All Episodes
Previous Next
April 6, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:43
April 6, 2010, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, pacifists, all across the fruited plane.
I am Rush Limbaugh.
Barack Obama has announced today that he has given the Secret Service new rules of engagement in order to lessen the threats to public officials.
The new rules are this.
The rule.
Secret Service agents, government bodyguards are not allowed to shoot any attacker who has a prior criminal record.
Now, you might be asking, how are they going to know in the flash of the moment whether anybody has a prior criminal record if they're taking a shot at a government official?
I have no idea.
I have no idea.
Just a new rule out there.
It makes about as much sense as the new rule here limiting our nuclear response.
The great thing about our nuclear response is it was purposely unknown.
You know, the deterrent factor, by the way, hi, Rush Limbaugh, which you know, telephone number 800-282-2882, email address lrushbo at EIBnet.com.
The great characteristic or factor in our nuclear deterrence is that these weirdos around the world never knew when we would reuse it.
So here comes Dr. Kvorkian.
We have a brand new name for the regime leader, Dr. Kvorkian, committing national suicide, self-assisted on the United States of America, announcing to every regime out there under what circumstances they can nuke us or they can chemical weapon us or biological weapon us, and we won't respond with our own nukes.
So if, you know, if I'm Mahmoud Ahmadine Izad or if I'm Hugo Chavez, I say, well, you know what?
I don't need to spend a whole bunch of money on nukes now.
All I got to do is figure out how to get some smallpox and some anthrax, other kinds of chemical weapons into the country, set them off, and I know I'm safe.
Because Obama won't nuke me even if he finds out I'm the one that did it.
So, folks, how are we supposed to interpret this?
You know, promoting peace, okay, promoting peace.
Well, I think we've had a pretty good record for peace with our existing nuclear policy, don't you?
I mean, for 65 years, we've had pretty much nobody's nuked us.
And we haven't had a biological weapon.
People fear us, or they did, our retaliatory capabilities if they do take us.
Well, see, that's sturdily, you know, that's that's you.
I know you're making a joke, but you may actually have swerved into one of the key reasons for this.
And that is Obama showing off.
Obama symbolically showing the rest of the world, it's a new country.
We don't hate you.
We're not going to nuke you.
You can nuke us even.
We deserve it.
Well, you can't nuke us, but you can biological weapon us.
We may even deserve it.
And we won't hit you back very much.
Look at Wookiee.
He's showing off.
He's preening before the world in a symbolic gesture.
Whether it's to make the world like us or not, I couldn't care less.
It's certainly not going to work.
The people we want to like us, we have no problem with.
The people that hate us that we want to like us are never going to like us.
They're just going to take advantage of this.
And there are some people, I think it was somebody at Powerline today who posed the question, does anybody really doubt that this regime would use nuclear weapons if it were necessary against an enemy?
And whoever wrote the piece at Powerline I don't have it in front of me said, I don't, there's no question in my mind that this regime would use nuclear weapons.
I'm not so sure they, I think this is the point about this guy and this administration.
He's unilaterally disarming.
He's going to sign this big deal in Prague this week, which is because he announced this in Prague.
So the carbon footprint to get back over there and sign this thing with the Russians and the Russians, their foreign minister, somebody said today in Moscow, hey, look, you know, we reserve the right to pull out of this as Drudge reports that Obama's on a leash.
Now, what this is all about in Prague, you know, he said some time ago that we're going to scrap the missile system for Eastern Europe to protect them against a re-emerging communist Russia or maybe even an attempt to re-Sovietize the old Soviet Union.
Obama pulled that, scrapped it, and now is going over to sign, in addition to that, the fact that we're going to be reducing nuclear arsenals by a significant number.
And the Russian foreign minister said, well, well, fine and dandy, but if we sense any movement on re-establishing a missile shield, that we're going to pull out of this thing.
Well, they never have agreed to any of these arms deals that they have signed anyway.
So it wouldn't be hard for them to pull an Obama and simply make up the fact that they have heard that we are going to re-put or rebuild the missile defense system in Eastern Europe to pull out of this thing.
The one thing, look at where we are.
Look at how cyclical things are.
When I started my talk show radio career in 1984 in Sacramento, this was a big deal.
Nuclear arms.
Remember the Gorbasims with Gorbachev arriving to meet Reagan?
All those talks in Reykjavik, Iceland designed to reduce nuclear stockpiles and so forth.
We win the Cold War against the Soviet Union.
They end up disarming to an extent.
Look, we're taking ourselves back.
We're rebuilding circumstances.
It's almost like we're sweeping our victory off the table.
Our victory of the Cold War, we don't like that.
Obama's not comfortable with victory anyway, as he has said in Afghanistan.
So it's almost like we're just forgetting all of our progress in the last 20 or 30 years, and we're going back to create a whole bunch of crisis and chaos, which is the recipe.
It is the order of the day.
There's no difference in this than telling the Secret Service they can't fire back an attacker who has a prior criminal record.
Let's say this is in fact what they just announced today.
This is how ridiculous this is.
If a nation signs a nuclear non-proliferation treaty and doesn't break it and agrees to it and still launches a cyber attack, a chemical attack, a bioweapons attack in this country, we are promising not to nuke them because they haven't violated the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Does this make any sense?
I mean, this is, again, another attempt to roll back the Reagan revolution and pretend that it never happened.
It is to take that totally off the table.
Man, this regime is in a cramped end.
They are going to get as much done before these November elections as they can.
They're proceeding here at a blistering pace.
It's now or never.
Now or never.
And that's the way they're looking at it.
And because their theory is that none of this is going to be rolled back.
Now, the regime is not going to be happy about this next story.
The FCC does not have the legal authority to impose strict net neutrality regulations on internet providers.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled this morning, three judge panel tossed out the FCC's August 2008 case.
It was a cease and desist order against Comcast, which had taken measures to slow BitTorrent transfers and had voluntarily ended them earlier in the year.
And the FCC didn't like that.
They don't want internet providers being able to regulate any aspect of who gets to see what via their website.
There's a lot of confusion about what net neutrality is.
I remember, you know, I had a conversation not long ago with a high government official about this.
And I explained on the program here what it is.
And I was bombarded with email from, you don't know what you're talking.
Net neutrality has nothing to do with what you're talking about.
And it does.
Basically, internet providers are supposed to treat all internet content equally.
In the case of Comcast, the government didn't like the fact that they did not make BitTorrent available to their subscribers.
Now, BitTorrent is a file transfer protocol that huge files, some of them not legal in terms of copyright and that sort of thing, are downloaded and uploaded and so forth.
And it poses, you know, virus risks and a number of other things.
And so Comcast, for whatever reason, if not those, we don't want to limit, well, we don't want to BitTorrent available here for a whole bunch of reasons.
And the FCC, you can't do that.
You can't do that.
And so they went to court over it.
And the FCC has, this is the court saying, the FCC has failed to tie its assertion of regulatory authority to any actual law enacted by Congress.
The agency does not have the authority to regulate an internet provider's network management practices, wrote the judge David Tattell.
Even though liberal advocacy groups had urged the FCC to take action against Comcast, the agency's vote to proceed was a narrow 3-2 on party lines.
The dissenting commissioners predicting at the time that it would not hold up in court.
FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell, a Republican, a Bush appointee, said at the time that the FCC's ruling was unlawful, and the lack of legal authority is sure to doom this order on appeal.
Now, there are great ramifications for this.
This decision could doom something recently announced by Julius Jenikowski, the new chairman of the FCC, which was a national broadband policy.
They don't have the, right now, the FCC does not have any regulatory authority, regulatory authority over the internet.
And they don't have any over cable TV.
They have it over broadcast.
They have it over the air, telephone, telephone, cell phone transmissions, television, and that kind of thing.
But they don't have it over the internet, and yet they asserted control.
And the court said, you don't have regulatory authority here.
There's no law granting you this.
Well, that will be taken care of pretty soon.
Because the regime wants to control everything, particularly internet content.
They want to make sure that what happens to what has happened here to talk radio does not happen to the internet.
They want to make sure that their point of view doesn't get snuffed out by the marketplace, which it has here on Talk Radio.
Despite their best efforts, liberals simply have failed to score anything significant in talk radio on the air.
And the regime, very unhappy about that.
There have been numerous attempts by some of the most supposedly competent superstar liberals in the history of the country, and still they get an asterisk as a rating point.
25.
Look at CNN.
One day, a couple weeks ago, in the 25 to 54 demographic, Anderson Cooper, 25,000 viewers in an hour.
25,000 people in the whole country.
That's all.
We're watching CNN.
My friends, I, on this program, have 25,000 viewers at the corner of 60th and Madison in New York City.
And what's happening, CNN is happening to Mess NBC as well.
And Liberal Talk Radio, and the regime does not want the same thing happening to the Internet.
And net neutrality was to make sure that internet providers made equal content available to anybody visiting through their portal.
Anyway, I got to take a brief time out here, folks.
Lots going on on the program today.
Harry Reid, Harry Reid says people are treating him nicer now since he passed health care, which is cockamami BS.
Do you see the aerial shots of the people showed up at that rally on the 27th of it?
Looks like more than 10,000 in the aerial shot that I saw.
At any rate, Harry Reid also said, we have changed America forever.
Now, he's the only Democrat being treated nicely after passing health care.
Because I've got, you know what the new template, the new narrative in the state-controlled media is?
Rage.
Members of Congress are going home, having town meetings, and their audiences are enraged.
The Tea Party is enraged.
Any opposition to Obama is said to be racist rage.
It's all over the drive-by media.
Lots to do today, folks.
As always, while we have more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Sit tight, be right back.
Okay, folks, so this week and next, the news will be a buzz about our nuclear arms treaties.
And don't worry, we are not going to allow the regime to distract us from their Dr. Kvorkian behavior over our domestic policies as well.
But it is amazing, the rollback of the Reagan revolution now, taking us back militarily, and as far as our defense posture is concerned, to our pre-victory in the Cold War days back in the 80s and even prior to that.
So brace yourselves because this week and next, new is going to be all about our nuclear arms treaties.
Obama goes to Europe, to Prague, this week, to sign a new treaty with the Ruskies.
Next week, leaders of 47 countries come to Washington.
Now, you're going to get a real good feel for how Obama takes on this topic this week.
We are going to tell our allies one more time that we will not defend them in Europe.
No more missile defense systems in Poland or the Czech Republic, for instance.
We are not going to build out any new comprehensive missile defense system.
We're going to send a message to the world that our conventional weapons is enough of a deterrent, and we're even going to limit our delivery systems in the New Deal with the Russians.
And this is a key thing to remember because we have, you know, delivery systems can deliver conventional weapons as well as nukes.
And we are going to voluntarily reduce our delivery systems.
Forget nukes.
This is about conventional ammo and warfare.
And it's an area where we have vast superiority over the Russians and anybody else.
And so we are going to disadvantage ourselves on purpose.
Now, we might treat Iran and North Korea differently, but that's still vague and undecided.
We are going to send a message to the world that our conventional weapons is enough of a deterrent, even if we roll back our delivery systems.
Now, there's going to be a lot of back and forth on this issue, starting with Russia, as I said, already announcing that they may back out of the treaty if they don't like America even considering a missile defense system being built in a different country, like in Romania.
Now, when Reagan originally put this plan into place, the world was dominated by two superpowers, the Russians and us.
Today, the world has changed.
Obama is naive to think otherwise.
Obama has done, there's no other way to say this, folks.
He has done a great job of undermining our national defense.
He is in the process of giving away our national security.
Ask our allies.
Watch the reaction of Iran and North Korea and Russia if you wonder about that.
And let me ask you this question.
What country has Obama befriended?
Name one.
Has he befriended the UK?
Has he befriended France?
How?
How's he befriended France?
Yeah, his last game was.
The only thing he did for Sarkozy was give him a little.
Well, yeah, we have reached out to Chavez, but this is my point.
But our allies, no, the only thing he did for Sarkozy, Snerdley, was give him a five-inch or six-inch platform to stand on so nobody would know he's 5'5.
Has he reached out to Germany?
No, he's mad as hell at Angela Merkel.
No, no, no.
Snerdley, the New York Times is not a country.
He has reached out to the New York Times.
In fact, I'm sure that Robert Gibbs was helping New York Times rewrite this story all morning long because it kept changing.
Every 30 minutes when you went to the website.
Now, the Heritage Foundation is all over this, folks.
This is an excellent time to become a member of the Heritage Foundation.
This is another one of their areas of specialty, another one of their areas of expertise.
They are tracking all of this.
There's going to be a whole lot of discussion about our national security, about our nuclear profile now.
If you are a member of Heritage, you know this.
You're getting all of this information in full detail.
If you're not, this is a perfect example of why you should be a member.
And it's a mere pittance.
$25, which is a donation to keep the scholars thinking, writing, producing.
Just go to askheritage.org and become a member, like I and over 600,000 Americans already are.
The views expressed by the host on this program are being interrupted by the official program observer who cannot stay quiet.
What now, Snerdley?
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Why are you getting upset over what people say to you on the phone?
That's like getting upset that the media is liberal.
You know, I can.
Snerdley just got a call saying, I ought to spend more time talking about conservative values.
Why does that upset you?
Why does that upset you?
Well, you think, well, you think it's a seminar caller?
You think it's a seminar caller?
There's a genuine caller that thinks I'm not spending.
Snerdley's upset about this, ladies and gentlemen.
I don't take anything personally anymore.
But Snerdley's upset because he thinks I define conservative values by virtue of my professional and personal existence.
And that's true.
I don't think anybody who listens to this program is curious or confused about what conservatism is.
But the caller's point is: remember, he thinks, I'm guessing, he's one of these people who thinks most Americans are uneducated, uninformed, and need to be treated as though they're in the first grade.
And I'm not a professor.
I'm not a preacher.
I don't do sermons.
I don't do lectures.
I don't pass out tests.
I do monologues.
But, Snerdley, don't let that stuff get to you.
If it does get to you, you don't have to share it with me.
You know, sick people make healthy people sick.
And you don't let sick callers bug you.
You just don't.
It's like getting upset over the media being liberal.
I get people emailing me all the time.
Rush, I mean, in my internet subscriber account, the website subscriber, look at this.
You believe the way the media is reporting this?
I always write back, yeah, totally predictable.
It makes news when they're not biased or are spewing propaganda.
Look, Thomas Lifson, at the American Thinker, has more details on what we're going to be signing with the Russians on Thursday in Prague.
As he writes it, the treaty envisages that Russia and the U.S. reduce and limit their strategic offensive arms in such a manner that seven years after it's coming into force and further on, the total amount in possession of each of the sides should not exceed one, 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and heavy bombers, 1,550 warheads for these,
and 3,800 deployed and undeployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers.
Now, that last is the delivery system.
You know, how do you get a nuke or any other kind of bomb to its target?
Do you launch it from a submarine?
Do you drop it from a bomber?
Do you launch it from the ground?
That's a delivery system.
They are a U.S. strength.
They are a Russian weakness.
And these same delivery systems, as I so aptly pointed out mere moments ago, can be used for conventional warheads as well as nuclear.
So, as Liftson writes it in one fell swoop, Obama has handed over one of our few military advantages.
Imagine OEF, OIF, Kosovo, with limited numbers of cruise missiles, B-52s, B-2s able to deliver PGMs.
Or worse, the treaty may be so restrictive that certain numbers of systems must be retained for the nuclear mission so that no conventional capability can be deployed.
And that the Defense Secretary went out there just moments ago, Robert Gates, singing the praises of this treaty is scarier still.
This is just going to add to the fear, the legitimate genuine fear that a lot of people have that we're losing the country.
Now, remember, yesterday I posed a question that has two possible answers, and I wanted your thoughts on it.
Very rare do I do this.
I'm the one who supplies the answers generally.
But most hosts, in order to generate calls, throw out a topic, what do you think of this?
And hope the phones ring.
I'm going to make a major departure.
We didn't get any calls on it yesterday because by the time I did it, our lines were already pulled, and the people who wanted to respond to the question couldn't get in.
The question is very simple.
Paul Ray, Hillsdale College, looks at the passing of Obamacare and the entire agenda of this regime as an opportunity for our America's finest hour because, in his view, the American people are not people that wish to be subjugated or suborned or dictated to, and that they are seeing for the first time, without doubt, as clear as can be, exactly what liberalism is.
There's no mistake.
It now doesn't require us to tell people and to warn people about liberalism.
It's there in the form of the health care bill, now in the form of limiting our nuclear weapons, in the form of making enemies out of our allies.
It's all out there for everybody to see.
And his theory is that the American people will rise up and not accept this.
On the other side of that, I found a couple of young people in their 30s, bloggers, who said, I wish he was right, but no way.
As they look at their own generation, they see sloth, laziness, uneducation or ill education.
People have been educated about wrong things and incorrect things.
An entitlement mentality.
A generation that's grown up being diagnosed with attention deficit disorder all over the place, given drugs to deal with it.
And basically, people who have expectations of great wealth the moment they get out of bed and the moment they get out of college.
And they don't know how to make anything.
So which do you see?
As you sit here living your life in America today, that's the question.
You see the Paul Ray version, opportunity for our finest hour, or do you see these young people in their generation's view of it that if it's up to us to fix it, our generation doesn't have the metal.
We have somebody who wants to weigh in on this.
This is Jan in Martinez, California.
Great to have you on the program.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi, Rush.
I've been listening to you since about 87 when you were in Sacramento.
And I have been awakened, not that I wasn't always seeking the truth.
It's now time for me to engage.
And I am optimistic that it's not too late for America because they've just pushed me too far.
People like me have been busy trying to raise my family.
My kids are 9 to 16, and I home school.
My first responsibility is my family.
And under George Bush, I wasn't happy with all the things he was doing.
I didn't like his overspending, but I could sleep at night.
Now I lay down my head on my pillow, and I've got things I'm thinking about, and they have to do with what this stupid Congress is conjuring up for us.
And I think that that's a huge thing.
And the other thing that will make a difference in this fight is that we have the truth on our side, and that's what you stand for.
That's what Reagan stood for.
And well, I'm not saying she's our savior, but that's what Sarah Palin stands for.
Why do they hate you so much?
Why do they hate him?
Why do they hate her?
Because they dare to speak the truth.
And our job as conservatives is the same.
No matter what the outcome looks like to us right now, we are to speak the truth.
We are to educate people.
And I just think it's not too late.
What do they try to do to us?
I'm not a Tea Party member.
I've gone to some tea parties.
I went to the Tax Day Tea Party in Sacramento last year.
That was the finest group of people you could ever hope to be with.
I talked to the Capitol Police.
What did they say?
This is a great crowd.
And then I said, well, are you right or you left?
And he said, well, I can't say, but I'll tell you, I carry a pocket constitution with me.
Does that tell you where I stand?
And I said, yes, sir.
My sign here says, uphold the Constitution.
If we just uphold the Constitution, we wouldn't be having the problems we have today.
So I would say yes, because we stand for the truth.
We stand for the Constitution.
And like myself, I think this 30-year-old generation, it might be too late for that one.
But I'm looking at my kids.
I'm looking at the people I associate with.
The homeschooling movement is huge.
And most of the people there are conservatives.
And what do they hold?
They hold to the same Judeo-Christian principles that our founders held to.
And I think that will make the difference because who has a lock on truth other than you, Rush?
Incredible.
Incredibly, incredibly well spoken, Jan.
You are very articulate.
And you sound clean.
Thank you.
I sound what?
Clean, clean and articulate, just like Biden said about Obama.
Well, thank you.
Seriously, that was well articulated with not even one stutter.
Well, you know, they're coming after my way of life, and in my case, my livelihood, okay?
My husband, he sells insurance.
He sells homeowners and auto.
Nobody's buying new cars.
Nobody's buying new houses because why?
The stinking government has screwed with those two industries majorly with their regulations and their takeover of loans and auto companies.
Can't people see it?
I just don't understand.
I want more for my kids than this crap.
I don't want free health care.
Is my health care going up?
You're darn right it's going up.
But I don't care.
I've sat down in the county hospital with my elderly mother, and I am not a racist person, and I hate the fact that these people are forcing us to have to say things like that.
If you saw how I lived, you saw how I teach my children to live and the people we come in contact and the lives we touch.
I am not a racist.
But gosh darn it, Rush, I can't provide for the whole world, okay?
And it's like, can I have the best Medi-Cal system in the world?
Yes, I can.
Does it have a few problems?
Yeah, but they're taking my Mercedes with a flat tire and they're handing me a Yugo and they're doing it in the name of social justice.
Well, what's going to happen?
There's not going to be one good thing left for anybody when they're done with it.
There will be no place for anyone to go.
I don't think they know what they have in store for them in November.
I've never gone down to my George Miller, my congressman, my liberal, liberal congressman that went down to see the guy in South America.
Noriega during the country wars.
Thank you.
I just got too upset.
He, you know, he fought against Ollie Miller.
He fought against Reagan.
Look where we're at now.
What do we have creeping into Venezuela?
We got Putin right there bringing in his, oh, his help for nuclear energy.
Oh, yeah.
Well, gee, what is that all about?
That's to get the materials in place so they can have nuclear weapons.
That's who I have for a congressman.
I have no one that represents my views out here.
It's horrible.
But I have a few people, you know, and we've got a great station out here that you're on, KSFO.
We've got a guy, Brian Sussman.
You should have him on.
He has a new book, Climate Gate, that's educating people.
And that is what we need to do.
Like you always said, you be the go-to person in your family.
You've been saying that lately.
You're exactly right.
Well, you know something?
I think one thing, you're exactly right about all this.
Three cheers.
You've got people in the country standing up and cheering you, which is my point.
The vast majority of Americans see it exactly as you do.
All the polling data shows it.
That's why I'm calling this bunch a regime.
They are governing against the will of the people on purpose.
You've got a majority, and you are part of it.
The question is the battle plan and the action plan beyond elections.
Well, including elections, but even beyond that.
Look, Jan, I'm glad you called.
You were so good.
I went beyond my mandated commercial timeout.
So the next segment we get back here, folks, is going to be a little shorter than usual, but it was worth it.
Jan, thank you very much.
Sit tight, folks.
Say, folks, a little history lesson.
Do you remember what we did to our military after World War I?
I mean, we've been here before.
We've been here before.
Right after World War I, the era after World War I, we sank a large percent of our Navy.
We scuttled a lot of the rest of our forces.
And we practically did away with our standing army after World War I, which is why we could not react to Hitler when it would have been easier to slap him down.
We had to ramp it up.
We had to wait years to get into World War II, which was almost lost.
Do you think, why do you think we had Rosie the Riveter and all of this?
Why do you think we came out of the Depression?
We had to rebuild our army and Navy and Air Force because we didn't have it anymore.
Not after World War I. You know, if the Germans, if the Germans had not decided to invade the USSR, they might have won World War II.
Their big mistake was going in and aggravating the Russians.
The Russians came in, of course, and history is history.
The worst thing about this is that the Russians will simply ignore the treaty.
History is history.
People are who they are.
They constantly, they always ignore treaties.
Every other arms treaty we've signed with them, they've ignored.
I don't know if you remember this.
It's in the last year, 18 months, but Putin ordered their long-range strategic bombers to go back on 24-7, 365 Alert, maybe a couple years ago.
Those bear bombers are in the air like our BI-52s used to be all the time.
We've even closed the place that, what was it, Strategic Defense or Strategic Air Command SAC?
We've shut that down.
It was an Offent Air Force Base.
Well, I don't know if we've shut it down, but we don't have B-52s in the air at all times like we used to.
The Soviets, the Chinese, they have such a vast superiority in conventional weapons.
We lead in delivery systems, but they have so many more conventional weapons than we do.
They're actually the THICOMs and the Russians are actually happy to see us denuke because they have the advantage in weapons which are conventional.
And look at the country today.
Look at how reluctant we are to fight a conventional war of even the smallest scale.
Look at all the hell we got for a limited conventional war in Iraq.
So this is not good news happening out there today.
It just, it's, and or this week and the next two weeks, we're really watching the rollback of the Reagan Revolution.
We are taking ourselves back to the days before we won the Cold War with Barack Dr. Kvorkian Obama.
You remember, folks, when the atomic bomb was first developed, it was hailed as the beginning of a golden age.
There would not be the endless cycles of conventional wars that we had had for generation after generation because the nuclear weapon would deter anybody attacking us.
And for the most part, it's been true.
We've used them one time against the Japanese, well, twice, and they did attack us.
And there hasn't been a use of nuclear weapons since.
The deterrence of our existing nuclear policy is flawless in terms of having conventional war launched against us.
Now, we've got, you know, dealing with terrorist attacks is a different thing.
But it's a very serious problem that we face.
And we've got a guy, Dr. Kvorkian, now running this regime who really apparently is seriously serious about cutting this country down to size.
You know, all this focus on Russia's fine and dandy.
They're still a third world country without a superpower military, but we're going to take care of that now because we're going to make ourselves the same thing.
What we really need to be keeping our eyes on are the CHICOMs in Taiwan keep a sharp eye on that.
That's going to happen.
They're going to attack them at some point.
And Iran has huge designs on the Saudis.
They just do.
If these countries think our nuclear umbrella is no longer strong enough or we don't have the will to protect them, they're going to ramp up on their own.
This is going to lead to more nukes.
▲
Export Selection