9/11: George W. Bush Stands Tall
September 12, 2011
RUSH: George Bush yesterday, the 9/11 memorials. You know, a friend of mine observed this. What did Obama do? Obama went to a soup kitchen, 9/11, a day of service, as though we've got something to apologize for, for what happened on 9/11. A friend of mine observes Obama and Bloomberg both acted like it was a natural disaster. Bush, George W. Bush, who, by the way, stands tall in retrospect. Ten years, not one attack. Great statesmanship.
If somebody told me today they wanted to put Bush's face on Mount Rushmore, I'd be in there supporting it. I saw the applause he got, I mean it was well deserved, too. I kept thinking of those "Miss Me Yet?" billboards that popped up all over the place.
A little bit about 9/11 and the memorials that took place over the weekend. When you hear Americans reliving 9/11 -- I mean real people that were citizens of the country; not media people or sports stars, but real people -- you have to wonder: At some point will George W. Bush be on Mount Rushmore? Look at what this nation went through. The shock, the horror, the terror, the doubts, the confusion, the fears of what's next, and out of that day -- and out of that treachery and confusion we got the most implausible result: No more attacks. Quite a job, Mr. President Bush. Quite a job -- and through those ten years, George W. Bush was criticized, he was mocked, he was smeared, he was the butt of late night so-called comedians.
They did assassination movies and books about George W. Bush. There's a picture. I don't know if you've seen the picture: Bush and Obama standing side by side while a memorial service is going on, prayer taking place. Bush is appropriately bowing his head. Obama is looking up at his son: God -- or, if you want, his father. But it's not an accident. Now, some people have said Obama looks like he's trying to figure out what he's gonna wear on the golf course later. But, no. Obama has this habit of looking up and looking up above everyone and Bush is bowing his head. Obama's eyes are closed looking up. That's quite striking. I think it's quite, quite telling.
They got all over Bush. He didn't leave the school the moment he heard. He didn't come back to Washington soon enough. Remember Peter Jennings saying, "Ah, you know, some presidents are just better at this than others," in expressing his disapproval the way Bush was handling the post-9/11 period. Then they said it was all his fault, not the Clintons'. And then they said he was violating civil rights, that he was listening in on liberals' phone calls and wiretapping their lives. He was rounding up citizens. He was torturing. He was invading your library records. And we had ten years of no attacks.
Rumsfeld put out a tweet today or somebody from Rumsfeld's office put out a tweet that he's canceled his New York Times subscription because of what Paul Krugman wrote about 9/11on Sunday. Krugman... I had it somewhere here in my stack, not all of it, but some of what he wrote. It really is repugnant. But Rumsfeld has canceled his subscription. I said, "What took you so long? Why is anybody on our side still reading the New York Times?" I know, I know. They're hopefully going to find themselves in praise. (interruption) No, I know. People on our side read the New York Times, Washington Post hoping and hoping that they'll be praised.
We had ten years of no attacks because of the way George W. Bush and his administration oversaw our safety -- and they left a plan for Obama to follow, which Obama did, when he wasn't complaining about what he inherited. In the meantime, 9/11 yesterday, and where's the Obama go? He says that 9/11 is "a day of service." The best way to remember 9/11 is as a day of service, to commit to service. (interruption) That's right. The New York Times, in a sane and just world, would owe George W. Bush a huge apology. Instead, they published Paul Krugman's insane rant. I guess I should find that since I've referenced this a couple of times here.
By the way, the New York Times is scared to death about Obama losing. They had they had a piece yesterday and I'm gonna spend some real time on this: "Democracy Fret Aloud Over Obama's Reelection." This is a warning to Obama that you better get serious, you better get real, you better pull out all the stops. You are losing, and you are losing in landslide proportions. I mean, this is a huge warning the New York Times has put out there. So I gotta get to that as the program unfolds, but I'm looking for the Krugman piece, and it's somewhere. Here it is: "Is it just me, or are the 9/11 commemorations oddly subdued? Actually, I don't think it’s me, and it's not really that odd. What happened after 9/11 -- and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not -- was deeply shameful.
"The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons. A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits -- people who should have understood very well what was happening -- took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity? "Te (sic) memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it." Paul Krugman.
RUSH: Let me read this from Paul Krugman. I'm gonna have to race through it because of an obscene profit hard break. "What happened after 9/11 -- and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not -- was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons. A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits -- people who should have understood very well what was happening -- took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity? The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it."
Remember how many times we've been lectured to by the great news media and the rest of the Democrats about not politicizing 9/11? And here come these guys, Krugman and so forth, and there's a piece that Richard Trumka, the head of the AFL-CIO posted on their website. This is the union that took hostages and beat up some people in Seattle last week who didn't get the memo on Obama's civility. "Sept. 11, 2011: A Day to Commit to Activism -- I would like to reflect on doors that were opened on Sept. 11, 2001, and what has come of them in the 10 years since. Working men and women rushed through doors to danger and became America’s everyday heroes. Firefighters, construction workers, nurses and EMTs, all kinds of professionals and volunteers ... And we swore we would never forget.
"Wealthy CEOs, anti-government extremist front groups and frothing talk show hosts --from the Rush Limbaughs --" there's only one me, Mr. Trumka. I wish there were another me. "From the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks to the Koch brothers, Karl Rove’s American Crossroads group, Americans for Prosperity, the Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and the American Legislative Exchange Council -- also pushed open the door to hate," after 9/11. So Krugman's demanding unity, Trumka's writing about all the hate that was spawned. And, of course, anybody that accurately remembers, for a week or ten days there was some semblance of unity. And then the Democrats began to politicize it. The Democrats opened fire on Bush for not retaliating soon enough. Yep, it was Tom Puff Daschle. He went out, said the president wasn't responding quickly enough, soon enough, whatever, and, of course, within hours the attack on Tora Bora was announced.
But it was inevitable that this would be politicized. Everything in our country always is politicized. The idea that there was unity was the fantasy. There never has been unity in the country. Not permanent unity. Not everybody agreeing on everything. All we have are contrasts. And I'll tell you, someday, 9/11 afforded us some fabulous ones. The president of the United States on 9/11, the president who wrecked our economy, shows up in a soup kitchen on 9/11 to honor... what? What do you honor? What does a soup kitchen have to do with 9/11? What are you honoring?
That our country has no jobs? A soup kitchen! All for the purposes of spreading his notion of what we should be doing on 9/11, a day of service? "President Obama and his family volunteered at a soup kitchen to help underscore his call to a national service that he has emphasized as a way to commemorate the terror attacks of 9/11." Now, doesn't making the anniversary of 9/11 into a day of service make it seem like we're the ones who have to make amends? Community service? That's, in many cases, part of a punishment that's handed out to people or a deal that's made with them. We have something to apologize for, to be sorry about; that America was somehow in the wrong, that we have to do something to make up for it, so we must have a day of service.
I'm gonna tell you, 9/11's always gonna be a day of remembrance multiply and when Obama shows up at a soup kitchen, it reminds all of us to remember that it is Obama who put all the people who were in the soup kitchen in the soup kitchen! Obama is going to the soup kitchen to visit the beneficiaries of his policies...on 9/11. Folks, even if that was not Obama's intended purpose behind call for a day of service on 9/11, isn't that how it would be perceived by a lot of people around the world, especially in the Muslim world? Isn't this the same White House that's so obsessed with creating precisely the right optics? How can they be this tone deaf? On 9/11, nearly 3,000 Americans were murdered for doing nothing more than going to work, not going to a soup kitchen!
They were going to work; they were murdered. The president of the United States says we need a day of service and he goes to a soup kitchen. Either this is intentional or they're tone deaf -- and his personal penance, his day of service is to help make meals for the poor? Was that what 9/11 was all about, the poor not having enough to eat? The unjust distribution of food, is that what 9/11 was all about? The lack of social justice in the world? In actual fact, most of the 9/11 hijackers were from quite wealthy families. We know this now. They came from a country, Saudi Arabia, where nobody goes hungry. They may have an appendage cut off here and there but nobody goes hungry.
There is not "food insecurity" in Saudi Arabia. You talk about a place where practically no one has to work, it is Saudi Arabia. Obama's claims to the contrary, the 9/11 hijackers were not motivated by poverty or any lack of opportunity or anger at economic injustice in this country. They were motivated by hate -- and they didn't just hate us because of our freedoms, either. They hated us because of what we're not. Muslims. So helping to make meals for the poor, while a noble gesture in and of itself, has nothing to do with why we were attacked on 9/11 and it has nothing to do with protecting the nation from having it happen again. It's misleading. Just a subtle form of agitprop. You talk about politicizing an event, the president of the United States at a soup kitchen on 9/11?
RUSH: Jane in Rockford, Illinois. Hi. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Jane is one of my all-time top ten favorite female names.
CALLER: Oh, Rush, I love you! Hey, Rush, I just... You know, so many things go through my mind, 9/11 and that; and as I told you Snerdley, you know, I -- I found your show on September 12th of 2011 -- I'm sorry, 2001. I -- I was just stunned and mortified by what happened on that day. It was my dad's 60th birthday, and so every year when his birthday comes around, of course it conjures up all these memories. And yesterday I spent the day just rifling through the TV stations trying to find George Bush on something, just because that feeling of security that he gave us after 9/11, just his stoicism; just everything about that man and his life brought peace and security to me especially. I had a young daughter, she wasn't even one yet, and I remember that day holding her crying, just wondering, "What kind of world have I brought you into?" and, you know, it's just... President Bush on Mount Rushmore, I'm all there. I'm right with you, I... He is the greatest president in my lifetime. I only wish I knew 20 years ago what I know now and I would have found your show so much earlier.
RUSH: You know, I often hear people say that. I can tell you: It is a beautiful thing to know now what you knew 20 years ago.
RUSH: I do know now what I knew 20 years ago, and it's something to aspire to. I tell you, you you've captured this. Your daughter is one, you're wondering what kind of world you brought her into, now you got Obama, and you're really wondering what kind of world you brought her into.
CALLER: Absolutely. I mean., now I'm even more fearful than I was then, actually.
CALLER: You know, isn't that ironic?
RUSH: That's what I mean by knowing then what you know now.
CALLER: Yeah. I love your show, Rush, I love Snerdley, I love everything, and I'm so glad I found on you. Not that I wish 9/11 would happen all over again, because that's how I found you, but keep up the great work, and I just love everything about.
RUSH: Thank you very much, Jane. I appreciate that. You're very sweet and (sigh) ou know, this so-called unity after 9/11, you know, the real reason that there was a semblance of any unity after 9/11 was that the Democrats thought that the Republicans were gonna blame Bill Clinton, and they sat around and waited for that to happen -- and that didn't happen because of Bush's class and dignity so after a couple weeks went by... Actually it wasn't even a couple weeks. Right after 9/11, like September 12, 18, in that range, Congress refused to give Bush some wiretapping authority. "Congress explicitly refused to grant Bush and the administration the authority to conduct warrantless wiretaps in surveillance operations against US citizens and its resolution authorizing the use of military force against terrorists." There was a lot of stuff happening in the immediate days afterwards, and Congress stood up. I'm not debating whether they should or shouldn't have, that's not the point. The point is, there wasn't all this "unity" that you hear all these pundits now waxing eloquent about, just wringing their hands, "Ohhh, I wish we could go back to the way it was! (sobbing)" It never was the way that anybody thinks it was, and don't doubt me because I am one of the few who knew then what I know now.