Rush's Interview with President George W. Bush [Transcript]

Rush's Interview with President George W. Bush
August 31, 2004

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH LIMBAUGH: Ladies and gentlemen, we have been saying President Bush will join us at 1:45 this afternoon, about 12 minutes from now, but he can't wait. He's so excited, he's here now. President George W. Bush, welcome to the program, sir. Nice to have you with us.

THE PRESIDENT: I just came from Nashville, Tennessee. I'm on my way to a big rally with some of our farmers and then I'm going to go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, where I will be participating in the convention from afar. After all, the First Lady Bush will be addressing the nation, and I want to welcome her to the podium.

RUSH: Let's talk about the American Legion convention. I watched your speech there this morning, and the Democrats are harping on something you said yesterday, or that was aired yesterday on the Today Show with Matt Lauer about your comment about we can't win it, meaning the war on terror. I think I know what you meant but John Edwards is out there saying (paraphrased), "A-ha! Bush is now flip-flopping, and we, John Kerry and I, we can win this, and Bush is..." What did you mean by this?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate you bringing that up. Listen, I should have made my point more clear about what I meant. What I meant was that this is not a conventional war. It is a different kind of war. We're fighting people who have got a dark ideology who use terrorists, terrorism, as a tool. They're trying to shake our conscience. They're trying to shake our will, and so in the short run the strategy has got to be to find them where they lurk. I tell people all the time, "We will find them on the offense. We will bring them to justice on foreign lands so we don't have to face them here at home," and that's because you cannot negotiate with these people. And in a conventional war there would be a peace treaty or there would be a moment where somebody would sit on the side and say we quit. That's not the kind of war we're in, and that's what I was saying. The kind of war we're in requires, you know, steadfast resolve, and I will continue to be resolved to bring them to justice, but as well as to spread liberty. And this is one of the interesting points of the debate, Rush, is that, you know, I believe societies can be transformed because of liberty, and I believe that Iraq and Afghanistan will be free nations, and I believe that those free nations right there in the heart of the Middle East will begin to transform that region into a more hopeful place, which in itself will be a detriment to the ability to these terrorists to recruit -- and that's what I was saying. I probably needed to be a little more articulate.

RUSH: Well, it's like saying that they're all over the world. You're not fighting a country here, a series of countries. You're fighting a movement that will hide out anywhere it can, and you're always going to have a renegade terrorist. Even if, let's say, we wipe out Al-Qaeda. There's some other group or individual that may spring up and blow up a bomb somewhere. That's always going to happen because it always has.

THE PRESIDENT: Right. Really what I was saying to Lauer was, is that this is not the kind of war where you sit down and sign a peace treaty. It's a totally different kind of war. But we will win it. Your listeners have got to know that I know we'll win it, but we're going to have to be resolved and firm, and we can't doubt what we stand for, and the long-term solution is to spread freedom. I love to tell the story, Rush, about a meeting with Prime Minister Koizumi. He's my friend. He's the prime minister of Japan. It wasn't all that long ago that my dad, your dad, and others dads were fighting against the Japanese, but because after World War II we believed that Japan could self-govern and could be democratic in its own fashion, Japan is no longer an enemy; it's a friend, and so I sit down with him to help resolve issues like the North Korean peninsula. In other words, we're working together to keep the peace. The same thing is going to happen in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that's when I say the transformational power of liberty. That's what I'm talking about.

RUSH: Well, I remember you also said in one of your first speeches after the 9/11 attacks that this is going to go maybe beyond one or even two terms that you might serve.

THE PRESIDENT: I think so. On the other hand, we're making great progress. Today at the Legion I said, "We're winning the war on terror, and we will win the war on terror." There's no doubt in my mind, so long as this country stays resolved and strong and determined, and by winning, I just would remind your listeners that Pakistan is now an ally in the war on terror. Saudi now takes Al-Qaeda seriously, and they're after the leadership. Libya is no longer got weapons of mass destruction. Afghanistan, I don't know if you've discussed this on your program, but there are over ten million people who have registered to vote in Afghanistan, which is a phenomenal statistic when you think about it. And then of course Iraq is now heading toward elections as well, and we're making progress.

RUSH: Let me ask you about Iraq, because as I look at your opponent and his party, it seems to me that they want to separate the war on terror as something that's localized in Afghanistan, and that Iraq is a rogue war that you started for whatever reasons they've concocted, and they are trying to make the American people believe there's no linkage whatsoever --

RUSH: -- between Iraq and the war on terror. Now, I've heard you not only today, but in previous addresses that you've made, there clearly is a linkage in your mind. Could you explain to the American people who are listening to this program, what is that linkage, war on terror to Iraq, why we're there? What your vision is for the war in Iraq? In your second term, what do you hope –

THE PRESIDENT: First, let me address my opponents. They all, they saw a threat in Iraq, and they voted to remove Saddam Hussein by force if necessary. So, in other words, you know, John Kerry looked at the same intelligence I saw and saw a threat and voted for the authorization of force.

THE PRESIDENT: (Laughing.) Well, that was -- you're talking about the actually funding of troops.

THE PRESIDENT: He made, in my judgment, a big mistake by saying yes, we can use force but we're not going to provide the troops the equipment necessary to fight the war.

THE PRESIDENT: Now, Iraq. You see, one of the lessons of September the 11th is that we gotta deal with threats before they fully materialize, and we saw a threat in Iraq. I say "we." The Congress saw a threat, I saw a threat and the United Nations Security Council saw a threat. In other words, the world took a look and said, "Saddam is a threat," and here's why they thought he was a threat. One, he used weapons of mass destruction, and one of the most dangerous parts of this new war is that if the enemy were ever to acquire the capacity to use a weapon of mass destruction it would make September 11th, you know, pale in comparison, and so we saw that threat.

Secondly, he had ties to terrorists. Abu Nidal was housed in Iraq, his organization. He was the guy that killed Leon Klinghoffer. He was a known terrorist. Zarqawi -- who's now, you know, the person beheading people in Iraq today -- was in and out of Baghdad and Iraq, as were members of his organization. So he had terrorist ties. As a matter of fact, not only did he have terrorist ties, he used to subsidize families of these suicide bombers, which is a terrorist act.

Thirdly, he invaded his neighbors. Fourthly, he was an enemy of this country, and we had been to war with him once. He had invaded others in the neighborhood. He was a source of great instability. So I saw a threat, and given the lessons of September the 11th, we decided to remove him from power, having tried diplomacy. See, I think it's very important for your listeners to know, Rush, that the commander-in-chief ought to try all avenues of diplomacy prior to committing troops and we did that. And so I'm sitting in the Oval Office, and I've seen a threat. I now see that he's ignoring the demands of the free world, he had no intention of disarming, as a matter of fact was systematically deceiving inspectors, and so I made the decision, a very difficult decision.

The way forward, which was to remove him from power -- and, by the way, we weren't "alone" going in. As a matter of fact, I talked to Tony Blair this morning, which I do on a regular basis, and Tony Blair saw the same threat. And so now the way ahead is this. We will work with Prime Minister Allawi to enable a political process to develop. In other words, we'll provide as much security as we can to help a political process forward which means elections in January, but more importantly we will train Iraqis so that they are capable of providing their own security, and that's an important ingredient about enabling me to say that troops will be there as long as necessary, but not a day longer -- and by that I mean when the Iraqis are capable of defending themselves and as the political process emerges, we will then be in a position to say the mission has been completed, which is a democratic Iraq, an ally in the war on terror and a source of stability in a part of the world that needs stability and freedom.

RUSH: A couple quick things. I know your time is short. The Democrats -- one voice I know for sure Elliott Spitzer, the attorney general of New York, warned, literally warned the Republicans not to mention the September 11th attacks at the convention.

THE PRESIDENT: (Laughing.) Well, they -- evidently Rudy didn't heed his warnings.

RUSH: (Laughing.) I was going to ask you, because they did. They, of course, were allowed to do what they did on their first right. I thought it was tastefully done last night --

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you. I tell you, I'm traveling with John McCain; I thought he gave a great speech. Look, September 11th is a defining moment in our history, and it's certainly a defining moment in my presidency, and the question is whether or not we've learned the lessons. Three quick lessons. I've already given you one lesson that I think is important to remember. We deal with threats before they fully materialize. What that means is that in the old days you could see a threat, and you may deal with it or you may not deal with it, but you never thought a threat would come to harm us. Those days are gone.

Secondly, if the United States ever says something we better mean it, and I say, "If you harbor a terrorist, you're just as guilty as a terrorist." When you say something you gotta act on it. And by acting on it not only is Afghanistan free, but the world now knows that we mean what we say, which makes the world a more peaceful place in my judgment, and the third thing is that these killers are people you can't negotiate with. You've got to find them. So that's why I told Matt Lauer what I told him. It's an unconventional war. In other words, these are people that, you know, they use terrorism as a tool to support and promote their ideology of hatred. And, you know, we must bring 'em to justice, and we are. Thursday night I will tell the people that three-quarters of the known Al-Qaeda leadership has been brought to justice. And we're still obviously on the hunt.

RUSH: Okay, final point. I remember your campaign for president, 2000. You mentioned some specific things that you would do if you were elected. One of them was tax cuts, and there were a couple other things. You talked about Social Security reform -- and after you were elected and inaugurated, you set out to proceed to do those things, and I remember reading that the Democrats were surprised that you were actually doing what you said you were gonna do. Now, my last question: are you going to trick them again and actually do in your second term what you're going to campaign on doing? And what is that? What is your agenda the second term?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm going to save some of it for the speech if you don't mind.

THE PRESIDENT: I mean, you're a good friend and I would hate to let you down, but --

THE PRESIDENT: Having said that -- no, no, I understand completely. Look, what we're going to do is we're going to have government -- look, the world has changed. No longer does just one person, generally a dad, work for the same company and receive a pension plan or health care from the same company. People change jobs. Women are in the workforce and therefore the role of government ought to be to enable people to be able to live in a changing world. Now, that means promoting policies that say you can own your own health care account like health savings accounts, promoting policies that says younger workers should be able to take some of their own money and set up a personal savings account as a part of Social Security, so they can call it their own. They can take it from job to job and they could pass it on to another generation, and so those are the kinds of things I'm going to address. It's how government doesn't give order to people, but how government can enable people to realize dreams in a changing world.

RUSH: Mr. President, thanks so much for your time. It's always an honor and a thrill to speak to you --

RUSH: Never better. I've never been happier. I've never been better, and you sound like you're ebullient as well. It's great to hear. I'm getting all kinds of comments about the optimism that was on display last night at the convention. People are very, very upbeat and ecstatic. People wish you the best and they're praying for you every day.

THE PRESIDENT: That's the most important thing people can do is pray, and I appreciate that. I tell you the crowds we're seeing out here are really big. I believe something is going on here in the hinterlands, in the heartland that is going to mean a victory come November, but I want to assure you I'm going to keep working and keep laying out my vision, so people understand exactly why I've made the decisions I've made.

RUSH: Well, make no mistake about something. I can't speak for everybody, but I can speak for quite a few. They love you out there, Mr. President, and they only wish you the best.

FWIW, I'm not an American, so I'm not entirely aware what old Republicanism meant. I do know old Democrats were pro-slavery and pro-Lenin.

But I am an Adam Smith laisse faire conservative. IMO, what made America great is not protectionism, but free trade and its ability to feed and mechanize the world. How are current Republicans any different than Democrats when it comes to the all embracing of John Maynard Keynes communistic ideals, I'm not too sure? Central Banking, currency manipulation, mercantalism, the dependence on government to solve our economic ills, the misinformed desire to eliminate business cycles (may as well eliminate human emotions while we're at it, funnelling of dollars to big business who should have been allowed to fail (airlines). The list can go on.

Well I guess I'm one of those too, while I am still voting for Bush on Nov 2nd, I think its counterproductive and sad to try to censor the asking of difficult questions.

You should read my posts more closely, because you would then know that I'm not doing that. As I said in my very first post on this thread, it is entirely appropriate to talk abot difficult questions here in FreeRepublic, or when we're far from election day.

It is another thing altogether to expect Rush Limbaugh to challenge Bush on issues that he's not being conservative enough on, with only two months to go before a close, bitter election---with millions of listeners, many of them undecided, listening. It is counterproductive to the greater cause of advancing conservatism. Frankly, just as John McCain did last night, Rush was right on target to set aside any notion of infighting for the sake of the candidate.

Right now we have to rally behind Bush, the clearly superior candidate. John Kerry would be a mortal blow to the conservative cause, if for no other reason than our next President is going to be appointing at least two, and possibly up to four, Supreme Court justices.

But again, in the meanwhile, it's quite reasonable to criticize our own man in sympathetic audiences such as this.

Having been adopted from birth, I too have some pretty strong feelings about abortion - after all, I wouldn't be alive today had my mother not had the sense at her young age to carry me full term.

That said, I have come to look at abortion in a morbidly positive note. Why? Because it is not conservative women who are having abortions. It is the leftist women who use abortion as a method of birth control. Not just in the US, but worldwide. The result of this is that there are that many fewer liberals being born - never take away your enemy's weapon while they are shooting themselves in the foot - hand them more ammo. If current trends continue, the left will by default become more marginalized every day. The few of them that are not gay and can breed, choose not to - by whatever means. Factoring in AIDS, along with other lifestyle issues, and the left will become extinct in short order. So I'm now content with their ability to kill their own, and at the same time feel comfortable with the morals that conservative parents pass along to their daughters regarding abortion. Just look at the Bush twins, and then compare them to Kerry's offspring. Upbringing shows.

No, I don't agree with the president on immigration. Economically, I'd like to see the IRS disbanded and replaced with a flat tax system which rewards savings and investment. On trade, I think that is something which should be negotiated between trading partners without the onerous anti-americanism of the WTO. Likewise, the UN MUST GO. World policeman? No, but any nation who desires to hinder Americans from the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness should not be allowed to project power anywhere. If that means turning China to glass, so be it.

It matters not how old you are, or where you've been in your life, only your beliefs matter in here. How you convey your views and opinions to others is vitally important, but so is having an open mind. Being open minded is one of the main things that separates us from the left. We don't need to be crass or condescending to others, because we generally take the correct or logical stand on the issues. Being new here, you need to show some tact, if not respect. It sucks being new. Deal with it.

Yes.

many of them undecided, listening.

No, I wouldn't say that.

Right now we have to rally behind Bush, the clearly superior candidate.

True, I would be uncomfortable with Rush getting hateful in this situation, my reaction was to those, not necessarily you, who just absolutely jumped down FrankWild's throat. I mean, one guy was calling him a "moron" and others calling him a liberal. Its just dangerous to go to these extremes to "rally" behind. Nearly everyone has made their choice, but the undecideds, ironically might be MORE swayed by Bush explaining his reasoning behind the prescription entitlement, lack of prosecution of illegal employers etc...ok that may not go well...But hey, he might make a pragmatic, political explanation that while the stay-home people on here wouldn't accept because they believe in limited government or Americans working the jobs, would still understand the logic behind his plea, the honesty in his desire to navigate the political seas, and they would trust the man again.

You speak of undecideds, I think Bush needs to work more to shore up the so called base from his 4 years of policies then he needs to reach out to "the great moderate majority "of undecideds that the media forces us to all believe in. With all the hate in the media the past 6 months, most people have made up their mind, the movement is going to come in turnout. Therefore, I get very worried when I see posters on here jump down Frank's throat. Difficult questions would give Bush the opportunity to do himself some favors.

Anyone who believes it's better not to vote for Bush because he's not conservative enough---and therefore increase the chance that Kerry is elected---is practicing the utter height of illogic.

Unless one resides in a state (or Congressional district in those states which split the electoral votes) that is very safely in the Bush column, then and only then, can one safely give a boost to ones third part of choice cannidate. The same logic applies in Congressional and lower races. Since the Incumbent wins most of those anyway, the danger in voting third party is even less, but check to be sure in your district.

Soon the Democrats will implode. Exactly what "soon" is, I can't say. But when they do, you can be assured that new party, or new parties, will be formed. I could see the less rabid Dems joining with the McCain wing of the Republicans and the more conservative Repulicans becoming something else, hopefully something which holds the basic principals of the Constitution in higher regard than either major party does today. Those basic principals, aside from protection of individual liberty and rights, include separation of powers, federalism, and most importantly limited government.

I know where you are coming from. Where the American socialist movement, helped by the FDR administration, failed - they succeeded in the field of economics. The bastardized economics of Keynes was the worse thing to happen to Western thought. The Soviet Union fell, but America, like most of the West, has fallen for the charms of "mixed economies". All you have to do is read stuff by John Kenneth Galbraith to understand the thinking behind economic policy of most Western governments. "Jump starting" the economy. Managing downturns. It's all from the playbook of socialized nations. Whether you call them facist or communist. Interest rates are suppose move in a FREE market, yet America allows an unelected (and politically compromised - he worked in the investment bank industry) Alan Greenspan set short term interest rates.

Some may wonder why, since I'm a Canadian, should I care? Because, as much as my compatriots may deny it, the US leads the Western world. We follow. The US goes down the road of fiscal deficit spending. So do we. American capitalism falls. So does ours.

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.