Re: Rush dining with terroist
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />RUSH: Let's move on to Karl Rove. I also was out last week when this happened, and I'm sure that it's been discussed every which way and I probably will not be able to add anything to it. I gotta tell you this though. I came in this morning and Snerdley walks in still half asleep and asked me how the vacation was. Typical sucking up. He doesn't really care. And I was, you know, going through it, and I said, "But, you know, I still worked every day, Snerdley, and it is about time somebody in this administration said what Rove said." And he looked at me wide-eyed and said, "What did he say?" I said, "Where have you been?" He said, "I took four days away from the media." So he didn't know till this morning what Rove had said. I guess Rove said it Wednesday night, and I saw it Thursday morning and said, "Well, hubba hubba, hey, dooba dooba, it's about time the administration stood up here and started saying things like this." And the thing that struck me immediately about it as I read news reports of Rove's speech, he never once used the word Democrat. He never once used the word Democrat. He always made sure to use the word liberal, and yet this even caught Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton, this is the smartest woman in politics, folks, this is the smartest woman in America, she got sucked in. This was Karl Rove in a rope-a-dope and it worked. <br /><br />Mrs. Clinton is out there reacting outrageously, she can't believe what she's heard, she's demanding an apology from Pataki and all this, that Pataki say something and do something about it, and Pataki had a great quote. Pataki said, (paraphrasing) "What? You want me to denounce Karl Rove? I'm not going to denounce Karl Rove. You didn't say a word about **** Durbin." I just couldn't stop laughing when I read the Democrats' reaction to what Rove said, they're demanding that Bush fire him, they're demanding an apology. Somebody, I guess it was Mara Liasson on Fox said, (paraphrasing) "Well, you can't compare what Rove and Durbin said. I mean Durbin is just a Senator." Well, what's Rove? He's a campaign advisor. I know he's more than a campaign advisor, he's in the policy office there at the White House, but still, you can't compare these two? I mean, that's just choice. But all these Democrats out there caterwauling and moaning and whine about how mean and vicious and unproductive and how it wasn't useful for Rove to say all these things, demanding, the same people that had not said a word about **** Durbin were demanding Rove's head, and it was just laughable. We have just a recap. Here's a little sound bite. It's only 14 seconds, but just a sample of what Karl Rove said, it was late Wednesday, last Wednesday at a fund-raiser in New York City for the conservative party of New York state. <br /> <br /> <br /> ROVE: Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war. Liberals saw the savagery of 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding to our attackers. <br /><br />RUSH: He's right! He's absolutely right on the money. The New York Post had this account on Friday. "While partisan warfare erupted yesterday over statements by Karl Rove that liberals responded to September 11 by wanting to offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. Furious Democrats demanded an apology or Rove's resignation. Republicans shot back that Rove was drawing a legitimate distinction between the reactions of conservatives and liberals to the threat posed by terrorism. Both Mayor Bloomberg and Governor Pataki were quickly drawn into the firestorm. The mayor issued a carefully worded statement urging that partisan politics be kept out of the discussion about 9/11." Yeah, well, then, mayor, why don't you get into gear and keep these leftists out of the 9/11 memorial. "Bloomberg said that in all the conversations he'd had with the families and survivors of the attacks, no one's ever raised issues of ideology or partisanship." Well, that may be in New York, but get out to the rest the country. And Rove wasn't just speaking about New Yorkers. "A City Hall source described Bloomberg as irritated by Rove's comments. Senator Hillary Rodham Rodham called on Pataki, who was in the audience when Rove spoke, to repudiate his remarks. Clinton said, 'It's hard to overstate the emotion we feel about this, but this is really painful.'" Well our heart bleeds, you know, we're really crying, there's not a dry eye in the house here, Mrs. Clinton, but I didn't know you were a liberal. <br /><br />I thought Mrs. Clinton was tacking to the right, I thought she was moving over there to position her as a moderate. What's she getting all upset about here? It wasn't her Rove was talking about, was it? Well, her reaction makes it look like it was. He sucked 'em in here, folks, he was talking about liberals and the Democrats all know he's talking about them. He never said the Democrats are guilty of this, just a bunch of liberals. But Pataki was having none of it, as I said, in what the Post called here a rare attack on Hillary Rodham Rodham, Pataki said it's hypocritical of Clinton to ask him to chastise Karl Rove when she didn't say a word about Senator Durbin. "I have absolutely no intention of asking him to apologize," Pataki said. "Senator Clinton might think about her propensity to allow outrageous statements from the other side that are far beyond political dialogue." Chuck Schumer said these comments of Rove's that we just played for you, "Turned my stomach." "What he said is not only a slap at New York and all those who have suffered, it's a dagger to the heart of what America is all about. I'd give him a day or so. If he retracts and soundly apologized it's one thing, but if they try to stonewall and back off, I think resignation would be called for." So they were just behaving as you can predict and imagine. Folks, it's just like when you accuse Democrats in the Senate of opposing a judicial nominee because of his faith, you have hit the bull's eye when you say that. And they react like stuck pigs. And they reacted like stuck pigs to Rove, and, of course, that caused the Democrats to react as they did because it was the truth. You know, you don't get these kind of squeals from people unless you've hit the nail on the head. You don't get this kind of outrageous response and vitriol to try to change the subject unless you've hit the nail on the head. We have a little montage here of -- I think this is Democrats -- yeah, this is Democrats responding to Rove. We got Pelosi, Schumer, Lautenberg, and Hillary Rodham Rodham here in this montage. <br /><br />PELOSI: For him to try to exploit 9/11 for political purposes once again just shows you how desperate they are. <br /><br />SCHUMER: There's a certain line that you should not cross, and last night Karl Rove crossed that line. He didn't just put his toe over the line, he jumped way over. <br /><br />LAUTENBERG: It's outrageous that he would suggest that those of us which disagree with him politically want to aid the terrorists. <br /><br />RODHAM RODHAM: The only way we'll know for sure as to what his real intention was last night in New York City is whether or not he retracts these comments and apologizes for them. <br /> <br /> <br /> RUSH: Uh, Mrs. Rodham Rodham, the smartest woman in America, I can't believe that you don't know for sure his intentions. I know what they are. His intentions were to say what he said. He said what he means. Words mean things. This was not sugarcoated, Mrs. Clinton. It's not hard to understand. He meant exactly what he said. What I can't believe is how you got fooled into responding to it as though he was talking about you, when you're obviously a moderate. Why, you're sitting there, you're on the foreign relations committee, you voted for the war, why are you acting like he's talking about you? And of course to these other clowns saying, "once again just shows how desperate they are," that's Pelosi. Lautenberg, "It's outrageous that he would suggest those of us who disagree with him politically want to aid the terrorists." What's all this Abu Ghraib and G'itmo stuff about, if not aiding the terrorists, Senator Lautenberg? And who is it that's down in G'itmo? These are people from Afghanistan, that's where we first went in the war on terror, that's who's down there, Senator. So we're supposed to give these people trials and be concerned about their feelings and their conditions and so forth and yet you don't want us to assume that you're acting as defense lawyers for these terrorist suspects down there? <br /><br />Now, Rove was right, there have been all kinds of people that have done the research and, you know, I don't want to sit here and repeat things that I'm sure you've already heard, maybe you haven't, but a number of people have done the research and this all centers around MoveOn.org and related 527 organizations. That's who Rove was primarily talking about, because you can source the very facts he cited right to MoveOn.org. And MoveOn.org has made a play to take over the Democratic Party. In fact, I'd say the Democratic Party has lost itself to MoveOn.org. The reason Durbin said what he said is to placate MoveOn.org types. Durbin doesn't really believe what he said. I firmly believe he doesn't really believe that, and if he does believe it's even worse. But the fact of the matter is that Hillary and Barbara Boxer, when it was time to count the electoral votes in early January and they tried to stop it because of the voting irregularities in Ohio, that was to appease the MoveOn.org crowd, but the MoveOn.org people certainly did oppose any kind of a military response to 9/11. They had a petition out there circulating and they had a number of members and a number of people and other related website leaders out there suggesting that the worst thing we could do would be to respond militarily or to start a war, and that we needed to have dialogue. <br /><br />Rove was exactly right. He nailed these people. And if you want, I don't know if you need it, I don't know how much has been done since then, but we could post on the website a number of quotes and bits of evidence that would establish this. Byron York wrote about it in National Review Online late last week, but here, let me just give you one. "We, the under signed, citizens and residents of the United States of America appeal to the president of the United States, George W. Bush, and to all leaders internationally to use moderation and restraint in responding to the recent terrorist attacks against the United States." George Soros: "War is false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism." Dennis Kucinich: "Afghanistan may be an incubator of terrorism, but it doesn't follow that we bomb them." Marcy Kaptur, Democrat, Ohio: "One could say that Osama bin Laden and these non-nation state fighters with religious purpose are very similar to those kind of atypical revolutionaries that helped to cast off the British crown." Reverend Sharpton: "The attacks of the World Trade Center are evidence that America's beginning to reap what it has sown." Michael Moore: "Likewise, to bomb Afghanistan, I mean, I've never understood this." The idea that this is not what liberals think is preposterous, and you can't separate the Democrats from liberals because they all went to Michael Moore's movie, they accept George Soros' money, they nominated one of these kooks to run their party, Howard Dean. So I was gratified to see it, I was excited that Rove said this. It was about time that this kind of thing was said from the upper levels of the administration, because it needs to be said from many quarters other than just in media. And as I say, the squealing, whining, shrieking reaction is evidence that the bull's-eye was hit head on. <br /><br />END TRANSCRIPT <br /> <br />Read the Article... <br /> <br />(NRO: Rove Was Right about MoveOn) <br />(NRO: The Politics of American Wars)
<br /><br />....and BTW if you base your opinions of people based on what their opponents say about them without evidents or research of the truth...then stay the hell away/out from my foxhole! 
