All Episodes
Previous Next
July 6, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
July 6, 2009, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, don't forget the Wisconsin part.
Do you know what I'm looking at on TV right now?
I was in a pretty good mood.
I was happy with the first hour.
We'll talk about Sarah later on on the show.
I'm in New York.
It's a beautiful day.
There's Al Franken on every cable channel standing next to Harry Reed.
There's no upside to this.
Friends have said to me, well, at least he'll be in there and he'll give you material.
He's going to say all sorts of stupid things.
No, he won't.
He won't say anything.
Al Franken is so determined to be taken seriously.
Look at that.
He won't smile.
He's got that permanent skull painted on his face because he now wants to be taken seriously, because he's not just a comedian anymore.
So he isn't going to say anything.
He's never said anything funny, even when he was supposed to be funny, he wasn't funny.
So now he's just going to be this serious time.
Hey, look at him.
He looks like the picture of death.
He's from Minnesota.
Everybody confuses Wisconsin and Minnesota.
Everybody confuses Milwaukee and Minneapolis.
We've done some real damage to this country, we people from Wisconsin.
We've sent some bad people to Congress.
We've sent you David Olby.
We've sent you Russ Feingold.
We've made some mistakes.
But never in my state's history have we ever done what the people of Minnesota have done.
And I know he stole the election.
I know he didn't really win.
I know it was freakish.
I know the Minnesota Supreme Court was in the pocket of Franken and the Democrats.
I know all of those things.
But we never sent that clown to the United States.
The House, you know, you can tolerate it.
We can put a few lunatics in the House of Representatives.
They've been there forever and they're still there.
Dennis Kucinich is in the House.
Maxine Waters is in the House.
Who's the woman from Georgia that was slapping everybody around?
Cynthia McKinney, I think.
We've had them in the House and it does.
This is the Senate of the United States.
This is terrible to think about.
This was as bad as the election of Obama was.
We elected Al Franken to the United States Senate?
You realize what a joke that is?
You read these stories about mini-skirted models getting elected to the Parliament in Greece or Italy, or flamboyant people being elected in other places, and Vita Peron ran everything in Argentina when Juan Peron was in charge.
This is the United States of America.
We've got Al Franken in there.
You can't exaggerate how bad this is.
Let's all just run.
And they say Sarah Palin was in over her head.
This is Al Franken, he's in the Senate.
The guy flopped.
He couldn't make it on Air America.
He's in the Senate of the United States.
Six years this term is.
And Minnesota has a history of this.
I mean, they gave us Wellstone, who died tragically, but was the most liberal member of the Senate before while he was around.
Now we've got Franken.
And as I said, if you could count on him to be a Biden, every week saying something stupid or odd or confusing or just showing early signs of dementia, that would be one thing.
Al Franken's not going to say anything funny at all.
He hasn't said anything funny as in his entire adult life.
He's the classic liberal humorist.
Say something snarly and kind of mean, and knowing people will chuckle.
Oh, that's Franklin, he's so witty.
That's what it's going to be for the next six years.
Thank you, Minnesota.
First hour of the program in commenting on the death of Robert McNamara, 93 years old.
I talked about the real parallels between 60s liberalism when it comes to foreign policy and the current Obama administration.
The president held a news conference earlier today with Medvedev, who is the puppet leader of Russia, the titular president of Russia, the real power, is the guy behind the scenes Putin, in which they announced some puny arms control deal, and Obama vowed that we're going to have a new chapter of an enlightened relationship with Russia.
We're going to get along.
These days of Bush are over.
We're going to cooperate.
He even said, I quote, I trust President Medvedev.
Think he might regret those words?
How many?
I was going to say months, let's make it weeks before the Russians do how many days, how many hours before the Russians do something that make Obama regret that he said, I trust President Medvedev.
That's, however, the way Obama intends to conduct foreign policy.
He's going to find every nation in the world that we have a problem with that causes us trouble.
And he's going to sit down and think, say to them, you know, that cowboy's gone.
I'm here now.
Let's work together.
That's the approach that you're going to see throughout.
There is going to be no attempt to encourage that the peoples of those nations give themselves a better government.
And for better or worse, that's what the Bush philosophy was.
Bush believed in democracy.
Bush believed, maybe naively, we'll find out that if the people have the right of true self-determination, they will get they will give themselves a better government than that that is being imposed upon them from above.
It was his belief as to what could happen happen in Afghanistan.
It was his belief as to what could happen in Iraq, and he was hoping that it would spread elsewhere.
He was hoping for an uprising of democracy all over the world, giving these nations better governments and therefore a more secure United States.
That's not the Obama approach.
He wants the tyrants to stay in power, and he thinks he can deal with them.
Never mind Russia for a moment.
As we speak, the crackdown is continuing in Iran.
There are many indications that the government is systematically going around to find who the ringleaders were of the pro-democracy protests, talk to them or do whatever it is that they're going to do with them.
They're going to make it clear that there are consequences for that messy couple of weeks that they had when they were out there defying their government.
It's ugly.
That's how tyrants operate.
They may stand in front of the cameras and smile, but in the neighborhoods, they do what Saddam Hussein did.
They go in, they round people up, they rough them up, and they make it clear that you don't do this kind of thing again.
Castro's done it for 50 years.
The Soviets did it.
Every bad immoral government has done it.
And it's what Iran is doing right now.
While they are doing that, the United States is making it clear that it wants to deal with the Iranian leaders.
Today's New York Times, despite crisis policy on Iran, is engagement.
President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in separate interviews this weekend said that the accelerating crackdown on opposition leaders in Iran in recent days would not deter them from seeking to engage the country's top leadership in direct negotiations.
They're coming right out and saying, okay, they may be cracking heads, they may be killing a few people, they may be totally repressing dissent, they may be killing off permanently the notion of any kind of democracy in Iran, but we're going to deal with them.
This empowers them.
That is a clear message to Iran that it can do whatever it wants to its citizens, and the United States is going to be okay with it.
Obama talked about raising America's moral standing, raising our image in the world.
What does that do to our world image?
People in Iran, naively thinking that maybe they could have some of the freedoms that came to Iraq, maybe thinking that they could be taken out of the stone age, are being beaten down.
And the response from the leader of the free world, we're gonna talk to the brutes that are beating you down.
We can still work with you.
I think this is the way President Obama likes it.
He wants order in these nations.
He would rather deal with the hard line Iranian regime that is in total control of that country than hope for some sort of internal change in Iran because Obama believes he can look these guys in the eye and he can make a deal with them.
He thinks he can go to Iran and just do what he thinks he did today in Russia, which was nothing, and make his deal there.
He's going to try the same approach with regard to the North Koreans.
We've tried that before.
We tried it during the Cold War.
It didn't work.
Republican presidents, Democratic presidents, tried to deal with the Soviet Union, tried to contain them.
It got us nowhere.
It got us into a nuclear arms race, and then it got us into the terrible situation in which the Russians evaded Afghanistan, the price for which we are paying even today, all of that led to the revolution that spawned the Taliban and allowed Afghanistan to become a home to Al Qaeda.
It was the appeasing of the Russians and the dealing with the Russians and the trying to work with the Russians that led us to that point.
There is a greater calling here, and that is to encourage freedom around the world.
It's not only a greater calling because it's morally right, it's in our own best interest.
For all the criticism that the left offered up, President Bush with regard to Iraq.
Which nation right now presents us a greater problem?
Iraq or Iran.
And the sad thing is we had a window of opportunity a couple of weeks ago in which it looked like there was a chance that we could have a better Iran without having to be militarily involved, without the United States having to come in and do anything.
We had people of Iran standing up, demanding freedom.
And our president ignored them.
And now that the crackdown is underway, he's sending out messages.
You can't get more clear than two separate interviews in the New York Times.
He'll work with you.
This is now our foreign policy.
It's the same stuff that Robert McNamara preached to Lyndon Johnson yesterday.
John F. Kennedy.
It didn't work then and it's not going to work now.
The same sort of thing is happening right now in Honduras.
We run the risk of losing Central and South America.
The communists are moving in.
Tell you a little bit about that in the next segment.
My name is Mark Gunning, and I'm sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
There's all sorts of trouble right now in Honduras.
It's kind of sad because Honduras was the one country in Central America that never seemed to have any problems.
Mexico, certainly a lot of problems.
Nicaragua, problems.
South America.
Hugo Chavez ruining Venezuela and trying to export his revolution to Colombia, a lot of problems.
Honduras had been relatively stable.
The president of Honduras was elected running a campaign as a centrist.
And from the moment he got into power, moved sharply to the left.
He's developed alliances with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Raul Castro in Cuba.
He recently essentially said, I'm going to take our country's constitution and I'm going to change it.
In other words, change it so that he doesn't have to run for re-election, change it so that he can become the dictator of Honduras.
The Supreme Court of Honduras stood up to him and said, You can't do that.
We have a constitution and it is to be followed.
The Congress of Honduras stood up and said, You can't do that.
You can't just ignore the law on your own.
That's the action of a despot.
You're no longer a democratically elected official, you've become a tyrant.
The military stepped in and decided to side with that nation's Congress and Supreme Court.
And the president, Zelaya, fled the country.
He's now trying to return, and his supporters are in the streets threatening the government that took over.
It's an ugly situation.
The best perspective that I've read on this so far is Samaria Anastasio Grady, who's with the Wall Street Journal.
She's really, really good.
She writes primarily about Central and South America, and she's been on to this, Hugo Chavez trying to upend every democratically elected government in Central and South America thing.
She writes, hundreds of emails from Honduras flooded my email box last week after I reported on the military's arrest of President Manuel Zelaya as ordered by the Supreme Court and his subsequent banishment from the country.
Zelaya's violations of the rule of law in recent months were numerous, but the tipping point came ten days ago when he led a violent mob that stormed a military base to seize and distribute Venezuelan printed ballots for an illegal referendum.
All but a handful of my letters pleaded for international understanding of the threat to the constitutional democracy that Zelaya presented.
One phrase occurred again and again.
Please pray for us.
Hondurans have good cause for calling on divine intervention.
Reason has gone AWOL in places like Turtle Bay and Foggy Bottom, ruling the debate on Zelaya's behavior is Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez, who is now the reigning international authority on quote democracy.
Chavez is demanding that Zelaya be reinstated and is even threatening to overthrow the new Honduran president Roberto Micheletti.
He's leading the charge from the Organization of American States, the OIS.
The United Nations and the Obama administration are falling in line.
See what I mean?
About Obama wanting to deal with tyrants again and again and again.
I'm not cherry picking individual cases.
Every foreign policy situation he's had to deal with since he's been president.
He has sided with trying to deal with the strong armed bandits who've confiscated their countries.
We have been falling through the looking glass.
She then recounts how Hugo Chavez himself got elected as something other than a Marxist and stole the next election and has become the de facto dictator of Venezuela.
She continues, predictably Washington's endorsement of the flawed Venezuelan electoral process was a green light.
Chavez grew more aggressive, emboldened by his quote, legitimate status.
He said about using his oil money to destabilize the Bolivian and Ecuadorian democracies and to help Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega and Argentina's Christina Kirchner get elected.
Soviet backed Fidel Castro was able to intimidate his neighbors in the 60s and 70s, and Castro and Chavez has done the same thing in the new millennium.
This has given him vast power at the OAS.
Hondurans had the courage to push back.
Now Chavez' supported agitators are trying to stir up violence.
Yesterday afternoon, airline service was suspended in Tessicabal Tegasagalpa, that's the capital city, when Zelaya tried to return to the country and his plane was not permitted to land.
There were reports of violence between his backers and troops.
This is a moment when the U.S. ought to be on the side of the rule of law, which the Honduran court and Congress upheld.
If Washington does not reverse course, it will be one more act of appeasement toward an ambitious and increasingly dangerous dictator.
We had concerns that Fidel Castro was going to try to take the entire Central America, Caribbean, and South America into a communist area.
It's the big reason we didn't want their missiles over here, and we pretty much succeeded in containing him.
Castro became a nothing in Cuba after the mid-1970s.
The fall of the Soviet Union ended his money.
We had problems in Nicaragua and in El Salvador, but we survived them.
Hugo Chavez is a new threat.
For people who don't think this is our fight.
Understand first of all that Venezuela and its oil are very important to us.
But secondly, he has made it clear he is trying to expand his influence, not only in South America, but in Central America.
He's formed his relationship with Cuba.
He has desperately tried to start a revolution in Colombia, inciting Gangs of drug dealers who have been assassinating people in that country.
And now he's standing up on behalf of the Honduran leader.
This is going to be nothing but trouble for the United States if a communist, a true communist, and that's what Chavez is, becomes essentially the emperor of Central and South America.
And once again, the instincts of President Obama are to try to work with the strongman.
Work with the dictator.
The people of Honduras don't want this.
That's why the military acted.
What we need to do is stand on the side of democracy and freedom.
Unfortunately, you have a president whose knee-jerk reaction is that when there is trouble in the country to support the tyrants that the public is upset with.
I wonder why he feels such a kinship with every global dictator.
I'm the guy from Milwaukee.
I'm not the guy from Minnesota.
Minnesota's the state that gave us Al Franken.
There is a sad story, actually, a tragic story that's developing in the news today.
There's a huge fire in my hometown of Milwaukee.
It's just going to reinforce all the stereotypes, though.
It's the Patrick Cuttahay plant.
It's a sausage factory.
I mean.
Is that all you have is beer, cheese, and sausage?
Well, they're having enormous fire there.
They're evacuating people.
Beer, cheese, and sausage.
I'm not making this.
I always have these experiences when I come to New York to do the program.
Something goes wrong with the cab, or there's a cab driver who does.
I'm in the cab yesterday.
No, normally they don't talk anymore because they don't speak English.
This cab driver, though, we got close to my destination.
Where are you from?
Milwaukee.
Oh yes, cheese said, yeah, yeah, okay.
Yes, geez, dairy, that's great.
Within 30 seconds, he's telling me that his father and brother have a weekend farm and asking me if I know anything about obtaining used farm equipment.
Said, I'm from the city.
Anything about used farm equipment.
Really, really, and then he then I got the Laverne and Shirley and the whole thing.
I jumped out of the cab a block before I got to the hotel.
Let's talk about Sarah Palin.
There's actually a little bit of a relationship between that and this.
Everybody's trying to figure out what's going on with Sarah.
In fact, not that I want to provide competition for myself here as I sit in for Rush.
On Rushlimba.com, Rush does have, I guess you'd call it an audio blog in which he addresses the situation since it happened after Russia's program on Friday.
So Russia's a statement that you can either read or listen to on Rush Limbaugh.com, but wait until after I'm done talking about it.
Don't go do it now.
There are a lot of pundits who are saying that she's doing this as a way of campaigning full time for the 2012 presidential election.
There are others who are saying she's destroyed her political future.
They're all talking about what the tactics are and what the motivations are and what the impact is going to be on her career.
Now I've got thoughts on that.
But before I share them, I have never, and I observe liberal behavior as a profession.
I have never seen a public figure, contemporary American history, savaged and brutalized the way she has.
No one has ever gotten this treatment.
It started from the moment she appeared on the national scene, and it continues until today.
Just look at what's going on in her home state politics in Alaska.
And remember, she came to power in Alaska by upsetting the political establishment there.
The Murkowski gang, the Ted Stevens crowd, all of those people.
You combine those people bitter that they lost their power there with the Democrats in Alaska who want to do the bidding of the National Party, and they have done nothing but obstruct her in her attempts to lead that state.
Fifteen ethics investigations.
Fifteen.
And she's been cleared in every one of them.
Five hundred thousand dollars in legal costs.
As for the state of Alaska, two million dollars spent so far on all of these investigations.
None of them has ever led to anything.
And there was no reason to think it was going to stop.
Had Sarah not resigned, by September we'd be on Ethics Investigation 22.
By Christmas, it'd be Ethics Investigation 30.
By the middle of 2010, it'd be 40.
If she indeed ran for president in 2012, they'd have Ethics Investigation 237.
It was just going to continue again and again and again and again.
Make up an accusation, make up an allegation, investigated for three or four weeks, require her to hire a lawyer, knock the story down, and then invent another lie.
But it wasn't just that.
From her first appearance on the national scene, they went after her daughter, who happened to be pregnant.
Children of politicians have by and large been off limits for this kind of treatment.
Look at how Al Gore's son, who was an adult and his shenanigans were pretty much ignored by most in the media.
Yet the pregnancy of Sarah's daughter led to liberal commentators, including some prominent ones, to comment on the appropriateness or lack thereof of the daughter not having an abortion.
You immediately had some prominent liberal commentators questioning whether or not Sarah's youngest child was indeed her own or bristles.
That was from the beginning.
Then the attacks on her and her style and her hair came on relentlessly, again and again and again and again and again.
And they haven't stopped.
She ran for vice president of the United States.
Guess what?
They lost.
That would normally mean she'd be able to go back to her state in obscurity.
Vice presidential losers are always ignored.
Name the last time anybody paid any attention to somebody who ran as a vice presidential candidate on a losing ticket.
They go away and they're never heard from again.
Instead, this crowd of jackals followed her to Alaska, and they've been on her and on her and on here, trumping up all of these ethics scandals.
And then when she dares to come to the lower 48 to go to a conference and I go on a vacation, out come the attack dogs again.
There's been no limit here.
They not only went after her daughter, her oldest daughter, Letterman goes and makes the joke about her 14-year-old daughter, a joke that wasn't even funny, and a joke that he knew full well was about the 14-year-old.
There are even bloggers up in Alaska who are making fun of her youngest child, the child that has Down syndrome.
Prominent blogger up there.
No one has ever had to go through this.
There's a reason, of course, that they've singled her out for these kinds of attacks.
There's something about Sarah Palin that makes liberals go bonkers.
I mean, they hated Bush, but even Bush never had this kind of stuff.
The treatment that the Bush daughters received, and they had their moments, their partying moments.
They weren't really attacked or savaged or brutalized by the media or by the comedians.
Little bit of this and a little bit of that.
They hated Reagan.
He never got any of this.
The Reagan family situation was obviously difficult.
Not all of the Reagan children were on best terms with their mother or even with President Reagan.
There was some restraint in dealing with that.
They hated Newt Gingrich, they've hated a lot of people, but I've never seen a Republican or a conservative politician that has attracted this kind of treatment, just hateful vile stuff, across any kind of line that we've ever established before.
And there had to be a reason that they singled her out.
I've got my theories.
I think they don't like the fact that she's proven that you can have a large family and still have a career.
I think that that drives a lot of feminists crazy.
I think they are also threatened that somebody could have their break their claim on populism, since they claim that they're the great saviors of the middle class.
But it's been a personal thing and it's just been vicious and brutal that she's had to put up with.
As for what it all means, I'd like to allow the audience to weigh in on that.
The telephone number is one eight hundred two eight two eight eight two.
Comment your thoughts on what's happened to Sarah, what's in her future, and so on.
I'm going to share with you some of the reactions here from bad to better.
The first one from Steve Dupree, who is one of those mainstream Republicans.
Palin's resignation is a rich risky move since Steve Dupree, a veteran Republican activist in New Hampshire, and an advisor to Senator John McCain's presidential campaign.
If she doesn't like the heat in the rather cold kitchen of Alaska, imagine what it's going to be like when she goes to a state like South Carolina or New Hampshire or Iowa.
Today's Wall Street Journal editorial page.
Our advice after the election last year was that Mrs. Palin spend two years out of the limelight, tending to her Alaskan duties and studying national issues.
Last year's campaign showed she didn't understand economics any better than Mr. McCain, a very low bar, and her responses on too many issues sounded like half baked spin rather than sincere judgments that she herself had reached or understood.
No doubt McCain's backbiting campaign team didn't help her.
We hope the next nominee bars them all.
But every candidate is ultimately responsible for her own performance.
Ronald Reagan changed the national debate, and for three decades, Republicans have been able to utter bromides about liberals and big government and get away with it.
After the financial meltdown and long recession, those days are over.
The GOP nominee in 2012 will need an explanation for how we got into this mess that goes beyond mimicking Democrats about Wall Street greed, as well as an agenda for how to restore U.S. prosperity.
President Obama will take credit for any recovery, however sluggish, and Republicans will need more than a critical riff about spending and budget deficits.
On the evidence so far, Palin isn't yet up to the task.
Whether she will be in two years or six or ten will depend on whether she's willing to do the hard policy work that can add substance to her natural political talents.
And then finally, Ross Duthot, who's in the New York Times.
He writes, Palin's popularity popularity has as much to do with class as it does with ideology.
In this sense, she really is the perfect foil for Barack Obama.
Our president represents the meritocratic ideal that anyone from any background can grow up to attend Columbia and Harvard Law School and become a great American success story.
But Sarah Palin represents the democratic ideal.
Then anyone can grow up to be a great success story without graduating from Columbia and Harvard.
This ideal has had a tough ten months.
It's been tarnished by Palin herself, obviously.
With her misstep scandals, dreadful interviews, and self-pitying monologues, she's botched an essential democratic rule.
The ordinary citizen who takes on the elites, the up by your bootstrips role embodied by politicians from Andrew Jackson down to Harry Truman.
But it's also been tarnished by the elites themselves and the way the media and political establishments have treated her.
Here are lessons of the Sarah Palin experience.
For any aspiring politician who shares her background and her sex, your children will go through the tabloid ringer.
Your religion will be mocked and misrepresented.
Your political record will be distorted to better parody your family and your faith.
Male commentators will attack you for parading your children.
Female commentators will attack you for not staying home with them.
You'll be sneered at for how you talk and how many colleges you attended.
You'll endure jibes about your slutty looks and your white trash conspic uh good grief.
Conc your way to be while a prominent female academic declares your greatest hypocrisy is the pretense that you're a woman.
After eight months and eight months after the election, the professionals who pressed you into the service of a gimmicky dreary idea free campaign will still be blaming you for their defeat.
All of this had something to do with ordinary parts and politics.
But it had everything to do with Palin's gender and her social class.
Sarah Palin is beloved by millions because her rise suggested, however, temporarily, that the old American aphorism about how anyone can grow up to be president might actually be true.
But her unhappy sojourn on the national stage has had a different moral.
Not even think about it.
And I think that's what this is all about.
Elitists in this country telling Sarah, you aren't good enough to be one of us.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
We're going to give the Rush audience a chance to weigh in on Sarah Palin's resignation as governor of Alaska and their thoughts on it.
Let's start with Jessica in Chicago.
Jessica, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Hi, I don't blame her for quitting.
I think that she's doing what she needs to do for her family.
She needs to shore up her finances.
She's in debt because of all the legal bills.
Unless she's got some fairy godmother that's going to show up and pay her bills, like the Clintons had people paying their bills.
Um, I don't know what else she can do.
Well, yeah, she can't get Johnny Chung to go and raise a lot of cash for her.
She's not allowed to do that.
She's not allowed to do any of the things that any traditional politicians do.
She's not allowed to break any ethical rules.
She's not allowed to do anything, and she's been under this siege from the beginning.
Now let's look at the situation she's in.
She's got five, she built up $500,000 in legal bills, defending herself against all these bogus allegations.
Who's she supposed to raise the money from?
If she does what most politicians would do, which was raise the money in their own state, she's going to be accused of sucking up of the special interests in Alaska and selling the governorship.
Right.
If she leaves the state, then she's politicking and she's ignoring the people of Alaska.
If she raises the money from people like you who support her, then she's, you know, asking other people to bail her out.
She's in an O-win situation.
I think that what you say, you're on to something here, that she's seeing her family under assault because of what's happened with her, and she's feeling a need to step back from all of this.
Whether it ends her career as a national political figure or not, she's doing what I think she feels is necessary to preserve her family from a brutalization of her that has affected them.
You know, it's one thing to attack President Bush, whose daughters are now adults.
She's got a family in which the oldest is fighting a war.
The second oldest is going through a terrible time in her life, a very, very challenging time in her life with a new baby, and she she has three young children, and they're in the middle of this constant assault, which is personal and mean.
It's been a vicious attack put upon her, and it isn't just liberals.
There are a lot of Republicans who don't really like her, who've been setting the standard and have been commenting on her and taking all of these snipes and shots and attacks from the very beginning.
And I think what she's doing is essentially retreating.
Her children are being bullied on a national level, and I don't know any parent in America who would sit back and allow their child to be bullied at school, let alone on a national stage.
And I think that she knew no way to stop it other than to resign as governor.
Thank you for the call.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
We're talking about the Sarah Palin announcement and what's in her future.
Pensacola, Florida, and John, John, it's your turn on EIB.
Yes, uh Wisconsin Ditto's fellow Wisconsinite.
Thank you.
Um I I I in a way I agree with the previous caller, but what I think Sarah Palin is is embarking on, I think she's embarking to solidify and bring the Republican Party back together.
This party has been in such disarray for the last gee, what, eight, ten, twelve years?
Mm-hmm that uh I I think we need somebody to go underneath the radar.
We need to begin getting a platform.
We need to be getting a solid agenda for the future, say in ten and also eleven and twelve for the for the big election.
Well, and one of the problems with 2012 is that really uh we're lacking any real stars running for president, which was the problem in 2008 when we ended up getting stuck with McCain, and that's how we got McCain.
We were stuck with him.
Nobody else stepped forward and was able to win it.
With given the problems that Mark Sanford has had and that other Republicans have been having, and now Sarah's saying that she's not going to run for reelection.
I don't know who the Republican front runner is for 2012.
I don't know if she can put it all back together and run in twelve, or if she's stepping aside permanently or until 2016.
It's really, really hard to read that.
When you think about it though, it's really, really weird that of the two Republican governors that were being thought of as pre candidates for president in 2012, that Mark Sanford is still in office and Sarah Palin is the one who's resigned.
That's kind of weird.
▲
Export Selection