Rush Limbaugh Program - August 23, 2012, Thursday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 23, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program

37:35

August 23, 2012, Thursday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The views express meta host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time as we are having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
	I am Rush Limbaugh doing what I was born to do.
	And you are too.
	I was born to host, you were born to listen, and we're here together 800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.
	The email address Lrushbow at EIBNet.com.
	Latest data on Tropical Storm Isaac.
	As of 11 a.m. from the National Hurricane Center, here are the actual percentage probabilities.
	It's nothing to do with the track.
	Well, it does, but I'm not getting the information from the track.
	If you dig deep at the National Hurricane Center's website, you go beyond the track, you can find some interesting stuff.
	And right now there is a 24% probability that Tampa, Florida on Tuesday, will experience winds of 34 knots.
	That's a tropical depression.
	There is a 6% possibility that Tampa would experience tropical storm winds.
	50 knots.
	Now, 50 knots is 57 miles an hour.
	Give you an idea.
	One percent probability that Tampa will face hurricane winds on Tuesday at uh at noon.
	So well, 8 a.m.
	So we're looking here at uh 65 knots is hurricane, 74 miles an hour.
	1% chance of that, according to the National Hurricane Center, a 6% chance of tropical storm winds and a 24% probability of um tropical depression.
	Now, the the the numbers increase a little as you get into Tuesday night and uh and into Wednesday.
	Now I don't know on what basis the powers that be in Tampa will decide whether or not they should cancel a convention, postpone it, delay it, compress it, or uh or what have you.
	But those are the actual percentage probabilities as announced by the National Hurricane Center as of 11 a.m.
	Eastern.
	From Paul Bedard at the Washington Examiner.
	He used to be at U.S. News and World Report.
	Younger voters angry with the lack of jobs and a stalled economy that has cut their entertainment budget and forced many to live with mom and dad are expected to flock to the polls in even greater numbers than four years ago.
	While 51% of millennials between the age of 18 and 29 voted in 2008, 76% plan to vote this fall.
	This is according to a new poll from the influential group Generation Opportunity.
	Now, that's a 50% increase in the number of people in that demo who voted for hope and change in 2008.
	Now I know you're asking, well, whoa, okay, but Rush, who does a poll say they're gonna vote for?
	Oh, they didn't ask that.
	They didn't.
	Says right here, while the group did not ask the younger voters who they prefer in the presidential race, they are nevertheless inspired and and uh clearly driven by anger over the economy and the fact that they might not have lives as good as their parents.
	The poll of 1,003 adults aged 18 to 29 conducted at the end of July, and it has a margin of error plus or minus 3.1%.
	How in the world do you go out and conduct a poll like this and not ask them for whom they're gonna vote?
	So we're left to assume.
	So if you get if you get news that adults between 18 and 29 are really ticked off.
	They have to live home with mom and dad.
	Their entertainment budget has been cut because the economy's so bad that they're now gonna vote in a 50% increase in numbers.
	Would you think that that means they're gonna vote for the status quo?
	I wouldn't, but they didn't ask.
	And of course, we're talking about 18 to 29-year-olds.
	We don't know in this particular group what they know, what they've been taught, what their education is.
	So it's it's this is one of these things.
	If you get a story that all these young people are really ticked off at the economy, lack of jobs, and uh pared down entertainment, but it's important to throw that in there.
	Pared down entertainment budget.
	Then you would think they want to change.
	Change from what?
	Do they still blame Bush?
	Do these 18 to 29 year olds still think the problems that we're having because of Bush and poor old Obama?
	He's done everything he can.
	But yeah, let's vote for the guy in office now while it's so bad.
	But they didn't ask.
	At a fundraiser last night in New York City featuring former basketball players...
	Obama told the crowd we're in the fourth quarter.
	We're up by a few points, but the other side is coming on strong, and they play a little dirty.
	That reminded me of Jeremiah Wright when he told a congregation at Obama's church describing Bill Clinton.
	You remember what he said?
	He was riding dirty.
	Our buddy Bill was riding dirty.
	Hey!
	But nevertheless, Obama admits that Romney's coming on strong.
	That's that's an amazing admission.
	You don't I don't recall incumbent presidents acknowledging their opposition in such fashion.
	Very rarely do you even acknowledge the opposition.
	And here's Obama saying he's coming on strong, and he is.
	And the Gallup poll has Romney up now by two.
	It's been this way for five or six days, including Aiken now.
	Latest Gallup tracking includes Aiken, and Romney's up over Obama.
	And in the swing states, it's tightening up in these polls.
	In a lot of them.
	There's some nervousness out there on the left, some nervousness in the media, some nervousness in the regime.
	But it's kind of funny to hear Obama talk about Romney playing dirty after the campaign Obama has run.
	By the way, one of the people.
	No, before I tell you that, let me remind you of this.
	Obama said at this fundraiser last night, it's very rare that I come to an event where I'm like the fifth or sixth most interesting person.
	Now Obama does not have an accomplished sense of humor.
	He's not known as a jokester.
	Obama doesn't know really how to make people laugh.
	He doesn't have comedic timing.
	He's too narcissistic to think there's anything about him that's funny.
	Thinking of himself as humorous is uh is a self-put down.
	So he actually said to these people, it's very rare that I come to an event where I'm like the fifth or sixth most interesting person.
	One of the NBA heroes that appeared with Obama last night was Carmelo Anthony of the uh of the New York Knicks, formerly of the uh Denver Nuggets.
	Now, Carmelo Anthony is featured in a DVD circulating in his hometown of Baltimore.
	Stop snitching is the name of the DVD, and it shows drug dealers talking about the terrible things that happen to people who cooperate with the police.
	Carmelo Anthony of the New York Knicks with a DVD called Stop Snitching.
	He's appearing there with Obama, and the DVD tells drug dealers what happens to them if they talk to the cops, if they cooperate with the police.
	One of the men on the DVD goes on to tell how he would take care of snitches by putting a hole in their head.
	Obama's appearing with a guy who is one of the sponsors of this DVD.
	I didn't know this till I read this story.
	I don't keep up with the NBA anymore.
	There was a time I used to.
	But I don't keep up with it anymore.
	But apparently these are the kind of people that Obama and his campaign considers to be heroes.
	Yeah, don't snitch to the cops.
	Let me tell you what happened.
	You snitch to the cops, you participate, you cooperate, you end up with a hole in your head.
	A video being circulated in Baltimore, Carmelo Anthony, part of it, appearing there with Obama.
	And Obama's saying it's very rare that he goes anywhere where he's like the fifth or sixth most interesting person.
	No, no, it here's the story.
	This is a it's a uh not sure.
	Daniel Halper wrote it.
	This evening in New York City, President Obama will be fundraising with NBA heroes, according to his spokesman.
	The heroes include Michael Jordan, Patrick Ewing, Alonzo Morning, and perhaps most interestingly Carmelo Anthony.
	Anthony helped make the pro-drugs YouTube video, Snop Snitching.
	The pro-drugs YouTube video called Stop Snitchin'.
	This thing says Denver Nugget Star, but he's with the Knicks now.
	Carmelo Anthony featured in an underground DVD circulating in his hometown of Baltimore.
	The DVD called Stop Snitching.
	It shows alleged drug dealers talking about what happens to people who cooperate with the police.
	Anthony is standing next to one of them.
	He's also seen on the DVD talking about his Olympic bronze medal and saying he threw it in a lake.
	The man he stands next to later goes on to tell how he would take care of snitches by putting a hole in their head.
	Now, to be clear, Carmelo Anthony doesn't appear to be taking part in that portion of the discussion, but it's on the DVD.
	These are Obama's heroes.
	These are who he's hanging with.
	Here's something I you know, I know that Washington's an incestuous place.
	I know they're all married to each other.
	And I know that they go through revolving doors from journalism to media to back to the Supreme Court to wherever they end up.
	I did not know that Martha Raditz of ABC News was married to the FCC Commissioner Jules Jenikowski.
	I did not know.
	I know Chuck Todd's married to some Obama or Democrat consultant.
	I know that that what's his name?
	David Gregory is married to some babe that works at Fannie Mae.
	I know that Angrier Mitchell is married to uh uh what's his face, Alan Greenspan.
	And I know that the I know the incestuous nature of the place.
	They're all married to each other.
	But I didn't know that, and it's a story here in the Daily Caller, the moderator of the lone October vice presidential debate previously married to a top Obama official.
	An association, both ABC News and the Commission on Presidential Debates do not view as a conflict of info.
	How could it be?
	How could it be a conflict of if you are in the dominant liberal culture of Washington and you have a former Obama, a top Obama official, married to a debate moderator, where could there be a conflict?
	ABC senior foreign correspondent Martha Raditz, whose role as moderator was announced on August 13th, was previously married to the FCC chairman Julius Jenikowski.
	And Obama appointee Jenikowski And Raditz are married in 1991, the same year he graduated from Harvard Law.
	The marriage ended 1997.
	They have a son together.
	Raditz doesn't report on the FCC for ABC.
	Oh, oh, that would be a conflict.
	So they that that's good.
	ABC makes sure that she doesn't report on the FCC.
	So we can trust, folks, that there's no conflict there.
	Jennikowski and classmate Barack Hussein Obama worked together on the Harvard Law Review.
	Janikowski as the notes editor and Obama as the publications president.
	They graduated in the same class.
	My gosh, we found somebody actually went to school with Obama here.
	It's Harvard, not Columbia.
	And not Occidental, but Harvard, Jules Jenikowski.
	ABC didn't consider the disclosure of Raditz's ties to Obama appointee necessary when it issued a press release announcing that the Commission on Debates and selected her to moderate the VP debate.
	Of course not.
	Why would that matter to anybody?
	Why would it matter she used to be married to an Obama top advisor?
	She's a moderating the vice president.
	And everybody knows she's there to help destroy Ryan, so what possible conflict could there be?
	You know who the Commission on Presidential Debates co-chairman is?
	Mike McCurry, the former press secretary for Clinton.
	Commission on Presidential Debates co-chair Mike McCurry said his organization didn't take Raditz's prior marriage into account when selecting her.
	So we selected the moderators based on their reputations for integrity and journalistic impartiality, among other things.
	What counts is the quality of their work, not who they may have been married to in the past.
	Commission board chairman or board member uh FCC Commission board member Newton Minnow, who was FCC chairman under President Kennedy, was an early and prominent supporter of Obama's 2008 campaign.
	And well, there's a there's a there's a tie here.
	So uh that's too long to point it out.
	It's just it's another example of incestuousness from the FCC and Democrats to Obama to debate moderators.
	Oh, here it is.
	Here it is.
	Martha Minnow was recently, she's the dean of Harvard Law, was recently on Obama's shortlist for Supreme Court nomination.
	And Obama nominated Minnow's other daughter, Mary in 2010 to serve on the National Museum and Library Services Board, and these two babes' father was Newton Minnow, FCC guy back in 61, JFK, and is an emeritus type guy at the FCC.
	So it's there's not a Republican to be found anywhere in this entire arrangement.
	Nowhere.
	I gotta take a break, folks.
	Your telephone calls are coming next.
	And as promised back to the phones, Vinny in Brooklyn.
	Great to have you on the EIB network.
	Hello, sir.
	The great one.
	So good to uh listen to you again.
	Thank you, Vinny.
	You know, I'm I'm a bit despondent uh over what's going on, uh, but I can't help but think uh just like uh just like Tigers eat their own, eat their young, uh we of the GOP are exactly the same.
	And we've given the Democrats, in my opinion, license to run with these kind of Aiken stories over and over and over again because I mean we beat down the door to to throw our own under the bus.
	And it's it's I know you said this a few days ago, and I tried to get through then to you know applaud your sentiment, but I am I am so despondent over over what this man in Missouri You know, the stance he's taken now and how the Democrats just gonna run with this all the way to November 6th, over and over.
	You know, Sandra Fluck, I believe, is speaking at the uh at the DNC now uh at their convention, if I'm not sure.
	Well, well, no, no, no, no, that can't be.
	She she she's just a college student.
	Uh she'd not uh you can't uh they only have Democrat operatives speak at the convention.
	Well, um you know Rush uh and I'll say one more thing and um I was talking to this with this Sabot uh about this uh I really believe our biggest enemy is not Barack Obama our biggest enemy is the mainstream media and Romney and uh and and the GOP must learn to speak above and beyond the media like uh like Ronald Reagan did so successfully otherwise Barack Obama could never get away with what he's
	getting away with and they could never get away with the with with the things that they get away with on a daily basis we must learn to overcome the media bias because that is what will undo us in the end not Barack Obama and I I really feel strongly about that.
	Yeah, a lot of people do.
	A lot of people agree with you.
	And nobody has the answer for it.
	The only answer anybody has is what you said, Reagan.
	And how often do you get people like that?
	Well, we have you.
	And Lord knows you do it every day.
	But I guess what I'm saying is we need our candidate to come out.
	And again, this is a big point of contention with some people.
	I really think Romney should come out and literally condemn certain people by name.
	I mean, I've never seen that, basically.
	I've got 10 seconds.
	Condemn who?
	Well, when you have CNN, that's just running the Todd Akin story day after day after day.
	Okay, hang on, hang on, hang on.
	I still don't.
	Don't go away.
	Okay, we're back with Vinny in Brooklyn.
	Now, Vinny, you're either all over the board because of your despondency or I am depressed and miserable and therefore unable to understand what you're talking about.
	You started out by saying that you're ticked off that we eat our own then you sound like you want Aiken to be thrown to the wolves.
	Now you want Romney to condemn people by name who this is after you were you were properly pointing out how the media is an obstacle by the way that's not going to change.
	Why there's there's the media isn't going to change and there's only been one Reagan in my lifetime has the skill to go above and beyond them.
	So who do you want Romney condemn to condemn?
	Well, you know, excuse me for sounding so frustrated, but that's what I am.
	I'm just frustrated.
	I mean, I just noticed how the Democrats, you know, en masse, move to condemn whoever they're out to condemn as an entire party.
	Meanwhile, we, you know, maybe we ought to do that.
	Maybe when someone like Chuck Todd misreports about something and paints a conservative into a monster that he's not, you know, maybe it's time for not just Romney, but the leadership to speak up and say, wait a minute, we're just not going to grant interviews to someone like Chuck.
	Todd if he's not going to report things honestly and I guess that's what I'm trying to say.
	Okay so you want Romney you want Romney to condemn Chuck Todd.
	You want Romney and Ryan to say the hell with your debates we're not showing up for the stack deck no no no no no I'm I'm just using Chuck Todd as an example.
	I'm just trying to say is we don't effectually fight back.
	You know I agree with everything you said the other day I I felt just like you did.
	I didn't necessarily feel it was my place to throw Aiken to the wolves but at the same time he should have done the right thing and stepped down for the bigger picture.
	Are we together on this?
	Yep so far.
	Okay.
	All I was trying to comment on is what you echoed.
	Okay, nothing different, all right?
	We are so quick to throw our own to the wolves, and the Democrats see that.
	And, you know, they pounce on this because they know.
	Okay, let's examine.
	Let's take that one and let's talk about that.
	I'll ask your opinion, your theory.
	Why is it?
	Now, let's use the Aiken example.
	Aiken comes out and says, you know what?
	In a case of legitimate rape, yeah.
	But illegitimate rape, a woman's body shuts down in their then uh pregnancy is such uh little frequently occurs that uh and everybody has a cow everybody on the Republican side try gets in a race to the cameras and a race to the microphones to denounce the guy, throw him overboard, get the hell out of the party.
	Who do you think you are, you dumb idiot?
	Oh lordy, why do you think they do that, Vinny?
	What is it that drives them to do it?
	I think they're afraid of the media.
	Oh, right.
	Your exact there it's a combination of a desire to be politically correct and afraid of the media.
	I think in this case, there was also an an element of genuine truth in it.
	Oh no, this guy's gotta go.
	There was no question that that but at the same time.
	See what what bothers me, the thing, you know, you're since you're gonna talk about how you're despondent.
	Can I tell you what bothers me more than anything in the world?
	Sure, I know I'm gonna get it here, but no, no, it's not about what bothers me, I I I can't I have to be so careful saying this too, but I just uh when when you make every decision in your life,
	or when you allow your happiness, your self-worth to be determined by what you think other people think of you.
	You're finished.
	You are dead.
	You don't have the guts to be who you are.
	You are grabbing people all kinds of power, and I think that that's one of the reasons why there was a mad dash for these massive calls for Aiken to go on our side because I in Washington, is I think the liberals so dominate that place that the conservatives who live there want their respect,
	they want to get along, they don't want to be thought of as extreme wacko conservatives, so this guy pipes up and sends chills down there.
	Oh my God, this guy just confirmed what they think that we're all like this.
	Oh my so they run to the microphones, their primary objective was to tell everybody, particularly the liberal media, hey, I don't agree with this guy.
	That's don't don't confuse me with this guy.
	And I think there was also, as I say, there was also an element of of genuine this guy's gotta go.
	Uh I I I think there are a lot of factors here that that uh deserve some weight in terms of explaining why people do, but overall, throw the don't use the Aiken thing.
	It's still, it still happens.
	We still have people who are uh i in out in our media, in our party, who are obsessed that the liberals not think of them as they to think of uh all conservatives, for example.
	And I I I it it grates on me, it bothers me.
	I I it it's I know it's hard because everybody wants to be loved, and everybody wants to be respected, and everybody wants to be highly thought of.
	Uh and so here any any time uh massive bunch of criticism hits, a lot of most people wilt because they don't know how to deal with it, don't want to deal with it, don't don't care to understand why it's happening, uh just don't want it to happen anymore.
	In fact, can I can I say one more thing to you?
	Okay.
	Just one more thing to you.
	You know, uh then we need to just think in an of an effective way to answer our critics because no matter what we do, who we throw to the wolves, we're not gonna be light, we're never gonna be light.
	Okay, and we just sit there and we keep saying, but look, but look, Vinny room to the world.
	I stop you because now I mean it's not gonna work.
	You stepped in it again.
	You stepped in it again as far as I'm concerned.
	When you said we have to find an effective way to answer our critics, let me ask you what I mean, fight, fight.
	When I say answer, I mean fight, fight back.
	Okay, what is your objective in answering the critics?
	What do you hope not?
	Really think about this.
	Take it as far out as you can think.
	I mean don't go beyond the the knee jerk and visceral here.
	What do you want to happen as a result of fighting back Or answering the critics.
	I just want people to be judged evenly.
	I uh meaning don't have this double standard is so prevalent and it's so obvious that we just it's so frustrating day in and day out.
	I mean, you you brought up all those great examples.
	Uh, what's his name from Florida in 2006?
	Uh thrown to the wolves right away.
	Uh the uh member from the House from Florida.
	I'm um his name from having a member of the city.
	Mark Foley.
	Mark Foley.
	So when you bring that up, are you are you saying that you would have preferred the Republicans circle the wagons around the guy uh and not let the Democrats get away with smearing him and the party?
	In that in that instance, yeah, because it didn't do us any good anyway.
	And we we we threw another one of our own under the bus.
	And and where did it get us?
	It gets us nowhere, it doesn't get us liked in Washington, and you know as well as I do, we're never going to be liked or accepted in the beltway because it is a liberal town, and and that's that.
	We're hated there, and we're really not of it.
	And for those of us on our side, uh part of the establishment, well, we're trying to get rid of them too.
	Hey, let me say the first ones that did run for the let me answer this personally.
	I I'm gonna answer the question I asked you.
	And I'm gonna I'll use my own personal examples in trying to explain this.
	When this program started in 1988, everybody who knew me thought that I was okay.
	I mean, nobody hated me that I knew of.
	And they certainly, people who knew me, did not think that I hated people or what whatever.
	The ways that I was being described, starting in 1988, simply because I was a concern.
	Racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, all of those things.
	Nobody who knew me knew any of that to be true.
	It wasn't true, but yet here it came.
	Now I can sit here and tell you, after 24 years of this, you know, I I started radio in in uh 1967.
	I was 16.
	I've always wanted to be a guy on the radio.
	Now look.
	With 30% of the people in this country, my reputation is mud, it's dirt forever.
	Simply because of what you just the media, simply because of lies, distortions, untruths that have been said about me.
	My reputation is destroyed, and not through anything that I did.
	It's just the reality.
	So in the in the ensuing four years in 88, when this character assassination started, I was totally unprepared for it.
	Nothing like it had happened in my success track in Sacramento.
	So I didn't, I didn't know how to deal with it.
	And it was nobody I was with that knew how to deal with it.
	Nobody to give me advice.
	I just I uh I and I had every bit of advice you can imagine, which I've mentioned before.
	Some said you can't let that go, you gotta respond to that.
	You gotta fight back.
	You gotta re you gotta you gotta react to your critics.
	Others don't dare do it.
	If you react, they're just gonna think that you ups they they upset you, which is what they want to do, and they're gonna keep going.
	And the guy said, You gotta learn to understand they're only doing this because you're a threat, you're effective.
	So then I had to learn, and this is tough.
	I defy anybody to go out and do this.
	I had to learn to take being hated as a sign of success.
	Now, who grows up wanting that?
	Who in the world is raised to be hated, other than maybe these despots that have lived in I don't think anybody is raised or wants to grow up to be hated, and certainly to have that be defined as part of your success.
	But let me tell you when my real awakening occurred, and this cuts to the nub of this is the question I was asking you.
	Take this out.
	When I said, what do you hope to achieve with whatever you want Romney to do or Ryan to do or anybody else to do whenever this criticism comes?
	This unfair lying sack of you know what criticism, all of this all this stuff that's told about us not.
	What do you want to happen?
	The truthful answer is that you want it to stop.
	The truth went, you want the media To stop.
	You want somebody to come along and make them stop it.
	You want a teacher, you want a principal, you want a referee, you want somebody to come along and make it stop.
	And then the awakening occurs when you realize you can't.
	There is not a thing you can do to stop it.
	There's not a thing you can do to change it.
	Not other than join them.
	Other than totally cave, other than totally sell out.
	That's the only way you can stop it, is to join them.
	Now, if you don't choose that option, then you're stuck with it.
	There's nothing, it's the way it is.
	It's the lay of the land.
	You can't change it.
	You can't stop it.
	The media isn't going to change.
	There's not a one of us alive.
	There's not a single person alive that can make them stop it and be fair.
	There's not a single person alive who can make them change.
	So then what becomes the objective?
	The only thing left to do is beat them.
	Which we can do by being who we are.
	And by being unafraid to be who we are.
	But if we're going to constantly be at the end of everything afraid of who we are, or if we're going to end up being afraid of what they say we are, if we're going to be afraid and defensive as to how they talk about us and what they accuse us of being, then they're forever going to win.
	Because our objective is forever going to be flawed.
	It is going to be to try to change them.
	One of the best pieces of advice I ever got, I'd been doing interviews starting in 1988.
	And I honestly thought that when I was being asked on the Today Show or wherever, that a journalist was seriously interested in what I thought.
	And I thought, okay, I got a chance to really square them away.
	I got a chance to show them where they're wrong.
	That's not what they're interested in.
	You can't correct them.
	There is, I could spend 10 years with Chuck Todd and not change his worldview.
	It isn't going to happen.
	And so you learn that you do these interviews for an expressly different purpose.
	You get your message out no matter what they say.
	Anyway, I'm a little long here.
	I've got to take a break.
	The fact of the matter is there's just certain realities that you have to accept.
	And being despondent over unfairness is something we're gonna have to get over here.
	It's been 25 years, and I still hear people upset about it.
	I'll continue this, but I've got to take a brief time out of Vinny.
	Thanks for the call.
	Don't go away, folks.
	And greetings, welcome back.
	Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it pair.
	Now, all of that having been said, back to Aiken here for just now, Aiken, that that situation's a huge problem.
	You can be if you can be upset at at members of the Republican Party or the conservative movement who um who joined in unison to denounce Aiken and to suggest or ask or demand whatever they did that he get out of the race.
	But by the same token, we have no obligation to support people who don't deserve it.
	And you don't deserve support just because you say you're conservative.
	You don't deserve support just because you got an R beside your name.
	And you people know that.
	We support people who are also fighting the good fight.
	You talk about what do you want to happen?
	You sit around and you and you uh you cite the unfairness or the lack of uh of balance or what happened to the media seems to be a lot of people's focal point.
	What we really want to happen, and of course, by the way, it differs from some people are totally obsessed with being liked, and so they will say, and I'm talking about on our side in the media, wherever, in but they want to be liked, and so they'll say whatever they think they have to say to be liked.
	They'll criticize whoever they think they have to be criticized or be to be critical of in order to be liked.
	Others of us want to win.
	Others of us want to try to persuade as many people.
	Doesn't matter whether you like me or not, but if you love this country the way we do, you have got to see it our way, and that's our objective.
	Our objective is to sway and and mobilize public opinion in our favor.
	We're in the arena of ideas.
	We're competing in an unfair stacked deck.
	It's the way it is, and we can't change it.
	Individually, or is that we can't, all we can do is defeat it.
	And it can be done.
	We do it quite frequently, actually.
	Now I learned long ago to give up on this notion of being loved.
	I've become accustomed to being hated.
	It's just that that's I had to.
	I it's a sign of success.
	I've had to define it that way.
	But with Aiken, I mean, we we we do not have to support people who are not fighting a good fight like we are, who put themselves above it.
	You can't generalize.
	This is a specific case.
	What we're after is persuading as many people as possible in the arena of ideas to agree with us so that we advance our objectives, which are honorable, forthright, and worth it.
	Sit tight, my friends.
	The fastest three hours in media isn't finished with yet.
	It's not over.

▲