti-capitalism, anti-militarism.
It's very frightening, and I think it's very naive.
And I think what Vice President Cheney said tonight with Sean Hannity is right on the money.
It's reckless.
He's sending a signal around the world to people who intend us and other people harm that he doesn't see much wrong with them and that he thinks he can forge an understanding with them because he's somehow morally superior to every previous president and administration that we've had in this country.
So it really troubles me.
I try to find humor in everything, and I think that to start telling jokes about this and being humorous about it too much would be to ignore the seriousness of it all.
That is one of the answers last night when I was on Greta that Chris and Orlando wanted to ask me about and said he was very, very praiseworthy about the foreign policy aspect.
And he said, what's going to be the status of our foreign policy with Venezuela, Cuba, China, and some of these other countries in the next two years?
It's hard to say, but Obama's moving at a breakneck pace.
He is just lightning fast on all of these things.
And I think it really boils down here, folks, to the fact that he is trying to chum it up with these people it despises.
Why, I don't know, but he does believe that this country was moral and immoral and unjust before he was elected.
His wife has said so in so many words about him and about them, and so has he.
And now all of a sudden, America's great.
America's moral, and he's around apologizing for everything we've done.
Vice President Cheney's right.
The people who intend us harm hear this and they see a sap.
They see a weakling.
They see someone who can be exploited.
You know, these dictators and thugs, by definition, thrive on being hated.
They do not want to be loved and adored.
They end up being, if they have the cult personality of a Stalin or a Mao, they have the ability to be loved by the people they're imprisoning and holding in tyranny.
But I mean, they want to be feared.
They want people scared to death of them.
And Obama's, he's doing the best to indicate that he's got some problem with his own country and not with them.
So I think the United States looks ripe.
You know, for as long as we have been around, ladies and gentlemen, there have been countries who have wanted to wipe us out or cut us down to size.
It's the nature of the beast.
It's human nature.
People say, how come people around the world can look at the goodness of this country and not want to emulate it and become our friend?
There is this thing in the world called evil.
And when you couple an unquenchable thirst for power with evil and the desire to control people's lives, which is found all throughout the intellectual elites in this country on college campuses, for example, the desire to control people's lives.
That's why socialism, communism is attractive to these people because they think they're going to be above the ones that are controlled.
They're going to be the ones that are doing the controlling.
So people who have long sought to cut this country down in size or even defeat it have to be looking at developments in this country with the new president saying our task just got a little easier.
Back to the phones to Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Joanne, nice to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
Pleasure to talk to you.
Hey, listen, I was watching a program last night.
I was watching Dick Cheney.
Mr. Cheney was talking about releasing all the secrets.
I was totally, totally against releasing anything.
But since you're going to release them, release them all.
Because I want the American people to know the good things that came out of this.
Yeah, let's address that right in effect.
Ed Grabs, just sound by 13.
Sounds like 13 will do here.
Vice President Cheney was on with Sean Hannity last night, and the question was interrogation and the releasing of the memos that gave out specific information.
Why were those tactics needed and necessary?
Why do you think they continue to be necessary?
They didn't put out the memos that show the success of the effort.
And there are reports that show specifically what we gained as a result of this activity.
They have not been declassified.
I formally ask that they be declassified now.
I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw, that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country.
And I've now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there and the American people have a chance to see what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was, as well as to see this debate over the legal opinions.
Now, isn't this fascinating?
And by the way, Vice President Cheney asked for the release of these memos back in March, not just yesterday after the Obama administration released these memos.
So the Obama administration goes halfway.
The Obama administration releases the memos that describe the kind of torture.
And by the way, we're now calling anything that causes any discomfort torture.
It's like women being allowed to get away with saying their husbands torture them if they shout at them.
It's about the kind of restraints, those are about the kind of restraints we're putting on interrogation now.
I'll guarantee you, I don't know this.
But the morale among the counterterrorism people in the field has got to be in the basement after all this, especially since there are memos that Vice President Cheney just referenced that show the success of the techniques.
And the Obama administration does not release those.
Now, there's a great piece today in the Washington Post by Mark Thiessen.
It is a column, and its title is The CIA's Questioning Worked.
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists did not make us safer.
This is patently false.
The proof is in the memos Obama made public in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.
Consider the Justice Department memo of May 30th, 2005.
It notes that, quote, the CIA believes the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al-Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 9-11.
In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaida, without these enhanced techniques.
The memo continues, before the CIA used enhanced techniques, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply saying, soon you will find out.
But once the techniques were applied, interrogations have led to specific acts.
This is what Obama released.
This is in what he released that did not get reported on after the release of the memos.
Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques led to the, this is quoting now from the memo, May 30th, 2005, led to the discovery of a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed plot, the second wave, to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into a building in Los Angeles.
The memo explains that information obtained from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed also led to the capture of Redouan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Garaba cell, a 17-member Jeremiah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the second wave.
So even the stuff he puts out, the success is noted.
Cheney says there are many more memos that he saw, that he wants now declassified, that show the success of the techniques.
Now, what's happened, and Obama gives out half the story.
And when he gives these, releases these memos, he focuses the media on the harsh and unfair, the ridiculous torturous treatment of citizens of the world, Mr. Limbaugh, if unquailed for by Americans.
This could never happen, the voice of the new Castradi.
So Obama knows what he's doing.
He's focusing, once again, negative attention on his own country in the war on terror to advance his silly theory that our interrogation techniques created more terrorists.
Well, what interrogation techniques were we using before 9-11 that led to 9-11?
Hmm.
We have allowed, we have allowed these guys, Obama and his buddies over at the CIA and in Congress to water down the definition of torture to mean anything that makes a person uncomfortable.
You know what this reminds me of?
Remember when the now gang and all these other social interest groups started asking women if they'd ever been a victim of domestic violence?
They didn't like the numbers they got initially.
The numbers weren't high enough for the now gang.
So they expanded the definition to include a man shouting at them.
A man shouting at them equaled domestic violence.
It didn't matter if the women shouted first.
But let's not get sidetracked.
The important thing to understand is that these appeasers have painted themselves into a corner.
Dick Cheney has now called their bluff.
The stark truth is that despite what the political left and the Hollywood elites say, extreme measures, enhanced measures, so-called torture, whatever you want to call it, it works.
And he's seen the memos and he wants them released.
I got to take a brief time out, but I'm going to, folks, there are people who have sacrificed greatly to keep us safe.
They're out in the field.
There aren't very many of them, a couple hundred.
And they feel betrayed like you can't believe right now and scared to death.
They're going to be indicted or brought to trial by people in the Obama administration for helping defend and protect the country.
The real question is how many new terrorists did the release of the CIA memos by Barack Obama create?
▲
Export Selection