All Episodes
Previous Next
July 15, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:49
July 15, 2005, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Say, Mike, stand by if you would on uh audio soundbites 23 and 24.
We got that pencil-necked little nanny out there.
Michael Jacobson guy, the Peeps Center for Science and the Public Interest.
I knew he would have been all over television now, telling everybody how many soda pops their kids ought not be able to drink.
CNN American Morning today.
I could have told you.
But Raspet Rush, what's wrong with somebody telling us what they nothing's wrong?
Anybody can tell us what they think.
But for this guy to get promoted in publicity, he's no different than anybody else.
He's not an expert on anything.
He's just a nanny that's promoting big government, managing everybody's lives because he didn't think you have what you uh need to manage your own.
It's open line Friday.
Let's keep it going.
And once again, here are the rules.
Monday through Thursday, we only talk about things that interest me, but on Friday, we allow you.
And this is a huge career risk.
Uh as I'm a highly trained broadcast specialist.
It's very few uh people that can engage in a day like this.
What I do, I turn over much of the content of today's program to uh I mean you're decent-hearted people, you're great.
I love you, but you are rank amateurs.
But nevertheless, I am willing to indulge it because I enjoy it myself.
So you you can bring up things that may not interest me today, and uh we will talk about them.
It's my attempt at reaching out and giving something back.
Telephone numbers 800 28 282-2882, the email address is rush at eIBNet.com.
This is big news.
And I predicted this.
I told you this was going to happen, and this is another reason I feel great about it.
A federal appeals court, the DC Circuit, DC Court of Appeals, upheld the use of military tribunals to try terrorism suspects held at Club Gitmo in Cuba.
They ruled against a man accusing of accused of being Osama bin Laden's driver.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington today overturned a Clinton appointed federal judge's ruling last November that halted the military trial of Salem Ahmed Hamdan of Kyemen.
The lower court said that the military panels violate federal and international law.
Well, that's such an out overreach.
I've never seen anything like this.
A federal judge telling the commander-in-chief and the U.S. military how they can conduct a war.
Military panels, tribunals have been used since as far back as World War I and World War II, and a federal judge said you can't do that.
It's a violation of federal and international law.
And he threw something in there about the Geneva Convention.
But the DC Circuit Appeals Court ruled that Congress authorized the use of military tribunals to try terrorism suspects, and that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to members of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group.
This is why it is important to get people on the appellate court, folks.
This right here.
Because if we had the same kind of judges on the appellate court as this Clinton appointee, we would have just succeeded in the judiciary usurping constitutional power from the chief executive.
Now, they can appeal this up to the Supreme Court, and we're at risk again.
We are at risk if if uh if this guy, and here again his name is Salim Ahmed Chamdan.
And if he wants to take this appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, his he and his lawyers, they most certainly can.
But a federal judge just said, well, you you you can't do this.
The military tribunals violate federal and international law.
And they do not.
They have been used at the appeals court.
So wait a minute, violate law.
Congress authorized the use of military tribunals.
That makes it the law.
Hamdan claims that an army regulation entitles him to have a competent tribunal determine his status.
Judge Raymond Randolph wrote for the three-judge court.
We believe that the military commission is such a competent tribunal.
We therefore see no reason why Salem Ahmed Rhamdan Kyemen could not assert his claim to prisoner of war status Before the Military Commission at the time of his trial.
Joining the opinion was Judge John G. Roberts Jr., who is being viewed as a candidate for nomination of the U.S. Supreme Court to uh uh replace Sandra Day O'Connor.
Judge Stephen Williams wrote a concurring opinion.
This sounds to me like it's a three-to-nothing slam dunk of victory here at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The uh U.S. Supreme Court in January rejected, see, and this is another thing.
I forgot this.
This guy, this guy uh Salim Ahmed Khamdan of Kyemen, had a pretty sharp lawyer, and the lawyer said, I want to take this appeal straight to Supreme Court.
Remember this?
I want to take this straight to the Supreme Court because he didn't trust the D.C. circuit.
And you can fast-track these things if you want to.
Now, the Supreme Court in January rejected his appeal, declining a chance to examine the Bush administration's process.
So I'm wrong about this.
It can't go back there.
He's already been there.
So this is the final point.
Am I right about this?
They rejected his appeal already.
They sent it back down to the D.C. circuits to keep this in order.
They declined a chance to examine the Bush administration's procedures for military trials of accused terrorists.
Hamdan, who says he's about 35, was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and is being held at Club Gitmo.
He is at Club Gitmo now.
Well, maybe they can.
I'll have to check with the uh the guy that runs a legal division here at the uh Limbaugh Institute and see if indeed they can now go back to the Supreme Court after having been rejected there already.
We'll have to wait and see.
This is huge news, folks.
This is absolutely huge news, and it is as I say it is.
Why you need right people on these appellate courts because these circuit appointments, you never know who you're gonna get, depending on who the president is.
And had uh the wrong judges been on this court, we could have had it succeed.
This attempt by the federal judiciary to usurp uh constitutional power from the commander-in-chief.
So Salem Ahmed Hamdan will remain a uh a guest at Club Gitmo.
Now, there is a there is a big question here, uh ladies and gentlemen, on the ruling involving Salim Ahmed Khamdan Kyemen.
And that is how will this affect the uh future reservations at Club Gitmo?
You know, it it is sold out.
A people trying to get into Club Gitmo all the time, and you do have to move some people out.
They can't stay there forever, no matter uh that it is uh paradise compared to where they live.
But you got to move people out so you keep recycling the rooms.
That's how you make money.
Uh so we'll have to keep a sharp eye on this to see how you know this this ruling does affect uh the operation uh down at Club Gitmo.
In uh in other court news, jurors in the terrorism conspiracy trial of a former college professor, uh, heard his fiery language about the Palestinian cause and the virtues of martyrdom in video tapes that prosecutors say show he raised money for terrorists.
This is uh Sami Alarian.
Uh after struggling to stay alert, the story says here, during four weeks of testimony, the jurors finally got to hear Sami Al-Arian this week on tape.
At a conference in 1991, Al-Arian, then a University of South Florida computer engineering professor, praised the 1987 Intifada in Gaza.
He called it a fight until martyrdom and urged support for Muslims fighting in Israeli occupied territories.
On the tape, the jurors heard him say, This is the way of struggle.
This is the way of giving, thus is the way of sacrifice, thus is the way of battle, thus is the way of jihad, thus is the way of martyrdom, thus is the way of blood, because this is the path to heaven.
Basically killing yourself and bombing others.
Al-Aryan's remarks were in Arabic with English subtitles by a government translator.
And on the tape, he talked about the effects of the Intifada.
He said, Gaza hasn't been calm since the Intifada.
It brought new values to the Sons of Palestine, forever have gone these values that want mankind to be submissive, vanquished, and inferior to the occupier.
Your brothers in Palestine are struggling with their being, so let us struggle here with our money.
We will not cede one meter or one span to the enemies of God.
These tapes were found in the house of Sami Al-Arian in 1995.
They've been known to investigators in the media for a number of years, but they emerged as a key element in the trial this week as prosecutors are trying to convince the jurors that Al-Arian and three code defendants operated a Tampa cell of the Palestinian Islamic jihad raising money and fueling deadly suicide bombings in Israel, the West Bank and the uh the Gaza Strip.
A quick timeout.
Back with more your phone calls next on Open Line Friday, so stay with us.
Rush Limbaugh, America's anchor man and truth detector, as well as play-by-playman of the news.
It's been one heck of a week here, folks.
Right so many times.
Uh I never take it for granted being right.
I'm always appreciative of it.
One of the things, though, that that accompanies me, somebody right as often as I am, is I'm not allowed to be wrong.
Many of you people, you can make mistakes all over the place, and people say, that's good.
Learn from your mistakes and build on them.
I make mistakes and it's over for limbo.
He blew that one.
Well, I don't mind that pressure, but it's I can't tell you what an exciting I mean, I love hearing myself speak, you know that.
And I love hearing myself speak when I know I'm right, which is so often that it's it's becoming now a matter of habit.
I got an email note today that kind of reminded me of this in a way from a friend.
He said, Rush, look at this.
Michael Moore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Rodham, Chucky Schumer, Dan Rather, the New York Times, George Soros, Moveon.org.
These are the warriors of the left.
And these folks are waging one tough war.
But their war is not on terror.
Their war is on the truth.
Michael Moore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Rodham, Chuck Schumer, Dan Rather, the New York Times, George Soros, Moveon.org have savaged the truth about tax cuts in the American economy.
They have lied about the war in Iraq and the war on terror.
They've lied about the president.
They've lied about Carl Rove.
They've lied about originalists as being divisive.
They've lied about global warming.
They've lied about Walmart.
They've lied about the Patriot Act.
They've lied about Club Gitmo.
They lie about themselves.
They're not moderates.
They're not mainstream, and they sure as hell don't support our troops because they undercut their mission.
They minimize or refuse to report their successes and smear their commander-in-chief.
The liberals' war on truth is second to none.
And don't tell me they haven't paid a heavy price waging their war on truth.
Despite losing election after election, despite losing viewers, despite losing listeners, despite losing subscribers, despite losing readers, despite losing ad revenue, these America bashers have held their ground.
Liberals have been bloodied, humiliated, and defeated, yet they wage their war on the truth day after day, raiding period after raiding period, learning nothing.
If nothing else, these warriors have grit.
These liars have spunk.
These divisive class envy promoting tax raising rage-filled secular losers are not quitters.
No, sir, they're going to keep sticking their feet in their mouths and their heads in the sand until hell freezes over.
They are dedicated in their war against truth.
Cheers.
Rich.
Pretty good way to put it.
Here's Jade in Chicago.
Jade, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Thank you, Rush.
First off, I'd like to tell you I appreciate you bringing the honesty in this war against the radical Islamic terror we thing.
Second off, what do you think about what the Chinese said about threatening us with nuclear attack if we were to defend that one?
You know, uh okay.
Here's I don't know if could you understand what he said.
His cell phone was a little muffled.
Uh he wants to know what I thought about the ChICOMs threatening us with a nuclear attack if we were to fend uh to defend Taiwan.
I'm I always love to share with you my instincts and my instinctive reaction was, yeah, and where'd they get the technology to threaten us?
The Clinton administration.
Where did they get the technology to aim these missiles that they think they they have?
They got it from the Clinton administration.
Um I know it's no laughing matter, but folks, some me, sometimes that's all you can do.
The second thing, the second reaction is I think it's a preemptive strike, but I I do think this.
I think that I think the Chicoms do consider us an enemy.
I think that they consider us an enemy that they would just as soon not have to deal with.
And I think that's why they they they uh they're helping the Iranians in their nuclear program.
And I think they're uh they're they're probably really not a lot upset about the North Koreans, uh other than their close proximity, the North Koreans' close proximity to uh to China.
But this business about Taiwan, we have a treaty with Taiwan.
We have pledged to defend them if uh if uh if they're attacked.
And the Chaicoms have promised they're gonna go out and get Taiwan.
For as long as they've been alive, the Chaicoms, don't matter who their leadership has been, have pledged they're gonna bring that little island back and they're and they're gonna they're gonna make it part of China because they don't like these renegade rebels over there on the island.
And that will then that that'll that that's gonna force some kind of action because we have this uh we have this treaty.
Now there have been rumblings.
Uh uh maybe the better word would be whispers for the last 10 years that if Taiwan's attacked, we might not actually stop it.
That we might not actually do something uh uh about it, uh not wanting to risk the uh a military confrontation with the uh with the Chikoms.
I think you can't leave out of this equation that Chikoms are trying to trying to uh to buy Unical, and their latest effort failed.
They their company, I don't know how you pronounce this, I've never heard it pronounced, C N-O-O-C.
Is it Canuke?
Whatever.
Uh the Chicom's Canucke Limited failed to persuade UNICEL board of directors to accept its $18.5 billion cash bid because it didn't raise the share price offer beyond sixty-seven dollars.
Uh Canuc is the nation's third largest oil producer.
They promised to set aside two and a half billion dollars in an escrow account to cover uh Unical against possible shareholder lawsuits should a sale fail, and the people who asked not to be identified uh based, uh the Beijing-based Caduke didn't raise the value of its original offer of June 23rd.
Uh Canuc greatly underestimated how much this would cost, said Mark Cahita, who helps manage $550 million, including shares of Canucks and Chevron as chief investment officer at Baker Boyer National Bank in Walla Walla, Washington.
He didn't take into account the kind of fire storm they were about to set off in the uh in the United States.
So their their attempt to purchase things at at least for the moment stonewalled, and that's not going to sit well with them, because I don't for a minute believe that their attempt to purchase UNICAL with a lot of holdings in the Gulf is simply economic.
There has got to be something uh uh strategic to it that that's gonna raise all kinds of uh of red flags.
But the uh the the threat about Taiwan, it was clearly stated, if you respond when we eventually go back and take that place and reclaim it, we will have no choice but then to nuke you.
Uh now the Soviets, you know, had big bluster like this all over the.
I mean, I remember Leonid Brezhnev was walking around all over Europe on one of his many tours, and he was promising all these neighboring countries won't nuke you if you'll do what we say.
So uh uh, but it's you have to take it.
You have to take it seriously.
I think well, Mr. Snerdley asked, wouldn't it hurt their economy and make their economy tank?
I think you have to be realistic about Chikons.
They're communists.
And yeah, they don't mind their economy doing well, but I'm I think they're a little bit worried too about the fact that it's capitalism making their economy grow.
They're glad to take the receipts, but they look at it as a budding problem because with along with capitalism comes freedom and come demands and this sort by the people.
They got people they can't feed in that country.
They wouldn't mind losing a whole slew of them if you ask me.
They've got people in that they're communists, Mr. Snerdley, they don't they don't have the same.
This is what's always been laughable to me about Jimmy Carter and the rest of this crowd running around the world praising all these dictators and thugs for their human rights.
I mean, the Chikoms have how many, what is it, one billion?
What's the population of China now?
It's oh and it's over one billion people.
I mean, and uh, you know, they lost some of those people.
I don't think it'd bother them at all.
I mean they will kill a person that stands in front of a tank on television.
They will they will you know they're you can't tell me that they're they're they have a different respect for the sanctity of life than the other communists that have populated the earth and they're among the most powerful group of them uh today.
But yeah they do have economic pressures.
There's no question if if as long as those billion plus people are alive they have to be fed and communism can't feed them.
Uh it's just it's just that simple has been proven uh from the beginning of time so I I I think right now I think most people who threaten nuke action are blustering.
I think if you're gonna do it you do it.
Uh and they know there'd be a retaliation.
That's why I think they might not mind losing a bunch of their people in a retaliation.
We got a ruling from the legal division here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
There is nothing to prevent an appeal to the Supreme Court by this Yemeni citizen who was victorious in a lower court before a Clinton judge, a Clinton-appointed judge, who ruled that the whole concept of military tribunals are unconstitutional and violate international law.
The D.C. Circuit overturned that judge.
It was three conservatives on the panel, one appointed by Reagan, one...
one by Bush 41 and uh one by Bush 43.
So it was a three to zip decision.
I guess I guess Hamdan could uh uh request a a hearing before the full DC circuit and he could go back to the US Supreme Court.
It's doubtful the U.S. Supreme Court would take the case since they've already rejected it uh one time but now that the appellate court has ruled there's nothing to stop the terrorist from seeking review by the full Supreme Court.
Here is uh Carol in Norman Oklahoma.
Hi Carol, glad to have you on open line Friday.
Yes.
Yes hi.
I called because I was on my way home and I heard a commercial on our local Oklahoma City station by George Soros and uh it stated that uh Carl Rove uh is with uh is comparable to Bush and Delay.
They're all from Texas but the statement that bothered me was that they stated Carl starts with K just like the Klan You heard this I heard it on our uh local Oklahoma City station about ten minutes to one our time it took me a while to get to my home to call you uh and was this the first time you've heard this?
Yes.
And it says it's a George Soros card into the station from eleven to two here every day.
Thank you.
God love you for that.
I'm sure they're very happy I was just uh very surprised and very outraged so I just want to pass that along because you've been discussing the last couple days how far they will go and this was quite shocking.
Yeah these people on the left in it amazing what they're uh they'll stop at nothing.
They actually say that Carl Rove's name begins with a K just in the Carl starts with K. And they they said just like the Klan That's just unbelievable.
I I think that it's unacceptable these people are beyond the pale.
I wouldn't worry about it.
I think No I'm not worried I think the reaction you're having to it is probably identical to everybody that heard it.
I'm sure and my grandsons listen to you every day as well and uh and they're they're uh just so informed as a result of it.
I and uh I just I just uh get very upset that that people would do things like this rather than deal with the truth.
Well I mean the way you have to look at this is if that's all they've got on Carl Rowe that his name begins with a K just like the clan's name begins with a K that's really nothing.
I mean that's worth laughing at, don't you think?
Oh absolutely I mean then nobody's gonna fall for the fact that Rove's a bad guy because his first name starts with a K. Right.
George Soros might think so and some of the move on people, but I I wouldn't well I appreciate The report.
We'll keep a sharp eye out for that.
You heard it on the Oklahoma City K T O K you heard it on.
What time?
Uh let's see.
It would have been ten minutes to two your time.
Uh I had taken my grandsons to lunch, got back in the car, and my station's I mean, the station is always on that station.
Yeah.
And you you were doing your program and uh Do you think it was a good program today, by the way?
Oh, absolutely.
Yeah, thank you.
I'm I'm sorry when I can't hear all three hours, but uh they had to be fed.
Well, how old are your grandkids?
Twenty-one and seventeen.
And I make a point to go to lunch with them.
Their their father was a staunch listener of you.
That's how I uh was introduced to you back in the late eighties, and uh my son in law passed away in two thousand one of melanoma, and so I very close to my grandsons.
Well, that's great.
I'm sure they appreciate going to lunch with you too.
And I love them.
Do you drive?
Oh yes.
Yeah.
I drove all over Norman.
I know that.
But I mean, did you drive them to lunch?
I mean you you take it.
No, I actually met them there today.
They they uh they were doing some work for their mother and uh she was busy working and uh so I Oh so they didn't hear this sorrow school, did you?
No, they went off in their their cars doing different errands and did you talk did you did you did you tell them about it?
I haven't had a chance to because when I got home I dialed you.
Oh, you heard it on the way home.
Okay.
You heard it on the way.
And I was hitting redial all the time, trying to get through.
And I try not to do that.
The last time I called in to you was when I worked at my husband's office, and the health care plan of Hillary's was going on, and my husband's a physician.
And so I called you then.
And the last time I met you was when my friend and I came up for the Final Four in New Jersey, and we came to your studio when you were doing television shows, and you autographed a book for me.
And so I've been a Russian.
Limbaugh fan a long, long time.
Well and I just love to listen.
Uh because I learn you learn so much.
Well, thank you very much.
That's I I I love you too and love you for saying that and uh keep a sharp eye out for that.
You never know when KTOK will run that thing again.
I don't know.
Uh you just never know.
But if you if you do hear it again, don't let it upset you.
Oh, I won't.
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay, Carol, thanks very much.
Pam in Durham, North Carolina.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Rush.
Hello.
Um if I may take the opportunity first to thank you for explaining baseline budgeting.
You're more than welcome.
Yes, that's one of the uh one of the most memorable periods of this program's history.
It changed the way America looks at Congress.
Well, it was very useful to me, and I will always be grateful for that.
Even when I worked with you at other times, I'm always grateful for that.
Um I wanted to Well, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Uh like irked at me over what?
Well, um well uh I perhaps I shouldn't even have gone there because I don't want to be sidetracked from talking about No, I'll let you talk about what you want to talk about.
I just want to know what uh it's all part of my audience research.
What is it that irks you?
Oh well, I haven't really prepared a list in my mind, so I'm kind of nervous about talking what I wanted to talk about, so this is kind of off the cuff, so I you know that's generally the way it works best.
Okay.
Well uh no, I uh sometimes I get a little irked because it seems to me that you set up rather weak straw men to tear down to make your point.
And I think that many times you have very strong points and you don't need to be doing that, and that does irk me when various people do that.
I understand there's an element of entertainment involved, but it is irksome to me because I I have so little time and I, you know, well give me can you can you give me an example of setting up a straw man um I I can't even think of anything that's really meaningful.
I mean, uh the only thing I can't do.
The reason I'm folks is uh I know a lot of you people just a second here.
Uh Pam, a lot of people Rush, why are you doing this?
Folks, I get so few complaints.
Uh and complaints are an opportunity to learn.
I get so few that I mean I actually enjoy uh this kind of criticism because I never ever get it, and and it's it's a learning opportunity.
So if you i if you could give me an example because I uh directing straw men uh like and maybe if if you really want this, I'll try calling in another Friday with an actual list that's you know a little more thought out.
Why don't you do that?
I'll tell you what we'll do.
We'll get your number so that you won't have to worry about calling back uh getting through.
And you work on the list of things and and uh between we'll call you next Thursday, because next Thursday is the last my I'm only gonna be working through Thursday of next week.
Oh that's good.
I um yeah, okay.
So you've got you've got a week basically to put together this list.
Okay.
All right.
Now you wanted to talk about CAFTA, right?
Yeah.
Um I'm all for free trade.
I I'm I'm I'm uh staunch staunch free trader.
But the seven hundred and sixty-five pages of CAFTA uh seem to be talking about more than just uh free trade, which I think you could put on a page.
Um among other things that you know CAFTA is going to be imposing on us the international labor organization's uh manifesto or declaration.
And as you probably are familiar with, the International Labor Organization, which is associated with the UN, it it meddles with workers and their employers.
I mean, it talks about a right to a job, a right to a standard of living, a right to, you know, security, a right to all these things.
And um through CAFTA, those things are going to be imposed on us.
I mean it gives it gives the international community and the people who want to meddle with us an avenue to um to make laws and and and practices that are antithetical to what America is supposed to be about and the way people are supposed to have the freedom to um bargain with their employers and s you know, take a job voluntarily and do, you know, the various things that we have to do to uh to have a free and and open and strong economy.
Um and the um excuse me, I'm so very nervous.
Um you don't you no wait no no no you don't sound nervous at all.
You sound very passionate about this.
I can tell you you're very much were you also opposed to NAFTA?
You know, I have to be honest in saying that um my detailed examination and and it's not as detailed as I would like, um has not extended to NAFTA because I've come more lately to um researching things and whatever.
So I have not really gone into NAFTA.
Um so if there are pieces of it that are similar or not, I'm not really familiar with that.
So I really don't discuss that.
I'm gonna have to be honest uh with you about this, Pam, and uh I I haven't spent all that much time looking into CAFTA myself.
Uh I've been too busy dealing with uh Joe Wilson and the Liberals and the war on terror and beating them back from the Wolf's door.
And by the way, I understand folks, the Democrats in Washington are now beginning to stand down and drop this whole thing and they are they're they're they're pulling back from Joe Wilson.
They're not at all backing this guy up.
It's good.
You're gonna notice it's much, much quieter uh about Rove, I think from now through the weekend uh and so forth, because it's over.
And we hammered that we we were hammering nails in that coffin all week long.
And I must admit, Pam, I've been occupied with that and the uh uh all these other uh phony charges that the Democrats have been making and uh and CAFTA has something that I have not spent a whole lot of time with, but I do know this.
I do know that when NAFTA was in this uh in this stage, it had a whole bunch of complaints, a bunch of people complaining about it on the same basis.
Well, I mean I'm not sure.
Well, but the the the big problem with NAFTA to people was the ITO, International Trade Organization, which submitted uh, you know, domestic U.S. labor disputes and and trade disputes to an international body and uh there was all kinds of scaremongering that we had no uh no power there.
We're gonna have the world rule against us and so forth.
You to this day you've got some people who still think NAFTA is responsible for loss of manufacturing jobs in the country and so forth, but you can't argue with the state of the U.S. economy.
Well, you can't argue with the direction that it's taking.
Um I'm I'm like you.
Free trade's free trade, and I'm all for it.
Um free trade, fair trade and all that.
But I'm gonna have to look closer at this because you've that would be great because it's deal.
I'll look into CAFTA while you're preparing your list of complaints and irks about me.
Okay.
All right.
That sounds good.
Okay.
Now don't hang up because we gotta get your phone number to reach it.
Okay, have a have a have a have a great weekend.
We'll take a brief timeout, folks, and be back and continue with Open Line Friday right after almost this.
Welcome.
Excuse me.
Struggling here to maintain my composure.
Uh here, let me just read you an email I just got.
That lady from Oklahoma is on to something.
Uh dear Rush, I just heard your caller describing a commercial she heard in Norman, Oklahoma.
I heard the same commercial here in Tampa on nine seventy WFLA.
It was so absurd.
I actually thought it was one of your parodies.
I had no clue it was an actual commercial until I heard your caller.
Honestly, Rush, I was laughing myself silly.
It was so funny.
I really thought it was one of uh your your creations.
Keep up the good work.
Uh Scott.
His name.
We're getting tons of email uh about this here, just in the last, well, since uh since her call in the uh Rush comments line uh at uh rush 24-7.
Uh big news here, folks.
A major source of chemical contamination in the Arctic turns out to be bird droppings.
Wind currents and human activities long have been blamed for fouling the pristine Arctic, but a study by a group of Canadian researchers found that the chemical pollution in areas frequented by seabirds can be many times higher than in nearby regions.
Researchers led by Jules Blais of the University of Ottawa studied several ponds below the cliffs at Cape Vera on Devon Island in the Canadian Arctic, and they report in today's issue of the journal Science that the ponds which receive uh falling guano from a colony of northern fulmers that nest on the cliff.
For those of you in real linda here, we're talking about X uh you won't understand that either.
Um poop, yeah, bird poop.
This is this is this is this is bird poop.
Uh and what's now stop and think of this.
How long have birds been around and pooping?
And how long have birds been fouled?
I mean, the birds have been around before we have been around.
Everybody knows this.
Birds have been flying around all over the place and they've been pooping.
And and yet yet here we have in the last 20 years this hysteria about fouling the environment at the pristine Arctic.
And of course, when you're a bunch of libs, you just have to blame humanity.
You have to blame prosperity.
Your self-loathing and self-guilt as a liberal makes you blame yourself and everybody else for all of the horrors you imagine.
At the same time, you talk about the wonders and the beauties of nature and how nature is pristine.
And if we could all just get the human beings out of the way, why, this world would be a much better place for those who remain.
And we find out now that it's bird poop.
It's in bird poop all along that is fouling the so-called pristine.
Uh what could be more natural than bird poop.
Now, I think it's interesting to note, too, that these researchers did not find poop from anything else.
No polar bear poop.
No deer poop, no uh reindeer poop.
You know, nothing.
Bird poop.
No human poop.
And yet, isn't that pristine nature?
Birds, I mean, these birds are just their much of part of nature as a redwood tree is.
Arctic pollution linked to bird droppings.
Now, let's just see how long this story lasts, and then the next story about pollution in the Arctic and what it is blamed on in the next round of research we get.
It'll be something totally different.
And of course, then we'll get story well, penguin poop, but no, but the penguins poop in the water.
You that the birds poop in the air, and you know, you never know where it lands.
But it went the researchers are able to find it.
These people have a nose for poop.
And uh, you know, I don't know if there are penguins in the north in the north pole, Mr. Sturdling.
I think penguins in the South Pole.
I'm not, I'm I'm not totally sure about this.
Uh, even though penguin penguin and pelicans, uh, my two favorite birds.
Uh, and I know there aren't any pelicans up there.
Uh, but nevertheless, uh, we'll we'll just we'll just see what the there'll be some research on this, claiming, well, yes, this uh this obviously is uh oh yeah, quick break, out of time.
All right, folks, that's it.
Sadly, we are out of time.
Hope you have a great weekend.
We'll be back Monday and rev it back up all over.
Cheerio.
▲
Export Selection