RUSH: Well, let's see. We're having anniversaries to commemorate the Oklahoma City bombing, right? Well, I understand that. Were there any anniversary ceremonies for the Waco invasion? Have we had any anniversary ceremonies for the invasion of Waco by Janet Reno and US military tanks 17 years ago? Or did we do it a couple years ago on that 15th anniversary and I missed it. Did we do that? Seventy-six people who died in the Waco fire, including more than 20 children, two pregnant women at the hands of the US military ordered there by Janet Reno and when Clinton was asked about it, (doing Clinton impression) "Well, you know, you gotta go talk to Attorney General Reno about that, 'cause she's the one ordered that. I don't know much about that."
Greetings, folks. It's Rush Limbaugh, this the EIB Network, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Great to be-with you here's the telephone number, 800-282-2882, the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
Let me ask you a question. This is all over the media. This was so predictable. Starting last Wednesday or Thursday into the weekend the media template was established, the narrative was there, Bill Clinton and Obama blaming the tea parties for a future Oklahoma City type bombing, which hasn't happened. Let me ask you a question. What was a more likely cause of the Oklahoma City bombing: talk radio or Bill Clinton and Janet Reno's hands-on management of Waco, the Branch Davidian compound, and maybe to a lesser extent Ruby Ridge. Don't forget that the Oklahoma City bombing occurred two years to the day after the Waco invasion, two years to the day, and Tim McVeigh as much as said so. A survey of tea party people, they don't want any part of Timothy McVeigh, nobody does. No reasonable American does. But President Clinton is now trying to shift blame, all this focus on me and the tea parties and talk radio, let's just tell it and identify it for what it is. Just like they're trying to rewrite the economic history of the 1980s, it is an attempt to rewrite the history of the Oklahoma City bombing and the president's role in it and the administration's role in it.
They know this is about Waco. They know this is about the US military invading a religious compound. Sixty-seven people died in the fire. We remember watching it. Twenty children, Janet Reno said we have to go in there because children are being abused. Yeah, they really got abused by the US government, and this angered some people who didn't quite like this invasion domestically of military power. But Bill Clinton's ties, I mean, he and his buddies in the press, the Obama administration, they can go out there and try to rewrite history and they can try to make Oklahoma City the result of a modern tea party movement which is really what they're trying to do, but President Clinton's ties to the domestic terrorism of Oklahoma City are tangible. Talk radio's ties are nonexistent. We had nothing to do with it. There has never, ever been any -- it's ridiculous to even assert this.
This is another reason why President Clinton will forever blame talk radio. It takes the spotlight off of him and his policies and his administration. Here we have President Obama, a friend of Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist, a proud community agitator, Barack Obama. They will always try to be concerned about protests. But Obama's entire career has been based on agitation. Obama's entire career has been based on protests. What was the Million Man March? Obama was part of it. What was the racial makeup of the Million Man March? Louis Farrakhan was the leader, a Jew hater without peer, Obama a proud attendee. And let's talk about Bill and Hillary for a moment. I'd like to know if they would deny that they participated in numerous protest rallies in their hippie glory days. We know Clinton traveled to Europe to protest, did he not? And one more. Anybody who attended a civil rights march needs to tell us why protesting discrimination (most heavily supported by Democrats) was fine, but protesting the bankrupting of the country and the takeover of the private sector is not fine.
Why can we protest against discrimination, why can we protest against all these other horrible things, the power of the military, but somehow protesting against bankrupting the country, protesting the generational theft that has taken place here in this country, so here's Clinton, okay, time now to shift the blame back to me, back to talk radio, onto the tea parties for the Oklahoma City bombing and future bombings.
You know, I remember Wayne LaPierre was on This Week with David Brinkley one Sunday, and I think it was with Brinkley, it was sometime in the nineties, you remember this? And Wayne LaPierre was the first guest, Wayne LaPierre, the NRA, said, "I think President Clinton is comfortable with a certain level of violence because it allows him to push forays into anti-gun agenda." And I said, "That is dead on right on the money." So here they are now talking about a future event based on words. It wasn't words that ticked off Timothy McVeigh. It was actions taken by the US government, Waco invasion, to a lesser extent, the Ruby Ridge. So they're out now trying to make all of this our fault and talking about an event that hasn't happened. They're predicting it's going to happen and they're going to blame the tea party for it, almost as though it would help 'em if an event occurred. So anybody who attended a civil rights march needs to tell us again why protesting discrimination is fine, but we can't protest bankrupting the country. And by the way, we're not blowing up buildings and we're not throwing bricks through building windows. We are attending peacefully. And a whole bunch of lib reporters are reporting that they actually enjoyed the festive atmosphere at one of these things in Washington.
But who are Obama and Clinton? I mean let's call a spade a spade. Can I say let's call a spade a spade now? You get so sensitive about old just common, everyday phrases. Obama and Clinton are former protesters protesting protesters. I mean that's precisely what's happening here. Obama and Clinton are former protesters protesting protesters. They got their start in politics attending and organizing protest rallies. They know better than anybody how dangerous to those in power protesters can be. They can be the training ground for future presidents. The protest march, these guys know from where they came. Obama and Clinton both, and Hillary too, throw her in there. They're looking at this, "Oh, my God, the next president may be coming out of one of these tea parties unless we do everything we can to discredit this bunch of people."
RUSH: Now, Bill Clinton. (doing Clinton impression) "That's right. Those voices on the radio back in the nineties, they worked up all anti-government fervor, and you know what happened. It's a terrible, terrible thing. But, as Rahm Emanuel said: A crisis is a terrible thing to waste. So we're gonna go out there and we're gonna maximize this the best we can. Everybody knows that we're the ones have tied to protest past but we're going to try to make it look like these people that never protested a day in their life but just now started (chuckling), they're the people blowing up the country! Ha-ha, we're going to get away with it 'cause the media is kissing our butt every damn day because they want to be invited to all our parties. Ha-ha-ha-ha. So we're going to own the issue, Limbaugh. There's no way you can win this no matter what you say."
Fine and dandy. Here's the thing. Let us not forget, Bill Clinton ignored terrorism throughout the nineties. As a result, the country was attacked on 9/11. Debra Burlingame has a great column in the Wall Street Journal today. It's not just 9/11. How about the World Trade Center bombing in '93 on Clinton's watch, the Khobar Towers on Clinton's watch? There were so many acts of terrorism in this country and around the world on Clinton's watch. He didn't care about it. He didn't want to take on hard issues. He loved that 65% approval number. So throughout the nineties, we are the victims of terrorism acts by people Obama will not even call terrorists now. Bill Clinton and Janet Reno didn't just threaten violence at Waco, they delivered it.
As a result, American citizens -- children, women, mothers -- were killed, and what followed was a domestic terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City. President Clinton, who has had a direct and indirect role in so much pain and domestic violence, lectures us about threats and acts of violence? This is what he has written in the New York Times today, a column. (doing Clinton impression) "Fifteen years ago, the line was crossed in Oklahoma City. In the current climate, with so many threats against the president, members of Congress and other public servants, we owe it to the victims of Oklahoma City, and those who survived and responded so bravely, not to cross it again." (paraphrased) "Do you hear what I'm saying, Limbaugh?" It sounds reasonable if you don't know the history of this guy to Juanita Broaddrick in a hotel room in Arkansas: "Ah, just put some ice on that" lip.
President Barack Obama to Jane Sturm, August 9th, 2009: "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery. Just give your mom the pain pill." Barack Obama as quoted by Politico June 14th, 2008: "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun. Because from what I understand, folks in Philadelphia like a good brawl. I've seen Eagles fans. They hit, we hit back twice as hard." Who do you think it was that taught ACORN how to protest? Barack Obama. Has ACORN ever said anything provocative? And from our president's staff: "If you get hit, we'll punch back twice as hard." That's Jim Messina. And the big finish from Clinton, who scolded American people for behaving like thugs before Oklahoma City, and now "Bill Clinton believes the Democratic nominee, far from practicing a unifying, transformational brand of politics, has the political instincts of 'a Chicago thug.'" That was Bill Clinton on Barack Obama in 2008.
RUSH: Yeah, I wonder if President Obama ever heard Reverend Wright say anything provocative from the pulpit of the church in Chicago, such as "G-- damn America! America's chickens have come home to roost," he said seemingly understanding why World Trade Center and the Pentagon were hit on 9/11. We know that Obama did hear Reverend Wright say anything provocative. He said so in his famous historic speech about race where he admitted that he heard Wright say many divisive and outrageous things. "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I am no more disown him than I can disown my white grandmother -- a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. These people are a part of me and they're a part of America, this country that I love."
That's his big, famous race speech back in March of 2008. So if words incite then I'd say Obama has heard plenty of them. One of his good buddies, Bill Ayers, blew up the Pentagon and said his own regret was they "didn't do more." So if President Clinton and Obama want to run around and talk about the power of words to incite behavior and ignore what happened on the ground in Waco, Texas, then I'm sure we can find in their past plenty of people who have had very provocative words for them. Now, this poll, this is from the Pew Center. "Nearly 80% of Americans say they have little faith that the massive federal bureaucracy can solve the nation's ills." The question: "Can you trust Washington?" Do you realize here only 20% of Americans do not agree with me?
Better stated: 20% of Americans are not willing to admit that I'm right. "Eighty percent of Americans say they cannot trust Washington and they have little faith that the massive federal bureaucracy can solve the nation's ills." Are all of these people guilty of sedition? Eighty percent? I wonder what the political elite class thinks of this? I know what they think of it. They're blaming us. They're blaming me. They're blaming talk radio. They're blaming conservative bloggers. They're blaming the entire New Media for creating this circumstance where 80% of the American people lack trust in the government. This poll was released yesterday, and according to the government-run Associated Press, it "illustrates the ominous situation facing President Obama and the Democrat Party as they struggle to maintain their comfortable congressional majorities in this fall's election." Notice that everything is about the Democrats remaining in power.
Oh, my God, 80% don't trust the government! Oh, jeez! What does that mean for Obama's power? What does that mean for the Democrats and their comfortable majorities?
What does it mean to the country, AP?
"Add a toxic environment like this," writes AP, "and lots of incumbent Democrats could be out of work." (crying) Oh-ho-ho, really? "The survey found that just 22% of those questioned say that they can trust Washington almost always or most of the time. Just 19% say that they are basically content with it. Near half say the government negatively affects their daily lives, a sentiment that has grown over the past dozen years." Andrew Kohut: "Trust in government rarely gets this low." He's director of the Pew people. "'Some of it is backlash against Obama but there are a lot of other things going on. ... Politics has poisoned the well.' The survey found that Obama's policies were partly to blame for a rise in distrustful, anti-government views. In his first year in office, the president orchestrated a government takeover of Detroit automakers, secured a $787 billion [porkulus] package and pushed to overhaul the health care system.
"But the poll also identified a combination of factors that contributed to the electorate's hostility: the recession that Obama inherited from President George W. Bush; a dispirited public; and anger with Congress and politicians of all political leanings." (gasping) Yes. "But Matthew Dowd, a top strategist on Bush's re-election campaign who now shuns the GOP label, says both Republicans and Democrats are missing the mark. [He says,] 'What the country wants is a community solution.'" Hey, Matthew, sounds like we have the perfect president for that. Community organizer. "Community solution to the problems but not necessarily federal government action." Whoa. What's the good news here? The good news is: America wants its country back. The bad news is that we're getting close here to every American agreeing with me.
I mean do you realize only 20% don't now? Either way, 80% of America agrees with me -- a dangerous, divisive provocateur, if you listen to President Clinton, President Obama, the State-Controlled Media, and the Democrat Party. I am a dangerous guy, a divisive guy, an agent provocateur. But the poll says that my opinions are shared by 80% of Americans, and Obama's and Clinton's views have been thoroughly rejected. Going back to September 11th, 2008, Obama: "Barack Obama addressed the wide distaste for government -- and the fact that he and John McCain are running against Washington -- at the forum on national service at Columbia University. 'Our campaign from the beginning has been about changing government,' he said, recalling some great accomplishments of American government: Civil rights legislation, the interstate highway system, and the National Park system.
"Obama would, he said, 'transform Washington' and 'make government cool again.'" Yeah? Really? Do you know that with this survey from the Pew Center, trust in government is lower than during the Bush years? Trust in government is lower than during the Bush years. Congressional approval is at a record low, ladies and gentlemen. Yet, 80% of the American people agree with me -- a provocateur, a divisive individual -- and yet the president of unity, the president of love and the falling sea levels. Why hasn't he stopped, by the way, the volcanic ash? How about this? He canceled, ladies and gentlemen? He canceled a trip to Poland for the funeral of the deceased president there and went out and played golf. It's the thirty-second time Obama has played golf. Bush quit after playing 24 times. He thought, "You know, its' just not right, me out there playing golf in the middle of war in Iraq." So Obama happily cuts off the trip, doesn't go over there.
This ash cloud, I just have a thought. They close all these airports like in London, Heathrow and Gatwick. Now, I understand you can't take off going north and east. But what's to stop them from taking off and launching south and west? I have a couple friends over there who can't get back to America. I don't think the cloud... Yeah, there's some talk about hitting the northeastern coast of Canada, but why can't they take off and head west? "Well, Rush, because the whole system is very involved. They gotta get those planes back there, and the whole deal. You can't just say, 'Okay, we're going to launch to the west,' because those airplanes have to eventually get back to take people in the whole myriad spoke of a system." I understand that, but, anyway, they're going to open airspace tomorrow, ostensibly, and the volcano is continuing to erupt. It could go on for six months.
RUSH: Now, let's not forget, folks, the real point of the Pew poll. While we may rejoice in it and while we may take pleasure in it, that's not the reason for the publication of the poll and that's not the result that will be taken by the regime or by the Democrat Party. The point of the Pew poll is to prove that we have become a nation of irrational government haters. That's the point. That's the point. They're not out there saying, "Oh, my gosh, what's government doing wrong?" They're saying, "Look at these people, they have an irrational dislike of the government, and the government's gotta do something to stop this." This will be a call for even bigger government. This is how this all works. Don't frown at me, Snerdley, don't doubt me. Do you think the Pew Center is on our side of things? How many times do we say, "Would anybody in their right mind think that?" No, they're not in their right mind. The regime is not in their right mind. The Democrat Party is not in their right mind. But they have the power right now, and they will have through November.
They're gonna look at this poll and they're gonna confirm everything that they believe. They had Clinton out there saying this weekend, (doing Clinton impression) "See, Limbaugh, you can do all you want, you can say all you want, 80% of the American people think government is going to hell and it's your fault. You've been shouting this BS ever since I was in office, Limbaugh, and you and your buddies now on the right-wing Fox News guarantee it. That's what this all means." That's going to be their take. You know, it isn't hate when the Democrats protest the government. When they're out there trying to publish books on how to assassinate George W. Bush, making movies -- no, no, no, that's literature, that is art, and we must take time to understand the rage that went into these works. So it's a two-sided coin out there.
Debra Burlingame I mentioned. She had a piece, 2008, February 12th. No wonder 80% of Americans don't trust big government. Bill Clinton had to surrender his law license for five years for lying to a federal judge under oath in the Lewinsky case, $90,000 fine, but that's not the big deal. In 1999 Bill Clinton pardoned 16 members of two violent Puerto Rican nationalist organizations, the FALN. "While the pardon scandals that marked Bill and Hillary Clinton's final days in office are remembered as transactions involving cronies, criminals and campaign contributors, the FALN clemencies of 1999 should be remembered in the context of the increasing threat of domestic and transnational terrorism that was ramping up during the Clinton years of alleged peace and prosperity. To wit, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Tokyo subway sarin attack, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the 1995 'Bojinka' conspiracy to hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings, the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, the 1996 Summer Olympics bombing, Osama bin Laden's 1996 and 1998 'Declarations of War' on America, the 1998 East African embassy bombings, the 2000 USS Sullivans bombing attempt, the 2000 USS Cole bombing, and the 2000 Millennium bombing plot.
"It was within that context that the FBI gave its position on the FALN clemencies -- which the White House succeeded in keeping out of news coverage but ultimately failed to suppress -- stating that 'the release of these individuals will psychologically and operationally enhance the ongoing violent and criminal activities of terrorist groups, not only in Puerto Rico, but throughout the world.'" Debra Burlingame writing about the Clintons' terror pardons February 12th, 2008. You know, we don't forget, Mr. President. We have research arms. We have great, great memories. And we, like Ms. Burlingame has just done and I have amplified, all these terrorist acts occurring during your presidency when you didn't do anything about it, and pardoning terrorists. And now all of a sudden starting this past weekend it's our fault that something that hasn't happened is going to happen or might happen, when your administration presided over terrorist act after terrorist act after terrorist act, not that you committed them, except one, Waco. Uh, two, Ruby Ridge. Waco is a biggie.
RUSH: Now, why did they pardon the FALN terrorists? Let's not forget this. They pardoned them to get the Puerto Rican vote for Hillary, who was running for the Senate in New York. They wanted the Puerto Rican vote for Hillary so they pardoned the FALN terrorists. That's why they did it. And speaking of violence and terrorism, let's not forget the Unabomber. The Unabomber, living in a little one-room shack slightly larger than the hut that Obama's brother still lives in, with a copy of Algore's book. The Unabomber had Algore's book, and it was highlighted.
RUSH: So I'm told now that President Clinton's backpedaling a little bit, saying that the Oklahoma City bombing "should have taught us that the words we use matter." Okay, fair enough. Let me ask President Clinton: What words caused Timothy McVeigh to act? Name one. I want to know what words and who spoke them. What are the words that Timothy McVeigh heard? What are the words he admitted that he heard that prompted him to act? All I've ever heard is that Timothy McVeigh was outraged over the government invasion led by Janet Reno of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas -- and the Murrah Building was blown up on that exact date two years later. Somebody show me the words, Mr. President, that McVeigh heard and caused him to act. What's happening here, rightly or wrongly -- I just need to get this out there. Of course it was wrong.
McVeigh was not inspired by anybody's words. He was inspired by Mr. Clinton's deeds, and this is what they're trying to wash over. This is what they are trying to erase from the historical record. You have President Clinton here simply lying about a terrible tragedy, to try to chill free speech -- and libeling me and the tea party at the same time. It does not get more despicable than this, than what President Clinton was trying to do and how he's being aided and abetted by government-run media. You know, I want to know where Obama's speech to conservatives is. Obama is planning a massive outreach. New York Times has the story: Obama massive outreach to the Muslim world, massive outreach to the Muslim community, which is fine. But I want to know where is this outreach and the speech to conservatives?
When you stop and think of Barack Obama or Jeremiah Wright or any of the people who inspired Obama, their whole lives have been anti-government, when you stop and think about it. Obama's certainly has. Obama's whole life is anti-government: ACORN, protest government. Agitate until you run it. Obama's whole life is anti-government until he gets to run it. The country and the government were awful. Slave owning, racist, profiling, genocidal, segregationist maniacs. But no longer, because he's running it now! Every time he says, "Whoa, I'm president in this racist country, even though I have this funny name," he's ripping America. He runs around the world apologizes for the country. So even this talk about the tea parties being anti-American, it's just the exact opposite. The tea parties are not "anti-government." They are pro-founding!
They want to restore the country to its founding principles. They want to go back and have capitalism be the order of the day, economic opportunity and prosperity all over the place. It's the exact opposite. The reality is that it's the Obama crowd that doesn't like government, that doesn't like the country. It's the Obama crowd and all of their related groups that have been protesting for as long as I've been alive that don't like the country. The tea party people love this country, and that's what they're trying to hold onto: The country that they love. This is all about love versus hate, and there's no love on the left. They're trying to make it look like they have all of this love and all of this compassion, whereas we are possessed with all this hate and anger. We are angry, and our anger is valid. The country is being overthrown!
The country is being ripped apart, transformed right before our very eyes -- and in a fraudulent manner. None of this we were told during the presidential campaign. None of it. Had we been told this was to be the course of action, I doubt that Obama would have gotten 30 or 40% of the vote. So who is it that loves and who is it that is angry and who is it that really hates? Who is it that's been protesting government all of their lives? It's the left, is it not, folks? What is it that's remarkable about the tea party is that it's the first time an uprising of common, ordinary, average, everyday citizens since the Civil War has risen up like this. You know, we have things to do. We have jobs to go to, families to raise and all that. We don't have rent-a-mobs. It's always the left that has been agitating, protesting, organizing.
They are the ones that have been shouting, "Down with the government! Down with Nixon! Down with Bush! Down with this!" Not us. So as is always the case, everything is the exact opposite from what it seems to be and how it's being reported. What's motivating the tea party people is the greatness of love. Not hate. That can't be said that the people on the left, unless you want to say the love they have for themselves. But they're out to destroy. They're out to remake. They're out to reshape. They are out to re-form. They are out to take over. They are out to tear down. They're the ones motivated by an anger and a rage that we all were in awe of the last seven or eight years. We've never seen that kind of consistent, focused rage -- where even the efforts of the US military were impugned. Victory was impugned.
Defeat was sought. We hadn't seen that before, not in such a concerted effort with a political party totally behind the protesters. Oh, we'd seen people wanting us to lose wars before with Vietnam. We had never seen a whole political party get behind it as well. So don't any of you tea party people even accept this premise that you're the hater, that you are angry, that you are on the verge of violence. You're not. You're acting because you love the country. You love your community. You love your neighborhood. And you're not going to quietly sit by and watch it all get transformed, particularly when you didn't vote for it. When the people doing this are a minority and they're doing it against the will of the people. We didn't vote on any of this happening. We didn't vote on the government owning banks, the government owning automobile companies. We didn't vote on disarming. We didn't vote on half of the things that Obama's doing, if not more. The true anti-government rhetoric in this country can be found in Jeremiah Wright's church, where Obama admits he sat for 20 years. The true anti-American rhetoric can be found with Father Pfleger and Minister Farrakhan, people that are on Obama's side, people that are on the side of the regime. It's all very simple. They simply, in the press and on the left, are trying to transfer the love to themselves and the hate to you, when it's the exact opposite.