Rush on Hannity and Colmes

A Sean Hannity interview with Rush Limbaugh was on Hannity and Colmes tonight. I didn't see it, as I was having dinner at my grandparents, but Fox News has a partial transcript, as well as video, and The Political Teen also has video, here.

The interview was shown in three segments. According to the Political Teen, here is how they break down:

SEGMENT 1: Fundraiser for Katrina victims, 18th year in radio, Competetion, How he got in the biz.

SEGMENT 2: Liberals have no agenda, Liberal Whining, Abortion, Roe v. Wade

SEGMENT 3: Hillary Clinton, ‘08 Race, Reagan

Here is a portion of the transcript:

HANNITY: You still have that passion, I can tell. I know you for a long time. You still have the passion today.

You look at the Bush presidency. You look at the vote that took place in Iraq. What do you think? What are your thoughts on this president now, George W. Bush?

LIMBAUGH: I thought in the first term that he had a chance to go down as one of the greatest presidents in history — his fortitude and courage in staying the course on the war, and all these other things. You know, I've been an adult paying attention to politics probably since I was 10 or 11. I don't remember anybody more hated and vilified than Nixon. Reagan was a second close.

But I'll tell you, the way that George Bush has been dealt with, it borders on Nixonian, the way the personal disgust and hatred is for him, not just by the Washington, D.C., culture, but now mainstream — the base I describe as the new kook base that they have — literally filled with uncontrollable rage and hatred.

And yet he's stayed the course on this. I think the president has gone out of his way to make friends with these people. It hasn't worked. He's bent over backwards. He's extended the hand of friendship, lets Ted Kennedy write the education bill and so forth.

And it just proves something that I've always thought: As far as the liberals are concerned, this is war, control the country, power, any sign of friendship or "Hey, I'd rather get along with you than disagree with you," is received by them, perceived as a sign of weakness.

And it doesn't make them nicer. It doesn't make them more cooperative. It doesn't make them more willing to get along. It makes them think that their opponent can be rolled.

HANNITY: You wrote an op-ed yesterday in the "Wall Street Journal." "This isn't a conservative or a Republican crack-up. This is a crack-down." Explain that.

LIMBAUGH: I guess what inspired this was two things. Howard Fineman and some of the other people on the left are just gleefully watching what's happening on the right. And they think that finally this Republican coalition of conservatives is splitting and falling apart.

And the reason they're so giddy is because they don't have on the left an agenda of their own they can advance. They don't have any unity themselves. They don't have anything but whining, moaning and complaining.

They've been after conservatives, Bush and others, for five years, trying to criminalize some, discredit others. So here comes this Miers nomination. And what's actually happening among conservatives is a debate of ideas.

You know, if you look in American politics today, across the spectrum, the debate of ideas is occurring on the right. The left doesn't have the guts to tell us what they believe. They don't have the courage to be honest about it. They're all about masking who they really are.

And they look at this and misunderstand it, because if it were happening to them, it would be deep trouble, which it is happening to them and they won't admit it. They've got a new base of supporters that is as extreme, anti-war kook as you can — but they're the fund-raisers. They're the people that are really dictating the direction of the party.

And the Democrats themselves are trying to figure out how to marginalize those people and still figure out to get a candidate that moves to the center, be pro-war, admits he goes to church. Who would you rather be? I'd rather be us.

What happens when these debates take place is that we forge even more unity, we find out what it is we truly believe. Everybody gets to listen to us debate these ideas. Nobody holds back. Nobody's dishonest.

We're not afraid to be who we are. We're proud to admit it, flex our muscles. We're proud to be conservative. We want everybody to know who we are so they'll join us. We want to persuade them.

So here comes this little debate over Harriet Miers. They've been trying to destroy this Bush presidency for five years and they think this is going to do it. I wanted to write this piece to say, "The real crack-up is on the left."

And I find it interesting. All the people in the media who focused on this column have missed that. They have focused on the part of this column where they think I'm taking out after Bush. "Oh, Limbaugh now on Bush's case." And that's not what this is about.

HANNITY: Well, I've been listening to you in this Harriet Miers debate. Look, you don't think this was the best choice. That's it. And you're saying so publicly.

LIMBAUGH: Well, it is tough. I mean, it's not my pick. I didn't get elected president. And I don't presume to think that the White House should do what I say.

You know, my program's done for the American people, for the audience. My audience is not in Washington and it's not in the White House. I don't know if they listen. I don't know if they care what I say. Well, they may care what I say if it goes against them, but I don't have a direct line to them.

But my point with this is: It's just so unnecessary. It's just such a pity. It needn't have happened, this particular choice.

The thing that people have asked me, "Well, Rush, how did this happen? This is a well-oiled White House. They don't make mistakes here. They come up, and they do everything as smooth as silk, and how did they botch this?"

Now, the left is trying to chalk it up to Rove and Plame. And I don't think that has anything to do with it — or Andy Card. I think it has to do with a misunderstanding among some of the White House over who the conservative constituency is.

They think it's a single-issue group of people based on abortion. And I think they thought that if they just get a candidate out there that can people can be persuaded to believe is going to do the right thing on Roe vs. Wade, that they would have the base in their back pocket and they could move on.

I think they misunderstand that, because the conservative movement's not monolithic. It's not made up of single-issue people. Some of them are, but there are a lot more people who have far more interest than just one issue.

Where abortion's concerned, — pro-abortion, anti-abortion — Roe vs. Wade is bad law. I know a lot of people who are all right with abortion who think that Roe vs. Wade is bad law.

And the reason it's bad law is because seven judges decided on their own to see that the Constitution says, "Yes, there's a right to abortion," when it doesn't say that.

Now, if nine men, a majority of nine men and women in robes, lawyers, can say, "Yep, I see this in the Constitution and therefore it's the law of the land," then the Constitution's irrelevant.