All Episodes
Previous Next
April 30, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:48
April 30, 2012, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program make more sense than anything anybody else out there is saying.
Views expressed by the host on this program are documented to be almost always right 97.9% of the time.
It is great to have you with us.
It's a delight to have you with us.
What a day.
Do you know I don't know whether I ought to mention it because I don't know if I'm going to say it right.
I actually feel worthless on the weekends.
I feel like I'm not contributing anything.
I really, I was sitting there yesterday afternoon feeling depressed, like I was slacking off.
I don't know.
It's just good to get back here behind the golden EIB microphone.
Telephone number, you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, the email address, LRushbow at EIBnet.com.
So I'm just now, I'm watching Fox News during the break here at Top of the Hour.
And they've apparently got some polling data, and they're breathless about it.
Megan Kelly was talking to Pat Cadell and Chris Steyerwalt, who's their polling guy.
And they're just excited as they can be.
You know why?
Because blue-collar voters in their poll have abandoned Obama.
No, say it isn't true, madam.
Blue-collar voters, white, Cadell pointed this out, white blue-collar voters have abandoned Obama.
Now, you knew this all the way back last November.
And what do you also know?
You also know that Obama has abandoned them.
That's what's really going on.
How many times have I referenced it now?
The piece by Thomas B. Edsall that ran, he used to be the Washington Post now at the Huffington and Puffington Post.
He had a piece in the New York Times talking about how the regime was just, we're going to punt on white working-class voters, the bitter clingers.
They're going to write them off.
They're going to write them off because they'd already lost them back then.
Traditional Reagan Democrats, blue dogs, whatever, they just abandoned Obama because of economics.
They're tea partiers now.
And now it's codified.
Fox has it in their polling data.
So you knew it in November.
Cutting edge.
Societal evolution.
And then there's this from the Washington Examiner, a guy named Paul Bedard or Beddard, I don't know how to pronounce his name.
He used to be at U.S. News and World Report.
Young Obama voters turn on the president.
They lapped up Obama's 2008 promise of hope and change, but his inability to deliver has turned younger voters cynical and disillusioned, according to a new analysis of 18 to 29-year-olds who backed Obama but are now skeptical.
GOP pollster Ed Goaz said it'll take a decade before they believe in hope and change again.
Worse, he said, younger voters are disillusioned with Obama and have turned cynical of his rhetoric.
Obama recently traveled to Raleigh, North Carolina, and Columbus, Ohio, to conduct focus groups with voters between 18 and 29 who backed Obama in 08.
He found them gravely concerned about unemployment, the economy, and gas.
Of course, folks, this is why I said landslide.
Now, I know the Electoral College makes that unlikely and a number of other things, but this is not just true of younger voters.
It's also true of the blue-collar, white, working-class voters.
Nobody's happy with any of this.
There's nobody who wants more of this other than the 25% hardcore Obama voters who just want big government.
They want to be taken care of and don't want to have to work.
The unemployment rate doesn't matter to them.
They love higher taxes because they equate that with more welfare benefits.
I mean, that's the Obama voter.
The Obama voter doesn't vote and wants higher taxes.
And I'm telling you, that's not a majority of the people in this country.
It just isn't.
Now, the administration top environmental official in the South and Southwest region, this is Al Armandaris.
He's the guy who was caught on videotape two years ago saying he wanted to crucify oil and gas companies.
And by the way, here's another thing.
That word crucify, I know in the popular vernacular it means wipeout women, but I want you to stop and think.
Once again, those of you new to the program, and if you're in the 18 to 29 age range or although 35 or 40, crucify.
The guy chose the word crucify.
That's more than just discard.
What do you do when you crucify somebody?
You put them on a cross.
It has a specific meaning.
Now, we know that Al Armander's didn't want to put people up on a cross, but it's the same thing as humiliating them, killing them.
That's what he wanted to do.
And people said, gee, how did these guys get past Obama?
How do these guys end up in this?
He likes them.
They are in his administration because everybody picking these people knows exactly what Obama wants.
Crucifixion is torture.
It's a terrorist act.
It was chosen because of one of the slowest forms of death.
It was painful.
It took days.
It took days to die.
And you ended up being targeted by birds and all kinds.
It was horrible.
It was absolutely horrible.
Now, I'm not saying he literally meant crucify, but he did not mean these people just need to be beaten, defeated politically.
He wanted, well, because I don't think Al Armanderas is going to go erect crosses and put out to find Rick Tillerson and put him up on one.
That's not, he didn't mean it, but I just want people to understand that crucify has a specific meaning, and it's more than just we want to discard this guy, these oil people, and so forth.
So, Al Armanderas, he has quit, he's gone, he's out of there.
I have one more Al Gore soundbite from Amherst, New Hampshire, somebody number 21, Hampshire College, during the inauguration of his buddy, Jonathan Lash, to be the new president at Hampshire College.
Here's more from Al Gore.
What the scientists tell us would take place if we did not is too awful to contemplate.
We know that we have to, but to know is not enough.
We need to tune out some of what they're telling us.
Corporations are not the people.
Money is not speech.
We can afford to educate our young people.
We can afford to inequality health care.
We can afford to be on the environment.
We can't afford to achieve our own justice.
This is particularly disturbing because these young skulls full of mush are cheering.
Al Gore said two things: corporations are not people, and money is not speech.
Well, of course, corporations are people.
What is a corporation if it isn't people?
Let me attempt, by the way, Al Gore, again, for those of you here, Al Gore and his liberal ilk do not understand the basic laws of economics.
Al Gore is no different than Obama on economics.
And you see what a mess the Democrats have made in economics.
How can Al Gore understand the basic laws of physics, basic laws of science, if he is essentially illiterate on matters of economics?
These people are not wizards of smart.
They do not have all the answers.
They are wrong all the time.
Corporations are people.
Let me talk about Apple again.
Oh, and since I'm going to talk about Apple, let me read to you the quotes of this community college guy.
This is the New York Times piece on Apple Saturday I talked about in the previous hour, where they get crucified by the New York Times for not paying their fair share in taxes.
And it is a hit piece, and it's filled with errors, commingling years of income versus taxes paid.
They calculate taxes paid on incorrect years of income to come up with a lower percentage of taxes paid.
But Apple broke no law.
They are totally within the bounds of the IRS tax code in everything they do, tax-wise.
And so are all these other companies that are cited as doing the same things that Apple does.
One of the things, for example, Apple does, domestic sales, not all, but the domestic sales of digital stuff, like software downloads from their app stores or songs and TV shows and movies from the iTunes store.
Those sales get recorded in Nevada.
They've got a subsidiary set up in Nevada, and all the sales are recorded there.
Apple has an office in Nevada.
There's no corporate tax in Nevada.
They pay no corporate tax on the sale of digital products.
And the New York Times outrage, they're livid over this because Apple's not in Nevada.
Apple's in California.
California ought to be getting a tax revenue because California's in deep trouble.
Education is underfunded and the state budget is underfunded.
And at no point in this story, and I know it's a story on taxes and corporations, but still, there's nothing, there's not one reference to the irresponsible spending of governments here.
Why is the state of California?
It's not because Apple's doing anything.
It's not Apple's fault.
If the state were run like Apple is, everybody would be hunky-dory.
Apple's not the guilty party.
Microsoft isn't the guilty party.
Cisco's not the guilty party.
The guilty party of the state's Democrats and whoever else.
Republicans too, if they're engaged in this wild, irresponsible borrowing and spending.
And the same thing in educational institutions.
You don't spend what you don't have.
And then when you do and you rack up a big deficit, you blame it on yourself if you have any moral fiber.
You don't go blaming it on corporations that are doing their share.
Why does Apple, why do corporations want to spend as little on taxes as possible?
I'll tell you why.
They want to be competitive with all the other corporations that are doing the same thing.
They want to maximize shareholder value.
They want to keep the price of their products lower as they can so they can sell them.
Everything a successful corporation does is oriented to two things, the stockholders and the customers.
That's who their bosses are.
This New York Times piece and all the critics in it think the purpose of a corporation is to provide health care for the employees, free Wi-Fi for the community where the corporation is, and unlimited money for governments to spend irresponsibly.
That's what they think the purpose of a corporation is.
And it's not.
The purpose of a corporation is not to have jobs in the community.
It's not to have health care for people.
That's not why they exist.
There isn't one person that started a business because he thought his community needed jobs or because he thought people in his town needed health care.
That's not why people start businesses.
Corporations are people.
People work there.
Stockholders own shares of stock.
Who is it that's paying these taxes?
It's people.
Apple's employees pay taxes.
Apple pays withholding taxes.
It's absurd.
I use that word a lot.
It's absurd to believe, as the New York Times wants, to think that corporations don't pay their fair share.
It's ridiculous.
No law has been broken.
It'd be a different tune now if they had evidence Apple was breaking the law, but they don't.
So some of these little young bloggers on the Apple Network all talk about disappointed in Apple's lack of patriotism.
See how it works?
Patriotism equals paying taxes.
More than you should.
That's patriotism.
Apple's not being a very good citizen.
But this idea that corporations aren't people, I'll use Apple again as a means of explaining this.
And I know, I know full well, I get emails from people who tell me you're sick and tired of me talking about Apple.
Well, deal with it.
Same people, stop talking about golf.
Stick to the issues.
Well, this is the issues.
All Apple did is what Obama did.
The Obamas paid as little taxes as they could.
Warren Buffett's fighting a billion dollars owed in back taxes privately.
He doesn't want you to know that.
In public, Obama Buffett's running around and saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes.
So you love Buffett.
But let's say you have an iPhone or an iPad and you buy an app.
No.
Yeah, okay.
First, you buy an app.
Corporations aren't people.
So you click on the App Store, and there's an app and you want to buy and you download it.
Who put it there?
How did it end up there?
Some cyborg?
Some giant robot?
Who wrote the app?
Who ran it by Apple for approval?
Who at Apple approved it?
To put it in the App Store.
Then when you buy it, somebody is in Nevada recording the sale.
Have you ever, let's say, on your desktop Mac, all of a sudden there's a notice of a software update.
Okay, well, have you ever thought, okay, who, where was it decided that today is the day they're going to release the software update?
Who wrote the software?
Who determined it was ready to go?
How many months, whatever, been involved in testing?
Who did this?
It's people.
How much does the CEO know of all these intimate, intricate details, and how much does he delegate?
Who knows?
But it's people.
All of this stuff is people.
Corporations are people.
They can't be anything else.
What is a corporation?
Some building where inside a bunch of evil chicaneries going on.
Is that what it is?
It's just a giant building, and inside nobody's allowed.
And all this stuff happens where customers' lives are at stake.
The CEO plots the death of the customer in case he's a drug CEO or big oils and they're plotting how to screw the consumer at the pump.
Kill the planet at the same time.
But who is doing this?
Do you realize how absurd it is to say corporations aren't people?
That's all they are.
I got to take a break.
Next thing I want, I want to read to you this quote from the junior college guy, De Anza College, Community College near Apple and Cupertino.
Don't go away.
A lot of people writing me notes.
Hey, Rush, what is the New York Times paying taxes?
I don't know, but I'll guarantee you that they've got a battery of tax lawyers that are taking advantage of every depreciation opportunity they can and writing off every loss they can.
I guarantee you, the New York Times is not paying a penny more than they think they have to, just like the Obamas are.
But here comes a hit piece on Apple.
Now, a mile and a half from Apple's Cupertino headquarters is De Anza College Community College.
Steve Wozniak attended.
Because of California's state budget crisis, De Anza has cut more than a thousand courses and 8% of its faculty since 2008.
It's not Apple's fault, but the story wants you to think it is.
Now, De Anza College faces a budget gap so large that it's confronting a death spiral.
The school's president, Brian Murphy, wrote in the faculty to the faculty in January.
Apple, of course, is not responsible for the state's financial shortfall, but the company's tax policies are seen by officials like Mr. Murphy as symptomatic of the crisis, why it exists.
So Apple's not to blame, but let's go get to this community college guy and let him explain why Apple is to blame.
I just don't understand it, Brian Murphy said in an interview.
I'll bet every person at Apple has a connection to De Anza.
Their kids swim in our pool.
Their cousins take classes here.
They drive past it every day for Pete's sake.
But then they do everything they can to pay as few taxes as possible.
The sense of entitlement here is breathtaking.
This guy that runs this community college thinks he's entitled to Apple paying more taxes than they have to because his school's running a deficit.
And then there's this.
Still some, including De Anza's president, Mr. Murphy, say the philanthropy and job creation at Apple do not offset Apple's decisions to circumvent taxes.
When it comes to these companies, comes time for all of these companies, Google and Apple and Facebook and the rest to pay their fair share.
There's a knee-jerk resistance, Murphy said.
They're philosophically anti-tax and it's decimating the state.
But I'm not complaining.
I'm not complaining.
We can't afford to upset these guys.
We need every dollar we can get.
I kid you not.
They're philosophically anti-tax and Apple's decimal.
The state legislature is Mr. Murphy.
How are you?
We'll get back to your phone calls or get to your phone calls in just a second.
I want to read this.
I had to go too quickly.
I read it too fast, and I, as such, got some of it, bots, some of the words.
This Murphy guy, I'm missing one page of it, but I don't need it.
This is from the Saturday New York Times piece on Apple.
Not breaking any law, but not paying their fair share of taxes.
A mile and a half from Apple's Cupertino headquarters is De Anza College.
They have no business being in the story.
Have absolutely nothing to do with Apple paying taxes.
Not a thing in the real world.
There is no connection whatsoever.
But that doesn't matter.
The Times found the guy.
He's willing to say what the Times wouldn't say.
And they establish a connection because so many people have gone to this school.
So a mile and a half from Apple's Cupertino headquarters is De Anza College, community college that Steve Wozniak, one of Apple's founders, attended from 1969 to 1974.
How many years ago is that?
Wozniak is out there touting Android these days.
No, he's touting the Windows phone.
His favorite phone is still the iPhone, but the Windows phone's about to take over.
He says, not even at Apple anymore.
Because of California's state budget crisis, De Anza College has cut more than 1,000 courses in 8% of its faculties in 2008.
Fine.
What's that got to do with the story on taxes paid by Apple?
Now De Anza faces a budget gap so large that it is confronting a death spiral, according to the school's president, Brian Murphy.
Apple, of course, is not responsible for the state's financial shortfall, which has numerous causes.
Thank you, New York Times.
I should add that Apple's not responsible for whatever's wrong at De Anza College either.
But that's not going to stop the New York Times trying to make readers think it is.
The company's tax policies are seen by officials.
Officials?
He's the president of a community college.
The company's tax.
No, no, I am not.
This has nothing to do with this story could be about a widget maker.
It doesn't matter to me that it's Apple.
I didn't write the story.
I'm not the one that's got the problem here, but it's a teachable moment.
The company's tax policies are seen by officials like Mr. Murphy as symptomatic of why his crisis exists.
Yeah, Apple's success is why this junior college is cutting classes.
Now that makes a whole lot of sense, doesn't it?
I just don't understand it, Mr. Murphy said in an interview.
I'll bet every person at Apple has a connection to De Anza.
I will bet you that not every person does.
There's some 47,000 people at Apple.
Every one of them has what is a connection, seeing it out the window when they drive to work.
Their kids swim in our pool.
Their cousins take classes here.
Well, I bet there's some widows and orphans at Apple, too.
They drive past it every day for Pete's sake, he says.
So, listen, this is ridiculous.
Their kids swim in our pool.
Apple has cousins who take classes here.
Apple employees drive past the school every day for Pete's sake, he says.
It's a quote.
Still, some, including De Anza's president, Mr. Murphy, say that the philanthropy and the job creation from Apple do not offset Apple's and other companies' decisions to circumvent taxes.
So there's nothing Apple can do.
It can be as philanthropic in the way it can hire as many people.
It can make as much money, create great products at affordable prices for people, and that's still not enough for people like the guy that runs the community college.
Because all of that doesn't offset Apple's decision to circumvent taxes.
This guy at this community college is sitting there.
He's an Obama voter.
There's no question.
Obama voters are made up of people who don't care that they're unemployed because they're going to be taken care of.
And they like higher taxes because they know that's how they're going to be supported.
And that's this guy.
To him, higher taxes mean better days for his school.
When it comes time for all of these companies, this is Mr. Murphy, the president of De Anza College.
When it comes time for all these companies, Google and Apple and Facebook and the rest, to pay their fair share, there's a knee-jerk resistance.
They're philosophically anti-tax, and it's decimating the state.
But I'm not complaining, he said.
This is the last line of the story.
I'm not complaining.
We can't afford to upset these guys.
We need every dollar we can get.
What kind of this is Jekyll and Hyde throughout all of this article?
Apples mean, rotten, not paying their fair share.
It's cutting classes.
We're losing students, but I don't want to make them mad.
I'm not complaining.
I need every dollar from them I can get.
I'm assuming the Times quoted the guy acting.
I fully expect Mr. Murphy to say he was misquoted in this.
I would, if it were me.
I just tell you, I would say I was misquoted.
So I fully expect him at some point to say so.
Philosophically anti-tax.
Mr. Murphy, what's decimating your state is a Democrat Party.
What's decimating your state is liberalism, socialism, Marxism.
What is decimating your state is irresponsible spending in Sacramento.
That's what's decimating your state.
Apple is not your problem.
Just like I'm not your problem.
Although I'm sure after today, you think I am.
And I might be.
Okay, to the phones.
Where are we starting?
Samson.
Samson, Springfield, Missouri.
Hey, Samson.
You still have your hair?
And welcome to the program.
Yeah, my hair is pretty long.
Thanks, Rush, for taking my call.
I appreciate it.
Thank you, sir.
I'm a professor at Drury University in Springfield, Missouri.
I'm from Branson, Missouri, but I commute up there.
I teach global awareness, and I hear you talking about academia quite a bit.
I believe.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on.
I need to slow down so I can understand.
Did you say you teach global awareness?
Yes, sir, at Drury University in Springfield, Missouri.
Drury, D-R-U-R-Y?
Yes, sir.
Where Bob Barker went?
Price is the right guy.
Bob who went there?
Bob Barker.
The guy who retired.
Yeah, I don't know who he is.
A big animal rights nut.
What is global awareness?
Well, global awareness is teaching Americans because Americans are pretty much in the lower level of understanding geography and what's going on around them.
Global awareness teaches them about what's going on in the world.
And I teach them: look, give me current events.
This is what's going on in the world.
We talk about topics.
We talk about numbers and statistics, what's going on with war and crime, and how we are going to solve things in humanity, what we can do realistically to solve things.
That can make a difference, right?
Yeah, it's make a difference.
So I'm calling to really tell you a couple things.
We'll lead this to the other.
When I teach my kids something, I say, look, talk about what you're talking about, passionately give a report, but base it on facts.
I believe that academia, if they did listen to you for a three-hour show, the next day they start a Facebook page, every single one of them in academia in the United States, 100% of the professors would agree that you are basing things, your questions on statistics, on numbers.
You're unbiased.
And this is why academia, I believe, 100% would support you.
And maybe they do.
You know.
No, wait a minute.
Now, you may have a view of academia in your own perspective, but you get into most of the institutions of a higher learning, and that's not just me.
Any conservative is by definition ignorant, doesn't know facts, makes them up, lies about them.
If these professors you're talking about took the time to listen to this program, I don't think that my incredible persuasive powers would work at all.
I think they are so indoctrinated and maleducated themselves that they would consider me a radical.
Yes, but you know what?
They have to listen to you.
They should because we are taught to teach objectively and unbiased.
And we tell our students that.
So from telling our students that, we ourselves are objective, you are talking objectively and unbiasedly and with facts.
And this is another thing I want to lead into, Romney.
Romney could beat Obama tomorrow if he stopped doing the speeches he's doing talking about Obama.
Just use facts.
He's not going to beat Obama.
Obama is talking strategy from a Soviet, Soviet-eshave method.
And he's good at it.
The only way Romney's going to beat, and we're talking about statistics and numbers and facts, is to talk about statistics, numbers, and facts and do that from now until the day he gets elected.
That's the only way he's going to defeat him.
And I think academia needs to listen to you.
They need to do that because if they do that survey on Facebook, let's say they create a Facebook page, they will say, look, this helps us improve what we're thinking, our insight.
He might not change our political convictions, but I'll tell you what, you can make a difference in academia.
And I think we need to do a little challenge here.
Well, I wish that were true.
I think we need a thousand more Samsons people like you out there teaching with your philosophies.
I just don't think they exist in as great a number as you do.
What is your challenge?
What is my challenge?
You said you had a challenge for me.
Oh, that we get you and all these academics, create a Facebook page or whatever social network or a webpage you want.
Have a pick a survey and say, listen to a three-hour program of Rush.
And is he objective?
Is he talking truthfully?
Is he talking with genuine concern?
I guarantee you, you're going to get 100% A rating.
That would be a great.
The only thing I would change about that is I think everybody needs to listen, not just the Academy.
But it's a good start with academe.
Boy, you've got, I love your optimism.
It's just these professors start listening to me that would be simple as pie.
You can't disagree with this guy.
But I know that they would.
They're actively teaching courses.
Basically, the only difference between me and a bag of extrament is a bag.
A lot of people are upset that Obama is running around.
What's the word?
I'm having a mental block of this.
Well, not politicizing it.
He's beaten.
Oh, he's spiking the football.
Spiking the football over the death of Obama, Osama bin Laden.
And said he wouldn't do that.
Said he wouldn't do it.
He's out there doing it.
And he's also saying that Romney would not have pulled a trigger.
Folks, let me find something here.
Here we go.
Have you ever heard the name Admiral William McRaven?
The name ring a bell.
Let me read to you a story here from the Washington Post, the Washington Post, a guy named Craig Whitlock, May 4th, 2011, a year ago.
As U.S. helicopters secretly entered Pakistani airspace on Sunday, the Joint Operations Center at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan was under the control of a square-jawed admiral from Texas who had labored for years to find Osama bin Laden's elusive trail.
Vice Admiral William McRaven, one of the most experienced terrorist hunters in the government, had tapped a special unit of Navy SEALs for the mission two months earlier.
A former SEAL himself, McRaven had overseen weeks of intensive training for a covert operation that could cripple al-Qaeda if it worked or strain an already troubled alliance with Pakistan if it went awry.
The search for bin Laden was led by the CIA, which painstakingly pieced together scraps of intel that eventually pointed to a high-walled compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
You know, I've always liked saying Abbatabad.
It just rolls off the tongue.
Abattabad.
Some of those words you like saying.
But when President Obama gave the authorization to invade the site, CIA Director Leon Panetta delegated the raid to McRaven, who had been preparing for such a moment for most of his career.
I wish I could cite my source for you.
I can't.
Sworn to secrecy.
But I'm just going to tell you, they had to go call the president off the golf course and get him in that situation room an hour and a half before the attack, so he was there for the photo op.
And if you'll notice, if you've seen the picture of Obama looking the deer in the headlight eyes at the monitor supposedly at the op taking place, you see a golf shirt under that jacket that they.
Now, it's perfectly understandable.
This kind of stuff happens.
Any president would take credit for it.
I'm the big guy.
I pulled a trigger.
I gave the order, probably so.
But these people go further.
They want you to believe that Obama planned the op, that Obama gave the shoot order.
And Obama may as well have had a remote control on the trigger.
No, he didn't.
But that's what they want you to believe.
I'm positive there was no remote control on the SEAL triggers.
Obama could not push a button and have the SEAL's guns fire.
I want us to believe pretty much the opposite.
Here, grab, well, I have time to get them both.
Maybe I do.
Grab soundbites 4 and 5.
This on Meet the Press yesterday, David Gregory talking to former spokesman Robert Gibbs.
He said, you've seen Senator McCain saying that this over-the-line here, Obama spike in a football, celebrating, talking about how great he was for getting Osama.
Certainly it's not over the line.
Barack Obama is our commander-in-chief.
Ask our intelligence community to find him.
He was brought actionable.
Hell did justice.
See, this is what I mean.
Asked the intelligence community to find him.
So the intelligence community was sitting around doing what?
Playing tiddlywinks?
Trying to find out when the next Secret Service trip to Colombia was?
The intel guys sitting around minding their own business, not doing their jobs.
Obama, what did Gibbs say?
Obama asked our intelligence community to find.
Do you realize that nobody, Bush hadn't even done that?
Do you realize nobody had asked the intelligence community to find bin Laden?
But Obama figured out that's what would have to happen if we were going to get him.
And only Obama knew that we were going to have to find bin Laden.
So he told him to do it.
Here's the rest of what Gibbs said.
He directed the brave men and women in our military to go in and kill Osama bin Laden, which is exactly what they did under extraordinary circumstances.
And Osama bin Laden no longer walks on this planet today because of that brave decision and the brave actions by the men and women in our military.
And quite frankly, Mitt Romney said it was a foolish thing to do a few years ago.
And look, there's a difference in the roles they would play as commander-in-chief, and I certainly think that's fair game.
Right.
And of course, Romney would also tell Medvedev: look, dude, sit tight, wait till I'm re-elected, and then I'll have the flexibility, get rid of our nukes.
You tell Vlad to sit tight and hang on.
Go to Georgia, whatever.
I'll handle this once we get into December.
Now, Romney would have done that too, right?
So Obama told the Intel people, you find bin Laden.
Nobody else had told him that.
And it was a brave decision to finally issue the go order from the golf course, right?
Uh-huh.
Romney wasn't even talking about bin Laden.
In 2007, Romney was addressing Obama's claim that the war in Iraq was just a distraction.
He wasn't talking about the effort to go get bin Laden.
And now Gibbs and Obama are trying to say that Romney was saying that getting Bin Laden was a distraction.
It wasn't.
He was talking about Obama's claim that Iraq was.
▲
Export Selection