Posted on 10/18/2005 5:42:24 PM PDT by wagglebee
RUSH: All right, let's go to the audio sound bites. Seriously, I want to get these things about me out of the way so we can move on to the other items in the Stack of Stuff today. It's really funny how the press is turning on Judith Miller. To think -- to think! -- that they held retirement parties for Dan Rather; to think that they gave him all kinds of awards. He got the Peabody Award. The media circled the wagons to protect Dan Rather. They want Judith Miller back in jail. She has committed -- this is a quote from one of the stories from another journalist. "She has committed crimes against journalism." Crimes against journalism! Ho! It's big out there. But before we get to all that, let's go the audiotapes. Yesterday on CNN -- and I must tell you, Good Morning America asked for me to be on the program today. I said, "I don't get up that early. Thanks for the invitation." I'm doing a little interview with Sean Hannity tonight before the Rush on Broadway event that will air on his show on Fox. Was that going to air tonight or tomorrow? They're going to air it tonight? So Fox started promoting this as "an exclusive sit-town with Rush Limbaugh." So all these other networks started calling, "What do you mean exclusive to Hannity? What about me? What about us?"
They all think I'm going on Hannity to talk about that Wall Street Journal op-ed and that's what they all wanted me to come on and talk about. You know, the op-ed speaks for itself. I will talk about it tonight, the "Rush on Broadway." I'm sure Hannity will have a couple questions about it. But anyway Wolf Blitzer, who I like, his office called, "Can we get Rush?Can't believe he's doing an exclusive with Hannity." We said, "Sorry, don't have time." So what did they do? They went out and got the next best person they could to talk about my op-ed, Terry McAuliffe, the former chairman of the Democrat National Committee, The Punk, and so Wolf said to Terry McAuliffe, "Now, we heard from Rush Limbaugh in the form of an op-ed piece that he wrote in the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal today and among other things he said this. 'The purpose of the Miers debate is to ensure that we're doing the very best we can to move the nation in the right direction. And when all is said and done we'll be even stronger and more focused on our agenda and defeating those who obstruct it just in time for 2006 and 2008.' Do you agree with him, Mr. McAuliffe? What do you think?"
McAULIFFE: Rush Limbaugh, I mean, if you look at what Rush Limbaugh says it's the conservatives that are attacking this woman. They have been out from day one attacking her. Every major conservative journalist has attacked this woman. They've got problems on the Republican side. This is their problem. The Democrats -- I will speak for the Democratic Party. We all want to know her background. We want to know how she will be, how she will adjudicate cases in the United States Supreme Court. We're doing the responsible thing. Let's wait until the evidence is in and we can make our decision. RUSH: Did he actually answer the question? I don't think he did. See, nobody wants to deal with the real point that I made in that op-ed, and you know, the great thing about that op-ed if I say so myself -- and I can because I wrote it -- it was a thousand words, and there's not one word wasted in that op-ed. Every one of those thousand words means something. But these people that are looking at it solely as a primer, if you will, on conservative opposition to Harriet Miers are missing the whole point. What McAuliffe should be asked about: "What do you think about what Rush Limbaugh says, that you guys have no agenda, that you can't be honest about who you are, that no matter what you say and what you do, if you're honest you're dead, and if you mask yourselves, you'll continue to be dead, that you're nothing but a bunch of whiners and moaners? What about that?" Wolf doesn't ask them that. He asked what they think on what I said about Harriet Miers. Now, I want to go on record. I have been, where Harriet Miers is concerned, I have not been critical of her at all. I don't know her. She could turn out to be fine.
I have said this from the get-go. I have said that Harriet Miers, I have no brief against her -- and, you know, I don't want to repeat all of this. But the Punk is wrong here when he lumps me in with all these conservatives who have attacked her personally, and I don't, frankly, know too many people who have attacked her personally. Some have attacked what they don't know about her judicial philosophy and all that. But it is clear, it is clear that in that op-ed, which they read front-to-back, that the parts about the left and how they do nothing but look backwards, how they try to repeat their presumed past glories, that just glosses and goes right over their heads, and they have no interest in addressing it. Which is fine, because they're staring the truth on the page, and what happens when they look at the truth, whether it's in an op-ed I write or anywhere else. They ignore it, can't face it, can't deal with the truth. They have to continue to try to alter reality. Moving on to the audio sound bites: yesterday Michigan State University, a forum on the state of news journalism. ABC's Sam Donaldson says, "How important is objectivity?"
DONALDSON: If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you don't hear a lot of the other side. I try to --
RUSH: Stop the tape! Sam, you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, otherwise you wouldn't have said that. What do I do on this program? I set up exactly what the other side's position is; I'm the only one who will do it honestly. If I have a liberal guest on this program I'm not guaranteed the liberal guest will be honest about what he believes, so in order to establish what I believe and what I think, I set myself up by presenting the liberal point of view on whatever issue it is I'm talking about. So he's wrong about that. Let's resume.
DONALDSON: I tried a radio show for a while. I just didn't make it. I wasn't very good, and a guy from ABC came down and tried to help me -- he's no longer there, so I can say this -- and he said, "Hey, every morning you got to start your program by saying, 'I'm outraged.'" I said, "About what?" He said, "Just find something to be outraged about." I said, "Some mornings I am outraged, it's true, but other mornings, hey, I'm on top of the world! The birds are singing. I'm not outraged. Things are fine." "No, no," he said. "You don't understand. You have to be outraged," and then of course he told me I had to be on the right. I said, "If you give me a litmus test, on some of them, I'm a righty. Others I'm probably a lefty, but," I said, "I can't just be always on the right or something like this." "Well," he said, "you'll never get an audience," and he was exactly right.
RUSH: I'll tell you what. How many years has it been? We're in our 18th year, and they still don't get it. They think this is nothing but rage and anger, starting out mad. They don't get the optimism. They don't get the fun. They don't get the good cheer, and they also don't get the crucial aspect, and that's truth and honesty. Got one more bite from Sam. He's talking here about how important is objectivity.
DONALDSON: Who do we listen to? We listen to people that reinforce our views. Rush Limbaugh has an audience of about 20 million people. That's amazing, and Democrats are all worried about it. I said, "Look, he's not going to convert five million liberals to vote for George W. Bush. Excuse me. He's talking to people who are going to vote -- more power to them, praise them -- for George W. Bush, and they enjoy it." Maybe a few people listen because Rush is a greater entertainer. He tells you, "I'm an entertainer." But, ah, you can't make this stuff up. I mean. this is terrific. You know, and the way he uses his voice, the pause. I mean, he's dramatic, he's -- could be on... He could play Shakespeare! Who could he play? I don't know. Hamlet?
RUSH: I thought Hamlet was a moderate. Hamlet couldn't make up his mind about anything. I couldn't play Hamlet. Well, I'd have to act and be Hamlet, I guess. But, see, I think it's just interesting because the truth of the matter is one of the reasons the left is so concerned about this program is that there are former liberals (pause) who listen (dramatic pause, as in Shakespeare) to this program. All you've got to do is ask Tom Daschle. Tom Daschle, after the November mid-terms, 2002, came out and said some information is very shocking, and he basically let the cat out of the bag, indicating that we found out just now that all the people that listen to Rush Limbaugh are not conservative. That's what shook 'em up. At any rate, we continue after even 17 years to labor here under a veil of obscurity to some people. It is amazing. This program is on the radio. There's no deceit. There is no attempt to fool anybody here. How it is so difficult for the left to listen to this program and understand it or why it works? I guess it's one of the secrets of our success, but it still bamboozles me how it can happen.
Loveable Fuzzball Ping!
Anybody that has he likes of Dean, Sharpton, Jackson,
Kennedy and Kerry, along with the two California nit
wits..Boxer and Feinstein...what can you expect? How
does anyone look and listen to these people and then
vote for them??? is beyond me. Jake
It's funny because the leftists who know and listen to Rush like him, like James Carville.
He was bashing Bernie Goldberg for pointing out a few instances of bias and saying it's the entire media.
He then went on to say that it's not true....no bias, no sireebob!
Next he's pointing out that the Republicans actually tried to change their rules so that if a person in leadership is indicted they won't have to step down.
Does Sam mention that the dems don't have a rule that their leadership would have to step down.
NNNNOOOOOO he just says how the republicans had to back off because the public wouldn't stand for it.
If there was no bias in Sam he would have mentioned that little fact about the dems.
My sister is a super liberal. She is a true koolaid drinker, highly educated.
She has books all over her house about the evil Conservative Christian right, who are going to take over the US and turn it into the Taliban.
The last time I was there, I took a peek at one. It had several quotes of Rush and Hannity - totally ridiculous ones. They took all of their jokes and printed them them like they were said in deadly earnest.
I seem to remember one like, "Liberals shouldn't be allowed to own property" in the context of as if the host was pushing to take away liberal's property rights!
I agree with your comments. The only thing I would wish for is that the Republican Party leaders would get over their timid introverted cowardice and fear, and start ATTACKING the hypocrisy of the media and of the DimWits, as noted in the example above. Why are the Republican leaders so scared & timid about going on the offense for the innumerable sins of the DimWits and the failure of the left-wing media to expose that. Other examples include the allegations of unethical behavior against Delay or the dubious indictment against him, when over 100 of the top travelers (with travel expenses paid by lobbyists, etc) are Dims, or comparing the mild slap on the wrist for Sandy Berger compared to the hysteria being raised by the Dims over the supposed outing of Valerie Plame when it now appears that no laws in fact were broken (unless you count the outing of Valerie by none other than her husband Joe Wilson when he wrote his allegations in NYT), and so on & so on.
Fortunately at least we have Rush & some great commentators who point out the Dims & media hypocrisy. I only wish we has some Repuke senators or congressmen or President Bush who would grow a spine and go on the attack & offense against the Dims & partisan, left-wing media.
That was hilarious today.
"He was bashing Bernie Goldberg for pointing out a few instances of bias and saying it's the entire media."
The media is biased towards the Left and everyone knows it, and particularly the media knows it. What grates on the nerves of the Left is that there are people who disagree with them. They are outraged by that fact. That's why they bash the one moderately conservative television news channel, Fox. Because it broadcasts stuff they don't want to hear.
"He was bashing Bernie Goldberg for pointing out a few instances of bias and saying it's the entire media."
The media is biased towards the Left and everyone knows it, and particularly the media knows it. What grates on the nerves of the Left is that there are people who disagree with them. They are outraged by that fact. That's why they bash the one moderately conservative television news channel, Fox. Because it broadcasts stuff they don't want to hear.
"He was bashing Bernie Goldberg for pointing out a few instances of bias and saying it's the entire media."
The media is biased towards the Left and everyone knows it, and particularly the media knows it. What grates on the nerves of the Left is that there are people who disagree with them. They are outraged by that fact. That's why they bash the one moderately conservative television news channel, Fox. Because it broadcasts stuff they don't want to hear.
I went and saw the Rush on Broadway event tonight and it was excellent.
Cool, you should post a thread. What all did he talk about?
They just don't get it! And they don't want to get it!
He was guest hosting on WABC radio one time and he and I really got into it via email. He didn't like being called out on his blatant lie about the administration.
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.