This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by Mark Steyn's black rhino dinners
By Simon Maloy

Perhaps we've been too hard on Mark Steyn. After yesterday's Wire, we got to thinking about how the three shows Rush did this week were little more than fact-free diatribes about how much he dislikes President Obama and liberals in general. Come to think of it, that pretty accurately describes nearly every show he's done since we started the Limbaugh Wire. Either way, we found ourselves in dire need of a change, and perhaps Steyn's turn behind the golden microphone today will fulfill that need. The way we figured, even in the (likely) event that the content would be the same, at least the voice delivering it would be different.

Yeah, we're that desperate ...

Steyn got things started by celebrating the fact that it's post-Earth Day. Steyn told us all how he spent his Earth Day -- planting plastic trees, giving a black rhino to his son that he later cooked and ate, and dancing under a giant ball of dung at the annual Sierra Club Earth Day dinner.

Then Steyn offered his opinion on the possibility of investigations into the authors of the torture memos, claiming that prosecutions won't even be necessary, as the investigations will be punishment enough. That's the way it is now, said Steyn, and no one will give "honest advice" to the government anymore because everyone in public service will "prioritize CYA." Steyn said you can't fight a war if you're "focused on liability," which is what happened during the 1990s when terrorism was investigated as a "law-enforcement matter." Steyn then told the story of how Mullah Omar, on the first day of the Afghanistan war, was fleeing in an SUV with an unmanned drone in hot pursuit, but the order to strike was not given because someone at CENTCOM said "their JAG [Judge Advocate General] wouldn't like it." Steyn said what we have now is worse -- we're "retrospectively criminalizing" people's opinions.

After the break Steyn noted that he likes to joke that he crosses the Canadian border illegally in the trunks of cars, so he was glad to hear that Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said the other day that crossing the border like that is not a crime, which has made his crossings much easier. Steyn also attacked Napolitano for saying that the 9-11 hijackers entered the country through Canada, and for rebranding "terrorism" as "man-caused disasters." That term, Steyn said, could apply to a whole host of things, such as global warming and "date rape at Berkeley." What Steyn found interesting is that the people who prevented another terrorist attack on the United States after 9-11 are under threat of investigation, while "birdbrain" Janet Napolitano is in charge of Homeland Security.

Another break and Steyn came back with a caller, this one a former Marine who claimed to have undergone Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) training. The caller said that the techniques used in SERE training are similar to those detailed in the torture memos, and didn't understand why this is called torture. Steyn agreed, saying that the position of the Democrats is that it's okay to use these techniques on American soldiers, but not on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. If we may interject at this point, we'd like to explain why SERE training incorporates these techniques -- because they were recognized to be torture techniques employed by enemy regimes. As The New York Times reported, SERE training offers "a sample of the torture methods used by Communists in the Korean War, methods that had wrung false confessions from Americans." What's more, the SERE people themselves said they don't work as interrogation techniques. Anyway, Steyn went on to proclaim "absurd" the argument that "if America forswears waterboarding," then Al Qaeda will respond: OK, well, we're still going to behead you, but this time we're going to sterilize the scimitar first." We agree that's absurd; we're just not sure who, if anyone, is making that argument.

Steyn then compared the torture memo controversy to the Miss California/gay marriage flap, all the while claiming he didn't want to "trivialize" the issue of interrogations. Steyn said the idea behind investigating the torture memo authors and "berating" Miss California for her gay marriage comments is the same -- demonstrating that there will be harsh punishments for "dissenting" from "liberal orthodoxy."

After the break Steyn noted that tribesmen from New Guinea are suing The New Yorker over a story the magazine published, claiming they were falsely accused by the story's author of "serious criminal activity" and "murder." Steyn said that "up-and-coming" New Guinea tribesmen suing The New Yorker is a fine indication that we live in an overly legalistic world.

Steyn took one more caller before the break, this one wanting to know what was going on in the world with the Democrats looking to investigate the Bush administration for saving lives, but refusing to investigate Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for ruining the economy and this impelling Americans to commit violence against one another. Steyn said the caller was right, Frank should be investigated because he bears a huge amount of responsibility for the economic collapse. Steyn said what is going on is that the Democrats don't have the guts to go after Bush, so they're going after his underlings to make sure that the president can not receive honest advice from his subordinates. Then the caller asked about the "gay agenda," specifically as it relates to taxing churches and the plan to "indoctrinate" children in the gay lifestyle. Steyn said the first point was interesting -- "they" say that if a church teaches the tenets of Islam or Christianity on homosexuality, then you'll lose your tax status.

Rounding out the hour, Steyn returned to Miss California and "that gay blogger who was one of the judges on the Miss USA thing." Steyn quipped: "I don't even understand. What is a gay blogger doing judging a beauty competition?" By that logic, we assume Steyn also objects to heterosexual women judging the Miss USA pageant.

Highlights from Hour 1

Outrageous comments

STEYN: Yeah, and you mentioned the fact that, you know, those guys behead you. In other words, if you were a serving Marine and you fell into the hands of the wrong people in Iraq or Afghanistan on the Afghan/Pakistan border, there's no questions of them agonizing over what they're going to do to you. They're going to chop your head off, desecrate your corpse, take a video, and market it through every madrassa in Pakistan. And there's no -- they don't have any -- they don't have any -- so the idea that somehow if America forswears waterboarding, they'll say, "OK, well, we're still going to behead you, but this time we're going to sterilize the scimitar first." I mean, this is an absurd way of looking at it, isn't it?

[...]

STEYN: Richard was mentioning that gay blogger who was one of the judges on the Miss USA thing, the one who -- the one who, denounced Miss USA, Miss California as a dumb bitch and then subsequently posted on his website a photo of her from the TV broadcast with a microphone in front of her mouth Photoshopped out and a certain male anatomical part drawn in its place. And this twerp blogger, by the way, is objecting to her intolerance? I don't even understand. What is a gay blogger doing judging a beauty competition?

This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by the ex post facto speed trap
By Simon Maloy

Mark Steyn got the second hour rolling by saying he understands why Democrats want to go back to September 10, 2001, and why they want to investigate the past eight years - in doing so they can prevent investigations into what's going on right now. The Democratic mindset, said Steyn, is that the letter of the law should be observed in places where the laws don't apply. The protections of the Constitution, according to Steyn's description of how Democrats think, should be extended to foreigners, including those people standing next to Osama bin Laden in a cave in Afghanistan. If you're in the U.S., however, the Constitution is inoperative.

For example, Steyn claimed, look at what's going on with TARP. Citing Larry Kudlow's NRO blog post asking if TARP is a "criminal enterprise," Steyn claimed TARP and the stimulus are riddled with fraud, but you don't see The New York Times reporting on it (you do, actually) because everyone is caught up with the torture memos from seven years ago. Steyn then proclaimed that Barney Frank and President Obama should be held accountable for the world and economy that they are creating. TARP, he alleged, "is real loan-shark stuff ... this is how it works in Chicago." Steyn was referring to Treasury's reported plan to convert TARP debt owed by financial institutions into equity shares. According to Steyn: "[Y]ou get into trouble, and one day a guy comes by and he offers to loan you $10,000 to get you out of trouble. And you take the $10,000 and you get out of trouble and you get the money back and you want to pay him back but no, no, no, he doesn't, he wants you still there, he wants you still there dependent on him, still there part of the racket. That's the way it's going with these banks that are trying to get out of the TARP scheme"

After the break Steyn laughed at the fact that even though GM is planning to shut down plants for nine weeks, they're going to still pay workers to honor union contracts. Then he took a call from a woman who loved his comment that the Constitution no longer applies inside the United States, and said that Democrats need to read the Constitution before going forward on these terrorism investigations because it's illegal to change the law and then prosecute past behavior based on the new law. Steyn agreed that this is "unconstitutional," adding: "You're saying in effect it's like making a law that sets the speed limit at 30 miles an hour. And if you'd been driving at 40 miles an hour two years before the new law was brought in, they would be prosecuting you for speeding. Essentially, this is retrospective punishment for what is the Democrat administration's view of the war rather than the administration that was in power at the time." Distortions of the Constitution seem to be a popular theme on The Rush Limbaugh Show this week, so let's clear this one up too. Yes -- the Constitution expressly forbids Congress from passing any ex post facto laws. What's being proposed, however, is an investigation as to whether Bush administration officials violated existing law -- specifically, laws against torture.

Coming back from another break, Steyn took a call from a man who theorized that the Democrats are bringing up the torture memos now because they want to talk about George W. Bush incessantly until the next election rolls around in 2010. Steyn went a step further, saying that the plan is not just to link Bush and torture to the Republicans, but also to distract the nation from the disastrous economic policies enacted by Obama. Steyn doubted that this political calculation would work, though, because Americans are "cool with waterboarding." They understand, said Steyn, the options that are available - we can use harsh interrogation procedures, you "can bomb and kill tens of thousands of people among whom those suspects are lurking or you can just sit back and let your cities get hit." Steyn added: "You can let the Los Angeles plot succeed and let Los Angeles be hit on a 9-11 scale." We're glad he brought Los Angeles up, because that allows us to point out that waterboarding -- specifically, the waterboarding of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed -- had nothing to do with the disruption of the plot against L.A.'s Library Tower, which the Bush administration has said was thwarted one year before he was captured.

Steyn went on to claim that "pain is off the table" in the enhanced interrogation methods, it's just psychological disruption, and you can't call that torture. This would appear to be untrue, however, as the memos describe the tactics of "walling" and the "facial slap," which, as the names indicate, involve throwing someone into a wall and slapping them in the face.

Then Steyn offered some observations about the "caterpillar" technique that we can't begin to characterize, so we'll just quote them: "Now, try this on any other country in the world. Say, the head torture guy, the head torture guy of the United States government, they're having, like, a U.N. torture conference with all the big-time torturers. And the head torture man of the United States government flies in, and there's the Syrian torture guy, and there's the Iranian torture guy, and there's the North Korean torture guy, and there's the Sudanese torture guy, and they're saying, "Hey, welcome to the club, great to see you here. So what you been doing lately?" And they say, "Well, we have this guy Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in, and we had to get out the caterpillar." I mean, the [laughing] -- the Syrian -- and you know the way -- the Syrian guy, the Syrian torturer isn't going to be taking him seriously, is he? The Iranian torture is going to be thinking this guy's a joke"

Rounding out the hour, Steyn took a call from a gentleman who wanted to know why Obama is getting a free pass on deficits, but Reagan and Bush didn't. Steyn said it's not the deficit that matters, it's the policies behind them. Steyn said there's a difference in scale when talking about the Bush and Obama deficits, and he claimed there's a big question as to how Obama's deficits will be resolved.

Highlights from Hour 2

Outrageous comments

STEYN: We are told -- hear more and more about banks who took TARP money and would like to get out of government control and are being denied the possibility of doing it. This is, like, taking -- this is real loan-shark stuff. This is when the guy -- you get in trouble and you -- look, this is how it works in Chicago. You get into trouble, and one day a guy comes by and he offers to loan you $10,000 to get you out of trouble. And you take the $10,000 and you get out of trouble and you get the money back and you want to pay him back but no, no, no, he doesn't, he wants you still there, he wants you still there dependent on him, still there part of the racket. That's the way it's going with these banks that are trying to get out of the TARP scheme, that -- like the head guy at Citibank pitifully explaining, "Oh, well, yes, I took all the government money, nobody told me there would be strings attached."

[...]

STEYN: Yeah, you're right. It is -- it is unconstitutional. You're saying in effect it's like making a law that sets the speed limit at 30 miles an hour. And if you'd been driving at 40 miles an hour two years before the new law was brought in, they would be prosecuting you for speeding. Essentially, this is retrospective punishment for what is the Democrat administration's view of the war rather than the administration that was in power at the time.

[...]

STEYN: Now, try this on any other country in the world. Say, the head torture guy, the head torture guy of the United States government, they're having, like, a U.N. torture conference with all the big-time torturers. And the head torture man of the United States government flies in, and there's the Syrian torture guy, and there's the Iranian torture guy, and there's the North Korean torture guy, and there's the Sudanese torture guy, and they're saying, "Hey, welcome to the club, great to see you here. So what you been doing lately?" And they say, "Well, we have this guy Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in, and we had to get out the caterpillar." I mean, the [laughing] -- the Syrian -- and you know the way -- the Syrian guy, the Syrian torturer isn't going to be taking him seriously, is he? The Iranian torture is going to be thinking this guy's a joke [laughing].

America's guest-Truth Rejector

Falsely suggested enhanced interrogation was instrumental in disrupting Los Angeles plot:

STEYN: When you ask Americans about this, as we heard in the first hour, they're cool with waterboarding. They are perfectly happy if you've got some guy -- you pull some guy out of Pakistan or Indonesia and you get him in your custody and you think he's behind some plot -- for example, the plot to have a 9-11 on Los Angeles, the plot to blow up the U.S. airliners flying from Heathrow to the United States. These are active plots that are disrupted by intelligence.

They're disrupted -- the alternative to doing it this way, by the way, is -- there's two alternatives. You can do it this way, where you monitor, you eavesdrop, you listen to the chatter on the Internet, you hear keywords like "Brooklyn Bridge" that don't translate easily into Arabic, and you pull some guy out from some cell in Pakistan and you get the information out of him. The alternative to that -- there are two. You can either bomb and kill tens of thousands of people among whom those suspects are lurking, or you can just sit back and let your cities get hit. You can let that Heathrow plot succeed and all those people die in airliners flying to the United States. You can let the Los Angeles plot succeed and let Los Angeles be hit on a 9-11 scale. You can let the Brooklyn bridge be blown up with the attendant impact on the economy.

This hour of the Limbaugh Wire was paid for by the Somali pirates' Zanzibari doubloons
By Simon Maloy

Steyn got the third hour started by repeating his theory that the torture memo investigation is just like the Miss USA/gay marriage kerfuffle is all about a "thuggish" determination to make the price of "dissent" high. Then Steyn took up the "slippery slope" argument, asking where gay marriage will lead, and pointing to Iowa removing "bride" and "groom" from marriage certificates and a polygamy case going to the Canadian Supreme Court. Claiming that liberals have no problem with polygamy, Steyn said the dilemma for liberals is that they have no line to draw in their campaign to undermine the institution of marriage.

After some ranting about global warming and seatbelt laws being designed to control your life, Steyn lead into the break by mocking actress Mia Farrow for embarking on a hunger strike to call attention to the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. Steyn said the "left loves its causes" as long as they don't involve "meaningful action." Hey, have you all read Mark Steyn's column praising the "tea partiers" for "understand[ing] that their generation will be the principal victim of this grotesque government profligacy"?

Coming back from the break Steyn took a call from a man complaining about cap-and-trade, saying that no one gains from the arrangement. Steyn said he's right, no one gains, but someone loses -- you. Steyn said it was absurd to think that you can achieve a "green economy" through taxation, you're just going to make doing business more expensive. Steyn said the only way to achieve a green economy is to live in mud huts and have the women go down to the river to beat the laundry on rocks.

Another break, and Steyn came back with a caller who expressed his opinion that Miss California was in a no-win situation with the gay-marriage question. Steyn said he's right and it's all about free speech -- the point was to make her answer an unacceptable thing to say, and now future beauty pageant contestants will know not to answer that way. Then it was on to another caller, this one asking Steyn about the legislation just passed by the Connecticut state senate that requires schools to "encourage the homosexual lifestyle" and tell students that gay marriage is the only acceptable form of marriage. The Hartford Courant called this exact claim "baseless demagoguery," explaining that "[n]othing in the bill requires schools to 'teach gay marriage.' " But Steyn called it a "good point" as it relates to the removal of gender-specific words from school curricula.

Rounding out the show, Steyn took a call from a man who congratulated him on behalf of the entire Free Republic community and asked Steyn for advice on how to stand up to the "dismantling of our country" by the left. Steyn said that there's still hope out there because people realize the bailouts and the stimulus are a "crock," and he encouraged people to put pressure on their local governments to reject federal stimulus payments. After declaring that he wants his "freedom" and not "a lousy $400 tax credit from Barack Obama that came from me in the first place," Steyn kind of went off the rails a bit: "When those Navy SEALs took out -- took out the three pirates sitting in the ship and they shot them dead, did they say, 'Oh, let's have a look in the bottom of the boat. Whoa, there's a big chest here. And whoa, who would believe it, it's for $50 billion in old gold Zanzibari doubloons. Let's take that and give it to the federal treasury, and they can give it to the state of Illinois.' It's rubbish!"

Well, our desire that Mark Steyn's non-Rush voice and commentary would slake our thirst for change was not only left unfulfilled, it was exposed to us as so naïve and ridiculous that we are ashamed to have even hoped for it in the first place. But, live and learn. We'll be back tomorrow with guest host Mark Davis. Please join us, and help stave off Rush withdrawal by catching up on Media Matters' ever-growing Limbaugh archives.

Highlights from Hour 3

Outrageous comments

STEYN: Now that ridiculous woman, that Susan Roesgen, Roshten -- whatever she is -- from CNN who was berating that fella standing in the street at that demonstration in Chicago, and she said, "Well, don't you know you'll be getting a $400 tax credit?" I want my freedom; I don't want a $400 tax credit. Four hundred dollars -- I'll sell my freedom, but I'm not selling it for a lousy $400 tax credit from Barack Obama that came from me in the first place! And she goes, "Well, the state of Illinois is getting $50 million -- $50 billion dollars in extra --" OK, that sounds great, doesn't it? Where's that $50 billion coming from?

When those Navy SEALs took out -- took out the three pirates sitting in the ship and they shot them dead, did they say, "Oh, let's have a look in the bottom of the boat. Whoa, there's a big chest here. And whoa, who would believe it, it's for $50 billion in old gold Zanzibari doubloons. Let's take that and give it to the federal treasury, and they can give it to the state of Illinois." It's rubbish! It's only three hundred -- there are not enough rich people in this country, however broadly you define rich, to pay for what Obama is spending. So that means the only person he can get it from is you. And the only way he can take it from you is by limiting your freedoms so that you're as stupid as that CNN reporter and you think somehow it's worth trading your liberty for a $400 tax credit.