Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Just a couple more things that I want to mention here in reaction to last night’s program, and particularly something Tony Snow just said, he reiterated — we all know this, though — he reiterated that whatever action that we plan against Iran and Syria does not involve invasions, does not involve troops or any other kind of military movement into either Iran or Syria. A lot of people are asking, why? If this is the focal point of the war on terror and this is a wider war that we’ve gotta actually deal with these countries at some point, why not do it now?
Folks, there are some realities here that we have to face. Elections have consequences. They mean things. All of you people who thought it would be best for the Republicans to lose to learn a few things, keep this in mind. Elections have consequences. Bush is in a position now where he just simply can’t launch attacks against these regimes. The Democrats just took the Congress. The Democrats are threatening to cut off funds even for a relatively small increase in troop levels. They are threatening to cut off funds for reinforcements. What do you think they would do if Bush launched attacks against Tehran and Damascus? How many congressional Republicans do you think the president could count on to stick with him to prevent the cutting off of funds? I can tell you right now, overboard would go Chuck Hagel, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter, John Warner, any number of them would go overboard. Then we’d get impeachment proceedings, after they de-funded Iraq.
You can say this is something should have been done a couple years ago, but you have to deal with the here and now. You can go back and play TiVo all you want, but all we can do is deal with what exists to now. You might want to be able to criticize the president for not taking action or talking about these external threats, Iran and Syria more often and over a long period of time. He hasn’t done that. He started last night. I haven’t heard any other politician in Washington doing it either, including McCain. Ah, there have been a couple, but I mean they’re not prominent. I know this is what’s so frustrating, because we have the military power to stop all this right now, but we don’t have the political will.

Look it, folks, can we be honest again? The Democrats today are so craven in their demand for defeat, it is an incessantly, increasingly loud demand for defeat. They won’t even support the president sending reinforcements to the troops on the ground, and they all at the same time claim that they support the troops. Frankly, not enough has been done outside of talk radio to expose their sabotaging and that’s exactly what has been going on. The Democrat Party has been sabotaging this war effort as soon as they felt comfortable making the move. They were always going to. It just required a little work in advance on the part of their buddies in the media to start ginning up anti-war support, and they could make it look like they were reacting to the American people. That’s what all those polls way back in 2002, ‘3, ‘4, and ‘5 were all about. Creating enough anti-war sentiment, Democrats could pretend that they were listening to the will of the people, when in fact it was all a strategy designed to give them the freedom and opportunity to make statements which are, for them, honest and who they really are, no matter what the time frame.
So there has been an effort here to sabotage victory, and nobody talks about it. They drew the line in Iraq years ago, and they drew the line in Iraq because they don’t want us to win this war at any level, because they don’t want us to win a war at any level. They draw the line on Iraq because any successful military incursion, while George Bush is president, just dooms them in the future in one of their fundamental beliefs, and that is the US military is the focus of evil of the modern world. They’re doing the same thing when it comes to internal security from external threats. That’s why they’ve taken the ACLU’s litigation agenda, adopted it as their own policy. So, anyway, I totally agree, I understand we need to take out the Iranian and Syrian regimes, but it’s hard to see how that’s done when the Democrats, who would most certainly be joined by Lugar and Warner and Collins and Hagel and Snowe and Specter and several other Republicans would cut the executive branch off.
That’s the problem that we need to overcome now. I think I’ve got this figured out. I think I know what’s going to happen. It’s going to be left — we got a Democrat Congress now, with all the threats and all the hearings, all the investigations coming up — it’s going to be left to another Republican president, maybe ten years from now, to take care of this. It’s going to fester all this time. Democrats aren’t going to take care of this. We know how they deal with this. After these ten years or so that we get another Republican president, the problems are going to have gotten worse, after we’ve left, after we’ve gotten out of Iraq, after we are attacked again, the reality will set in and not before. Then we’re going to have to go back, we’re going to have to go back somewhere, Iraq, I don’t know where, at a far greater cost to us and our allies in the region such as they are, it’s going to be far more dangerous. But right now neither the Democrats nor some queasy Republicans or the public accepts generally the enormity of what we are dealing with, despite 9/11 having happened, which is what’s so frustrating to those of us who see this clearly. In fact, it may take a Democrat president to deal with this years and years and years from now.

RUSH: Now, let me explain something to you. When I said it may require a Democrat president to ultimately deal with the enormity of what we face; I don’t say that because they are better. They are not. I say that because the Democrats, they will throw everything out in order to deny victory, they’ll do that at all costs, they will take all costs to deny any victory to any Republican president, because they put party and power above all else.
You think if Bill Clinton were president right now, they’d be calling for pulling out? Do you think they’d be conducting hearings against Clinton? Do you think the anti-war movement would be as strident as it is? Do you think John Conyers and Kennedy and all these guys would oppose supplemental funding requests for reinforcements, do you think that would happen if Bill Clinton or Hillary, or take your pick if any Democrat were president today? Of course it would not. And guess what, there wouldn’t be any Republicans doing it, either, because the Republicans would join with the Democrats in facing the enormity of the problem. They would support a Democrat president under these circumstances. The Democrats simply will not do it. They supported FDR, they supported Truman, they supported Clinton. There was some talk about Republicans opposing Clinton when he used NATO to bomb the former Yugoslavia. But there were no resolutions, and there was no legislation introduced threatening cutting off funding.
The voices of dissent in Congress were in the minority, and there were hardly any public voices of dissent, when Clinton was bombing the former Yugoslavia. Anyway, that’s my summation, that’s my total analysis and the reaction I wanted to share with you after last night, watching some of the Drive-By Media. Oh, there was one more thing in the Drive-By Media. Howard Fineman, I guess he filed a story about an hour on MSNBC’s website last night after the president’s speech. ?George W. Bush spoke with all the confidence of a perp in a police lineup.? Now, this stupid AP story last night talking about war-weary Americans, let me tell you what we’re weary of, AP, you!
We are weary of the Drive-By Media. We are weary of the Americans being deluged with a bunch of propaganda about how we can’t win. We are sick and tired of being treated every night to you people telling us you’re not liberal, and that you’re totally objective and that you have no agenda, when in fact you’re aiding and abetting the Democratic Party in securing the defeat of this country because you are so desperate to secure the defeat of George W. Bush, and that’s what we’re weary of — and I know, when I say that, I speak for gazillions of you people.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This