Here's Bob in Rockville Maryland. You're great, next on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. I've listened for decades, called scores of times, and wouldn't you know it? The first time I get through I'm going to mildly disagree with you.
RUSH: What's that about?
CALLER: I do agree with the Limbaugh Rule, and I followed it today when I cast my vote in the Maryland Republican gubernatorial primary.
RUSH: Good for you, sir. Good for you.
CALLER: But I would hope for Republicans who want to see the regime stifled and therefore want the largest possible Senate majority, that legitimate cases can be made for O'Donnell versus Castle without distorting the facts. I agree with you that it's a matter of strategy.
RUSH: Well, what did I get wrong?
CALLER: Well, Castle did not vote for Kucinich's impeachment proposal. What he did vote for -- as did other Republicans including Peter King, for example -- was to refer Kucinich's impeachment proposal to the Judiciary Committee where it died a quiet death. So I would hope... As you said it's getting more and more bitter on all this stuff going on in the Internet, and I think unnecessarily bitter.
RUSH: All I can tell you, he voted for the resolution to investigate Bush for the possibility of impeachment.
RUSH: All right. I see what's happening now. "Rush, you gotta be a little bit more accurate than you are here on Castle. Peter King did the same thing. They voted just to move it to the Judiciary Committee, where it was gonna die. It was called 'moving the ball.'" In early May 2007, Representative Castle attended a meeting organized by Charlie Dent (Republican-Pennsylvania) between several moderate Republicans in the House and President Bush to express their concerns over the war in Iraq. The group warned the president his pursuit of the war in Iraq was risking the future of the Republican Party. He could not count on Republican support for much longer." Castle was already threatening Bush with the withdrawal of Republican support for the war effort.
And Castle voted for the resolution. Now, I said Delaware has only one member of the House, one representative. They've got two Senators but they have one member of the House. I'm just trying to illustrate how small the state is: Some lead, however large, can be overcome. Now, I was also making argument about RINOs. I said earlier here that the problem with RINOs is that they confuse the electorate, and they confuse the electorate over what conservatism is. But RINOs are worse than run-of-the-mill Democrats. A run-of-the-mill Democrat is a run-of-the-mill Democrat, but a Republican-in-name-only, a Republican who votes with Democrats... When you vote for terrible Democrat bills, all of a sudden you get this cover for "bipartisanship," and we all know that bipartisanship means compromising what we believe to go along with Democrats.
That's what a Mike Castle is. That's what RINOs do. They give cover to the whole concept of bipartisanship. We don't need "bipartisanship" right now. Bipartisanship is not on the agenda. It's not part of the recipe to fix what's wrong. The other side is not interested in bipartisanship. I mean, they may be now temporarily because it's election time and they realize they're saddled with a horrible agenda, some of the individual Democrats. Obama's not interested in it, though, and that's all that matters. Now, the Castle vote was to send the impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee. That's the process. That moves the ball. Castle voted to do that. What's the controversy? What is the misrepresentation?
Look, what we're trying to point out here is that for some reason (sigh) a line has been drawn here in this race by the professional Republican so-called conservative Washington establishment. They've lost Bennett, they lost Murkowski, and this is it. They're not going to lose any more of their pros. This is about them. It's not even about Castle, to tell you the truth. It's about Castle protecting them or them protecting themselves by shoring up Castle 'cause O'Donnell's not one of them. Palin's not one of them. I'm not one of 'em! This is very clear for anybody to see. I'll tell you something else: The same people who are telling us that Mike Castle is "electable" and Christine O'Donnell isn't, are the same people that insist that only McCain could win in 2008.
Same people. Same thinking. The same modus operandi. "Mike Castle. He's the only one that can win. McCain. He's the only one that can win, Rush. Romney can't win. Huckabee can't win. No, McCain's the only one has a possibility of winning. That's why you have to support McCain." Well, we see how flawed that was. Now, let me grab a quick phone call here, quick. People have been on hold waiting for quite a while. You know, Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey? "Arlen Specter, he's the only Republican that can win, Rush. It's a blue state, Arlen Specter, he's the only one that can win, Rush." Yeah, to win he had to become a Democrat. That's what Castle ought to do.
RUSH: Well, this is all so predictable, but I'm going to stick with it. People say, "Rush, you gotta be careful. That caller was right, that caller was right, you're a little bit off target here on Castle and impeachment. He didn't vote for impeachment." I didn't say he did. I said he voted for a resolution written by Democrats to move it to the Judiciary Committee. "But, Rush, but, Rush, but, Rush, you don't understand, that's how they killed it, everybody knew they were going to kill it." Okay, fine. Let's walk through this 'cause I don't want to get sidetracked here over what we really should be talking about. We can understand why Peter King of Long Island, some conservatives might attempt a strategery in that impeachment resolution to kill it in committee. We can understand that. But why is it assumed that that was Castle's strategy? Castle had joined a bunch of moderate Republicans to go up to the White House and threatened Bush over this. Why is it assumed that Castle, given his statement that he and fellow RINOs went up to warn Bush that he jeopardized the Republican Party over this, why is it automatically assumed that Castle had the same objective to kill the resolution? I mean how do we assume this? You know, all the Democrats voted to kill the resolution, too? What was the purpose of this?
Now, we know that Kucinich came up with the resolution. He was running for president so he wants to appease his base and the wacko fringe wants to impeach Bush, so here comes little Kucinich and he comes up with his resolution. Fine. Once that happens, a bunch of Democrats have to get on board and then secretly hope the thing gets killed. So some Republicans said, "Okay, here's how we'll get on board, we'll kill it," Peter King and these guys, but we're assuming that Castle was one of the people who was employing the same strategy of wanting to kill it when his statement to Bush going to the White House, warning Bush, "The future of the Republican Party is at stake, Mr. President, if you're doing this." You know, Ron Paul voted for it, too. Ron Paul voted for this resolution. Why is this just coming out now? All these people who have been studying this race, Christine O'Donnell versus Mike Castle, when they're looking at Christine O'Donnell's personal matters, suing a think tank and she had problems with the IRS, how come they didn't think to mention this Castle vote on sending the impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee in the House? I'm sure Castle would distance himself from it today if somebody goes up to him, "Did you really intend --" "Of course not. Why, I didn't want to impeach the president, I knew what was going to --" of course he would do that, but what about at the time?
What was his motivation at the time? We know by virtue of his vote, he votes for cap and trade. And we know he's a RINO. Why is it that over 160 Republicans voted against it? You can talk about all those Republicans that voted for the resolution, but 160 Republicans voted against it. Castle happens to be one of the few who voted for it. We are to believe here that Castle was standing up for Bush? He was standing with the conservatives in some grand strategy here to head off impeachment after he had met with other moderates and threatened Bush about the war? Where's the proof of this? My only point in bringing this up is we're making all these allegations about how rotten, stinking incompetent, dishonest Christine O'Donnell is, and we put angel wings on Mike Castle. Well, we haven't, but the professional Republican establishment people have. They put angel wings on him. Castle not only voted for cap and trade, he promised Harry Reid he'll vote for cap and trade once he's elected to the Senate. Folks, that's the next great encroachment on our freedom after health care. That's like a VAT tax on every carbon granule of energy expended. He promised Dingy Harry he'll vote for cap and trade once he's elected to the Senate. This is the guy that professional Republicans say has got to win if we have any choice, if we have any hope of being the majority in the Senate. He's already promised Harry Reid, who may not even be there himself? So Mike Castle is already striking deals with Harry Reid instead of working with another Republican trying to defeat Harry Reid. And who is it we're supporting here? Not we, but the professional establishment.