THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS

This is anniversary weekend for two events that improved society.

It is the 18th anniversary of the first Gulf War, when President George Herbert Walker Bush, Colin Powell, and Norman Schwarzkopf took Saddam Hussein and kicked his terrorist hide back to Baghdad, where the current President Bush finished him off and sent him to hell.

It is also the 20th anniversary of another man that has shaped history, Rush Limbaugh.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/08/01/rush-limbaugh-20-years-of-excellence-in-broadcasting/#comments

Whether one likes him or hates him, Rush Limbaugh has managed to do what few people do for 20 minutes, much less 20 years…stay relevant.

I agree with Rush 2/3 of the time. I like him most of the time.

The republican takeover of 1994 happened because of three men: Haley Barbour, Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh.

People who hate Limbaugh simply do not understand his success.

First of all, Rush Limbaugh saved AM Radio. This is not in dispute. FM Radio dominates music, and AM Radio was about to collapse. No less a liberal than Alan Colmes credits Rush with revolutionizing talk radio.

Rush is unique. He does not have guests. I personally do a weekly radio show, and I will not do a show without guests. To be able to talk for three hours per day is a gift that Rush has.

Rush also tapped into a vein that the liberal media refuses to admit. The media is overwhelmingly liberal. Rush succeeded because people wanted to have their voices heard. There simply was no outlet for conservatives.

When I was in college people assumed that I got my ideas from Rush. This was condescending
because it implied that I could not think for myself. It was also a bizarre notion because I had never heard of him. Until somebody bought me his second book, “See, I told you so,” I had no inkling of his existence. I read the book and thought, “Wow, I have been saying some of this stuff for years.”

Even though Rush was unique back then, there are now plenty of talk radio programs, including lil old me. So why is Rush still number one?

Because I have not been on long enough to dethrone him.

Ok, ego aside, it is because the man is funny. It is not his politics. He is an entertainer. He delivers his message in a lighthearted, jovial manner. He constantly reminds his audience to “be of good cheer.”

One of his fun bits centered on a political gasbag, Senator Charles Schumer of New York. Senator Schumer demanded that the baseball strike be ended with congressional intervention. He demanded that people call up congress, and say two words: “Play ball.”

Limbaugh recommended that his audience call up Schumer’s office and say two words: “Cut taxes.”

94% of the calls that came to the Senator’s office were against ending the baseball strike. Yet so many people called up and said, “Cut taxes,” that the phones and faxes had to be unplugged.

To his credit, Limbaugh does not give out the numbers. He also reminds his audience to be cheery, and not to be rude when calling up opponents.

Limbaugh is serious about his conservatism, and loves Ronald Reagan as virtually all republicans and conservatives do. Yet he is lighthearted about his presentation, often relying on hilarious song parodies from Paul Shanklin.

One reason Rush is enjoyable is because he is absolutely capable of conversing about other topics. He delves into the stock market, music, and culture. He is also a die hard fan of the National Football League, with his favorite team being the Pittsburgh Steelers. Some of the funniest bits have been when one female Jacksonville Jaguars fan would call in and harangue him after the Jaguars defeated the Steelers. Limbaugh’s own call screener, Bo Snerdly, purposely lets her through.  Rush has gotten frustrated with Mr. Snerdly more than once, and his exasperation is amusing.

In 1997, Rush was married to a Denver Broncos fan. The two teams were playing in the AFC Title Game, and Rush explained that he was banished to the bedroom, while his wife watched it in the living room. Rush confessed that he was terrified of his wife’s wrath if the Broncos were to lose. He wanted his team to win, but he also wanted peace in his home. The Broncos won 24-21. Rush was crushed, but was allowed back in the living room.

Limbaugh has had three divorces. He has never claimed to be a success in that arena, and it should not dimiish his conservative message on economics and foreign policy.

He has battled an addiction to prescription pain killers, and suffered hearing loss that could have ended his career.

Yet he keeps chugging along, because very few have been able to blend his conservative political outlook with a fun, entertaining program.

Liberals tried silencing him by bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, known as the “Hush Rush” law. Limbaugh delights i pointing out that the reason they do this is because liberals fail in the free market place. Air America hired people that had comedic backgrounds, but they focused too much on angry politics and hatred, rather than simply being entertaining. The rest are just boring.

I have not listened to Rush in years. My commute to work is only about 10 minutes, so there is simply no need for talk radio. I am thankfully not a commuter.

Nevertheless, I am thrilled Limbaugh is still going strong after 20 years. Without him, conservatives would be silenced.

Liberals want to go back to the good old days, where things were more  “civilized,” and less “coarse.” The debate was more harmonious then. This is because liberals were the only ones allowed to speak. ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, and the Jayson Blair Times controlled everything.

Liberals are not just angry that they are losing the debate. They are enraged that the debate even exists. The idea of “I am liberal, if you disagree with me, you are an imbecile, this is beyond dispute,” existed for so long. Rush shattered the monopoly.

Liberalism will never be wiped off of the face of the Earth, but at least conservatives have a chance to get their message out.

In America, one man with a dream can be broke twice, divorced thrice, and make it to the top through talent and hard work.

Congratulations Rush. You’ve earned it.

Just be careful. I am gaining on you. I am sure you would enjoy the healthy competition that capitalism provides. Besides, I will be honored to have you on my program. After all, unlike you, I depend on guests.

eric

I had the honor and privilege recently of interviewing three men from the group Vets For Freedom.

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/states/MN/

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/states/OH/

Jason Meszaros heads the Minnesota chapter. Nathan Martin runs the Ohio Chapter. Pete Hegseth heads up the entire organization at the national level. I had the pleasure of meeting Jason and Pete at a Republican Jewish Coalition event in San Francisco several months ago. I have emailed with Nathan and Jason, and visited their blogs.

The link to this radio interview is below.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/TheGGRNetwork

Jason had his article recently published in the Minneapolis new site Twincities.com

What he emphasizes is that partisan politics must take a back seat to the reality and facts on the ground.

http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_10034912

For obvious reasons, I would prefer that people listen to my one hour interview with them in its entirety. I also know that time is precious.

Here are some of the exchanges.

Eric: This is not Hardball and I am not Chris Matthews. Pete, as long as you promise not to come to my day job and tell me how to do it, I have no interest in telling you about the facts on the ground in Iraq.

Pete: Eric, I like that deal. I’ll take it.

Eric: Pete, what is going on in Iraq. Give us the facts. Arianna Huffington says we are losing.

Pete: The surge, and more importantly, the new counterinsurgency strategy in 2007, is the driver behind the progress. Iraqis are prepared to maintain security gains because Americans fought so dearly. It is important that we get the word out. Jason is a particularly effective advocate. We have to get the word out that we are succeeding, and why we are succeeding.

Eric: I am proud of you guys. Welcome home. I believe what you say, that the surge is working. However, Americans want tangible metrics. What statistics do you have?

Pete: Since June of 2007, attacks down 85%, sectarian violence down 98%. Talking point of Iraqi civil war does not exist. In addition to our surge of 30,000 troops, the Iraqi Army surged, and added 133,000 members, plus 98,000 Sons of Iraq. Over 200,000 Iraqis have stood up to fight. Caches are being found at a rate of over 70% higher than last year.

That is on the military side. On the political side, Iraqis have passed 15 of the 18 benchmarks. The Maliki government has taken the fight to Basra and Sadr City. There is also reconciliation and elections coming up.

This July America lost 5 service members. Last year we lost 70. Violence continues to drop.

Jason: The Iraqi Sunni Bloc rejoined the government. They are working with the Shiites and Kurds. The country is healing politically.

Eric: We ask so much of you guys. What do you want from us? Maybe I could use basic training. I am fat and out of shape from sitting on my couch. However, I don’t want to do basic training. What can I and other ordinary Americans do to help you guys win?

Nathan: Americans need to do what our forefathers did. We need to look past ourselves. We need to make America better for future generations. Support our troops by allowing them to do the job. America is not a strong America if we lose.

Eric: I think we are a dead America if we lose.

Pete: Jason had an outstanding op ed today which I urge listeners to check out. Partisan politics must be taken out of this war. This is much more than an election cycle. It is about winning the wars we start. Also, arm yourself with the facts. I see signs in Iraq saying “Marines and Army are at war, and the rest of the country is at the mall.” Folks at home need to stay informed. Read military blogs like Blackfive.net.

http://www.blackfive.net/

Jason: We soldiers know how to win this war. We need people to put aside their political biases and just support us. Get informed. Talk to soldiers. Ask us. We will give you the good and the bad. We give it straight up. Talk to people who were there in 2006 and 2007. Find out how the surge has succeeded.

Eric: What do you say to those that point out that 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq? How do we react to the idea that Afghanistan is the good war, Iraq is the bad war, and that Saddam had nothing to do with Bin Laden? How do you argue the point that it was wrong from the beginning?

Jason: 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. That is true. However, it is not true to say Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism. That is the distinction. Replace 9/11 with terrorism. Saddam’s connection to terrorism was incredible.

Arguments such as WMD are not worth bothering with. The connections to terrorism were there.

Pete: We try to bring the debate to 2006 and 2007 and 2008. Regardless of whether you thought it was right to go in, we are there, and must have the right strategy. Historians can debate 2003. I supported it, others did not. It is irrelevant. We are there, and must insure we are successful. What we do now is more indicative of who we are as a country.

As for good and bad wars, leaders of Al Queda repeatedly declare that Iraq is the central front. They came close. In 2006, Anbar was almost lost. It is also about what our members have seen. We were fighting Jihadists from around the world, Syrians, Chechens, etc. We are beating them there. This is why they are forced to go to Afghanistan. It is their last haven.

Eric: Some members of Congress say that they support the troops by bringing them home. I personally feel we should support Congress by sending them home. Can good patriotic Americans support the troops, but be against the mission?

Nathan: It’s difficult. Somebody can say that they hate football, it’s a violent sport, but that they root for the Pittsburgh Steelers. It’s difficult to do that. In any other line of work that would be called silly. People don’t love plumbers but hate what they do. To lambaste a soldier and then say you love them does not make sense. Those who sacrificed voer the past 5 years…the way to ensure their legacy is to emphasize the importance of the mission, and allow them to come home with honor and dignity.

Pete: There is an intellectual disconnect to separate the two. I understand why people want to. They want freedom, but don’t like this President. Therefore, I hate the mission. That undercuts the mission. Honor our service by honoring what we are fighting for. I support you, but don’t want you to do the dirty work to defend the freedoms I have.

Eric: How do you feel when people such as Max Cleland, John Kerry, John Murtha, and Jim Webb try to speak for the military? Are they military opinion, or aberrations?

Pete: They are a product of a particular time. They came out with an ax to grind based on their experiences. Fighting in Vietnam does not mean they understand the current conflict. We started Vets For Freedom to provide a counter voice. Soldiers are not monolithic. The opinion we espouse does represent the vast majority of soldiers on this mission. We believe in it and want to finish it.

When Murtha called our Marines cold blooded killers, it hurt. He was not informed because he was not there. We honor the military service of him and the others, but they are not as informed on this issue as the soldiers fighting now.

Nathan: You will never hear Pete talk about himself. He talks about the mission. It is not about us. It is about every other American that deserves to have their freedoms protected. We want people to be free from a black cloud over America. Some say “look at me.” That is not us.

Eric: Donald Rumsfeld had a quarter of a century experience. He was the Secretary of Defense for Gerald Ford. Yet despite his resume, it seemed in 2006 that we were in a state of stagnation. Rumsfeld then lost his job. What is it that General David Petraeus did that nobody else could have done, or nobody else did?

Pete: General Petraeus studied counterinsurgency. He wrote his dissertation on it based on the lessons of Vietnam. He wrote the counterinsurgency manual. He was the right man at the right time. We can armchair quarterback why it took so long. Rumsfeld had his vision, but it took a fresh set of eyes to change everything from the top down. He has the skill set and the intelligence to make it happen. He is an outside the box thinker. We were fortunate, and are fortunate to have him at CENTCOM. Some lessons can be exported to Afghnaistan, but some new tactics will be needed as well.

Nathan: When victory became a partisan cause, any kind of change would be a media defeat. This pidgeonholed the administration. The 2006 elections freed them from this.

Eric: Given that political analysts try to be military generals, I will ask you for some political analysis. Did Barack Obama do the right thing regarding his trip, and the flap over the troops?

Pete: Vets For Freedom called on him to go to Iraq. This was not to score political points. It was because he might be the next President, and he needed to benefit from hearing Petraeus. I was dismayed he laid out his plans five days before going. He should have gone first.

All in all, it was good that he made the trip, but his observations may have been predetermined. As for Germany, I don’t buy his explanation. If he wants it to be private, and apolitical, leave behind the cameras and visit them. I think they realize it was a mistake, and they should admit that.

Nathan: Senators visit places such as Walter Reed all the time. Cameras do not need to be there. If you go for the troops, you can go any time.

Eric: Over the next one to two years…do you have any projections? What can be done to make this situation in Iraq what we want it to be, dare I say it, a shining city on a hill?

Pete: Our timeline should be based on conditions on the ground. Jason is right about the significance of the Sunnis rejoining the government.

Myself and 7 others are going back to Iraq to where we served previously to get that assessment on the ground. We need to make sure the gains do not slip away. We will put together policy observations when we come back.

Eric: You guys are the definition of heroes. One of you gave the hypothetical example of hating football. That could get me to take up arms. Sometimes it takes a 9/11 or a canceling of the NFL season to get people off of their couches.

Guys like you are the reason Chris Matthews is able to berate and attack you. The more you do, the more it allows me and others to enjoy the future.

I want to get a commitment from you guys. I don’t need it now. I have met two of you in real life. The only thing I would ask is this. You guys secured Fallujah and Anbar. Is the situation hopeless, or can David Petraeus turn around and secure Detroit?

Jason: It’s not hopeless.

Eric: I won’t ask for a battle plan now. We don’t want the enemy to get our tactics. If anybody can secure it, you guys can.

Nathan: Americans like you help.

Eric: I am a chimpanzee typing on a keyboard. You are out saving lives. I will be in Israel next week partying on the beach. You will be in Iraq saving all of our lives. So I will say to you guys in advance…Thank you, and welcome home. I speak for a majority of Americans.

Pete: We’ll do this again.

Eric: Thank you, and welcome home. God bless.

The above transcription were mere snippets of the program. I implore those to listen to the entire program. Skip my voice, since all I do is ask questions. Listen to Pete Hegseth, Jason Meszaros, and Nathan Martin.

Hear them out. They have been there.

Pete will be there again next week. I eagerly await his report.

eric