RUSH: Well-l-l-l-l. Well-l-l-l-l. “An abortion rights group is withdrawing a heavily criticized television ad that linked John Roberts to violent anti-abortion activists, saying its attempt to illuminate the Supreme Court nominee’s record has been ‘misconstrued.'” (Laughing.) Let me define this for you. You people are too stupid to understand what NARAL was trying to say in their ad. “After protests by conservatives, NARAL Pro-Choice America said Thursday night it would pull the ad that began running this week. ‘We regret that many people have misconstrued our recent advertisement about Mr. Roberts’ record,’ NARAL President Nancy Keenan said. ‘Unfortunately, the debate over that advertisement has become a distraction from the serious discussion we hoped to have with the American public,’ she said in a letter Thursday to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who earlier in the day had urged the group to withdraw the ad.” Specter, who is pro-choice, said that the ad’s not true and it’s unfair, and it’s not helpful to the pro-choice cause which he supports.
Now, you can say that the conservatives got this ban, and I’m happy to take credit for it, or partial credit, but I actually think that Specter’s letter really had more to do with it than anything else. He’s a pro-choice guy. I find it interesting that it says here in the story, “Senate Democrats have not taken a position on the ad. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, told The Associated Press that ads for and against Roberts wouldn’t sway senators weighing the confirmation.” But no Democrat has yet spoken out against the ad!
Now, they haven’t confirmed their support for it, but they haven’t spoken out against it, but all of a sudden the Washington Post, you got an E. J. Dionne, Jr., column today — by the way, E. J. deserves some credit because E. J. says the reason the ad should have been canceled is because it’s blatantly false and he gives details about how it’s false. The others that are claiming this ad should be dropped are simply saying, “It’s hurting the cause, drop the ad.” As in, “My gosh we gotta do something to stop hurting the cause here.” Never mind that it’s false, never mind that it’s full of lies. No, no, no, don’t pull it for that reason, pull it because it’s hurting us. So we’ve got the Washington Post editorial, E. J. Dionne, Jr., and I think, what is it, the Boston Globe or somebody’s editorialized against this ad today? Just a few of them out there that I’ve found that I have in the stacks of stuff. But where was this earlier in the week? Where is all this outrage from the left earlier in the week? Folks, I’m telling you this is a huge chink in their armor.
This would not have happened 20 years ago. They would not have had to pull this ad 20 years ago and I actually do think that it is conservative pressure and I do think it’s something else. Remember that Stanley Greenberg survey that I told you about yesterday that essentially says to the Democrats, “No matter how much Bush is hated on war and no matter how bad people think the economy is, you people aren’t going to capitalize at all because you have no credibility on issues of morality and ethics,” and I think that probably had something to do — there’s a lot of factors involved but, ladies and gentlemen, we are compassionate here at the EIB Network, as you all know, and we are fair. We exist, ladies and gentlemen, to be fair, to show both sides of the issue, and I find it, frankly, unfortunate that in the land with the First Amendment, particularly about political speech, a group has been forced to pull its ad because it’s not true. That shouldn’t matter.
The First Amendment says in political speech you can say whatever you want to say, and it’s up to the people to ferret it out. I understand, I have researched this. CNN has even pulled this ad. CNN has pulled this ad. So NARAL has gotten the ad pulled. But this just isn’t right, ladies and gentlemen. As a show of magnanimity and compassion and in an illustration of fairness, I am going to air the NARAL ad during the program today, at least the audio to it. They didn’t buy any time here, so we’re going to do it free of charge. They may have pulled the ad but we think you need to hear it since NARAL’s position is you’re too stupid to understand it. “We regret that many people have misconstrued our recent advertisement over Mr. Roberts’ record. The debate over the advertisement has become a distraction.” Well, we’re going to try to cut through some of this fog and we will pay the ad for you throughout the program today as a show of solidarity, compassion, and understanding to NARAL. Let’s play it now.
(Playing of NARAL ad.)
(Playing of Roberts spoof ad.)
See? You see how fair we are here at the EIB Network? NARAL may have pulled their ad, but not here. They didn’t buy any time here so they can’t pull it, and we want to help. They clearly intended for as many Americans as possible to hear and see this ad and we’re going to come to their rescue today ladies and gentlemen, our own Operation Rescue to make sure the NARAL ad gets the exposure it deserves, free of charge, courtesy EIB Network and Rush Limbaugh.
We just had a drive-by caller who said, “Rush, isn’t what happened with the NARAL ad sort of like NARAL aborting the ad?” No, sir, this is like a partial-birth abortion. That ad lived. That ad saw the light of day, that ad was out there for a while, and then NARAL aborted it. So NARAL had a partial abortion of their own ad, which, of course, I guess they could say illustrates the safety of partial-birth abortions.