All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 11, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:44
January 11, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, I have a I have an story here somewhere in the stack I gotta dig it up.
But uh Chef Dupner called Tea Party a bunch of racist bigots back in September.
So it I mean it's it's everything I said and more.
These people wait for an event, seize it to uh try to advance their agenda.
Now, with uh uh Rom Emanuel at a news conference this morning, mayoral candidate Rahmanuel, Illinois, Chicago, fielded questions on the Arizona shooting, and he was asked about a comment attributed to him some years ago about never letting a good crisis go to waste.
It says here from NBC News in Chicago that Rom Emanuel is taken aback by the question.
That's not intended for this moment, doesn't apply to this moment, Rahm Emanuel says.
This is not a crisis.
That should not be wasted.
This is something he doesn't want to be linked to in um in any way.
Nice to have you back, folks, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Happy to have you along.
The telephone numbers 800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com, and here you go from the Hill.com.
Lawmakers struggle for answers.
Consider curbs on incendiary speech.
Is anybody linked incendiary speech to this guy's actions?
It hasn't happened.
There has been no linkage.
Shocked and saddened lawmakers grappled on Monday with the weekend shooting of one of their own, with some suggesting that new laws and regulations are needed to curb incendiary speech.
The aftermath of Saturday's attack brought a rare moment of unity on Capitol Hill, but it also escalated a contentious debate over violent imagery in the nation's political discourse.
Representative Bill Pascrell, Democrat New Jersey, was having a beer and eating pizza at a New Jersey bar when he heard the news via TV.
Soon thereafter, he was contacted by his staff, was on the phone with other House members.
Yeah, it's somewhat overwhelming.
We're all flabbergasted, stunned, he said.
While noting the obvious differences between the two events, Pascal said Saturday reminds him of 9-11.
I couldn't believe I was really seeing this.
This can't be real, he told the Hill in an interview on Monday.
An emotional Pascal added, all of us at the bar prayed.
Representative Jack Kingston, Republican Georgia, said he had just finished giving a speech when he learned of the assassination attempt.
Soon as I stepped off stage, they told me, Kingston said, noting he was with his family at the time.
Wasn't much that we could do but pray.
Several leading House Democrats blame the inflammatory rhetoric for contributing to the Tucson Massacre.
I'm telling you the strategy just sits in a desk drawer waiting for an event for them to trot it out.
It is uh classic.
Folks, uh perhaps I should revisit my explanation about why these leftists do this.
I shared with you in the uh in the first hour because it's just this is irrational.
This is this is born of people who really believe that if they controlled everybody and everything, that this would never ever happen, that nobody insane or lunatic would ever have to be locked up, that criminals wouldn't have to be locked up, that there wouldn't be criminals, we'd have a panacea.
If A, they just controlled everybody, and B, everybody just listened to them was one of them.
Why there wouldn't be any poverty.
There wouldn't be uh any of these inequities in society that cause all these problems.
Uh there wouldn't be any insanity.
If if they if if if they could just control everybody's minds, control everybody's thinking.
And any defeat they take it personally, personal rejection.
When this kind of thing happens, it's a personal rejection because this doesn't fit.
This incident just doesn't fit.
Them losing elections doesn't fit the templates.
They have irrational explanations for.
It's never them.
They never lose elections because they gave people reason to vote against them, or because they never gave people reason to vote for them.
Uh Always marketing packaging some trick.
Somebody was able to massage the minds of people against these good people on the left.
There's always some trick behind them losing.
Somebody outsmarted them.
It's just, it's you know, trying to explain rationally an irrational event or irrational person is one of the definitions of insanity.
Let's stick with the audio sound bites.
Here is Clarence Ducknik doubling down with no evidence, admittedly no evidence whatsoever.
Sheriff Dupnik blaming me.
We know that he now missed all the warning signs on Lochner or ignored them.
We know that Sheriff Dupnik bungled a case.
He needs a big distraction.
Last night, ABC's world news tonight, Diane Sawyer said, I don't know if you heard about Rush Limbaugh.
Kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh.
In my judgment, he's irresponsible, uses uh partial information, sometimes uh wrong information, attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials, and that kind of behavior, in my opinion, is not without consequences, and I think he's irresponsible.
He has not been asked, by the way, to cite any evidence.
Any examples, partial information, wrong information.
This is all cliched.
This is all part of the book on me that they have.
Well, we like Limbaugh, a great indicator, but you know he gets so much wrong.
That's that's all Dupnik knows.
It's all part of the Close attacks people, angers them.
He can't find any evidence that I have suggested people behave like the shooter did.
And they're not even asking him for any.
Meghan Kelly did it, Fox.
And he said, Well, I've I'm just I'm speculating.
Uh Diane Sawyer and uh Sheriff Ducknick continue uh with this science Sawyer says something to it.
Is it right to link it to this horrible incident?
Well, that's that's my opinion.
Uh people can have their own opinions.
The listeners, the viewers can judge for themselves.
But my feeling is that there are millions of people in this country who feel exactly as I do, and nobody is saying anything.
That it is somehow linked?
Of course.
Sounds like Diane Sawyer was even have trouble uh buying this.
I mean, these I know Diane Sawyer.
I can tell you some stories.
I mean, uh I won't, but I mean, she know each other a little bit.
All of these people in the media who are making these comments and listen to this guy, they all know me.
And not one of them actually believes it.
Now it fits the liberal template to say it.
And Dupnik thinks he's the only guy saying it.
He wants a medal here.
There are millions of people in this country who feel exactly as I do, and nobody is saying it.
Nobody's saying anything.
You're it, Sheriff.
Try the whole media for crying out loud.
And many in the Democrat Party last night, client uh love client number nine, Elliot Spitzer on the Parker Spitzer show on CNN, they had Duchnik, he was making the rounds, and uh and client number nine said, What do you have to say to Rush Limbaugh's language and the crazy things he said on his radio program today?
Now they didn't define these crazy things that I said.
What do you think I said yesterday was crazy that they think is crazy?
I was thinking about that last night because somebody sent me a note.
Hey, Spitzer called you crazy.
I said, What did I say last night that was crazy or yesterday?
What could that they would think it was crazy?
What was it?
And maybe it's that I accuse them of having this as a policy.
Uh that the Democrat Party profits seeks to profit from murder.
Are they not doing that?
That may sound crazy to them.
We got Mark Penn last November suggesting that what Obama needs is uh something like an Oklahoma City bombing to reconnect with the American people.
We don't make these things up.
We are in relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth here.
Now we listen to what these people say.
We quote it, react to it.
And it does appear to me that these people are attempting to politically profit off this event, which featured what?
Murder.
There's no question about it.
These people are seeking to advance their political agenda.
I'll tell you what I said today that's going to drive them nuts if they haven't heard it.
If they did, it's already driving them nuts.
And that is that this smiling perp in his mugshot, why wouldn't you be smiling too if you had the entire Democrat Party running interference for you?
If you knew that you had committed this act, that you were the shooter, with six dead and a number of people wounded, and the Democrat Party's out there trying to blame everybody but you, wouldn't you be happy?
Wouldn't you be smiling?
You know that's gonna bug them.
But somebody tell me where I'm wrong.
Sony, tell me where I'm wrong in this assertion.
The Democrat Party's trying to make Walkner a victim.
They're out there saying I'm responsible.
Yesterday was Sarah Palin, today it's me, and that's because I called a sheriff out by name.
That's why he's coming after me.
But is it beyond the pale to suggest that the sheriff's comments are helping the defense in this case?
It's beyond the pale to suggest that Mr. Lochner can take comfort in the fact that the Democrat Party is seeking to find anybody but him to blame for this.
If they thought what I said yesterday was crazy, this is going to be driving them insane.
So anyway, client number nine says to Ducknik, uh, what do you have to say to Rush Limbaugh's language and crazy things he said in his radio program today?
It's exactly this kind of personal name calling.
He didn't sound like he was uh really concerned about me when he was uh criticizing and saying things that absolutely were not true.
He knows they're not true.
I have a reputation of 50 years, and I don't think I have to defend myself on the kinds of issues that he was raising.
It's my belief that the hard right is deliberately fueling the fire against public officials, elected officials, government, and the administration.
They think that in some way, and maybe they're right, it benefits them in the election process.
Didn't Sheriff Ducknik see the CBS news poll, most Americans don't connect the shooting to the rhetoric.
Now, Sheriff Dupnik also vehemently opposes Arizona, his own state, on their new immigration law.
Two-thirds of the American people support the Arizona bill.
So who is it, Sheriff?
It's out of touch.
Who is it, Sheriff that's actually in the minority?
Uh sixty percent of the American people do not see a connection between the shootings and anybody's rhetoric.
And two-thirds of the American people support the Arizona immigration bill, which you don't.
You're in the one-third minority.
So who's out of touch?
What did I say about him yes?
It's untrue.
I mean, they say these things and they don't.
I don't know if they played audio of me, what I said yesterday, but I this is generally how this works.
Yeah, what Limbaugh said about me, he knows it's not true.
It's not true, and he knows it.
What did I say?
I had three hours on this program yesterday.
I'm I'm not gonna be able to just on recall but what is what it is he thinks he's talking about.
Uh Elliot Spitcher then says, Can you talk about voices on the hard right?
About whom are you referring to?
Give us names.
What do you mean specifically?
Who's doing this?
I don't want to get into name-calling.
You know, uh, you played uh one of the the people who is uh a master at this kind of uh diatribe.
And he inflames a lot of people against people like me and against Democrats and liberals, and this benefits the other party.
Uh when it comes election time, I think that they're happy when the people are very angry at government, period.
Well, it must not be me because they did play audio of it.
I've just got an email.
They just played a still don't know what the audio was, but they did play audio of me.
Well, at some point here, I guess I'll find out what it is.
And then I'll be more specifically able to uh to respond.
Then they asked Kathleen Parker.
Uh well, Kathleen Parker and Sheriff Ducknik had a conversation about the Tucson shooting and me.
It's not my job to defend Rush Limbaugh, and I don't intend to.
But I do think that in his case just now, he was exaggerating.
He was using hyperbole to try to show you what it felt like to be accused of something of which you were not guilty.
I think that's what he was doing.
He was inflaming people against me, which uh uh the right and people like Rush Limbaugh don't want to listen to to the voice of reason at all.
They have an agenda, and uh they pursue that and they make a lot of money out of it.
Wow, this guy is touchy, isn't he?
It's almost like he can't take it.
So I don't know um.
I don't know what I'll have to find it as a breaker at somebody.
I don't know what I said or what they played.
But when he says here, um, well, he was inflaming people against me.
Which the right and people like Rush Limbaugh don't want to listen to the voice of reason at all.
I was as always the case.
What happens on this program is we come here, we start the program each and every day, minding our own business.
We're not bothering or harming anybody, and then somebody says something about us and we react.
And we respond and we defend ourselves upon occasion when necessary.
And he might not have used my name at first, but he was using names of people who believe things I believe on my side of the aisle.
Tea Party, Sarah Palin, voices on the radio.
There's no question we meant.
So I did respond to him.
He responded to me.
That's not fair.
He was inflaming people against me, as though what he did was not inflaming people.
And he inflamed people without any evidence.
He admitted he had no evidence for what his opinion is, for what his belief is.
Zilch zero nada.
And then when we respond to it, it becomes a little crybaby.
He appoints himself as the voice of reason, and now he's a victim.
He starts all of this and he's the victim.
And it pains Kathleen Parker to try to tell him what you know, this guy Rush is just exaggerating to try to show you how all this felt.
He was inflaming me against me.
It sounded like he was almost crying there.
He's inflaming me against me.
So people are unaware of what they say about people, and then when those people react to it, it's like, who did they think they are?
Doesn't this sheriff by the way, what is he doing on television?
Does he have a job to do here?
Isn't he a sheriff?
Shouldn't he be conducting an investigation or leading it or something?
Or providing guidance for the people who are actually engaging in it?
Calling Tea Party supporters racist bigots, that's not inflaming people.
Here's a guy calling for civility in in our in our conversation, our discourse, promoting just the opposite.
Kathleen Parker said, Do you have any evidence whatsoever that this was a politically motivated act, or that rhetoric indeed influenced this young man to do what he did?
Rush Limbaugh knows along with uh a lot of other people that uh we can't prove what was in this man's heart uh at the time of the act.
It's my feeling that the tenor of the country particularly influences unbalanced, unstable personalities, especially.
I'm not blaming Rush Limbaugh specifically, but I'm saying that people who do this continually, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and have an agenda, have a responsibility.
They have free speech, but I think with free speech comes some responsibility, and there can be consequences.
And I I firmly believe that.
Do I need to take a break here?
I've lost track of okay, here we go.
All right, grab sound by 34.
This is what I said that uh Sheriff Duppnik uh was reacting.
This is what CNN played for him that client number nine then characterize as crazy.
You have any uh response to crazy things Rush Linboss said.
I guess Sheriff wouldn't mind if the shooter's acquitted.
After all, it's not the shooter's fault if you carry the sheriff's logic all the way out.
Well, what do you mean, HR, if this if the sheriff's gonna speculate, I'm gonna speculate.
How does it feel?
Hey, Sheriff, I'll bet you hope he's acquitted, right?
What do you know about it?
I don't know anything.
I just know how liberals are, sheriff.
You would probably have a tough time putting the guilty behind bars because it's always somebody else's fault, right, Sheriff?
It's never the guilty's fault.
They didn't do it, somebody made them do it, right, Sheriff?
That's crazy comments from me that the sheriff is reacting to.
And why is it the sheriff's entitled to an opinion, but I'm not?
And the sheriff can forego his own investigation to spend time on television.
Uh this sheriff is just so upset with the election results in November he is obsessed with it rather than focusing on his own very important job.
And I'm just pointing out, the sheriff says incendiary rhetoric made this guy do it.
The guy is a victim.
The guy didn't do it.
Somebody made him do it.
So I was just trying to give the sheriff a dose of his own method.
Hey, Sheriff, it's never the guilty's fault.
They didn't do it.
Somebody made them do it right.
I mean, you probably wouldn't mind if the shooters acquitted.
I mean, it would facilitate your case that somebody made him do it, right?
The sheriff didn't like that.
Sheriff said that I was inflaming people against him.
*laughter*
And he had to respond to it on CNN.
How dare we question the government?
How dare we citizens insist that our representatives represent us and follow the Constitution?
How dare we act insolent like this?
That's what the sheriff is saying.
He was inflaming people against me.
After the sheriff had just spent a whole day and a half inflaming as many people as he could against Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, the Republican Party, and anybody who is conservative.
He goes out and talks about people who are angry at government.
Sheriff, are you talking about all that hate Bush stuff from the liberals?
Particularly in Bush's second term, Bush equals Hitler, Bush is a Nazi.
Um I remember all that the assassination uh movies and books about Bush.
Is that is that the anger at government that you're talking about here?
All the anti-war stuff from the liberals, was that love?
Was all the hate rhetoric at Bush was that love, Sheriff?
I mean, all those attacks on Supreme Court justices for ruling in the Citizens United case, the president in his State of the Union speech, personally castigating the court, that was love, sheriff.
You see, folks, what the sheriff really means, but can't say it or won't say it is he doesn't like liberalism being challenged.
He doesn't like his point of view being challenged.
He doesn't like the Democrats being challenged.
He believes free speech, political speech, debate, arguments, elections should be left to him and his fellow liberals.
This sheriff is so upset with the election results in November that he is obsessed with that rather than focusing on his very important job.
This guy has got election hangover.
He cannot get over it.
This I told you earlier today, they can't shake what happened.
This rejection that they faced and got last November was thorough and complete.
And they have not yet found a way to deal with it.
How dare we question the government?
How dare we question the sheriff?
How dare we citizens insist that our representatives represent us?
How dare we insist that they follow the Constitution?
In fact, how dare we to even be engaged, informed and passionate, passionate about this?
Don't we know we're just supposed to shut up and let the smart People run this stuff and control it.
We want the government to do its job, Sheriff.
We want the government to secure the border, for example, which you apparently don't.
And it was you, Sheriff Dupnik, who attacked the Arizona government when it passed a law to do its job.
So this was this sheriff who was attacking the government.
How dare we attack government?
How dare we be angry at government?
But this sheriff can call his own state the capital, the cesspool of bigotry and racism.
Because of what his government's gonna.
See, you see, it's okay for Sheriff Duppnik, an approved liberal to criticize the government.
But not us.
It was the liberals who attacked the Supreme Court when it upheld the second amendment in the gun case.
Upheld the First Amendment, the Citizens United case, including the president at the State of the Union.
It's okay for them to attack the government.
It's okay for the president to attack the Supreme Court, but we can't.
It's okay for the sheriff to attack his own government in Arizona, but we It's okay for them to engage in the destructive rhetoric aimed at George W. Bush.
But that we can't.
It is the left that attacks government every time they attack our military.
Whenever we are at war.
Harry Reid, this war is lost.
This war is lost.
The Democrats attack this government all over the world, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, wherever they were in the 2004 election cycle.
Sheriff.
During the 2008 election, I couldn't distinguish the comments about this country from Democrats to Ahmedini Zad.
They sounded the same.
It's okay for Ahmedini Zad to attack our government.
It's okay for our president to go around the world and apologize for our government.
It is the left that attacks the government in the form of police officers whenever there's a racially sensitive crime caught on video.
Sheriff, you leftists attack the government all the time.
You've made a career out of trying to destroy Republic administrations, all for the sake of the advancement of your political agenda.
Who, I ask, is attacking the government when they attack those who believe in the Constitution that established the government?
We have James Clyburn saying...
Reading the Constitution on the floor of the House is uncalled for.
That it is equivalent to incendiary rhetoric.
I mean, who's who's attacking government there?
What we reject, Sheriff, is liberalism.
Say it, Sheriff, we reject liberalism.
But unlike liberals, we play by the rules.
We don't seek to evade them.
Those rules set out in the Constitution.
And our agenda, what is it?
Freedom.
Liberty.
That's what we're on a path.
Can't say war path, that's a scenario.
We're on the freedom path.
That's our agenda, freedom.
That's what we reject, Sheriff is liberalism.
Now, Sheriff, I uh I would suggest you've had your you've had your rounds on TV and you're getting your praise and your accolades for not backing down, even though you have no evidence for the claims you're making.
Now it's time to start acting like a real sheriff.
Even the Arizona Republic newspaper lead editorial.
Sheriff, come back, do your job.
Sheriff, please.
There's enough embarrassment at Arizona enough.
They just want Sheriff Dupnik to come back and start doing his job.
Don't act like a hack.
Sheriff, you're embarrassing other liberals.
It's other liberals who should be saying what you're saying, but you're a law enforcement officer.
You can't, as a law enforcement officer, you can't go out there and start assigning guilt in this case with no evidence.
And which is what you're Doing, and then you're you're embarrassing your fellow liberals.
That's you know, leave that to the liberals on TV radio and the blogs.
They're comfortable doing that.
But you're a law enforced official.
You're supposed to at least disguise your liberalism.
But you're embarrassing even your buddies when you run out there and start accusing people of guilt.
And then admit in the next breath you don't have any evidence.
And if you don't want to do, if you like what you're doing now, making the rounds on television, then step down and allow a professional to do it.
I don't remember this sheriff telling Obama or Harry Reed or Pelosi and his party to stop attacking Bush.
I don't remember Sheriff Dubnik telling Obama read Pelosi Schumer to stop attacking Bush and his policies at any time.
I I don't I don't remember Sheriff Dupnik telling Harry Reed to stop attacking, period.
Or Pelosi.
I don't remember it.
Sheriff, did you speak out when the left attacked uh Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsville?
I don't I don't recall.
Maybe those of you in Arizona remember if he did.
I don't I just I just don't recall.
We'll have to get some research on that.
Dale in Blythe, California.
As we go back to the phones, great to have you here with us, sir.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
Thank you for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
Listener, first-time caller.
You know, I was listening to you earlier, and you you basically said that uh Sheriff Dubnik was a representative of the law to enforce it or to not.
Uh I am a retired peace officer.
I worked in corrections for California for 24 years.
And uh to me it struck a note that that he's really much more than that.
He's actually a symbol of the law.
Uh that symbol of right and wrong, justice, fairness, equality.
And by voicing his opinion like he's done, he's just totally walked away from his sworn duty as a jail officer.
Dale.
You are inflaming people against Sheriff Dubnick.
Oh, I'm sorry, Rush.
Yeah, you are.
You're hurting his feelings, too.
Yeah, yeah.
Because as a peace officer, I do take that as an uphrunt.
Uh, you know, walking what we call walking the line with uh convicted felons.
Yeah, yeah, I know what you mean.
Yeah, I know.
Well, you know, Sheriff Ducknik was on MSNBC last night with Oberman.
He did not tell Oberman to stop attacking the GOP.
He didn't tell Olberman to stop all the incendiary rhetoric.
Um in fact, Sheriff Ducknik is trying to chill free speech.
Isn't that a violation of the law?
First Amendment.
It's just a question.
And we'll be back right after this.
Okay, we've got a couple sound bites I want to play for you.
First off, uh, we've come a long way.
Uh uh, ladies and gentlemen, uh back on April 28, 2003 in Hartford, Connecticut, the annual Jefferson Jackson Bailey dinner.
Then Senator Hillary Clinton screeched.
In addition to spoke.
As I say, we've come a long way since I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic.
And we should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.
Well, that was fine back in 2003.
Dissent was patriotic.
Now it's racist.
Dissent is racism.
Rom Emanuel this morning in Chicago, responding to a question about the shooting and his old statement, never let a good crisis go to waste.
I said was never allow a good crisis to go to waste when it's an opportunity to do things that you had never considered when you didn't think were possible.
That's not intended for this moment.
So this is not a good crisis.
Democrats need to let this one go to waste.
By the way, Hillary Clinton has already pronounced Lochner to be an extremist.
She did this somewhere on foreign soil.
Came close to calling him a terrorist, but she didn't want to go uh that far.
Folks, the ability to connect wirelessly has a lot to do with the indispensability of the internet in our daily lives.
Wireless internet's available everywhere.
Uh and your even your car now driving around, even airplanes, the mobility factor allows us to work anytime, anywhere on numerous devices, and being connected is at an all-time high.
But it's amazing, but is it safe?
And the short answer is no.
Wi-Fi was born to be convenient, not secure.
Unsecured, unprotected wireless is everywhere.
And when a device connects to unprotected Wi-Fi, all the data stored in that device is available to a hacker with the proper sniffing tools.
And in Wi-Fi hotspots in public, coffee shops, malls, you name it.
I mean, you know these people are out there, and they're probably being inspired by rhetoric they have seen at a Sarah Palin website to go out there and steal your identity.
Sheriff Dupnik, I'm sure would agree with me on this that wireless internet's uh one of the biggest problems facing the Democrat Party and the citizenry because conservatives use it.
Well, there's a way that you can protect yourself and your identity.
It's called life lock.
Nobody is going to stop identity theft entirely.
But when you learn how easy it is for your identity to be stolen, it makes me glad that there is life lock to tell you about.
When it comes to identity protection, don't waste your time with anybody but life luck.
Relentlessly protecting your identity is what they do, and that's all they do.
They not only have your back, they provide early notification on both credit and non-credit related identity threats within their network, and they find them in process.
That's when you're notified.
They work around the clock to help stop the crime before it even happens.
So now's the time to get life locked, folks.
Call them at 800-440-4833.
Save 10% off your membership just by mentioning the promo code Rush.
That's 800-440-4833 LifeLock.
Call now.
Chesapeake, Virginia, Joshua.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hello, Mr. Limbaugh.
Well, first I want to say thank you for sipping through all the hate and vitriol to keep us informed on what's going on, especially as truck drivers.
But uh, I wanted to ask you, I got uh I stopped at the truck stop Saturday and I listened to the news.
I walked in and saw what was going on on the news.
And first thing that I felt was my heart just got ripped out of my chest.
And then the next thought that entered my mind was like a knife plunging into it and being turned sideways because I immediately knew, and I I call it cynicism or whatever, but I immediately knew that they were going to take and use this against uh against you, against us, against gun total Americans that just love firearms and whatnot.
They're gonna use it in every way possible to to further their agenda.
And it just hurt my heart so much that first the first, of course, the the thing, but then that on top of it, it just compounds it for everyone.
It's not just it's it it strikes home for everyone.
See, this is like this is interesting.
The first thing that you thought about after how the tragedy affected you was you knew what they were going to do.
Yes, sir.
And you know why?
Because they do it every time.
It's almost a Pavlovian knee-jerk reaction now.
I mean, you ask Rush when I've had a lot of people ask me, when did you think?
As soon as I saw the D next to the Congresswoman's name.
Soon as I saw that she was a Democrat, I knew.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it doesn't take a conspiracy to see the to see the way that they react to everything.
It's not a too many of them do it that way.
Well, but it is a conspiracy if I'm in the strict definition of the word.
Bunch of Democrats have conspired to use events like this to advance their agenda.
You can call it a conspiracy, you can call it uh a strategic element of their agenda, advance it or whatever, but it is what it is.
And it is so obvious to people now that it was the Second thing you thought of in an instant.
And believe me, you were not alone.
And we'll be back.
None of us are alone, folks.
Upon that, you can count.
Yeah, we've got a caller on Riverside from Livermore, California.
Don't have time to put him on the air, but he wants to talk about Alec Baldwin suggesting that Henry Hyde be stoned and killed.
Member of Congress from Illinois.
Yeah, this uh this generally cuts one way when we're talking about incendiary rhetoric uh leading to action.
Again, folks, thanks for being with us today.
And remember, the first episode of the Haney Project is at 9 o'clock tonight on the Golf Channel.
That's 9 o'clock Eastern.
And we'll see you back here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection