Gore to Dubya: Condemn Limbaugh (transcript of Rush Limbaugh's response)

May 26, 2004
Listen to Rush…
(...roll the MoveOn.org ad, Algore demanding Bush renounce Rush and all his works)

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Just sitting here minding my own business. I'm not bothering anybody. Just doing my job here on the EIB Network, and the vice president, ex-vice president, of the Democratic Party, has demanded today that George W. Bush condemn and denounce me. (speech) We have the sound bite coming up. Greetings, my friends. Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. You are listening to America's most listened to and most powerful radio talk show, a program which meets and surpasses all audience expectations on a daily basis. I heard this bite during the break, folks. (Laughing)

We all just listened to it together, and we just laughed. You've got to hear this. This is a MoveOn.org event. It's here in New York at New York University. Gore and I in the same town. (Gasping.) MoveOn.org, this is the wacko bunch that is doing ads equating Bush with Hitler. Don't they have a new ad? Hang on, let me check. Move On has a new [staff interruption] Yeah. Yeah. Before we play the Gore bite, you've got to hear the audio track to the latest MoveOn.org ad, which puts an Abu Ghraib hood over the Statute of Liberty.

VOICE: (Absurd doom-and-gloom music.) They said we went to Iraq to bring American values -- democracy, liberty. But something has gone terribly wrong. (Dramatic pause) Now it's been reported that (Secretary of Defense) Donald Rumsfeld initiated the plan that encouraged the physical coercion and sexual humiliation of prisoners. [Rush laughing] Rumsfeld has endangered our soldiers and America. [sic] Why hasn't (President of the United States) George (W.) Bush fired this man?

RUSH: (Laughing.) So that's their latest commercial, and I haven't seen it, but apparently during one of the darkest moments of that commercial is where a hood, an Abu Ghraib hood, is placed over (laughing) the Statue of Liberty. That's what I meant earlier about these people kind of going a little too far. They're really going to persuade people with this. So anyway at their big event, a big shindig out there here in New York at New York University, former vice president Al Gore -- I guess (EIB Chief of Staff) H.R. is right. I guess I've become the new Newt Gingrich of the Republican Party. A talk show host has become the new Newt Gingrich. He's the excerpt from the Gore speech.

ALGORE: "This president episodically poses as a uniter and healer. If he really has any desire to play that role, then I call upon him to condemn Rush Limbaugh, perhaps his strongest political supporter, who said publicly that the torture in Abu Grab [sic—Ghraib] was 'a brilliant maneuver' and that the photos were 'good old American pornography,' and that the actions portrayed were simply those of people 'having a good time' and 'needing to blow off steam.'"

RUSH: I guess those naked pyramids are just not in the national interest to Algore. (Laughing and laughing.) Okay. Well, you know, here's the thing, folks. Algore, this whole speech, he went nuts. He's flailing around wildly there. Not just me, he's attacking everybody who has led the nation through 9/11, the war on terrorism, and he's making statements that are flat out lies in this speech. For example, the Geneva Conventions. I don't know how many of you know this, the Geneva Conventions do not protect terrorists. (PTI: Interrogation of Ultras Not Regulated Under Geneva) They protect soldiers who serve under a nation who wear uniforms who carry their weapons openly, and with the kind of threat that we're facing today with terrorist cells in the U.S. plotting an even bigger attack than 9/11. I mean, it says a lot about Gore. It says he's perverse, that he would be argue to go confer greater rights on those who seek to murder millions of Americans and calling for even tougher actions to seek them out and destroy them before they destroy us, and this is what is truly puzzling to me about the left, and this is what's disarming about these prison photos.

What really troubles me about these photos, above and beyond what's in them, is how they're being used to undermine our war effort. Now we have the former vice president, a man who was thisclose to becoming president of the United States, speak out in this speech. We haven't played you the bites, but he was flailing around on the Geneva Convention. He starts talking about conferring more rights on the kind of people who want to murder tens of thousands more Americans than he does seem interested in dealing with the people who want to commit those murders. He has succeeded in giving our adversaries in Europe and our enemies in the caves of Afghanistan and the allies of Iraq a message that they'll take to heart, and that is that we are not a united nation, that we do not have the will to win this war, and that we are weak and indecisive. That's the message that Gore sends today, and it's the wrong message, because it's a lie, and beyond that it is an outrage.

I don't think anything of this kind has ever been done by a former vice president during a war, but our adversaries and our enemies would be badly mistaken if they actually believe that Gore speaks for this nation, because he doesn't. I speak for more of this nation than Algore does, and I will say it on this program. Otherwise, why is he bothering to mention my name? He speaks for the radical fringe in his party who have become more and more the mainstream of his party. They are the Hate-America First radical left, and I hope the American people get to hear all of this speech. I hope it's played over and over again, for this is how low Gore and his crowd are willing to go to undermine the war effort and our troops and this president to promote themselves and their own agenda and get themselves back into power. Lest we forget, Algore and his boss, Bill Clinton, stood by while the enemy was plotting and planning to murder thousands of Americans.

They did nothing serious to stop bin Laden. They did nothing serious to fight terrorism. They degraded or military. They slashed our troop levels, undermined our intelligence services. Today calls for civil rights for terrorists in his speech while opposing the Patriot Act which helps us find and stop terrorist cells right here in our country, and Gore has said nothing about how he would fight this evil because he's obsessed with hatred not for the enemy but for George W. Bush -- and that's what identifies MoveOn.org. That's what identifies most of the fringe, radical left in this country. They actually think Bush is a greater threat to the people of this world and this country than any thug dictator, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong ll, anybody. They think Bush poses a greater threat, and as misguided as that is, this is what animates them. It is what motivates them and inspires them.

In this speech today he actually makes the case for civil rights for terrorist cells in these prisons under the Geneva Convention when the Geneva Convention does not even cover terrorists. But more importantly, the idea that this guy -- who didn't say anything about terrorism in his presidential campaign. For all you people that want to talk about how the Clinton administration was really tough on terrorism, go back to the 2000 campaign. Find for me where Gore said anything about it. He didn't. It wasn't a big deal. We know what Jamie Gorelick was doing. We know Gorelick built the wall with her famous 1995 memo that prevented intelligence that was gathered on terrorists from being conveyed to law enforcement agencies because of the way the Clinton administration was actually, according to a great piece at FrontPageMag.com. The purpose of the Gorelick memo, you know what it was? To actually protect the privacy of Clinton's fund-raising with the Chinese. (Story)

That's what the purpose of it was, and it had this ancillary effect of stymieing the war on terror. We've had Mansoor Ijaz as many times as he's got the breath to say it, talk about the bin Laden deal with Sudan that Clinton rejected. There is audiotape of Clinton admitting to an audience in New York City that he rejected bin Laden and rejected the offer of bin Laden by the Sudanese. So for this guy to come forth now and act like he is the great protector and the great defender of liberty and so forth when they didn't do diddlysquat during the eight years that Clinton-Gore sat in the White House is just a bit much to take. Here. Play that bite one more time in case you're just joining us and wonder what this little monologue was all about. Gore made a speech today at the New York University, and it's a big, big fund-raising event from MoveOn.org and this is an excerpt.

ALGORE: "This president episodically poses as a uniter and healer. If he really has any desire to play that role, then I call upon him to condemn Rush Limbaugh, perhaps his strongest political supporter, who said publicly that the torture in Abu Grab [sic—Ghraib] was 'a brilliant maneuver' and that the photos were 'good old American pornography,' and that the actions portrayed were simply those of, of people 'having a good time' and 'needing to blow off steam.'"

Since this prison thing has come up here again, we have this from Rowan Scarborough in the Washington Times. "An Army investigation and congressional hearings have spotlighted a series of conflicting statement..." By the way, hold it. Hey, Koko? I want you to go back to the website last week or the week before. I guess it was the week-before last. I want you to grab Kate O'Beirne's column that she wrote on National Review Online placing in context my comments about Abu "Grab," as Gore called it. Didn't he say Abu "Grab"? What's on his mind? He calls it Abu Grab Prison. At any rate, find out in Gore lingo what "Abu" means and we could really be onto something. But go back and get that Kate O'Beirne piece, because she had called me. She sent me an e-mail. She wanted to know what is this? I just sent her the transcript for the whole show from which those comments that these guys are isolating and taking out of context were taken, and she wrote a great piece that puts it all in context and perspective and explains what it was that I was saying in her own words. I mean, it's one thing for me to say it.

So I want you to re-link to that, or just post it, whatever. Put it up there now, Koko. Don't waste any time. Just get it up there now. Get this, folks. There's something going on. I mean, every day now somebody is out there trashing me and mentioning my name from someplace, and it's all these comments. These comments are two weeks old. Now they've even got Gore mouthing these comments. Last week we got a call innocently enough from somebody at TIME magazine. I guess they've got a section -- I don't read TIME magazine so I had to be told about this -- "Ten Questions For" and they change the American every week. Last week they wanted to do ten questions for me, and I agreed to do it. "What the hell, it's ten questions. Yip yip yip yip yahoo," but they pulled out at the last minute. They went to the editors meeting at ten o'clock Friday morning and decided to move it to this week, which is tomorrow. They're going to do this, right here on the heels of all this.

TIME and Newsweek have both, in cover stories, mentioned these quotes that you heard Gore just say about me. It is an all-out concerted effort. I'm honored by it, but I am intrigued by it. I have never seen a media figure targeted much the same way the president of the United States is being targeted, and now the president of the United States, who's got really important things to do, has been told or challenged by Gore to condemn me. (Tapping desk.) So I'm wondering about this TIME magazine. I'm still going to do it, but I'm going to be loaded. I'm going to be ready. In fact, they want to take a picture. I ought to show up in prison guard garb, or maybe take the picture with a hood on and say, "Here, I'm the Statue of Liberty. I showed up today to do my show as the Statue of Liberty. Take a picture of me with this hood on. Send a copy over to MoveOn.org." (Laughing.)

Anyway, where was I? I normally don't lose my place, and I haven't lost it. Get that thing posted up there, Koko, the Kate O'Beirne piece at RushLimbaugh.com. Anyway, "Army investigations and congressional hearings have spotlighted a list of conflicting statements about Iraq prisoner abuse between the top brass and the general who once ran Abu (Grab)" and I'm going to start pronouncing it that way I want to make sure that I'm not (to staff). Play the Gore bite, I just want to hear how he says Abu "Grab." (Replaying of Gore sound bite.) Yeah, right there. Abu. It's "Abu Grab." All right. So from now on, just like we used to pronounce Mario Cuomo's name "Cooomo," because that's how the Reverend Jackson pronounced it -- didn't want to embarrass Reverend Jackson, so he thought it was Cooomo; it was Coomo -- so now it's "Abu Grab." So the general who once ran Abu Grab prison or once ran it and who was stripped this week of her brigade command, 'Some military advocates say that Brigadier General Janice Karpinski received light punishment because she is one of the Army's few females.'"

Special treatment because she's a woman? "That's the charge recommended for a..." (laughing) and the "seriousness of the charge" of course, matters more than the nature of the evidence, "...recommended for a reprimand. She instead received a minor letter of admonishment. However, Major General Antonio M. Taguba, who completed the first of several ongoing administrative investigations, lays some blame squarely at the feet of General Karpinski. His report says that she did not act on recommendations from a series of fault-finding inquiries before the ill treatment began in October. In fact, William Lindh, who directs the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the Free Congress Foundation writes in a column this week that the apparent breakdown in discipline from the MPs at Abu Grab may relate to the presence of women and especially to the fact that the commander was a woman. The climate of political correctness or to give it its true name, 'Cultural Marxism..."

(Laughing). Well, okay. (Laughing.) "...Cultural Marxism that has infested and overwhelmed the American armed forces makes it almost impossible to discipline a woman, and risky for a man to attempt to do so. Whatever the reason, one theme is clear: Abu Grab was a disaster waiting to happen. Rules on uniforms were not enforced, soldiers wrote poems and other sayings on their helmets..." Oh, really? Are you telling me that these brutes, these brutes who did all these horrible, insulting things to these people, wrote poetry? Come on, how does that happen? Poets are gentle little flowers wilting in the breeze. Well, it might have been limericks, but anyway, so they wrote poems and other sayings on their helmets, saluting of "orificers" was not forced. "Records on inmates and escapes were spotty, and regulations were not posted. No MP had been trained adequately in detainee operations." (sigh) Just fix this and move on. What are we beating ourselves over the head with this for? This is what's not productive, acting like this (abuse) is regular and commonplace, and now we've got to stop everything to take care of this all for our psyche, actually all for the advancement of John Kerry is just a bit much. It's putting people who wear the uniform at greater risk over there, which we've been through countless times and nobody hears, when I say it.

END TRANSCRIPT

I mentioned this on another thread, but you know... we're moving in the direction of Iraq. Their "groups" such as sheite and kurds are so divided, so filled with hate for each other that their country cannot function. They can't even set up a constitutional government without trying to keep certain groups completely out of it.

We are headed that way as the democrats become focused solely on HATE. I mean they are burning every bridge behind them in this downward spiral.

Thanks for the insults.

By the way, citing 70 year old history regarding one election has nothing to do with the way people think today. I know it would be the "honorable" way to play this game but if you look at the polls here in America you will see that Kerry is actully gaining. I also know it's early but the American people are easily swayed by the media. And, unless GWB starts fighting back, even a supporter like me, starts to think he has no backbone.

While I think Common Tator has a point, I think GWB is already "there" in terms of being the "fixer". He already has that high ground. He should be more on the offensive now, and all the way up to Nov 2. It's Kerry that has nothing but attacks. Unfortunately, since he has the media on his side, the attacks are working. It might be a good idea to hold off for now, but GW should definitely do some attack ads before the election, and also, using his office, do the same in a more subtle way with the media. That, combined with the fact that he's the only one with ideas at this point, will win him the election.

Again though, in today's era of sound bites, he can't simply be the "fixer". He must also be somewhat agressive.

Hey, anybody out there think the Bush administration will finally take the gloves off and fight these pieces of crap?

In due time.

Never mind that I'm thankful that AlSoreloser is not our president, but I am glad that I am not part of the administration. It has nothing to do with any disagreement with the President, or with his policies or agenda. I am completely in favor of the President, and would take a bullet for him if I could.

The reason I'm glad not to be part of the administration is that I would be so incensed at all of the falsehoods that are daily (and loudly) perpetrated by the left, that I would be calling for charges of treason and sedition, and calling for a scene out of "Hang 'Em High" with Clint Eastwood, a mass hangin' in the town square. Or, to be more humane, a mass serving of the triple cocktail. After all, "Flipper" Kerry, wouldn't that "Let America Be America Again"? People used to get the lethal Bill Blass tie for poaching cattle, for cryin' out loud.

The best way to get rid of smelly trash is not to put an air freshener in the trashcan, or to spray Glade in there. The best way to get rid of smelly trash is to THROW OUT THE TRASH. Or, in our case, VOTE out the trash.

When I have smelly trash at home, I don't let it consume me. I do my work, take care of my priorities, wrap up the trash, throw out the trash, and go on with my life, doing the right thing.

So the best thing that can happen is for the Administration to keep working, to keep America as safe as possible. Take care of Iraq. Take care of the economy. Combat the lies with the truth. Get reelected. And then...TAKE OUT THE TRASH.

In the meantime, to make ourselves feel better...call out the VIKING KITTIES!!!

Why do you think most people are not a bright as you?
You create the impression that a brilliant person like you can see through Gore... but the ordinary dumb idiots not born with your brilliance have to watch a fight between Bush and Gore to see the truth.

What a load of condescending garbage.

You don't think moderate, ordinary Americans are swayed by what they see and hear on TV??? Are you joking? Mass media - network television in particular - is a billion dollar industry simply because people believe, and will buy, what they see on TV. In this country, there are so many, particularly the elderly, that still believe that whatever is shown on network news is the gospel truth. They are of the old school in believing that "Walter Cronkite would never lie!" Dan Rather et al have stepped into those shoes, and although a vast number see through the bias, sadly, many do not.

After the relentless pounding of the Bush administration by the media, Al Gore steps in and turns it up a notch. You don't think those who have only gotten one side of the news will believe what he is saying? The fact is that older Americans are less likely to have internet access - many don't even have cable. Unfortunately many good, decent people may not be politically savy and well read. When the media distorts and takes out of context most everything the Bush administration puts forth, many people are only getting part of the picture. And they believe what little they see. It doesn't make them "dumb idiots" as you say. All they know is what they've been told. And they vote.

I don't advocate having President Bush lower himself to the depths of the filthy mud slingers. I DO believe however, sometimes silence isn't golden.

I'll say this, I don't think that the DNC ever wanted to give the nomination to Howard Dean but they sure liked the way he was able to say all sorts of things against President Bush without tainting the "real" Democrat candidate.

Their strategy last year was to run a composite candidate (one with military experience, Wes Clark, one to appeal to the Nader voters, Howard Dead, one to appeal to the black community, Al Sharpton, one to appeal to the Clinton southerners, Edwards...).

Al Gore is able to say some things that need to be refuted by the DNC but they will never do it. Also, Bill Clinton has been notable silent (then again he's saving it for his book's promotional tour).

Rush talks about winning on his show,now this is his chance to step up and show us.Not dumping on Iman Allie but putting his resource into get W re-elected.Total focus,no vacations,Rush this your moment don't waste it.

Rush's moment, it seems to me, is in the fall. Rush holds the opinion that "the long form" - his openended talk format - exposes character and intelligence in a way that short, scripted programs on TV never will. If he is correct, and if he seriously wants to illuminate the actual choice in Nov'04, he should give the vp candidates and/or the presidential candidates time for a series of 3-hour (less commercials) chess-timer-moderated debates on the radio. Let we-the-people learn what these candidates are made of. Let the candidates use notes and/or laptop computers if they want, but let them talk long enough to expose their characters to the public. And the candidates need not physically be together nor spend long in cram sessions.

I am just tired of trying to defend Bush to the liberals around me when he won't. I guess I don't really want him to attack but at least defend himself.

For instance: When Bush gave his speech last Monday? about Iraq he went before a war college. To me this is either preaching to the choir or he's afraid to stand up in front of hostile crowd or even a neutral crowd.

This, to me, is a lack of fortitude. If he's convinced that he is right (I think he is regarding the war on terror) then he should be able to speak his mind in front of any crowd.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.