 |
 RUSH: You people out there that have robbed banks, what do they call the red dye? What do they call the red dye that banks use? Somebody steals a bag of money and they escape and they open it, and (interruption). The dye pack, that's right. Maimone knows. He's a former bank robber. Kaboom! You've got red dye all over the perp and all over the money. It's a red dye bomb, is that what it's called? Pretty much? We'll just say it is, because it captures enough. Whatever you call it, the red dye bomb exposed John F. Kerry -- John "Filibuster" Kerry. I mean, the New York Times planted the red dye bomb in their editorial demanding guts and a spine from somebody in the Democratic Party, and here's old Lurch. (laughing) Here's old Lurch while he's over in Davos with the Swimmer. The Swimmer is probably hanging around at the lodge with the ski bunnies when they come off the slopes. Who would be the first liberal to obey the marching orders of the New York Times? It was New York Times just yesterday planted that red dye bomb in an editorial, and kaboom! John Kerry is covered in the red of embarrassment but he's not smart enough to know it. The New York Times called for a filibuster of Alito, and kaboom! John Filibuster Kerry called for a filibuster from Davos, Switzerland. The New York Times said, "Dance, boy! Dance," and Kerry clicked his heels -- which isn't that easy when you're grabbing your knees and bending over, but he was still able to do it, folks. Now, it doesn't get any better than this, folks. It really doesn't. Does John Filibuster Kerry really believe in a filibuster, or is he trying to remind America that he is one tough filibuster? This whole Alito vote has made a mockery of liberals claiming they're "voting their conscience." As I and the New York Times pointed out this week: If this Alito guy is this destructive -- I mean, if what you're saying about this guy is true, if he's going to take away women's rights, animal rights, minority rights, human rights, civil rights, workers rights -- do all this damage to people and humans, and he's going to turn back the hands of time, and all of these things that they've said that will happen if this guy gets in the court, "My gosh, if that's true, if you really think that, don't you pull out all the stops?" Yes, you do. But they're not pulling out all the stops. Who's the latest? Oh, Susan Collins, Republican, has said that these going to vote for Alito. They don't have the votes for a filibuster, and look it Dingy Harry. Dingy Harry last night and a bunch of other Democrats after this red dye bomb blew up on John Kerry in Davos; here's the New York Times headline: "Kerry Gets Cool Response on Call to Filibuster Alito -- Democrats cringed," this is the New York Times, which demanded somebody do this! (laughing) "Democrats cringed and Republicans jeered at the awkwardness of his gesture, which almost no one in the Senate expects to succeed. 'God bless John Kerry,' said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee. 'He just cinched this whole nomination. With Senator Kerry, it is Christmas every day.'" It is. It's an adult Christmas every day. "Senator [Dingy] Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, sounded almost apologetic about Mr. Kerry's statements. 'No one can complain on this matter that there hasn't been sufficient time to talk about Judge Alito, pro and con,' Mr. Reid said on the Senate floor. 'I hope that this matter will be resolved without too much more talking.' And on Friday, Senator Joseph Biden[pence], a Delaware Democrat and member of the Judiciary Committee who voted against Mr. Alito there, said he would not support a filibuster and doubted one would happen. Speaking in a televised interview on CNN, Mr. Biden said that he thought the Republicans would inevitably force a decision, so Democrats should use their votes to 'make a statement' without seeking a delay." |
|
Last night after Dingy Harry said, "Noooo, it wouldn't be useful. We don't have the votes for it," Dingy Harry admitted today that he and Democrats lacked the votes to block the nomination of Sam Alito. He said, "'Everybody knows there's not enough votes to support a filibuster,' but he said that he'd vote for such a measure to at least send a message of opposition to the nominee. The vote will come Monday with final confirmation set for Tuesday. Harry Reid was talking to reporters after a speech in a Washington hotel. He said, 'I think it's an opportunity for people to express their opinion is to what a bad choice it was to replace Sandra Day O'Connor with Alito.'" All right, now, it matters not what people on the right think of this because our minds have been made up long ago, and this is an example of exactly what we all know is happening to the Democrats.  They are imploding and they are being taken over by this fringe kook base. RedState.org -- it's one of the blogs we look at -- one of the contributors over there had this analysis of Dingy Harry. "Is their base..." the Democrat base. "Is their base so pathetic that it will give credibility to John Kerry from Switzerland, and now Harry Reid trying to kiss them after a one-nightstand of self-flagellation? Or do Reid and Kerry view their base so pathetically thinking that with the game lost they'll still say they're going to filibuster to keep the base happy, sort of like, 'Just keep your eyes closed, honey, because while we make the sounds, you're not actually going to get anything bullet another kiss. You may think I'm going to love you, and we'll make all the groans and all (kissing sounds) but that's all you're going to get is a kiss.'" How pathetic must they think this base is? Kerry makes this move; Dingy Harry is all over the ballpark last night, won't work, and Durbin, too, a lot of Democrats did cringe, but today, they must have heard it last night, they must have heard it from these wacko kooks because now they're out there talking about, "Well! Of course we don't have the votes for it, everybody knows that. But I'm willing to vote for one anyway, just -- just! -- to make a statement," and so forth. You know what? Here's the bottom line, folks. Earlier this week, I said the Democrats have no onions, then the New York Times said the Democrats have no onions. Today they're in a pickle. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: All right, let's look at the Washington Post take on the John Kerry red dye bomb. "Several prominent Democrat senators called for a filibuster..." Several? Who are the others? Who besides Kennedy? What, did Durbin join them? Okay, three equals "several"? Anyway... "Several prominent Democrat Senators called for a filibuster of Alito yesterday, exposing a deep divide in the party even as they delighted the party's liberal base." (Laughing.) Well, that's the story, but we will keep reading. "Liberal groups such as People for the American Way had implored Democratic senators to filibuster Alito's nomination even if it means nothing more than staking their principles and showing that Democrats will fight against a party that controls the House, the Senate and the White House," as if they haven't been fighting the last five years. "But many Republicans have relished the idea of a Democratic-led filibuster saying it helps them portray the minority part as obstructionist and beholden to left-leaning groups." Once again there's no "portrayal" necessary. It is what it is! It's plain as day for all to see -- and then there's this little paragraph as well in the Washington Post story: "Party sources said that Dingy Harry and others worry that a filibuster, while likely to fail, will nonetheless detract voters' attention from issues that Democratic leaders consider more promising. Those include Bush's controversial domestic surveillance program," another contemptible lie in the media, "the indictments of a top White House official, and a congressional leader, and the unfolding scandal centered on former lobbyist Jack Abramoff." That's what they've put their eggs in: that basket, the Abramoff basket. This scandal thing, the public (interruption). Wait a minute, I know we're going to get to the poll on this. There's a New York Times poll. That paper is cracking up every bit as fast and as hard as the Democratic Party is, but I'm going to tell you why there is not going to be a filibuster. I'll tell you why there will not be. The Democrats in the Senate -- remember when Harry Reid shut down the Senate, or whatever, using that pressure? He did that to cover up the actual impotence of the Democrats to stop Bush on anything. That was my point then, and that's what this filibuster is. That's why they don't want this filibuster. They've got their base, these lunatics, thinking that if all they do is flex their muscles so they could stop this one-party rule, this coup d'etat that took place back in 2000 and 2001. The last thing the Democrats can do, the last thing Dingy Harry could afford is for his base to see how truly impotent the Democrats in the Senate are. Imagine how weak they would look, along with Dingy Harry, if they could publicly muster no more than 30 some odd votes for a filibuster. |
|
| They need 41. They're not going to do that, despite John Kerry and the red dye bomb that was set off by the New York Times and joined by the Swimmer. They're not going to do this. It's far better for them to go directly to a roll call where they'll have a good chance of holding Alito to less than 60 votes or right around there. That's why Reid desperately wants to avoid a filibuster fight. It isn't for these other issues. It's because he can't afford for his base to see how impotent the party is in the Senate. That's it pure and simple. It's why he shut down the Senate in that one-day little tirade back toward the end of last year. Let's listen to some audio here on this. CBS This Morning: Harry Smith, talking to Senator Biden, says, "Your colleague, Senator Kerry, interested in putting together a filibuster to block the confirmation of Sam Alito. You want to help him out?" BIDEN: No. Um, I -- I -- I think that, uh, uh, a filibuster is not, uh, likely to bear any fruit, uh, here. We already have, uh, four Democrats who have announced, uh, they're going to vote for Judge Alito. A filibuster I think is, uh, not likely to occur. RUSH: And here's Senator Durbin from yesterday at the National Press Club. DURBIN: Having, uh, made a count, uh, I have come to the conclusion that it is highly unlikely that a filibuster would succeed. RUSH: That's yesterday. Now, today they're all: "Oh, yeah, of course we'd vote for one to show support. Ah, it doesn't have a chance." I will be stunned if they do this because if they try not only will they fail, they will demonstrate -- and their base doesn't get it. While you think the base is angry at the Democrats for being impotent and weak, the reason they're angry is because they don't think there's any reason for it! They think if the Democrats would just get some onions, just get up there and stand for what they believe in and say exactly what the base is saying in these left wing blogs and it would shock everybody back into reality -- which is exactly what's been going on and it's only hurting them. So the Democrats know that it's hopeless. The base us doesn't, and so as long as the base has hope, the Democrats don't dare tamper with that, and you would erase hope. You know, marriage? Marriage is the end of hope. Look at it that way. If they go out there and they actually force this vote, they are going to demonstrate and they are going to show first class just how incompetent, how weak, how impotent they are, -- and they won't do that, because they need the base fired up. They need the base thinking that the base is winning things. They need the base thinking that they are the mainstream, because that will keep the money flowing in, and they desperately need and want the money. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: We got three sound bites here from Senator Byrd (D-KKK) yesterday afternoon on the Senate floor. Here's the first of three. Get this first sentence.  BYRD: Like a majority of my constituents, I would prefer conservative judges. I've been saying that for years and years. That is, judges who do not try to make the law. I was once approached by President Richard Nixon to inquire about my interest in being a US Supreme Court justice. I said to my wife, "I don't think I'd like that position." She said, "Well, you'd better let the president know that." I declined that I might continue to serve the people of West Virginia. RUSH: "Like a majority of my constituents, I prefer conservative judges, have been saying that for years, that is, judges who don't try to make the law..." Did this guy get off...? Is he alive today? Did he show up for work today? This is a Democrat saying this. Here's the second sound bite. BYRD: First three words in the preamble to the Constitution are, as we all know, "We, the people." The framers ensured that the people, through us, their elected representatives in the Congress, would have the greatest power in our government. Judge Alito said he respected the separation of powers and would not rule in support of a power hungry president. I liked that answer. I liked Judge Alito. He struck me as a plan of his word, and I intend to vote for him. RUSH: And here's the last bite. BYRD: From his obvious intelligence, from his obvious sincerity, lead me to believe him to be an honorable man, a man who loves his country, loves his Constitution, and a man who will give of his best. Can we really...ask...for more? RUSH: Yes, we can ask for a filibuster, and I've been thinking about this, folks. You know, I'm going to flip-flop here like Dingy Harry is flip-flopping. Like I said the last half hour -- I firmly believed it when I said it -- I don't think they'll risk a filibuster. They'll show how impotent they are. It would be the stupidest thing they could do, and that's precisely why they may do it. They have established a pattern of opening the door right into their nose, right into their face, doing the stupidest things from the Wellstone memorial on. They have established a pattern of doing the dumbest things they could do, and a filibuster would fit right in. |
