{"id":11861,"date":"2013-07-24T17:04:03","date_gmt":"2013-07-24T17:04:03","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2013-07-24T17:04:03","modified_gmt":"2013-07-24T17:04:03","slug":"media_proclaims_oh_the_huma_nity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2013\/07\/24\/media_proclaims_oh_the_huma_nity\/","title":{"rendered":"Media Proclaims: Oh, the Huma-nity!"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

RUSH: Wait \u2019til you hear the media reaction. It\u2019s predictable, but the media is having an orgasm over Huma. Liberal feminist women are having an orgasm over this! It is ironic, it is hypocritical, it\u2019s funny as well.<\/line>BREAK TRANSCRIPT <\/line><\/p>\n

RUSH: This is Dana Bash on CNN with Wolf Blitzer on The Situation Room. This is after Weiner and Huma held their joint presser to discuss new revelations of Weiner\u2019s sex perversions. Wolf Blitzer, speaking with Dana Bash, said, “Dana, he acknowledged that some of these new revelations of sexting occurred after he resigned from Congress.”<\/p>\n

BASH: I think the most important thing is, “Wow!” Not just that he acknowledged that, but that this was the first time we heard his wife Huma Abedin speak at a press conference, but also speak about these issues. This wasn\u2019t just an issue of a scene of a wife standing by her political man. This was a wife coming up to the cameras, coming up to the microphones, and talking — which was, frankly, extraordinary.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

She is somebody who isn\u2019t just a wife. She is very politically savvy. Those of us who knew her in Washington know she knows exactly what she\u2019s doing and maybe, most importantly, she learned at the knee of Hillary Clinton. Somebody who, maybe most famously, stood by her man politically. And so she\u2019s following in those footsteps.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Gosh. It\u2019s something to be proud of. Something to be proud of. “[S]he learned at the knee…”? I\u2019m thinking other body part here, folks. “[S]he learned at the knee of Hillary Clinton”? Hillary Clinton taught Huma everything she knows. It\u2019s a badge of honor to have a husband who\u2019s a sex pervert that behaves this way. They\u2019re in awe. They\u2019re stunned. These are feminist women who are going gaga over this!<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Back to the audio sound bites we go. We\u2019re not through with the media and its adulation for Huma. We left off with Dana Bash at CNN. We\u2019re gonna stick with CNN\u2019s Situation Room late yesterday afternoon. Gloria Borger and Wolf Blitzer decided to talk about it.<\/p>\n

BORGER: She made the point: As the wife, I have forgiven him. She said, “I believe in him.” The point being that: Politically, if I\u2019d forgiven him; you ought to forgive him. They both made the point that actually — to them, to their marriage, to their personal life — that wasn\u2019t the key point in time, that this was something they had to continue working on as he just admitted for almost a year afterwards. But it is a question of judgment, and will the voters buy this?<\/p>\n

BLITZER: And I think he was aided by a powerful assist from his wife —<\/p>\n

BORGER: Absolutely!<\/p>\n

BLITZER: — who showed up at that news conference.<\/p>\n

BORGER: Absolutely!<\/p>\n

RUSH: So he was fine. Huma was fine. He was fine. They\u2019re talking about this as though it\u2019s just a standard, ordinary, average, everyday in Democrat Party politics. Ask this: Would Gloria Borger…? I don\u2019t even know if she\u2019s married. I assume she is. Would Gloria Borger put up with this? I don\u2019t know. I shouldn\u2019t go there. I shouldn\u2019t go there. I just marvel at this, folks. I don\u2019t quite know how properly to express what I\u2019m trying to say here. <\/p>\n

I\u2019m kind of hamstrung, \u2019cause this whole thing is surreal to me, that there is any… I know these people like the back of my hand. I know they\u2019re gonna do everything they can to keep a liberal propped up until they determine he really is a drag at party, and then they let him go. But that hasn\u2019t happened, and that Weiner is not looked at as a drag on this party is quite telling in and of itself. Anyway, here\u2019s Lanny Davis on Piers Morgan Live. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Piers wasn\u2019t there. I don\u2019t know where Piers was, but the fill-in host was Chris Cuomo talking to Lanny “Poof” Davis about Weiner\u2019s new admission of an inappropriate online relationship. Chris Cuomo said, “You believe Anthony Weiner was not telling the truth when he said there would be more? Was that enough to cover this,” that back then he said: “Hey, there\u2019s gonna be more people pop up”? <\/p>\n

“Was that enough to cover this, or was this new behavior that makes him untrustworthy,” Lanny?<\/p>\n

DAVIS: Clearly he warned us ahead of time — and, as someone who looks at crises and tries to mitigate harm, that was a wise decision by him. I would have liked for him to address the post-resignation behavior more frontally —<\/p>\n

RUSH: What?<\/p>\n

DAVIS: — \u2019cause that is an issue that will bother some voters. But the other thing I would point out about his performance today is that without Huma being next to him, it would be a much different conversation. This is a huge, huge, meaningful presence by Huma.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Mmm-hmm. Yeah, well, we know that. But Lanny said that he would have had Weiner “address the post-resignation behavior more frontally.” Now, what he means by that is, see, Weiner resigned but then he kept doing the perverted sex texting and stuff, and Lanny said he would have liked for Weiner “to address [that] more frontally.” What did Weiner do here that Lanny said wasn\u2019t “frontally”? What did Weiner do? Did he get down on all fours and explain it in detail?<\/p>\n

What did he do? More frontally? Well, we\u2019ll try to figure that out. Let\u2019s just keep going because it gets better. We now move to CBS This Morning during national correspondent Jan Crawford\u2019s report about Anthony Weiner\u2019s new admission of an inappropriate online relationship. Cohost Charlie Rose, cohost Norah O\u2019Donnell and Jan Crawford took their turn discussing it.<\/p>\n

ROSE: It wasn\u2019t just sexting. It was also conversation? Phone conversations?<\/p>\n

O\u2019DONNELL: Allegedly.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: Yeah. The one that says they spoke several times a day. But those are always the things that we ask, right? You see these disgraced politicians have affairs, cheating on their wives, and then [ask], “Why does the wife stand by the man,” or “Does the wife stand by the man in the press conference?”<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

O\u2019DONNELL: And in what example has the wife ended up standing by the man or standing with the man?<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: Well, Hillary Clinton is, I guess, most prominent —<\/p>\n

ROSE: Probably the closest person to her in her life.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORRD: — and a very close adviser.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay, so they\u2019re saying, “Oh, Hillary did this! Hillary stood by her man and was a very close advisor.” “Oh, oh! Okay. Oh, that\u2019s right.” Then their discussion continued with a classic declaration from Charlie Rose.<\/p>\n

ROSE: Here\u2019s the thing we all have to remember: Perhaps she loves him and that\u2019s it.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: Charlie, you sound like a romantic.<\/p>\n

ROSE: I am.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: “Perhaps she does love him.”<\/p>\n

O\u2019DONNELL: Sure.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: I mean, we don\u2019t know. I mean, goodness knows.<\/p>\n

ROSE: I think that\u2019s it. She loves him.<\/p>\n

CRAWFORD: Well, you know, you have… I\u2019m sure we all could think of friends of ours [where] you want to say, “Why is she staying with him?”<\/p>\n

ROSE: Or per… And perhaps she\u2019s ambitious for him.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, which is it, Charlie? She either loves him or she\u2019s ambitious for him. At any rate, that\u2019s how it went on the Drive-By Media. Actually, there\u2019s one more. George Stephanopoulos, talking with Jeff Zeleny, used to be with the New York Times, now with ABC. Now, here you have a supposed news anchor in Stephanopoulos who worked for Bill and Hillary during the height of the bimbo eruption days. Stephanopoulos was in the middle of that. And he\u2019s pushing the narrative here that Huma didn\u2019t know what was going on, which is a rerun of the Clinton playbook. The wives don\u2019t know anything. The low-information crowd, though, eats up this victim routine. Huma didn\u2019t know; Hillary didn\u2019t know, but they\u2019re standing by their man.<\/p>\n

STEPHANOPOULOS: This seemed to surprise even those closest to the campaign.<\/p>\n

ZELENY: It did, George, and surprised those closest to the family. Friends close to the family said that Huma was shocked and saddened by this when it happened. You could see that look on her face.<\/p>\n

RUSH: No, you couldn\u2019t. That is the point. Huma did not look distressed. Did she look distressed to you? Huma looked almost joyful in this press conference. She looked defiant and happy. You contrast the way Huma looked with the way Silda Spitzer looked when Client No. 9 went out there. I mean, she was devastated. That woman was wilting before our eyes. If she coulda done a Claude Rains and turned invisible, she would have done it. But Huma was full of notice me, notice me, notice me. Huma knew that it was all about her. Weiner is chump change in this. But here was Stephanopoulos from the Clinton war room making Huma the victim, the poor sympathetic victim. And on the same day that the Weiner scandal broke again, Client No. 9 released an ad. Spitzer running for the New York City comptroller ran an ad.<\/p>\n