RUSH: Now, Dingy Harry is on the floor of the Senate. Has he yet announced his “no” vote? Okay. So is there a big audience on the floor of the Senate? There’s hardly anybody there. There wasn’t anybody there when Specter announced his vote for Roberts yesterday. But Dingy Harry has got a big, long, boring speech here leading up to his earth-shattering decision not to vote for Judge Roberts. Here are the main points as I’ve been able to grasp them up to now. Dingy Harry that says, “Judge Roberts may turn out to be the wrong man for the job,” and he can’t risk that for the American people. Dingy Harry said that the president is “not entitled to much deference when it comes to judicial appointments.” He did allow that “while Roberts is not motivated by bigotry, he does not appreciate the history of the civil rights movement in this country,” and, as such, he can’t get Dingy Harry’s vote. He hasn’t said that yet, but, of course, he’s not motivated by bigotry; he just doesn’t understand the civil rights movement and its history. So, you see, there’s this never-absent underlying tone when it comes to Democrats: All Republicans are racist. Even the ones that don’t know it. Even the ones that don’t want to be, they still are, just because they’re Republican. He’s not motivated by bigotry but he’s simply too stupid to appreciate the history of the civil rights movement. Can you imagine a lightweight like Dingy Harry commenting on the intelligence of a man like John Roberts? If nothing else, folks, we saw that Roberts is the smartest guy that sat before the Senate judiciary committee in my lifetime. I mean, if nothing else, I don’t care what he ends up doing as a judge, his brain is unsurpassed.
Dingy Harry runs at a snail’s pace compared to John Roberts’ brain, and for us to sit here and have to listen to Dingy Harry comment and the sensitivity of John Roberts is nothing more than laughable and comical, and especially when you realize Dingy Harry and his crowd think they’ve turned the corner now. They think they’ve got the ’06 and ’08 elections wrapped up, folks. I kid you not. They think they have destroyed the Bush presidency. Meanwhile, Roberts is going to get confirmed, and there’s going to be a new nominee to come down the pike and probably upset them just as much. Dingy Harry also said that John Roberts failed to adequately answer questions including the one on stare decisis, which is precedent. That’s only because Dingy Harry doesn’t have the slightest idea how to understand what Roberts said about stare decisis. It’s only because the Democrats don’t themselves believe in it. They believe in precedent only when it up holds the cases they like. But they are firmly against precedent when they want to overturn decisions accident like the Texas sodomy law, or when they want to overturn any number of cases the Democrats. Oh, stare decisis? It can be punted right out the window! These people are just laughable. They’re intellectual, effete snobs who have no clue how truly ignorant they really are, but Dingy Harry did say he “personally likes him.” He personally liked Judge Roberts, the not-intentional bigot, and the obstruction of justice answer of questions. But this is a high burden, and Dingy Harry is thinking of the American people.
You’re just a fool, you old man.
RUSH: All right, now, one of the things that I have commented on particularly when it comes to the Democrats and the John Roberts nomination, I have warned you people several times to keep a sharp eye out on how the Democrats decide to vote on this, because the Democrats are going to be divvying up their votes, making sure that he doesn’t get too many. But he’s going to get confirmed because they’ve got to leave room to oppose the next nominee. So the Democrats are going to be twisting arms in their caucus to make sure this guy doesn’t get 70 or more votes. So it’s all about, “How can this help us? How can we turn this to our advantage?” rather than having it be on the substance of any of this, and I’ve also told you in the last couple or three days that the Democrats are becoming more and more concerned and loyal to these kook fringe bloggers. Where was that story from that talked about how Hillary was going to be meeting with some of these bloggers? What was that story? I don’t remember the source of the story. Was it AP story? It was something, but it was all about how the Democrats are going to… Oh! It was somebody warning the Democrats, or advising them, that they’re going to have to take on the face and actions of the kooks. It was Howard Fineman. It was Howard Fineman’s piece at MSNBC. Howard Fineman late to the day saying, “You know what? These activists on these blogs. They might provide a little bit of a problem for Washington Democrats.”
Might? They already are! They’re threatening the existing Democrat establishment, and they’re vowing to take over if the Democrats in Washington don’t do what these extremist kooks want. So, from The Hill, the newspaper of Capitol Hill, comes this story: “For ’08, a Tough Choice Lies Ahead for Democrats.” It’s by Jonathan Allen. “A vote for Judge John Roberts could be well within the mainstream but that may not be where Democrats with an eye on the Oval Office are looking to swim, according to some political strategists and analysts. ‘If you?re running for president, you need to take a hard look at voting no because that?s where the Democratic base is,’ said Steve McMahon [best known for being the husband of Cynthia Alksne], a Democratic political consultant who worked on Howard Dean?s 2004 presidential campaign…. ‘Anybody who?s running for president is watching everybody else who?s running,’ said McMahon…. When the Roberts roll call starts, those senators who are viewed as possible contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008,” Hillary, Kerry, Biden, Bayh, Feingold, and maybe others, will “be under a microscope. That is particularly true of Clinton, who has not publicly revealed her intentions on either Roberts or the 2008 race.” Okay, we knew all that.
Page two: “Comments on the liberal website Dailykos.com excoriated The Washington Post?s editorial page for recommending that senators support Roberts. The more liberal editorial page of The New York Times called Sunday for ‘no’ votes ? a position not likely to be ignored by Clinton. ‘Senators should vote against Mr. Roberts not because they know he does not have the qualities to be an excellent chief justice, but because he has not met the very heavy burden of proving that he does,’ the Times [ridiculously] opined. The reasoning underscores a dilemma for Senate Democrats. They have expressed few complaints about what the 50-year-old appellate court judge actually said, but the next nominee may be inclined to reveal even less if Roberts is confirmed. Senate Democrats also remain frustrated by White House refusal to release documents from Roberts?s stint as a deputy in the solicitor general?s office during the presidency of George H.W. Bush.” They never do. Executive privilege. It’s silly. No president’s given up those papers and those documents. At any rate… So once again, let me put it to you in a way that you can understand. Folks, if you found out that Karl Rove and the Bush White House were formulating policy based on some kook, fringe, right-wing blog, what would your reaction be? You would be panicked. “Oh, my God! Oh, no, what’s happened?” That’s exactly what’s happening for the Democrats. But the thing is, this has been going for a long time. It’s not something new as Mr. Fineman discovered last week prior to writing his column. This is just patently absurd. I don’t know if you people have taken time to look at some of these websites.
You really should. You really should. You should go to the DailyKos, you should go to the Democrat Underground, and you should for as long as you can handle it treat yourself to some of the bile, the vile, the absolute sewer trash drivel that’s coming from these sites and understand, and then understand that this is the pressure being brought to bear on the Washington Democrats, and then keep in mind that while all this is going on, they think they are winning. Sigh blogger, a wacko kook blogger can threaten Democrats on their vote on John Roberts and they stop and consider it. If it was a mainstream Democrat blog, that would be one thing, but the ones they are listening to, folks! They make Cindy Sheehan look like Pat Buchanan! That’s the best way I can put it. I mean, that’s how far off to the left that they are. It’s glorious. It’s absolutely wonderful. Now they’re out there worried how they should vote on this nominee based on what their reaction is going to be on these kook fringe websites? If you take some time to read some of these things you will no longer have any worries. If you struggle through this remember that people like Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein and Ted Kennedy and all the others are reading them, too, for guidance, and then they’re also listening to the NARAL babes, the NAGs, Ralph Neas, People for the American Way– and isn’t it obvious that these groups don’t have the power that they used to have?
They couldn’t stop Janice Rogers Brown. They couldn’t stop Priscilla Owen. They couldn’t stop Bill Pryor — and yet the Democrats are listening to them more than ever! I love this. I just can’t believe it. I think we are succeeding in driving them insane and I’m going to raise my hand as a leader of the bunch that’s causing them to go insane. I don’t think they’ve been able to deal with competition. I don’t think they’ve been able to deal with the facts that the bloom is off their rose and that we’re shining a constant, bright light at their tactics, at their customs, at their despicable views, their whole philosophy. They’ve been able to get away all these years about lying what they’re going to do, saying what they’re going to do and then doing something else. They’ve been able to portray themselves as people that they aren’t and now who liberals really are is on full display. Their rage and hatred and anger has removed the mask, the camouflage that has always hidden who they really are. The monsters that these people are and have always been is now plainly viewable, and they scare not just kids but anybody who gets anywhere near their path and gets a good look at them — and I think we’re driving them insane, and I’m the reason, and a lot of others, too, don’t misunderstand, but I’m pointing at myself, I’m raising my hand as the leader of the corps of conservatism to drive the left insane and we are succeeding.
RUSH: All right, we have a couple of sound bites here from Dingy Harry and his floor speech to the US Senate today where he leads up to and actually says here that he’s opposing Judge Roberts. As you people know, I have a very fertile and big brain, and I access my brain frequently trying to come up with the most accurate descriptions of events and people. I’m at a loss here. Listen to this. I’m just… I’m just… I’m at a loss to explain this to you, other than to say these people are insane. When you couple this with the fact they think they’re winning, and they think that they are communicating to a majority of Americans, Dingy Harry thinks he’s actually communicating to a majority of Americans — and if he doesn’t think that, he thinks that he will persuade a bunch of people to join him and will be a majority by speaking this way? It’s more than out of touch. It’s more than elitist. It’s more than being just removed. It’s embodied somewhere in elitism and superiority, but the man just cannot possibly be happy. I don’t… I’m sorry. I’m failing you here in coming up with an explanation for this, but just listen to the audio. We have two bites. Here’s the first one.
REID: Judge Roberts spoke about a Hispanic group that President Reagan would soon address, and he suggested that the audience would be pleased to know that the administration favored legal status for the “illegal amigos” in the audience. (absurd dramatic pause) Illegal amigos. After 23 years, couldn’t he acknowledge that that was insensitive, that it was wrong? The use of the Spanish word “amigos” in this memo is patronizing and offensive to a contemporary reader. I don’t c — con — condemn Judge Roberts for using the word amigos 20 years ago in a nonpublic memo, but I was stunned when at his confirmation hearing he could not bring himself to express regret for using that term, or recognize that it might cause offense.
RUSH: Dingy Harry, um, you are not the arbiter of sensitive. You and your crowd, you don’t get to define what “sensitive” is. This is what rubs me so wrong about it. Who the hell do you think you are? Some of the things that you have said about President Bush, some of the things that you have said about the American servicemen and women in Iraq, some of the things that you have said about your own country, senator, and you dare to sit there and preach like someone who is infallible, who never makes any mistakes, daring to define what’s sensitive and insensitive and demanding that someone respond to you and admit it? The truth is you do hope to score politically points by saying this just like you illegally looked at some judge nominee’s FBI files and blabbed to the world on the floor of the Senate that he was unfit. That’s a violation of the law. You don’t have the character to speak for this country, senator, and that’s why people laugh at you in this country who know the score about illegal immigration to boot — and that people like you won’t even do anything about it. Just can’t take these people anymore.