As Advertisers Come Crawling Back, Rush Not Interested In Restoring Ties

Apparently Rush Limbaugh meant what he said when he told his listeners, "Those advertisers who no longer want your business, fine, we'll replace them."

He was also apparently telling the truth when he said that a number of advertisers who pulled their ads in response to Leftist pressure were begging to come back.

One of them was Sleep Train, the first advertiser to pull its ads from Limbaugh's show and someone who had been advertising on Limbaugh's show for 25 years. When they asked to return and tried to book a voiced endorsement, the highest priced kind of radio ad where the host endorses the product, they were turned down cold.

The Blaze managed to obtain the email that a Limbaugh representative sent to Sleep Train President Dale Carlsen:

Thank you for your requests last week and this week to restart your voiced endorsement in local markets of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Rush received your requests personally.

Unfortunately, your public comments were not well received by our audience, and did not accurately portray either Rush Limbaugh’s character or the intent of his remarks. Thus, we regret to inform you that Rush will be unable to endorse Sleep Train in the future.

Rush appreciates your long friendship and your past support, and we wish you good luck in the future.

What's that old saying again? Screw me once, shame on thee. Screw me twice...

Kudos to El Rushbo for being a man of principle and showing these weasels the door.

Rush Limbaugh Shows Why A Few Sponsor Cancellations Won't Take Him Off The Air

With all the attempts to destroy Rush Limbaugh by the Obama Administration and the Left, one thing they seem to have forgotten is the basic nature of how a syndicated radio show works. El Rushbo explains it here:

RUSH: I want to ask if you will indulge me for just a brief few minutes for some inside baseball stuff before we move on to our review of the issues of the day, politics and so forth, Super Tuesday, the results, and where we are. The reason for this is, once again, so much misinformation about this program and advertisers is in the mainstream media. People are reporting things that, A, are not true, and B, I don't even think the people reporting it have the slightest idea what they're talking about, nor do they have the ability to understand it.

But I know that many of you are spending a lot of time -- God bless you -- on the Web doing what you can to express your support for the program. And judging from the reaction of my own brother, who sends me a note last night, "You really lost 28 sponsors?" No, we have not lost 28 sponsors. "Well, how can they say it?" Because they lie and because they don't understand how it works, and that's what I want to try and explain. In fact, folks, we have three brand-new sponsors that will be starting in the next two weeks. Now, obviously, I'm not gonna tell you who they are today, but we've got three brand-new, full-fledged sponsors starting in the next two weeks.



Two of the sponsors who have canceled have asked to return. We are being very careful about that. Not gonna give you any names here. One of them is practically begging to come back. Everything is fine on the business side. Everything's cool. There is not a thing to worry about. What you're seeing on television about this program and sponsors and advertisers is just incorrect. And let me try to explain how this works. Let's take the claim that we've lost 28 sponsors. Sponsors on this program are both local and national. We deal with the national sponsors on this program. We have 600-plus stations. They sell their own commercials. We don't have anything to do with those sponsors. We don't get paid by those sponsors. We have no idea who those sponsors are.

Let's make up a company, ABC Widget Company. And let's say that ABC Widget Company says, "We are no longer going to appear on the Rush Limbaugh Show." Well, ABC Widget Company isn't on the Rush Limbaugh Show. What happens is, advertising agencies order advertising buys on a series of local stations from market to market to market. A controversy like this erupts. They put out a notice to the stations, "By the way, for the time being we don't want our commercials run when Limbaugh is on." But they are not canceling their advertising on the station. They're just saying they don't want it running on my program during the local affiliate's commercial time, not ours.

So this 28 or 32 -- and I don't even know if that number's accurate, numbers are coming from Media Matters. There's no way anybody could know this, but I'm gonna put it in further perspective in just a second. What it means is there have been -- let's use the number 28 -- 28 advertisers who none of us are aware are even advertising on our local stations who had sent out orders that their commercials are not to run on my program. But that is not revenue to us. They are not our sponsors. They are not even canceling their advertising on the local station. They're just saying for the time being they don't want it run from noon to three. And let me tell you, this happens every day. It's been happening for 23-plus years. And it's not just to me. There are clients, advertisers, that tell stations, "I don't want this to run in Beck's show. I don't want it to run in Hannity's. I don't want it to run in Howard Stern's." It's all part of the business.

But because there's a focal point on this in trying to dispirit you and trying to present a picture of this program that doesn't exist and that's untrue, they're trying to make it sound like this is unprecedented -- that it's never happened before, it's at an all-time high -- and it simply isn't the case. We have not lost 28 national sponsors. There are not 28 advertisers who were paying us who aren't anymore. They are local commercial buys. Many of them may not even be running in my show to begin with. The advertisers are just saying, "If they are, pull 'em. We don't want 'em in there for now," but they're staying on the local stations. These advertisers are not abandoning EIB affiliates.

Nobody is losing money here, including us, in all this. And that is key for you to understand. They are not canceling the business on our stations. They're just saying they don't want their spots to appear in my show. We don't get any revenue from 'em anyway. The whole effort is to dispirit you. It's to make you think the left is being successful in its campaign when it isn't. In fact, the left is so fed up, they can't see straight. They thought they had me. They thought I would be off the air by now. They can't understand why I still am on the air. There is also another rumor going around that I am going to be suspended for a week. It is utter BS.

Read the rest here:

As I said previously, 23 milllion daily listeners have a force all their own, and the majority aren't going anywhere because of the Left's kabuki outrage over a left-wing agitator like Sandra Fluke. In fact, the current controversy will probably increase Limbaugh's ratings. I speak from personal experience here...I first started listening to Rush Limbaugh after the Clintons attempted to demonize him, just to see what all the fuss was about.

The latest move by the Left, spearheaded by cartoon character Gloria Allred is to try to criminalize the matter. ( h/t, Rhymes With Right). Apparently, there's an old defamation statute in Florida where Limbaugh lives that provides that '“whoever speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree."

First of all, since Ms. Fluke has already provided the numbers on the amount of contraception she cliams she needs for her apparently active sex life, the 'falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity ' part falls apart. And secondly, she is what the law terms a 'semi-public figure', and the SCOTUS has already ruled pretty decisively on that.

Just another excuse for Allred to try and milk a few headlines...pathetic.

'Sluts', Hypocrisy And The Leftist Agenda

What price silence? How does liberty wither and fade away? It seems we're about to find out.

In looking at the media frenzy over the story of Georgetown coed Sandra Fluke and conservative icon Rush Limbaugh, the Left's obscene agenda has never been clearer. And as you'll see, this is no accident.

The story began when Rep. Darrel Issa held a hearing over whether President Obama had the authority to violate the First Amendment and require Catholic institutions to pay for abortions, birth control, and other items forbidden by the Catholic Church, a clear violation in my view and that of many others of the First Amendment's free practice and establishment clauses.

During the hearings, the Democrats, seemingly out of left field wanted to bring in Georgetown third year student Sandra Fluke to testify before Issa's committee on contraceptives. Rep. Issa refused, correctly pointing out that this hearing was not about contraception but a constitutional issue, whereupon a number of the Democrats staged a noisy public walk out. It was amplified, repeated ad nauseum and heavily covered by their operatives in the media exactly the way the Democrats wanted it to be scripted - as a story about the Evil Republicans trying to outlaw birth control rather than about a president's arrogant bypassing of the Constitution .

To underline this, the Democrats put together an 'unofficial committee' and had Ms. Fluke testify as the sole witness, during which she went into what was well-scripted angst about the cost of contraception, how her friends were being denied, and why the taxpayers should be made to pay for it. Again, on cue, this was blown up into major headlines.

Ms. Fluke's testimony, if one could call it that, attracted a great deal of ridicule because the numbers she gave were so obviously inflated that her fellow Georgetown students would have had little time to do anything else but have sex if they were even remotely accurate.

For instance, she cited a 'survey' she claimed to have made showing that 40% of her fellow students "struggled financially" to meet a $1,000 per year cost for contraception, justifying a federal mandate to force insurance companies to provide coverage for contraceptives free of charge, and force religious institutions to buy that insurance.

The actual cost of contraception? Per the pharmacy clerk at the local DC area Target, the price of the generic versions of the standard birth control pills like Ortho Tri-Cyclen and Ortho-Cyclen go for $9 per month...without insurance.

That's where Rush Limbaugh got involved.

After deconstructing the actual facts, Limbaugh turned his sights on Sandra Fluke's basic premise:

“What does it say about the college coed Susan Fluke [sic], who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex."

“She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps.“The johns, that’s right. We would be the johns — no! We’re not the johns. Well — yeah, that’s right. Pimp’s not the right word.”

As inartful as his phrasing was, he was substantially correct in taking this to its point of logical absurdity. What this whining professional Leftist agitator - we'll examine that in a minute - wanted was for a Catholic university to violate its principles and its right to religious liberty so that other people can finance for her sex life. But in doing so, the normally astute commentator fell into a carefully laid trap, one arranged with the connivance of the White House that started when Democrat operative turned media shill George Stephanopoulos asked a seemingly out of the blue question a few weeks ago about Republicans banning contraception while he was supposedly moderating a GOP debate for ABC News .

The idea behind the trap's quite simple. Barack Hussein Obama can't run on his record, and the spotlight needs to be taken away from high gas prices, continued real unemployment and this president's incompetency and adherence to an agenda foreign to the majority of Americans. This made up 'war against woman and birth control' is what they decided on.

Sarah Fluke was definitely not chosen at random to be the spear point of this attack. The 30-year-old 'student' has a long time involvement with Leftist causes ( and the Democrat Party) who enrolled at Georgetown with the express purpose of agitating for the school to pay for students’ birth control and abortions. Nor is birth control all she believes you should pay for. She also wants you to cover the complete cost of sex change operations, which she labels 'gender re-assignment'.

Another piece of the puzzle was revealed when Rush Limbaugh made an on-the-air apology for his choice of words and for any distress he had caused Sandra Fluke...who in the interim, got a call of support from none other than Barack Obama, who brought his daughters into the mix:
“I thought about Malia and Sasha,” Obama said Tuesday at a news conference. “And one of the things I want them … to be able to do is speak their minds in a civil and thoughtful way, and I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names when they’re being good citizens.

"I wanted Sandra to know that her parents ought to be proud of her.”

When Sandra Fluke was interviewed on The View, she was asked about Limbaugh's apology by the resident harpies. She of course refused to accept it, telling a nation-wide audience to 'go to Media Matters, they have an excellent article on this.'

Now, why would Sandra Fluke refer people to an openly anti-Semitic, George Soros financed web site?

The rules of the dinosaur media are quite clear - a Leftist or a Democrat can say or do pretty much anything, but someone on the right of the spectrum is subject to what amounts to speech codes and thought crime penalties.

That's even more true these days than ever, because not only does this White House coordinate with its lackeys employed in media, not only does it have an enemies list - but it now has an entire organized media infrastructure which Media Matters is a part of, financed by Soros and other wealthy Leftists with the expressed goal of taking down and silencing 'dissidents' and thought criminals.

One useful tactic involves orchestrating Leftists to use social media and e-mail to firebomb advertisers. Media Matters and other affiliated groups used this tactic to get Lou Dobbs off the air at CNN, played a role in getting Glenn Beck off FOX and getting Pat Buchanan fired from MSNBC. Now, it's Rush Limbaugh's turn.

House Democrats have already raised over $1.1 million and reportedly collected 500,000 signatures on a petition targeted Limbaugh with a "war on women" campaign, while Senate Democrats have started an online petition calling for him to be thrown off the air and demanding that Republicans in Congress denounce him. Sandra Fluke is undoubtedly part of this network..which is exactly why she was chosen by Leftist Democrats to be their 'poster girl' for the campaign.

Meanwhile several major advertisers have pulled their ads from the show : Sleep Train, Pro Flowers, Sleep Number Beds, Carbonite, Quicken Loans, Citrix, and Legal Zoom.

There's a suspicious coordination seemingly at work here. For one thing, almost all of these companies are owned by people who contribute heavily to Democrats or Leftist Causes, like Carbonite's CEO David Friend whose parent company Orchid Partners contributes heavily to MoveOn.org, America Coming Together and Democracy for America, or Sleep Number's CEO Bill McLaughlin, another America Coming Together and Media Matters contributor.

There's even evidence that pressure is being brought on others not connected with Limbaugh's show to get in line with the 'demonize Rush ' policy by some of these same advertisers and the Soros machine. I've heard from at least one of my notorious Little Birdies that MSNBC, where some of these companies also advertise was involved in pushing them to jump ship from what was obviously a very productive advertising platform.

I'm not particularly worried about Rush Limbaugh surviving. His 23 million daily listeners are a force all their own, and he's going to continue to be a force to be reckoned with. But others without his clout are going to be victimized by this machine and taken down.

It's time to make a stand and show these corrupt jackals that there's a price tag for trying to hijack our liberty.

At the bottom of this essay, I'm going to provide you with the contact information for the seven advertisers who decided to cooperate in convicting Rush Limbaugh of a thought crime and work for the Soros and Obama agenda. I recommend you carpet bomb them with e-mails, faxes and calls telling them that now that their true colors are out in the open, you will no longer purchase their products and services. A simple search on the web reveals a number of other companies who do exactly what they do and will serve just as well. Put this information on your Facebook pages and tell your friends to do the same.Use Twitter. Make them hurt.

It's also time to send the Left and the Democrats a message that their kabuki outrage isn't fooling anyone. When Bill Maher, who referred to Governor Sarah Palin as a 'c**t' and never bothered to apologize for it gives a million dollars to Obama's PAC and that money is accepted cheerfully, it's time to get in this president and his supporters faces about why that's acceptable. Does President Obama want to send that kind of message to his daughters? Does he not think Sarah Palin deserves the same consideration as a 'good citizen'? Is he comfortable with Bill Maher being used as a high profile Democrat fundraiser? It appears that he is.

No comment, Mr. President?

Any one of the Democrats frothing at the mouth over Limbaugh's remarks ever say anything about Ed Schultz repeatedly referring to conservative Talk show host Laura Ingraham as a 'slut'? On the contrary, a number of them thought it was absolutely hilarious. Remember when 'comedian' Sarah Bernhard made calling for the gang rape of Sarah Palin a part of her routines?

In fact, there's a whole history of vile attacks on women by the unrepentant Left.

This is total war. Remember, we think they're wrong, but they hate us and think that any means fair or foul is justified.

It's time we started fighting back.



****************************************************

Citrix: Mark B. Templeton is the President and CEO.

The contact info for the Citrix Corporate Headquarters is :

Toll Free Phone: 1-800-424-8749

Phone: 954-267-3000

Fax: 954-267-9319

mail:

Citrix Systems Fort Lauderdale
851 West Cypress Creek Road
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309

**********************************************

Quicken contact info is on this page of their website. The company has an online chat function here as well.

Phone, Client Relations: 1-800- 863-4332

Mail Address:

Quicken Loans - Main Office – Compuware
1050 Woodward Avenue
Detroit, MI 48226

*******************************************************
The President and CEO of Sleep Number is Bill McLaughlin. This company has contact through an e-mail form they provide here.


**********************************************************

Legal Zoom: The Co-founders of this company are Brian Liu, Brian Lee, Eddie Hartman and Robert Shapiro. The contact info for Legal Zoom:

The address for e-mails is here

The Corporate Headquarters phone number is: 1-323-962-8600.

The fax number is: 323-962-8300

The Corporate Headquarters mail address is:

Legal Zoom.com
101 N. Brand Blvd., 11th Floor
Glendale, CA 91203

****************************************
Pro-Flowers: Their contact info is here.

***********************************

Carbonite's CEO is David Friend.

Corporate Headquarters
177 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02115
Main Office: 617-587-1100
Toll Free: 877-665-4466

Customer Support Center
24 Mollison Way
Lewiston, ME 04240
Customer Support

Their e-mail contact is available here

Why The Boehner Bill Should Die - And Quickly

I had a piece I've been toying with about why the Boehner bill ought to deep sixed, and I get about half way done with it when I found out that Rush beat me to it, and quite eloquently.

To summarize, (a) it's obvious that Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid has no plan, as I pointed out yesterday. (b) The president is absolutely clueless and disengaged and (c) the Democrats want a default for political reasons and will use it to avoid paying our military or issuing social security checks to bash the Republicans unless they get the massive tax increases they want.

What El Rushbo did was to take it a step further, as he often does. Since the Democrats have no plan, what Reid will do is take Boehner's plan once the House votes on it, gut it and tweak it get what they want, pass it in the Democrat majority Senate and then claim the GOP are 'obstructionist' if they fail to go along. The Boehner Bill, highly edited and warped, will become the Reid bill!

Simply brilliant, in all it's perfidy.

Rush Limbaugh has a long transcript up on this, which is a must-read. On th eplus side, I know Boehner checks in with Limbaugh and so do some other members of the GOP, so hopefully they'll just let the Boehner bill die. Voting has already been postponed again on it.

Boehner should simply declare Cut, Cap and Balance was best House offer, and that it's now up to President Obama to submit HIS plan for a vote. Call their bluff.

It would be nice if we were dealing with people who would put the country's welfare ahead of their political agenda and lust for power. We're not.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Rush Limbaugh : "Obama's Urging Israel To Destroy Itself"

Here's a snippet of Rush Limbaugh's reaction to President Obama's Middle East speech yesterday..and the full transcript to the entire segment below. As usual, he's ahead of the curve and points out what I've been saying all along...that the president has been orchestrating and assisting the Muslim Brotherhood revolts in the Arab world, particularly in Egypt.

The one link he didn't make in this segment ( although I'm sure he's aware of it) is the UN's 'Responsibility to Protect' doctrine that Obama pushed to get adopted there and is using as a precedent in Libya.

I can almost guarantee you that Obama has plans to use it against Israel to get the US to intervene against Israel and in favor of the 'Palestinians'.

RUSH: All right, so now we know, ladies and gentlemen, it is official, and the instincts of many, including mine, were correct. The Arab Spring is an uprising of Middle Eastern nations against Israel, and they have been aided and abetted by President Barack Obama of the United States of America. That's what's going on, and that's what this speech was all about.

Greetings, welcome back. Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, and the Limbaugh Institute.

Here's the money quote of the speech. It came near the end of it. This is what all of this was about. "The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state."

Back to the 1967 borders. So Israel is now surrounded by enemies. I've been there. You really can't grasp this until you go. I mean you can look at it on a map but 'til you see how small Israel is and how surrounded it is, and then the demands that they give up even more, Israel is a country at one point nine miles wide, nine miles is all. Now, these enemies which surround Israel now have major weapons. And so according to President Obama, in a speech, Israel should give up its buffer areas like the Golan Heights, and again, if you've been to the Golan Heights you can see the strategic importance. You can see everything from there, including who's coming at you.

Now, for me, I don't know how you can even think this way. And again, I say this having been there and toured Israel for five days. I don't know how you can think this way when the Palestinians are committed to destroying Israel. And it's not just the Palestinians. Virtually every nation surrounding Israel is committed to its destruction. What country in its right mind would make a deal with such an enemy? Would we go back to our 1848 borders? Would we give the French areas of the Louisiana Purchase? Would we do this? What kind of president urges a country to destroy itself and submit its people to potential genocide? And that's what Obama has just done.

Now, there is some scuttlebutt going on, and it's only fair to mention this. As you know, Benjamin Netanyahu is coming to Washington to meet with President Obama. And the scuttlebutt is that as a bargaining chip, Netanyahu was considering using this offer of going back to the '67 borders with swaps. I don't know if this is true, but the scuttlebutt is that in a certain set of circumstances, if negotiations evolved in a certain way, that this would be something Netanyahu would propose. Well, if that's true, he's lost it because Obama just gave it away. Obama just used it himself, if that was to be a bargaining chip. Now, I have to tell you, I don't understand how that would be a bargaining chip. I don't know yet, I'm gonna have to try to learn this. I don't know why Israel would offer to go back to the '67 borders. But that's the scuttlebutt. The scuttlebutt is that they might be willing to and Netanyahu might be willing to offer such a thing. All right, well, let's accept that, the scuttlebutt's true; he can't offer it any longer because Obama just took it.

So if that was true, if that was something in Netanyahu's arsenal, Obama just took it away from him. Israel has no flexibility in this at all other than to say no. So again, Obama just took away what could have been a bargaining chip the Israelis wanted to employ here. So that's what this is all about. The Arab Spring is an uprising against Israel. The president of the United States has implicitly recognized the ultimate goal of the Arab Spring, and that is the defeat of and the end of Israel. And in this speech, President Obama got out in front of it. President Obama is helping them in their goal. That's real leadership, is it not? Realizing what the Arab Spring is and moving the ball forward for them.
Just the other day, by the way, we saw Israel being attacked from all sides. There was a day last week where Israel was under the gun from all three sides. It was on the day of the anniversary of the founding of their nation, which the Arabs call that day a catastrophe. Those are the demonstrators that impressed Obama, by the way, and those are the demonstrators he cited today in his speech, the ones that were protesting Israel. So Obama is implicitly recognizing the ultimate goal of the Arab Spring, the defeat of Israel. He's trying to get out in front and help them achieve their goal. The Arab Spring is an offensive against Israel, and this speech proves it. Every new government in the Middle East will be anti-Israel.

I tell you what, folks, Obama is really feeling his oats here from the Osama Bin Laden assassination. On the heels of that, he has sided with the Palestinians against Israel. It's almost as if he had a Democrat-controlled Congress again, could jam legislation down our throats. And yes, all the other stuff is true, too. He did pledge all kinds of money. He did promise to give away the store. He pledged all kinds of new aid to help in this process. So it's an amazing thing, the 1967 borders, give up the buffer zones. The one thing again, and I'm gonna have to dig deep on this, and it's gonna be tough for me to find this during the program. I hope I can, but I don't quite understand Israel offering this as a bargaining chip. I don't know what they would get for it, but that's the scuttlebutt. The scuttlebutt is that Israel was gonna offer this themselves, a return to the '67 borders. And again, even if that happened to be true, they can't now because Obama's just demanded it, not made it a bargaining chip. Israel, I don't know what they hope to gain by this.

I remember on that trip, it was in the summer of 1993, five-day trip, it was profoundly informative, moving, and educational. I had a chance to talk with many of the leaders of the day -- Rabin, Shimon Peres -- some of this I look back on, it was funny, I remember sitting in Shimon Peres's office, he kept buckling and unbuckling his belt while seated. I tried not to comment on it. I tried not to even look like I noticed it. But he had obviously been prepared, done his homework, 'cause he kept ragging on Ronald Reagan and the trees, that Reagan had done great damage to the trees. So I think he was jabbing me in a way, trying to get a rise, but the belt buckle thing I never quite got. When I had a chance to talk with Rabin, remember, we didn't know it at the time we were there, but they were in the midst of secret discussions to give up even more of the country with Arafat. These talks were going on I think in Germany. We didn't learn about this 'til a couple months later.

I asked Rabin, "Why are you all of a sudden willing to make deals with people who have sworn your extermination? Intellectually I don't understand it." I said, "Is it because of your age and you've lived your entire life at war, and you don't want that for your kids?" And he swore that's not what it was. And he said this was the time this had to be done to end hostilities. The highlight was getting a three-hour tour of settlements in the West Bank on a bus with Ariel Sharon, who, of course, had no desire to give up anything. And the people of the West Bank, we stopped at a couple houses in the West Bank, and the people there loved Ariel Sharon. We had a Mossad briefing, went up to the Golan Heights. And that was kind of moving, too.

At the military installation in the Golan Heights I remember asking a young 19-year-old member of the Israeli Defense Forces something along the lines of why, other than conscription, why do you do this? And he said, "I want you to look over there." And he pointed in the direction -- "See, that's Syria." And it was, you know, a couple cornfields away. I mean it was right there, is the point. "See over there? That's Jordan." They can see the land representing every country that wants them wiped out. And then he pointed down the bottom of the hill. He said, "You see that? That's my house where my mom and dad and my sister live. That's why I do this. We're surrounded. We're totally surrounded."

Okay. Psst. Media tweak time, folks, Media Tweak of the Day. Don't tell anybody. Time for the media tweak. Given the partial mission of Osama Bin Laden, you have to know that there are places in the Middle East today who think it's just a shame he didn't live to see this day, after this speech by an American president. If he woulda just hung on a couple of more weeks, they are no doubt saying at Al-Qaeda camps, at Taliban camps, Sheik Bin Laden would have been so happy. They're no doubt saying that after hearing this speech.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, we'll get to the phones here just a second, but I have one little thing. I did get a note here from someone familiar with the internal political workings of the state of Israel. "Rush, the 1967 borders, as a basis for two states, is not a big deal. The vast majority of Israelis favor it or are at least politically reconciled to that. That's not a big deal. The real news in this speech is that Obama advocates a two-state deal without first settling the claims of the Palestinian refugees from 1948 to a right of return." You're familiar with that term? The right of return means the 1948 refugees demand a return to their homes in pre-1967 Israel. "If that were part of any deal that would of course destroy Israel as a Jewish state, it would be overrun. And it's an extreme demand that nobody in Israel can or ever would accept, and until the Palestinians agree, as they haven't, to relinquish this right, there can't be a deal."

There will not be two states unless the Palestinians give up on that. And they haven't, and they won't, and my old buddy here says if Obama can't say that in public, he's being irresponsible or worse. Now, I'm assuming here that all of this is pap. This whole speech today is designed to be something other than what it came off being. It celebrates the Arab Spring, aligning against Israel, all of this, there's no question about it. But to have a genuine two-state existence, the right of return has to be dealt with, and it hasn't been. It wasn't even mentioned and as such to talk about a two-state solution without mentioning a right of return is irresponsible.

So here you have grandstanding on the part of the president for his own personal political purposes, without regard to the results of anything on the ground in Israel. It's not surprising. It's not surprising Obama would hijack something that everybody thinks is of great, major import; would hijack something that everybody thinks portends major change for the region, when in fact it doesn't at all. And yet he gets credit for being ahead of major change when nothing really is going to happen. You talk about meddling in another country's affairs. You know, I don't know. I don't live in Israel, obviously. I keep hearing here the '67 borders, not a big deal to Israelis. To me, it seems like suicide. But what do I know? I'm not an Israeli, and I don't live here.

We'll shake all this out. (interruption) What is our foreign policy? What is Obama's foreign policy? It's called reelect 2012 Barack Obama. I shoulda mentioned this at the top because it's true of everything that he's doing now, foreign policy, domestic or what have you. You have to look at all this through the prism of the Obama reelect effort. Our foreign policy is reelect Obama. It's not so much what our foreign policy is, is they believe in the power of speeches to win votes. They believe in the aggressive use of speeches, pure and simple. He knows full well that by tomorrow everybody's gonna have forgotten the nuts and bolts of what he said, that Israel is not gonna go to the '67 borders because the Palestinians are not gonna cave on the right to return, so nothing's really gonna change except he's gonna have made one hell of a good speech that the media will be able to go back to it and say it was thoughtful, it was sincere, it was serious, all that rotgut. Everything's designed to make Obama look good, Snerdley. You know that.

Break Transcript

RUSH: This is Kevin, St. Clairsville, Ohio. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hello, Rush. Longtime listener. I've been a listener since 1988.

RUSH: Thank you, sir, that's from the get-go.

CALLER: Yes, sir. And the reason I was calling was to weigh in on the president's speech today. My theory is that with him asking the Israelis to pull back to the '67 borders, I think Israel is being set up in that obviously I don't believe that Israel is just gonna roll over and play dead and do what President Obama wants them to do. But the average person out there who isn't informed enough about what's going on in the Middle East, when Israel fails to do that, and then, you know, this is the beginning of making the Israelis look like the bad guys, in other words, making them look like --

RUSH: Oh, yeah.

CALLER: -- the poor Palestinians --

RUSH: Absolutely.

CALLER: -- are really trying, but the Israelis --

RUSH: Oh, yeah, there's no question that's the point. As I was just reading, somebody had a point here that I can't remember -- I am absorbing so much -- Israel is paying the price for Barack Obama's lack of popularity in the Arab world. That's how somebody here has just put it, and I wish I could remember who said it so that I could credit them, but you're exactly right. Israel is paying the price for Obama's lack of popularity, and his attempt to regain it in the Middle East.

Now, get this. This is just in from the Jerusalem Post. Now, remember, my media tweak on today's program was that you just know that in certain terrorist enclaves of the Middle East, they're saying, "Damn it, if only Sheik Bin Laden could have been alive to hear this speech, to hear the plan offered for the destruction of Israel. If only Sheik Bin Laden could have heard." You know they're saying this.

And from the Jerusalem Post: "Right-Wing Members of the Knesset are Calling Obama the New Arafat -- 'Barack Hussein Obama adopted the staged plan for Israel's destruction of Yasser Arafat, and he is trying to force it on our prime minister,' said Likud MK Danny Danon. 'All that was new in the speech was that he called for Israel to return to 1967 borders without solving the crisis. Netanyahu has only one option: To tell Obama forget about it.'" So the caller says Obama is playing the Arab street, and he is. He's trying to define the Arab Spring here as an Arab uprising. You know, going back to '67, the more I've looked into this the more I have found that it's not that big a deal to Israelis, that apparently it was going to be a bargaining chip that Netanyahu was prepared to use, but he can't now since Obama has appropriated it for himself.

Tantamount here, though, is the right of return. And without acknowledging that, there cannot be a two-state solution, because the Israelis are not ever gonna agree to a right of return. If there was, there's no Israel left, and the Palestinians are never gonna formally agree to a right of return, so there's never gonna be an agreement here. You know, I am not a diplomat and I didn't go to school to be a diplomat, and I'm therefore, in these circles, not qualified, but I'm just gonna tell you here, folks, from the streets of common sense. For as long as I've been alive we've been going through this dog and pony show of negotiated peace settlements in the Middle East, and there's no such thing. It is never going to happen, and it never does happen.

Peace results from one side emerging victorious in the conflict, the other side losing and surrendering. Until that happens, all of this... it's amazing, there are careers planned for, there are careers built on this never being solved. I mean the last thing diplomats at the State Department want is a solution for any of this. There's no reason for them, then. It's like the Reverend Jackson really doesn't want to end racial strife, 'cause there's no reason for the Monochrome Coalition. These people feed off of this stuff. But just using simple common sense, how can you expect there to be a negotiated peace between two parties when one side has as its objective the extermination of the other side? You can throw all the striped-pants diplomat bigwigs in the State Department at me all day long and nobody's gonna ever be able to persuade me that I'm full of it. This is to me just simple, pure common sense.

I don't know about you, but as a citizen, it doesn't matter who the president is, it doesn't matter what world leaders are; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, boy, what a purpose it serves. It serves a purpose for presidents to be great like Clinton wanted to be great. It offered a forum for Arafat to be whatever he wanted to be. In fact, you know, proof of what I'm saying, there was a point in time when Clinton gave Arafat everything he was asking for, and Arafat ran away from it and hid. He was stunned and he was shocked. But this conflict is just too handy for too many people. It offers too much too much opportunity for too many people. A bunch of think tank people have an opportunity to make careers as great thinkers by being Middle East experts, all the guest opportunities on the cable network shows, all the writing opportunities, the publishing opportunities, sitting in this distinguished chair, or that distinguished chair, at this prestigious think tank or what have you, never solving anything. Never, ever getting anything done.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Some Thanksgiving Morsels You'll Enjoy

El Rushbo tells the real story of Thanksgiving



And a few heroes who really deserve our thanks take a little time off to enjoy the day....

And finally, the original Thanksgiving Proclamation by George Washington, 1789:



Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty G-d, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Fresh Evidence (If It Were Needed) That Rush Is Brilliant - Reverse Operation Chaos!

Rush Limbaugh has decided that he is going to provide the October surprise in the midterms...by using a reverse version of the famous Operation Chaos he used in the primaries by telling Hillary's potential2012 supporters to sit on their hands this November!

The brilliant part is that I guarantee it will have an effect, just as Operation Chaos did.

via Breitbart...

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Rush: Liberals And The Violence Card

Rush Limbaugh scintillates as always with a superb editorial in the Wall Street Journal...reproduced here in full because of the paywall:

The latest liberal meme is to equate skepticism of the Obama administration with a tendency toward violence. That takes me back 15 years ago to the time President Bill Clinton accused "loud and angry voices" on the airwaves (i.e., radio talk-show hosts like me) of having incited Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. What self-serving nonsense. Liberals are perfectly comfortable with antigovernment protest when they're not in power.

From the halls of the Ivy League to the halls of Congress, from the antiwar protests during the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq to the anticapitalist protests during International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings, we're used to seeing leftist malcontents take to the streets. Sometimes they're violent, breaking shop windows with bricks and throwing rocks at police. Sometimes there are arrests. Not all leftists are violent, of course. But most are angry. It's in their DNA. They view the culture as corrupt and capitalism as unjust.

Now the liberals run the government and they're using their power to implement their radical agenda. Mr. Obama and his party believe that the election of November 2008 entitled them to make permanent, "transformational" changes to our society. In just 16 months they've added more than $2 trillion to the national debt, essentially nationalized the health-care system, the student-loan industry, and have their sights set on draconian cap-and-trade regulations on carbon emissions and amnesty for illegal aliens.

Had President Obama campaigned on this agenda, he wouldn't have garnered 30% of the popular vote.

Like the millions of citizens who've peacefully risen up and attended thousands of rallies in protest, I seek nothing more than the preservation of the social contract that undergirds our society. I do not hate the government, as the left does when it is not running it. I love this country. And because I do, I insist that the temporary inhabitants of high political office comply with the Constitution, honor our God-given unalienable rights, and respect our hard-earned private property. For this I am called seditious, among other things, by some of the very people who've condemned this society?

I reject the notion that America is in a well-deserved decline, that she and her citizens are unexceptional. I do not believe America is the problem in the world. I believe America is the solution to the world's problems. I reject a foreign policy that treats our allies like our enemies and our enemies like our allies. I condemn the president traveling the world apologizing for America's great contributions to mankind. And I condemn his soft-pedaling the dangers we face from terrorism. For this I am inciting violence?

Few presidents have sunk so low as Mr. Clinton did with his accusations about Oklahoma City. Last week—on the very day I was contributing to and raising more than $3 million to fight leukemia and lymphoma on my radio program—Mr. Clinton used the 15th anniversary of that horrific day to regurgitate his claims about talk radio.

At a speech delivered last Friday at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C., the former president said: [T]here were a lot of people who were in the business back then of saying that the biggest threat to our liberty and the cause of our domestic economic problem was the federal government itself. And we have to realize that there were others who fueled this both because they agreed with it and because it was in their advantage to do so. . . . We didn't have blog sites back then so the instrument of carrying this forward was basically the right-wing radio talk show hosts and they understand clearly that emotion was more powerful than reason most of the time."

Timothy McVeigh was incensed by the Clinton administration's 1993 siege on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. It's no coincidence that the bombing took place two years to the day of the Waco siege. McVeigh was not inspired by anything I said or believe and to say otherwise is outright slander. In the aftermath of the bombing, I raised millions of dollars for the children of federal employees killed in that cowardly attack through my association with the Marine Corp Law Enforcement Foundation.

Let me just say it. The Obama/Clinton/media left are comfortable with the unrest in our society today. It allows them to blame and demonize their opponents (doctors, insurance companies, Wall Street, talk radio, Fox News) in order to portray their regime as the great healer of all our ills, thus expanding their power and control over our society.

A clear majority of the American people want no part of this. They instinctively know that the Obama way is not how things get done in this country. They are motivated by love. Not hate, not sedition. They love their country and want to save it from those who do not.

Rush it totally correct to castigate President Clinton on this one. As a matter of fact, McVeigh specifically mention Waco, where seventy-six people died in the Waco fire at the hands of the BATF, including more than 20 children and two pregnant women as a reason for his actions at his trial.

And there was also a very interesting Middle East connection to the Oklahoma city Bombing that President Clinton chose to totally ignore...with consequences that surfaced later.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Rush Limbaugh: "Obama's Got Something Against Israel..."

Rush Limbaugh did an amazing interview on Sean Hannity last night that's a must see, and I'll try to post the rest later.But this nugget popped out and I think it merits some clarification, especially in view of the recent Lap Dance of the Seven Veils in Cairo.

I think Limbaugh's entirely correct. Obama does indeed have something against Israel and possibly against Jews as well, and I think it stems from his background and history.

Barack Hussein Obama was the product of a marriage between a third world Muslim diplomat and an  anthropologist whom her friends described as fairly left wing. She had likely swallowed the line common in those circles at that time about the evils of American society, western colonialism and imperialism, of which Israel was considered an outpost.

He then spent his formative years as a Muslim, something he was caught lying about during his campaign until the evidence came to light. And it's uncertain exactly how long he remained a Muslim, if a sporadic one. As he recently revealed to Jake Tapper, he took a trip to Pakistan during his college days when there was a travel advisory in effect and very few people traveled to the country unless they had official government business or were Muslims.

The Muslim connection is important, because of the wide spread Jew hatred throughout the Qu'ran and Hadiths, the account of the life, times and deeds of Islam's prophet Mohammed. It's not impossible for a practitioner of Islam to avoid the virus, but anyone who looks at the Muslim world today knows that it's quite common to catch it.

During the period in college when, by his own admission Barry Soetoro was changing himself into Barack Hussein Obama, his hero and role model was the arch anti-semite Malcolm X. It's largely forgotten today, but while Malcolm X eventually eased up on his hatred for the White Devils provided they embraced Islam after he returned from making the hadj to Mecca, he remained a Jew hater until he died.

We also know that Barack Obama had extensive and documented links with Israel basher, terrorism apologist and academic fraud Edward Said when he was at Columbia, as well as major connections with the Saudis and the Nation of Islam through Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and his advisor, Khalid al-Mansour AKA Don Warden, a well known American Islamist with ties to both the Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam.

Al-Waleed, some of you might remember, is one of the prime movers behind the Wahabi takeover of America's mosques and madrassahs through his funding of the Islamic Society Of North America(ISNA), was a major funder of the Al Qaeda charity al-Haramain and was the Saudi prince who's $10 million dollar donation to New York City after 9/11 was spurned by then mayor Rudy Giuliani after after the prince made a public comment suggesting that the U.S. relationship with Israel were responsible for the attack.

He also has donated millions to establishing Saudi controlled Middle East Studies departments - including at Harvard, Obama's alma mater, where he ponied up a mere $20million.

After college, Obama helped organize and attended Louis Farrakhan's foul anti-Semitic orgy in Washington DC, the Million Man March.

And as we all know, as part of establishing himself in Chicago Barack Hussein Obama spent two decades sitting in Trinity United Church with the anti-semitic Jeremiah Wright ( an ex-member of the Nation of Islam and a close friend of Louis Farrakhan's) as his pastor and spiritual mentor.

In the world view of the major figures Barack Hussein Obama chose to associate himself with and many of his foreign policy cabinet appointments, Israel is a white colonialist state oppressing 'people of color' and stealing land that rightfully belongs to Muslims. Israel itself is an illegitimate state that was created and imposed by Europeans on the Muslim world out of guilt over the Holocaust - which of course, the peaceful Arab world had nothing whatsoever to do with. So it's time to force the Israelis into a political settlement to the Arab's liking, for peace and justice.

That's the mindset exactly. So is it any wonder during his speech in Cairo that Obama equated the Palestinian nakba with the Holocaust and compared the Israelis with slavemasters in the old South and the apartheid of South Africa?

Barack Obama does indeed have something against Israel, and it stems from his deepest beliefs. And now that he's in the White House, it's obvious he's prepared to act on it.