RUSH: All right, folks. Let me cut to the chase. I’m just going to cut straight to the chase. Here is all you have to know about the president’s Supreme Court nomination. I have a quote here for you from Dingy Harry, who is the Senate Democratic leader. “Isn’t it interesting how the subject has changed from the White House administrative staff to the court today, isn’t it? It’s interesting there has been no question here about a CIA operative being outed.”
Greetings, my friends, and welcome. It is the award winning, thrill packed, increasingly popular Rush Limbaugh program, and we here in the midst of continued growth on our radio program and the website as well, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. I have the Dittocam on. It will be on for all three hours of the program today barring some unforeseen circumstance, such circumstances yet to occur. The telephone number is 800-282-2882. The e-mail address Rush@EIBnet.com. Now, let me understand this. We went through three years of filibusters of appellate court nominees and we have the Democrats threatening to shut down the Senate, “Nothing else is going get done until the president started picking the right people for the appellate courts.” We had a gang of 14 that got together, and they came up with that deal. It eventuated in three of the president’s nominees being confirmed with this deal that only extraordinary circumstances can occur to at least a trigger of filibuster. So, for all this, I guess for three years of the Bush administration, the most important thing in the world was the court. The most important thing in the world was court nominations, be they appellate court, or now the Supreme Court nomination. And here is Harry Reid… What is Harry Reid upset about? Harry Reid is upset that Karl Rove isn’t on the front page today.
Harry Reid actually accused the White House of doing this to change the subject. He wagged his finger at reporters and he said, “Isn’t it interesting there has been no question here about a CIA operative being outed?” Now, if Dingy Harry is going to take the day of President Bush’s first Supreme Court nomination and use it to complain that Karl Rove is no longer on the front pages, I’m just telling you, folks, that will give you all you need to know about this. And I’ll tell you what I sensed last night, and it’s hard to predict these kinds of things, too. It’s just very difficult. But the moment that there was a name, a confirmed name, when was it last night, about 7, 7:30 last night? When there was a confirmed name, a change came over me — and, I know a change came over the Democrats, and I know a realization hit them, and basically the realization is this: Reality! Reality set in last night. The President of the United States is the President of the United States, and the President of the United States won two elections and the President of the United States gets to name nominees to the Supreme Court. Senators, no matter how pompous, no matter how arrogant, or merely one out of a body of 100, some of them get on television all of the time but they only get one out of 100 votes. What the realization that swept over me last night was — remember when I predicted to you, I think, actually I did predict this. I just forgot that I predicted it. I predict so much and I’m almost always right. I can’t remember all of the predictions, but I do actually remember I made this. That when we get a Supreme Court nominee, whether confirmed or not, that is when reality is going to set in that these guys in the Democratic Party realize that they have lost.
Not only have they lost, folks, but if you look at the predictable responses from the usual suspects, People for the American Way, Ted Kennedy, they are saying about Roberts everything they were saying during the day about Edith Clement. But even if they hadn’t been boxed in that way — and more on that as the program unfolds today — what is also apparent to me is that their old playbook is now almost irrelevant. The way that they are going to go after this guy is pretty much the same that they have gone after everybody else. Don’t for a minute be fooled by this notion that you’re hearing from a lot of Democrats, “Oh, this guy is smart. This guy is brilliant! Oooh! The president made a great pick.” You don’t know who these people are. There will be some last minute discovery going into the confirmation hearings, somebody will dig something out somewhere, make something up, whatever. But it isn’t going to work. The American people don’t fall anymore for the notion that a judge in the Supreme Court is going to roll back civil rights. Ted Kennedy cannot say about this guy what he said about Bork. He couldn’t say what he said about Bork today and get away with it. It doesn’t work. They may try “pubic hair on a Coke can” again with this guy but they won’t be able to do that. That is what they tried with Anita Hill. It isn’t going to work. The American people are more sophisticated and more informed. And, remember, this is the first Supreme Court nomination to occur within the 24/7 news cycle. This is the first Supreme Court nomination to occur within the 24/7 news cycle. That is how long it has been and as such, in that period of time, as we talk about constantly on the program here, you become more sophisticated. All of the American people have to pay attention to these things, you become more educated and informed, and if the liberals were able to win elections with this playbook then they might have a chance here.
They are losing elections with the playbook they have been using for all these years and everything they do now is just predictable and therefore it is a yawner. They say the same things about every conservative, doesn’t matter if he is a judicial nominee or an attorney general nominee or a cabinet member nominee or secretary of defense, they all say the same thing. They all call them extremists. They all say they’re going to roll back civil rights, back alley abortions, whatever they are going to come up with. It always the same thing about everybody. You can do it once or twice and get it away with it, but unless you come up with something new, it’s burned out. I think this is something even they realize. Now the groups themselves don’t, but I’m talking about some of the Democrats. I sense a little bit of — just on what I am hearing — said about this gentleman Mr. Roberts, I’m sensing some dispiritedness on the left. I really see a palpable fear or depression that has fallen these people. Like I say, reality finally set in last night. Because you have to understand, the court is where they place their last hope for survival. They can lose presidential as long as they make sure Supreme Court is filled with liberal activists institutionalizing liberalism and calling it law. But when you have the President of the United States, George W. Bush, who once again, here we have this dumb frat boy barbecue jockey from Texas outsmarting all these people, outsmarting DC. You know what was ironic last night? I was laughing myself silly. I was watching the media last night and they were frustrated. Before Roberts name was announced they were mad as hell that they couldn’t find out who it was. Nobody in the White House was leaking — except there were people in the White House who were trying to steer reporters off of the Clement story.
Same lingo that Carl Rowe used with Matt Cooper. “I’m going to try to talk you off of that. Move you down the road.” Whatever Rove’s phrase was that was being used last night. But the media, who is all upset about a leak of a CIA agents name, was just frustrated as could be that there was no leak yesterday to tell them who the nominee really was. The town was, “Bzzz, bzzz, bzzz,” and they were as frustrated as could be. The media, you could hear it in some of the preannouncement commentary and then the post announcement analysis. It was just rich. Now they are even talking how good the guy looks, “central-casting looks.” He looks a lot like this Senator Burr from North Carolina. Get a picture. He ran against Irksome Bowels. He’s almost a dead ringer. Stop and think about this, too. The left is out there, “You don’t make fun of people, the way they look, Limbaugh. That’s not fair. That’s not right. People can’t help that. You don’t make fun of circumstances which they have no control.” I find it interesting that the left capitalized on Bork’s strange beard. They still make fun of John Bolton’s weird mustache — and I can just hear Ernest Hollings out there looking at a picture of John Roberts saying (Foghorn Leghorn-Senator impression), “There is not enough weirdness going on out there. I don’t see enough weirdness in this nominee! How can I make an objection based on the man’s weirdness?” Translation: He doesn’t look screwy enough for us to make fun of. So, anyway, I just have this sense… (interruption) I’m not overconfident. No, no, no, no. Folks, do not misunderstand. I fully expect these people to fire both barrels. It’s just that today they know.
They’ve got 45 votes in the Senate. There is nothing they can do. About the only thing — not the only thing. I don’t want to say that. I will tell you what I think will happen based on Leaky Leahy last night. Leaky Leahy and Schumer went out there right after the president and Judge Roberts had their coming out party at the White House. I’m sitting there and I’m laughing at these guys because you know they just take themselves so seriously and you know they just want to be so important and they look so small. It kind of reminded me how Jim Wright looked giving a response to President Reagan’s State of the Union address. Here you have these two lightweights out there telling the country, (doing impression) “Well, we must do this and we must do that. He didn’t answer questions fully and I’m going to boar in.” Leahy said something key here. Leahy said, “Justice O’Connor gave us such a gift,” meaning, Justice O’Connor says she will serve. She will serve until her replacement is confirmed — and I think that the thing you can almost bank on, if you wanted to bet on it, I would say, “Go ahead and bet on it,” that their real strategy will be to delay and shut down and make sure that this nomination takes months and months and months to occur. That is what I got from Leahy. Leahy is also talking about how he is going to go back up to his farmhouse up there in Vermont where he’ll be able to shed the coat and tie, sit under his favorite apple tree in jeans and a t-shirt and read all there is to read about Judge Roberts. He says it is going to take him the whole month of August to do that. Well, he is saying, (paraphrasing) “A, if I’m under my apple tree at my farmhouse up in Vermont in blue jeans and a t-shirt I can’t be in Washington conducting hearings.” So, “delay” will be the first order of business which will give them time to try to construct and try to find some piece of dirt on this guy because they’ll find no substantive reason to oppose him.
RUSH: Leaky Leahy and Schumer, they go out there and of course there was one reporter. Did you see who the reporter was, Mr. Snerdley? Male or female? The female reporter, almost hysterical, says, “Are you saying that he’s not an extreme nominee? Are you saying that you don’t have anything to say about him, that he’s an extreme nominee?” And Leahy shut that down real fast (doing impression), “Whoa! Whoa! You gotta give us time here. I have to go up to my apple farm and sit under the apple tree in my jeans and t-shirt. I have to read about this guy. We’ll find something. Be cool, media. Be cool. We’ll find something that is extreme about this guy.” He is Catholic. That will be enough to get Schumer off of his rocker. That is what Schumer didn’t like about Bill Pryor. When Schumer starts talking — he did it last night. When Schumer or anyone else starts talking about “deeply held beliefs,” they are talking about religion. I tell you, folks, it works every time it is tried. Every time he’s talking about a “deeply held personal view,” he is talking about his religion. It is codeword, a liberal codeword, like the New York Times has code in its Supreme Court writings. The writer, Linda Greenhouse — and you have to read Linda Greenhouse in code because Linda Greenhouse writes for the rest of the media as does the New York Times. It’s not writing for you. It’s not writing for the general public. The New York Times is writing to advise the Democrats and advise the liberals. So you have to know the code. Basically what Linda Greenhouse was saying today, is, “Un-uh, we may be something but it doesn’t look good.” But you are going to keep hearing that the guy is Catholic — and, of course, that will make him an “extremist” with Chuck Schumer.
They’ll never say this, but the way to call them on it, say, “Senator Schumer you keep talking the man’s ‘deeply held personal beliefs.’ What the hell does it have to do with anything? We are talking about judicial temperament and judicial philosophy.” Did you also hear Schumer say last night, if you were watching this, “It’s one thing to have a guy like this on the appellate court, but when you go to the Supreme Court that is where you can make law.” Did you hear Schumer say that? Well, he said it, and that’s a dead giveaway of how they view the place. I’ll tell you what he is worried about when it comes to making law, and when it comes to John Roberts, everybody is talking about how he is anti-abortion, the NARAL gang are all upset, the NOW gang has a press out calling him “anti-anti-female” because anti-female is not enough anymore. By the time they are finished it will be anti-, anti-, anti-women. He hates women. He wants them in bondage, in shackles, barefoot and in a cave. In fact, he wants them dead. He doesn’t even like women being alive. That is how extreme they’ll have to go. That is my point here. Their normal procedures just don’t work. But there is this concept here of horizontal and vertical of <a target=new href=”http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=2005&bold=||||”>stare decisis</a>. Now, when you are an appellate court judge, whatever the Supreme Court says the law of the land is, you have to find. You cannot disagree with the U.S. Supreme Court’s final authority. So, as an appellate judge, when deciding an abortion case, even if it’s on the fringes of it, like parental consent or whatever, you have to be guided by what the Supreme Court has said.
Right now Roe v Wade is the law of the land, but horizontal stare decisis, is when you get to the Supreme Court, can you, as a judge change Supreme Court precedent? Now, a lot of libs are out there saying, “You can’t do that. Why, the Supreme Court is the law of the land. What they say is final.” If that were the case, we would still have slavery because of Dred Scott. Of course the Supreme Court can reverse itself! They did so in the sodomy case recently, have done so in a number of cases in just the last three to four years. They did so in Dred Scott. They reversed themselves. They can reverse themselves on Roe. They can reverse themselves on portions of Roe. Justice Scalia has written over his career that it is apparent to him that the mansion, the big House of Abortion Law will have to be “dismantled, doorjamb by doorjamb.” Meaning piece by piece. He doesn’t think it’s ever going to be taken care of in one fell swoop — so you nibble at it around the edges. You deal with parental consent and then you make it tougher and tougher to actually have one. You do this in stages and eventually you get to the point where you overturn it. Schumer is afraid of this whole concept of making law because to him, making law will be to overturn precedent. But still, his very usage of that phrase, “because when he gets to the Supreme Court, he is going to be able to make law.” That tells you the problem. That tells you how the liberals look at it. As far as Chuckie is concerned, he’ll be making the wrong kind of law. If you go up there and you make liberal law, you go up there and make liberalism law, then you’re making good law. But if you don’t do that, you’re an extremist. You want to hear something funny today? On the Senate floor, just a portion of remarks made by Senator Kennedy after he got back from — oh, do you know why Bush scheduled the show for 9 o’clock last night? That’s after happy hour, so if Kennedy went on TV last night, how would he appear? Here is what Senator Kennedy said on the floor of the Senate this morning.
KENNEDY: I will not decide whether to support or oppose him based on any single issue. What All-Americans deserve to know is whether Judge Roberts respects the core values of the Constitution and falls within the conservative mainstream of America along the lines of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
RUSH: Did he really mean to say this, “falls within the conservative mainstream of America,” or is he saying that Justice O’Connor is the conservative mainstream of America? Probably the latter. But this follows their tune of yesterday. You gotta be an O’Connor. You can’t replace an O’Connor with somebody who is not an O’Connor. You have a swing vote with a swing vote. Bush didn’t do that and they’re all flummoxed. Bush didn’t do anything and all been consulted with and he still was his own man.
<*ICON*> <font color=”CC0000″><b>Rush’s Supreme Court Stack of Stuff …</b></font>
<a target=new href=”//home/eibessential/judicial_activism.member.html”>(The Battle for the Judiciary)</a>