{"id":11826,"date":"2013-07-29T16:56:58","date_gmt":"2013-07-29T16:56:58","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2013-07-29T16:56:58","modified_gmt":"2013-07-29T16:56:58","slug":"the_clintons_are_ticked_off_at_the_weiners","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2013\/07\/29\/the_clintons_are_ticked_off_at_the_weiners\/","title":{"rendered":"The Clintons are Ticked Off at the Weiners"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Listen<\/a><\/p>\n

RUSH: I love this. Folks, the Clintons are ticked off at the Weiners. Oh, big time. The Clintons are really mad that the Weiners are saying that Huma is just like Hillary. The Clintons are running around behind the scenes saying, how dare they compare Huma to Hillary. Hillary was the First Lady. Hillary was a senator. She was a secretary of state. She was also a doormat, just like Huma is. That\u2019s what the comparison is.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Clintons are livid. The media, if you watch CNN and some of these other liberal cable networks, apparently some 50-year-old film, now converted to video, of the family of Camelot, JFK, Jackie and two crumb crunchers, they got some 50-year-old film running around showing what a wonderful family it is. And the media, they\u2019re orgasming over it. They\u2019re going gaga. It\u2019s a little snippet of Camelot, and then I saw CNN go right into a story on the Weiners from that without any apparent appreciation for the irony of it.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Bob Schieffer yesterday said the Weiner scandal is sickening. He said that on CBS Slay the Nation. NBC is planning — I think not just NBC, but a lot of them. NBC specifically is planning for a Hillary Clinton TV miniseries in the run-up to 2016. There are a couple of stories on this. John Fund has one at National Review Online. There\u2019s another one from the Associated Press. And of course it is designed to grease the skids for Hillary\u2019s 2016 presidential campaign and ultimate nomination which has been written in stone again in the Democrat Party. The last time this was written in stone for Hillary being the nominee was 2007. And then outta nowhere, a skinny Chicago senator came along that captivated everybody, and the Democrat Party decided to throw Hillary overboard. <\/p>\n

But now Hillary\u2019s back and she is accordingly a fait accompli and the made-for-TV movies are in the works designed to shape and form everybody\u2019s public opinion about Mrs. Clinton. And there will not be, quite naturally, any of the negative stuff. Nothing on her secretary of state. Actually, some of them are not even gonna start until after Obama took office. Nothing on the bimbo eruptions. Nothing on the Clinton presidential years. It\u2019s gonna be an-all-out effort — you\u2019re gonna get sick of it. I already am. Frankly, I\u2019m already tired of talking about the Clintons other than as they amuse me. And this amuses me in the sense that they\u2019re all ticked off at the Weiners. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

I just think that\u2019s hilarious. <\/p>\n

“Bill and Hillary Clinton are angry with efforts by mayoral hopeful Anthony Weiner and his campaign to compare his Internet sexcapades — and his wife Huma Abedin\u00c2\u2019s incredible forgiveness — to the Clintons\u00c2\u2019 notorious White House saga, The Post has learned. ‘The Clintons are upset with the comparisons that the Weiners seem to be encouraging — that Huma is “standing by her man” the way Hillary did with Bill, which is not what she in fact did,\u2019 said a top state Democrat.”<\/p>\n

Well, now, that makes me want to read further. A top state Democrat in New York said Hillary did not stand by her man. What did she do, then “Weiner and his campaign aides have explicitly referred to the Clintons as they privately seek to convince skeptical Democrats that voters can back Weiner despite his online sexual antics — just as they supported then-President Bill Clinton in the face of repeated allegations of marital betrayals.”<\/p>\n

I\u2019ll tell you something, folks. I think the people saying this have a point. The media and the Democrats, if they are to be consistent, ought to be defending Weiner all the time. They didn\u2019t have a problem with what Clinton did. The media didn\u2019t have a problem with Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. What did he do? He destroyed the life of a 19-year-old. He was having oral sex in the White House, in the Oval Office, with a 19-year-old intern. <\/p>\n

He lied in grand jury testimony. But yet the media was all there all the time defending him and trying to make Ken Starr out to be the sex pervert, and going after all the women. The media did their best to destroy Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Gennifer Flowers, you name it. If the media were being consistent they would now be trying to destroy all the women sexting with Weiner. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

If the media and the Democrats were trying to be consistent, they would be telling us, “Hey, it doesn\u2019t affect Weiner\u2019s ability to govern.” If they were being consistent, they\u2019d be praising Huma for standing by her man the way they praised Hillary because it is identical. So all of these Democrats? Bob Schieffer, where were you? If this sickens with you, why didn\u2019t the Clintons? Is that not a legitimate question? <\/p>\n

If Weiner sending photos of his member to young girls on the Internet sickens you, well, then why doesn\u2019t what happened with Clinton\u2019s wiener sicken you? You see the inconsistency here. (interruption) Well, that\u2019s true. There are no pictures of Clinton, because he didn\u2019t tweet any, \u2019cause there weren\u2019t any tweets (at least not as you and I know them). So it\u2019s true, there aren\u2019t any pictures of what Clinton did. <\/p>\n

There\u2019s just confirmation and proof in other forms, but no pictures. But still, where\u2019s the defense? They told us, “Hey, it\u2019s sex! It\u2019s a private matter. It doesn\u2019t affect his job and the way he governs.” Where is that excuse for Weiner? They are being inconsistent with this. What it all boils down to is, they don\u2019t like Weiner. There\u2019s nothing very likable about the guy. He\u2019s not really done anything except cause them trouble. <\/p>\n

He\u2019s noted for going on TV and yelling at Fox anchors and anchorettes and then trying to get their phone number afterwards. But that\u2019s it. He hasn\u2019t really accomplished anything. Clinton, of course, took the Democrat Party to new lows — heights. And about that, there are things about which to celebrate.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Diane Lane… Do you guys know who Diane Lane is, the actress? She\u2019s gonna play Hillary in the NBC television movie of Mrs. Clinton. (interruption) Well, I was not all that familiar with her. I know that she used to be married to Josh Brolin, and she was in some movie that took place in Venice when she was a teenager. That was her debut. I can\u2019t remember the name of it. But, anyway, I don\u2019t know if she\u2019s got the legs to pull this off, if she\u2019ll fill out a pantsuit the way Hillary fills out a pantsuit. I mean, I know, there…<\/line><\/p>\n

(interruption)<\/p>\n

You know, that\u2019s a good point. There are prosthetics can be used in makeup. I shoulda thought of that. Okay. Never mind. Nothing to worry about there, folks. They can make it happen. (So subtle, so subtle.)<\/p>\n

Andrea Mitchell was on the Today show today. The cohostette, Savannah Guthrie, spoke to her about the comparisons made between Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton. Savannah Guthrie said, “Where are the Clintons on all this, Andrea? You know them well. How do they feel about Weiner and this continued campaign?”<\/p>\n

MITCHELL: This is terribly painful from people close to the Clintons. Friends of both, they care deeply about Huma, but this is getting to the point where it is really splashing up against the Clintons. People have been making comparisons to the way Hillary Clinton handled Bill Clinton\u2019s difficulties in the 1992 campaign, and it\u2019s just only going to reach a further point if he stays in this race. So they are not at all happy. They are loyal to Huma but at this point even some friends, mutual friends are saying, “Why is she letting this happen to Hillary Clinton, her longtime mentor?”<\/p>\n

RUSH: She can\u2019t stop it. Nobody can stop this. How can Huma let this happen to Hillary? How can Huma stand by her man? In one of the stories, there is somebody who says, “How can Huma do this? How could Huma go out and do this and humiliate Hillary?” By the way, the \u201992 campaign? How about the second term? I mean, it was a never-ending lifestyle with the Clintons. There were “bimbo eruptions” all the time. You can\u2019t be alive and paying even scant attention and not see the similarities. I think it is hilarious that the Clintons are putting a story out there that they are offended, that they\u2019re hurt, that it\u2019s terribly painful; that they\u2019re really, really starting to get mad at Huma for behaving in such a way as to draw comparisons to Hillary. <\/p>\n

Here\u2019s Bob Schieffer. He was on Slay the Nation yesterday.<\/p>\n