{"id":23060,"date":"2005-10-11T01:01:01","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T06:40:27","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2011-05-19T06:40:27","modified_gmt":"2011-05-19T06:40:27","slug":"it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/","title":{"rendered":"It\u2019s Not All About Roe v. Wade"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

RUSH: This disappoints me. It confuses me a little bit. The first lady, Laura Bush — for whom I have nothing but greatest <\/emphasize>admiration — has joined in the… I guess she was asked by Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy. She said, “It\u2019s possible. I think that\u2019s possible. I think people are not looking it her accomplishments here.” We\u2019ve got the sound bite. Let\u2019s go to audio sound bite #4. This was the Today Show today from Covington, Louisiana and Matt Lauer says, “Some are suggesting there\u2019s a little possible sexism in the criticism of Harriet Miers. How would you feel about that?”<\/line> THE FIRST LADY: I think that\u2019s possible. I think she is so accomplished, and, you know, I think people are not looking at her accomplishments and not realizing that she was the first elected woman to be the head of the Texas Bar Association, for instance, and all the other things. She was the first woman, managing partner of a major law firm. She was the first woman hired <\/emphasize>by a major law firm, her law firm.<\/line>RUSH: We\u2019ve heard that, I know, but the idea that there is some sort of sexism here? This is hard for me. It is really, really hard for me. The more I hear from the defenders of Ms. Miers — and again, I\u2019ve got no brief against her, but the more I hear the people whose job it is to defend her, the more I hear them sounding like the left, that there\u2019s sexism here, that that\u2019s elitism going on. Let me take a stab at this again. Let me go back to one of the things that got this whole ball rolling, and that is this whole notion of Roe vs. Wade and we need to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and I think that there has developed here a considerable sense of confusion and lack of understanding about most of the people on the right <\/emphasize>about Roe vs. Wade. There two camps in the Roe vs. Wade camp, I guess, on the right. The left is a unified voice on this. They care about the vote. There are some on the right that care only about overturning Roe vs. Wade, but I have spoken at length on this program about the fact that the Constitution is a science, that the Supreme Court is a culture, and that the culture of the Supreme Court is just way out of whack. So while some people may think that the primary objective here on the part of conservatives and people like me, is to get enough votes on the court to overturn Roe vs. Wade, that\u2019s not going to stop abortion. That\u2019s really not what this is about. Roe vs. Wade is bad law.<\/emphasize> What happened was that a Supreme Court could not find the word “abortion” in the Constitution and yet found it, and they created a right to privacy and a number of other rights.<\/line>I mean, Harry Blackmun<\/a> talked about the “penumbra of the Constitution.” Well, spare me! We don\u2019t care about the “penumbra” of the Constitution. We care about the Constitution, and if you\u2019re going to have a Supreme Court — and, folks, if you\u2019ve listened to me regularly for a long period of time you understand that this is a consistent point of view that I\u2019ve held, and it is this. The court is out of control. The court is made up now of nine people, some of whom are simply substituting their own personal policy preferences or foreign law or whatever to find in legal cases that come before them. Now, these cases involve the Constitution. If you\u2019re going to have members of the Supreme Court look at the document and find something in it that isn\u2019t there, then the Constitution is meaningless! If you can find something that\u2019s not there, and if you can ignore something that is, and get away with it because you are in the majority of the Supreme Court then the Constitution is meaningless. This whole thing is about reorienting the court for constitutionalism. Another word for that is originalism. <\/emphasize>You go back and you check the originalists, the Founders. It\u2019s there, and if the Constitution doesn\u2019t provide for it, you don\u2019t make it up. You amend it, and there is an amendment process. The Founders left us quite a path — constitutionally defined, I might add — to change the Constitution. It\u2019s how we deal with things that it doesn\u2019t specifically address, and some things that it doesn\u2019t specifically address, that\u2019s it, and it\u2019s up to other people to decide, such as the states. <\/line><\/p>\n

Roe vs. Wade, if it\u2019s ever overturned, is simply going to go back to the states. It\u2019s going to be decided on by the people of this country and it\u2019s going to be legal in some of these states. You know that. Overturning Roe vs. Wade is not going to overturn abortion. It\u2019s not going to make it illegal throughout this country, and so a vote just to overturn Roe vs. Wade is meaningless unless there\u2019s some foundation behind that vote that believes it\u2019s bad law, not just that it was a bad result — and to sit here and get caught up in all this, “Well, this is a sexist view, and these are elitists, and these people don\u2019t understand,” it so misses the point. It just saddens me as I listen to the people whose job it is to defend Harriet Miers in this nomination, run around. Like Rich Lowry makes the point today that something\u2019s wrong when Ed Gillespie, the former chairman of the Republican National Committee, basically has the same talking points that Barbara Mikulski does. Now, something\u2019s wrong there. Barbara Mikulski is sitting there saying we\u2019re a bunch of sexists and we\u2019re anti-women and so forth, and to have the former chairman of the RNC out saying similar things to us about those who oppose the Miers nomination is (sigh). Well, as I say, it\u2019s dumfounding, and I can\u2019t — I refuse — to believe that they really mean it. No, I don\u2019t think they think we\u2019re sexist. I don\u2019t think Laura Bush thinks that, either. I think it\u2019s just what else have they got to say? She was this and that; she was accomplished. I\u2019m not denying any of that. <\/line>All I\u2019m saying is that there are people, and women — and, by the way, this sexist business, I don\u2019t know that Janice Rogers Brown or Priscilla Owen or Edith Jones would consider me a sexist or any of the other people who have supported them in their quests to sit on the appellate bench and then on up to the Supreme Court. That\u2019s why this sexist business doesn\u2019t wash. (interruption) Well, who is she talking about? Okay, Mr. Snerdley says I\u2019m not who she is talking about. Who\u2019s she talking about? Mmm-hmm. Uh-huh. Well, all right. Okay, Snerdley says that Laura Bush is not talking about me; she\u2019s talking about those out there criticizing Harriet Miers on the basis that she has no qualifications. Hey, Brian, open those up. I\u2019m like a kid on Christmas morning with those things. I haven\u2019t had a new set of those things in six years. This is a bunch of sex toys, folks. My mistress in Arizona sent that in. Make sure it\u2019s from Arizona before you open it. If they\u2019re out there saying of the critics that are not me, are unappreciative of her qualifications, I think they\u2019re misunderstanding. Most of the people I know who are having a problem with this nomination have a problem with it on the basis that I just mentioned: the Constitution, the court, originalism, not a single case, not a single vote, because that single vote is not going to change it. It\u2019s fine if you\u2019re against Roe vs. Wade because you\u2019re against abortion. That\u2019s very moral of you and I love you and I\u2019m proud of you, but you\u2019ve also got to understand that it is horrible law. <\/emphasize><\/line> It set the precedent. Well, it didn\u2019t set the precedent, but I mean it established a huge, huge <\/emphasize>precedent to allow the rulings of the court ever since then, since 1973, to go outside the Constitution. Once it was praised as great law, once it was praised as progressive; we had all kinds of trouble because it\u2019s bad law. It would be no different than if the court decided to just cancel the Second Amendment because some justices didn\u2019t like it. What would you think of that? And, by the way, that\u2019s not far out of the realm of possibility, because liberals read the Constitution differently than you and I do. They read it and they see things that aren\u2019t in there, and then they read it and they see the things that are in there that they can\u2019t believe are in there and if they can write them out of there with a Supreme Court decision, they would. So if you\u2019ve got enough of them on there that want to get rid of the Second Amendment on the basis, “The Founders never intended! It\u2019s up to us to interpret modern times,” well, it\u2019s no different than that. It\u2019s the same type of reasoning as what gave us Roe vs. Wade. Well, that kind of reasoning stinks, <\/emphasize>and that\u2019s kind of reasoning is going to end up destroying the very fabric that holds us together, constitutionally and legally, and that\u2019s the beef here. (sigh) Oh, boy. <\/line>BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/line>RUSH: You know, there\u2019s also some people out there, folks, on the conservative side, who are beginning to level these allegations that the conservative movement is a lockstep movement and if you\u2019re off the beaten path, then you\u2019re going to get savaged, and I can\u2019t believe that after the four years that we\u2019ve just had, five years of proving this. We\u2019re a movement. We\u2019re not a political party. The conservative movement is not a political party. It\u2019s made up of all kinds of people with all kinds of different views, but there\u2019s a core in there. There\u2019s a foundation in there that makes somebody conservative or not, but this is the place where ideas are openly debated. The left is where you have lockstep <\/emphasize>demands. The left is where you don\u2019t have any “mavericks” as it were. Conservatives are where all the mavericks are, and this idea now that there\u2019s some ideological test that somebody has to pass in order to be a conservative. I mean, this is the kind of stuff that I\u2019ve been hearing the left say, “Litmus tests,” and all this sort of thing, all these years, and now we got some people on the right wing starting to use this kind of language. Nobody demands acceptance in toto in the conservative movement. (sigh) I\u2019m befuddled. I\u2019m amazed here at this. The conservative movement, if you want to talk about marching lockstep, it has marched lockstep behind the president until this moment. The conservative movement\u2019s been right there — and some of you people during the course of these five years, some of you people who have called here and angry with me over Miers how many of you wanted to sell Bush out in 2002? How many of you wanted to sell him out in 2003 because immigration or spending or whatever? I mean, this is common. <\/line><\/p>\n

There are always debates within the conservative movement. It\u2019s where ideas do <\/emphasize>get debated. The idea that there\u2019s some lockstep requirement now and that Harriet Miers doesn\u2019t meet the demands is silly. It isn\u2019t what this is about. We\u2019re not out there, you know, “Gotta get a real conservative.” If somebody is saying we need a real conservative what they really mean is, “We need somebody that\u2019s going to be able to be on the court that\u2019s going to have to understand the Constitution and how it is being bastardized by the current culture of the Supreme Court.” I think this debate that\u2019s going on, on the right actually shows the maturity of the conservative movement and the principled approach to this issue that is being taken. I mean, the idea that there are elitists, purists, or that we are elitists or purists or whatever because we question the wisdom of this one thing <\/emphasize>the president\u2019s done — and the criticism, by the way, falls down on several legitimate and thoughtful levels. I mean, to think that there is elitism going on or litmus testing being required is foolish. The other <\/emphasize>side uses old, worn liberal arguments to attack us like sexism and glass ceiling and “trust me,” all that, and now to have the right wing start using this kind of lingo, whew! <\/emphasize>It\u2019s puzzling to me, folks. Now, I know some of these people on the right, they\u2019re trying to carve out… They\u2019re new players out there and they\u2019re trying to carve out a niche for themselves as the smartest people in the room and all that, but I tell you, I think some of the critics of this nomination have been far more intellectually honest and principled than some of the defenders have been, if you want to know the truth. <\/line>You know, folks, I\u2019ve tried. I\u2019ve really worked on this. I\u2019ve got friends of mine saying, “I can\u2019t believe <\/emphasize>you\u2019re doing this! I can\u2019t believe <\/emphasize>you\u2019re not behind the president.” I am totally behind the president, folks, but I disagree with this nomination. I\u2019ve tried to put myself in the shoes of those who were defending it, and I can\u2019t come here and tell you — I\u2019m sorry, I couldn\u2019t come here honestly and say — “You know those people against Harriet Miers are a bunch of sexists,” because I know they\u2019re not, and, “You know these people against Harriet Miers? They just want a glass ceiling; they\u2019re just a bunch of anti-women types.” I cannot hear myself saying these words about people I know who are opposed to this. To me these are all phony arguments. Like when they come from the left they\u2019re just as phony. The left is clich?: racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe. Those are the clich? arguments, and to have those now advanced by some of our people is silly, especially when there are plenty of highly qualified women that Bush could have chosen from and would have been profoundly <\/emphasize>supported in doing so. So I\u2019ve worked this any number of ways. When people have been critical of me, I\u2019ve said, “Okay, let me see if I can say to you what you\u2019re saying to me and see if I can believe myself,” and I can\u2019t. After railing against these labels and these clich?s for so long, I just can\u2019t imagine myself uttering them again — and, you know what, folks? I\u2019ll bet you that if I came on this program and sounded like some of the people paid to defend Harriet Miers you would excuse me of selling out, simply because of the words I\u2019d be using. Because you know those are not words that I use and that\u2019s not even the way I think: racist, sexist, bigot. Those are all labels designed to discredit people with whom you don\u2019t have the guts to debate. So you come up with these labels to just discredit them so you don\u2019t have to take them on so you don\u2019t even get to the problem of dealing with their ideas.<\/line>END TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.<\/emphasize><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

RUSH: This disappoints me. It confuses me a little bit. The first lady, Laura Bush — for whom I have nothing but greatest admiration — has joined in the… I guess she was asked by Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy. She said, “It\u2019s possible. I think that\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nIt's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"It's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: This disappoints me. It confuses me a little bit. The first lady, Laura Bush — for whom I have nothing but greatest admiration — has joined in the… I guess she was asked by Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy. She said, “It\u2019s possible. I think that\u2019s […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/\",\"name\":\"It's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T06:40:27+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2011-05-19T06:40:27+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"It\\u2019s Not All About Roe v. Wade\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"It's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"It's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: This disappoints me. It confuses me a little bit. The first lady, Laura Bush — for whom I have nothing but greatest admiration — has joined in the… I guess she was asked by Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy. She said, “It\u2019s possible. I think that\u2019s […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v__wade_.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/","name":"It's Not All About Roe v. Wade - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2011-05-19T06:40:27+00:00","dateModified":"2011-05-19T06:40:27+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/10\/11\/it_s_not_all_about_roe_v_wade2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"It\u2019s Not All About Roe v. Wade"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23060"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23060"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23060\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23060"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23060"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23060"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}