All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 16, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:13
September 16, 2005, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
By the way, just want to let you know, folks, we have no further updates today on the sad saga of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana.
Or do we?
No, I guess we don't have any updates in the saga of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, other than to say you miss the guys that knew how to corrupt competently.
Even corruption's gone downhill in Louisiana.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's open line Friday.
And I promise they're going to be getting to your phone calls in this hour, folks, and it won't be long.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
I want to confirm something that I referenced in the last hour.
I got an email from a subscriber at Rush 24-7 that there was a story in the, what was it?
It's a Lafayette Louisiana newspaper that Mary Landrew had succeeded in putting a bunch of buses on the street to get people to the polls to vote for her in 1996.
And I can't find that story on Nexus.
I don't know that the Lafayette newspaper reports to Nexus.
We found it, though, in the New Orleans Times-Picayune of November 9th, 1996.
And basically, what happened there was that Mary Landreaux was trailing badly in her race with Woody Jenkins for the Senate, and they found out that the inner city of New Orleans had not voted, something to the tune of, what, 186,000 people.
They pulled out all the stops.
Clinton was making phone calls.
Clinton, Landrew, and Harry Connick Sr. put this whole thing together.
The work to get African American voters to the polls started at the True Gospel of Jesus Christ Church on North Broad Street before the polling places opened.
Thousand workers would hit the streets that day, 500 in the morning and 500 that afternoon.
And they went all through town.
They put together parades with New Orleans music to go through the housing projects.
They gave away red beans and rice, and they found buses.
They found countless buses to get people to the polls.
Now, the only reason I bring this up is to once again confirm that when they really want to move people, they can do it in New Orleans.
When they really want to move them, they can do it.
The paragraph from the Times Picayune.
Within 45 minutes, we arranged a motorcade.
We found Mary and Mark.
We got school buses for workers, soundtracks with music, and put on parades to flush out our voters.
Mary, we're in Norma Jane Sebiston's little red convertible.
It was a tight fit for Mark, big as he is.
I think this is Mark Morreal, but they were both up there waving.
We moved them into the major housing project areas, blowing horns and playing New Orleans music.
We were doing what we do best in New Orleans.
We were having a parade.
PhoneBank was operating at another location.
Workers calling voters, asking them to get to the polls and asking them if they needed a bus.
Surge time, 4.30 to 7.30 p.m.
When large numbers of voters get off work and go to the places, there were more parades in key areas.
So, you know, no big deal.
It's common.
I'm just saying that when they want to use those buses to get people where they want them to be, they can do it.
Now, a little bit of a change of direction, but still relates to what we've been discussing at length today.
Most amazing piece last night at MSNBC.com posted by Howard Feynman.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for Howard Feynman.
You have to have respect for Howard Feynman.
He's a reporter of great repute and long-standing time-honored work in Washington, D.C. Works for Newsweek and appears on MSNBC now and then.
He also writes a web-exclusive commentary for their website, MSNBC.
And this one was stunning.
The title is Beltway versus Blogosphere.
And the subhead is this.
Democrats are struggling to reconcile a difference between party leaders in D.C. and independent activists on the net.
Now, my point about this is, I said yesterday, and I mentioned again today, that the media in this, particularly inside the Beltway, but the mass national media, mainstream media, as we call them, or as they have been known.
And I'm purposely trying to run this phrase into the ground because I want it to become as familiar to you as any other phrase you utter, and that is they simply live in the moment.
The moment is the cycle, the current news cycle that they create.
The current cycle prevents them from seeing all of the currents that are flowing through American society.
There is a deeper current of events that they miss all the time.
Now, some chalk this up to bias.
Partially it is, but some is they just live in the moment.
The moment right now is destroying Bush.
That's why the media, I think it's CNN and NBC announced that they have set up bureaus in New Orleans.
They're going to have a continued 24-7 presence in New Orleans.
They're going to have bureau chiefs, reporters based there.
Why?
To chronicle the disaster for George W. Bush.
This news cycle has been going on since January of 2001.
And it's taken on different personalities, Cindy Sheehan, Bill Burkett, the Jersey Girls, the 9-11 Commission, the whole National Guard story, and anything else they've tried to gin up or make up that would fit into this cycle.
But this cycle causes tunnel vision.
And so this cycle, this living in the moment has them focused on news only from the aspect of will this hurt Bush or will this help Bush?
They don't even ask if it'll help Bush, really.
So the focus of their current cycle that they are in is, will this hurt Bush?
Can we help this hurt Bush?
Can we encourage this to hurt Bush?
And in the process, they miss all kinds of other things.
Now, how many months ago was it that I told you of the coming crisis in the Democratic Party based on the kook fringe left, as typified by their websites and their blogs, versus the DC Beltway crowd and this fringe kook group on the left demanding to take it over and threatening to take it over, sending threatening letters to Howard Dean even.
Hey, you at the DLC, you at the DNC, don't care where you are.
You're too embedded in that DC culture in the K-Street lobbyists.
And we are the people to make this party.
We're going to take it over.
Who are these people?
They are filled with rage.
They are filled with hatred.
They don't even focus on winning elections.
Their total focus is destroying Bush.
To think now, and this is where Mr. Feynman kind of surprises me that he just now sees this.
The mainstream of the Democratic Party has been paying respect and fealty to this fringe group for at least a number of years.
When Hillary Clinton, when they were counting the electoral votes after the 04 election, when she stands up to interrupt the vote from Ohio and joins everybody else saying, we need a new bill to count every vote, and when they demand a recount in Ohio because the voting fraud, she wasn't echoing what she thought, she was echoing what she was told to say.
When these senators and the Judiciary Committee made absolute fools of themselves by reading the talking points from Ralph Neese, People for the American Way, the NAROL gang, the NAGs, and all these other special interest leftist groups, Roberts ran rings around them, but they were being field.
They were being loyal to these groups.
They were doing what they had to do to get these groups money.
The idea that it's just now discoverable that there's a war going on in the Democratic Party is amazing to me because I've been telling you about this for two years.
Michael Barone wrote about this some months ago, and I even said he's arriving late to this.
And it is breathtaking when you, I'm going to share with you some of the details here of Mr. Feynman's piece, but it's happening out there.
I have thought one of the bigger stories out there today is the coming breakup of the Democratic Party and its destruction because it is being taken over and wildly influenced by these fringe kooks who are not even focused on winning elections.
Their pure focus is on destroying George W. Bush.
And how you can look at the D.C. Democrats and see that there's anything different from them is beyond me.
The D.C. Democrats, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, may as well be articulating talking points that they're being sent by these groups.
And yet that has just now been discovered.
And more on this when we come back, stay with us.
One, two, three, four, five, Mambo number five.
Greetings and welcome back.
The Rush Limbaugh program and the EIB network.
By the way, speaking of my plan, the Limbaugh plan to rebuild the New Orleans and Gulf Coast regions, Coco is going to put my plan, as outlined by me in the first hour at rushlimbaugh.com.
And if you have any ideas or suggestions to add to it, we can do that from subscribers at Rush24-7, just as we're posting club Gitmo pictures.
But I just want to tell you, when this rebuilding effort starts, you know who you won't see down there chipping in, and you know who you haven't seen chipping in?
The backbone of America.
You're not going to find the ACLU down there.
You're not going to find people for the American way down there.
You're not going to find the NAROL babes.
You're not going to find the NAGs.
You're not going to find any of these left-wing whiners, complainers, and finger pointers on the battlefront.
You will not find them.
They are not the backbone of this country.
They're the ones that always talk about civil rights and the violation of others' rights if they are minorities.
And they're so concerned this is going to happen.
But do you see them leaving their ivory towers to hit the site to make sure in person it doesn't happen?
No, you don't.
Now back to this Feynman piece.
I've set the table for this.
Let me begin reading it.
If I'm hearing Simon Rosenberg write, and he's worth listening to, and I don't know who Simon Rosenberg is, but he's somebody that Feynman trusts implicitly.
If I'm hearing Simon Rosenberg write, a nasty civil war is brewing within the Democratic Party, and Senator Clinton, the party's presumptive 2008 nominee, needs to avoid getting caught in the middle of it.
It's not a fight between the liberals and conservatives, Rosenberg told me the other day.
It's between our governing class here and the activists everywhere else.
Well, I just want to remind everybody in this audience, I have been telling you about this for two years.
And here is a highly respected, highly reputed member of the mainstream press who's just now being told about it by somebody he trusts.
Hadn't even seen it himself.
Now, why?
Why is this?
Well, that's what I always say.
They're living in the moment, missing the deeper currents.
They got one objective and one conclusion they want everybody to reach, and that is that Bush stinks.
He's horrible, and we need to destroy his presidency and get rid of him.
In the meantime, the Democratic Party's falling apart and they don't even see it.
Thankfully, Mr. Feynman has a friend who's clued him in.
And now he's written a breathless piece.
In other words, it's the Beltway versus the blogosphere, writes Mr. Feynman.
What's interesting is that Rosenberg is himself a Beltway creature, a preternaturally self-assured young insider with a sherubic face and a cold smile.
He heads a group called the New Democratic Network, and he ran his own campaign for DNC chair.
But the names he utters with reverence are net-based.
Organizers such as Eli Pariser and bloggers such as Daily Cause and Atrios.
Rosenberg rejects the notion that the bloggers represent a new internet left.
It's not an ideological rift, he says, but a narrative of independence versus capitulation.
Too many Democrats here are too yielding to George W. Bush and the war in Iraq on tax policy, you name it.
What the blogs have developed is a narrative, he told me the other day.
And the narrative is that the official Washington Party has become very like Vichy France.
Even though John Kerry eventually outlasted the rebels, and even though Howard Dean, for some weird reason, decided to become chair of the Democratic National Committee, the Civil War didn't end.
It just went underground.
The first sign of its re-emergence was Cindy Sheehan.
Howard, Mr. Feynman, she's the latest example.
She's by no means the first.
In Rosenberg's view, the tone the Democrats need to adopt now, especially after Hurricane Katrina, is that is essentially Cindy Sheehan.
Cindy Sheehan needs to be the face of the party.
Cindy Sheehan and her activism and the people that she's she, and by the way, none of those people act, well, none, very few of those people showed up spontaneously.
They were all set around by a PR group.
A PR group in San Francisco arranged that crowd.
There was nothing really spontaneous or genuine about it.
And yet now these Beltway Democrats, oh my gosh, that's not too the Democratic Party's become, and we got to find a way to emulate those people if we hope to hold on to power.
Too many governing Democrats, he says, wrongly assume their party's traditional version of competent, benevolent government has been rejected by the voters.
It hasn't, he says.
Why does any of this matter?
Well, for one, it could affect Hillary Rodham Clinton's run for the White House.
The consensus among the insiders and in the early national polls is that the nomination's hers to lose.
But Clinton, by virtue of her DLC family roots and her role in the U.S. Senate, has no choice but to inherit the leadership of the Washington governing class, not to mention the fact that she's a baby boomer of an almost grandmotherly age.
Ooh, bet that hurts when Hillary hears about that.
Strategically, Clinton has no higher priority than reaching out to what Rosenberg calls the emerging activist class.
And word is that through aides and advisors, she's doing just that.
They have set up meetings with key bloggers.
Oh, folks, we are being handed this opportunity on a silver platter.
The bloggers are going to have a chance to make sure that Hillary talks and thinks like they do.
Feynman says, I'm waiting to see which, if any, of the crop of likely Democrat challengers tries to make himself the avatar of the emerging activist class.
The blogs are trying to destroy the Democrat Leadership Council.
They're trying to take over the Democrat National Committee.
Whatever, they own the black vote no matter what happens.
Any Democrat who tries to be centrist is going to be targeted here, as will the DLC.
And this is why Hillary's running a bit of a risk trying to make people think she's moving to the right.
The bloggers don't want tricks.
They want blood.
The Democrats, you're making a mistake if you think these activists will tolerate Hillary making a phony move to the right to try to fool conservative moderates.
Ain't going to happen.
They're not going to put up with it.
They want somebody who is articulating bullets aimed for the heart of George W. Bush each and every day, and they will tolerate nothing less.
So what Mr. Feynman's saying here is the Democratic Party must become what the fringe kooks on the Democrat blogs like Daily Coss and the Atrios are.
They're in the process of it already happening.
How can this not be seen by people?
There will be no patience for moderate Democrats.
They're not going to be tolerated.
The new face of the party must be a Cindy Sheehan type.
And the Democrats better start listening.
The story says that people like all these other people who think that Bush has to be gotten rid of.
The thing is, nobody reads these blogs.
Nobody reads them.
That's the great thing about other bloggers read it, and that's it.
In addition to a mainstream reporter, Howard Feynman, arriving at this, what do you call it, chasm here between the fringe kooks and the DC Beltway Democrats.
In addition to him arriving late at this, the idea now that a Democratic presidential hopeful has got to have meetings with these bloggers if they are to have a chance here is, folks, it is a, we are being handed the future on a silver platter.
I mean no offense here, but the percentage of Americans that read blogs is still small.
I saw a poll on it not long ago.
It's something like 2%.
If that, I mean, it's really, most of the people who read blogs are other bloggers.
Some of them have chats and they have their readers that get into discussion groups after various bloggers post things.
This is not to put them down.
Do not miss it.
It's a growing industry, but it's not.
I just, this is utterly fascinating.
Not just listen to the blogs, but who these particular blogs are.
They are absolutely lunatics.
It is.
We've been sitting around minding our own business here and they are handing us presents day after day after day.
We wake up every day and it's Christmas morning.
So, and even Feynman has to put this on MSNBC.
It's not in Newsweek.
It may be in Newsweek by the time Newsweek comes out.
I don't know, but it says web exclusive on the commentary.
So mainstream press still is not actively reporting in their own organs what's happening here to the to the Democratic Party.
All right, let's go to the phones.
I promised you we go to the phones.
You're going to go to the phones.
We'll start in Newton, Massachusetts.
And Jim, you're up.
Nice to have you with us.
Yeah, Rush.
One thing you haven't discussed and you've overlooked so far is the impact that campaign finance reform McCain Feingold has had on the demise and the civil war going on of the Democratic Party because what it's done is taken away the central power and money garnering capacity of the DNC and the DLC and it's given it to the 527 fringe groups.
Yeah, that's a good point.
You cannot donate limitless amount of money to the parties anymore.
So these 527s like the Soros Group and the moveon.orgs were set up.
And so the money is going directly to the fringe kooks.
And the money is where the power comes from.
That's right.
And that's why they're threatening the inside.
That's why you see all these Democrats on the Judiciary Committee mouthing the words that these special interest groups are demanding that they say.
There was a fascinating piece yesterday on Britt Hume had Major Garrett, the reporter, who I must say is doing some great work out there.
Major Garrett is doing some great work.
And Major Garrett used to be at CNN.
He used before that he was at a, I think at Time magazine for a while.
I think, check it out.
Okay, U.S. News of the World, whatever.
He was at one of the news magazines.
But nevertheless, he put together this great report.
He had a little montage.
They didn't televise any more of the hearings once Roberts was done.
And yesterday afternoon, it was all of these fringe groups, the NARAL babes, and it must have been four different abortion groups and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
And they played little excerpts.
Major Garrett played excerpts of what these people said.
And it was could have grabbed a tape from these guys appearing at the Bork hearings, at the Clarence Thomas hearings, any other hearings where a Republican president has nominated a judge for a court, Supreme Court or Circuit Court, federal court, district court, what have you.
It's the same litany.
Going to turn back the clock, going to roll back civil rights, going to send women back to the back alleys.
It was no different.
It was, it was, huh?
What?
Yeah, hostile to civil rights, hostile to women's rights, hostile to same, same thing that we've been hearing from these people is what I mean when I say the 30-year-old playbook.
And so afterwards, Major Garrett, or maybe it wasn't Garrett, no, it was a member of the committee.
It was a member of the committee because it was during the hearings.
Have you ever, to one of the abortion group babes, have you ever supported a nominee of a Republican president?
I don't think we have.
Okay, so here you have these fringe groups, and they're out there articulating nothing new, all the same tired, worn-out accusations.
And Roberts is, they turn back the clock on race, they turn back the clock on civil rights, they'd be hostile to this or that.
And of course, people that watch the hearings did nothing about that in John Roberts that anybody heard.
Zero.
It's so out of touch.
And yet these are the people that guide the Democrats on the committee.
You know what the Democrats are struggling with today?
The Democrats, follow me on this.
And this is pure politics.
The Democrats in the Senate are having meetings about how to vote on this.
They know he's going to get through.
So the debate is on the Judiciary Committee, do we have any Democrats vote for him or to go straight party line and have all eight Democrats oppose him?
Then when we get to the floor vote in the Senate, do we want this guy to get 70 votes?
If this guy gets 70 votes, are we not endorsing another guy just like him?
How can we, if we give this guy 70 votes, how can we give the next nominee no votes if he's pretty much just the same?
So the Democrats are thinking that if they can enforce it, it may be best for no Democrats or just one or two to vote for the guy to set up opposing the next nominee.
Here you have somebody who the nation has seen is imminently qualified, eminently qualified.
And yet, but this is not, this is fine.
I mean, I'm not, this is, this is politics.
I'm just telling you folks how out of touch they are when they can't even recognize that somebody is good for the country.
They don't, they're really worried about how many Democrats are going to end up voting for this guy and what impact that'll have on the next vote, given whoever the next nominee might be.
That's where they are.
Now, at this point, who is the final influence?
It's going to be these wacko groups.
These wacko, you can't vote for this guy.
He's going to be hostile to civil rights.
He's going to roll back women's rights.
He's going to roll all these things that these groups have all said when they got their chance to testify yesterday.
And all the things these fringe bloggers are saying, if the Democrats don't echo that, folks are going to blow up.
And if the Democrats do echo it, they're going to look like the rest of the country like the rest of these bloggers would look if people knew who they were.
So they're between a rock and a hard play.
Meanwhile, what are they doing?
Trying to destroy Bush, who is leaving them in the dust.
All they can do is what they always do, whine, complain, and moan.
And yet, who is it that's moving forward, moving things forward on this?
It's the Bush administration, federal government under his leadership.
As I say, you don't see the ACLU, NAREL, the NAGS, people for the American West.
You don't see them in New Orleans.
You don't see them on the battle lines.
You don't see them as the backbone of America because they're not.
So here they're now struggling.
Oh, gosh, what do we do with this guy?
Because they're scared to death if he gets 70 or more votes.
And what do they do in the next guy?
If he gets 70 or more votes and Bush picks somebody relatively as competent and relatively identical in temperament, what are they going to do if it's somebody they really hate?
So this is exactly happening.
This is precisely happening because they have felt the need to be loyal to these wacko fringe groups because as our caller has pointed out with the 527 organizations, they're the ones raising money in the place of the old party, the Democratic.
Same thing on the Republican side, just the Republicans don't have as many 527 groups.
They're not nearly as fringe.
But I mean, it's just great to see this.
So they have to get the money.
Money is the mother's milk of politics.
To get the money, they got to say things that these wackos want them to say.
They got to vote the way these things.
And it's going to doom them.
It's just going to doom them.
Sean in Oklahoma City.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
How are you doing?
Couldn't be better, sir.
Thank you.
Oh, excellent, excellent.
As a conservative, as a taxpayer, I think that this opportunity to rebuild the Gulf Coast, especially New Orleans, is a great time for conservatism.
But my question is, how do we limit it?
What can we do?
What can the president do to keep this from turning into like another Tennessee Valley authority or things out of the depression that Roosevelt put in and it just kept on and just, I mean, it just kept on.
And I don't want to be paying for New Orleans 60 years down the road.
I don't think you will be.
I think that there are ways to do this, and that is to set upper boundaries and limits.
Once we reach this limit, figure out how much it's going to cost.
Set some limits on it.
Make sure you include the private sector in a lot.
And by the way, private sector is moving in there fast.
There's opportunity galore down there.
But you set an amount of money that's okay.
At this point, that's it.
The way to do this, it's not going to be easy, but the way to do this is to make sure that the money you're spending gets as close to the end user in every project as possible and doesn't go through some corrupt bureaucracy to be distributed.
For example, I don't think it's, it may still be this way.
I'm sure it is.
We're spending more on poverty in the Bush years than we did in the Clinton years.
But the administrative cost on a dollar of welfare last I checked, which some years ago was 78 cents, meaning that 22 cents of every dollar is what got to the recipient.
Well, that's because it goes through layers and layers and layers of bureaucracy and who knows how many pockets it ends up in before it gets to where it's headed or intended.
So in this case, make sure as much of this gets directly to people, the end users, the recipients as possible.
And that would really improve the efficiency of this.
But at some point, there needs to be, you're right, a cutoff line with, okay, this is it.
Now you take over.
And I will have to wait and see if this happens.
But remember, these proposals the president made are simply proposals.
It has to go down through the legislative process.
And a bunch of Republicans already talking about the Limbaugh plan urging cuts to offset these storm relief costs.
Tom Coburn, Senator, Oklahoma, we can't just throw money at the problem here.
And if we do throw money at the problem, which seems to my way of thinking, some of what we're going to do today, we better figure out how we're going to handle the financial difficulties that come from that.
But you've got Coburn, McCain, and DeMint are urging spending offsets, meaning go find some other place in the budget to get this money, like all the pork in the highway bill, like the pork in the energy bill, like the pork in the farm bills, and all of the wasteful spending that is being spent on illegal immigration.
There's so much money to be found, and a bunch of Republicans are urging not these specific places yet.
That's the Limbaugh plan, but they're talking about it philosophically.
Now, what's the Democrats' response?
Well, dingy Harry Reid, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, said, I'm not really into cutting right now.
I'm into figuring out a way that we can get the Republican majority in the Senate to care about those people down there who are still desperate.
Hey, Harry, what in the world?
He says this after the president's speech.
I'm not really into cutting.
Well, you were before this.
You were all worried about the deficit.
You're all worried about all kinds of things.
He didn't even talk about raising taxes in this comment.
I'm into figuring out a way we can get the Republican majority to care.
This is more of the same template.
Republicans are evil, mean-spirited, racist, sexist, bigot homophones.
They don't care.
And it's not playing.
You heard the comments of the people outside the Astrodome last night.
The Democrats are truly becoming a bunch of dinosaurs.
And it's great to see.
And they don't even realize it.
And they don't realize how people are laughing at them and how frustrated members of their party have to be at how ineffective they've become.
A quick timeout.
Back after this.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
America's Anchorman, America's Truth Detector.
Rush Limbaugh at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I saw this story, and I'm sorry, I had to laugh.
There were some dolphins, you know, at an aquarium in Jackson, Mississippi.
And the hurricane blew the aquarium apart.
The dolphins got out of there.
And the AP story says something about dolphins being rescued at sea to be returned to aquarium home in Jackson, Mississippi.
How do you rescue something from its natural habitat?
They're sick in the sea.
They only live in Camp.
Oh, they've gotten sick out there.
Is that what it is?
Okay.
Okay, so they've been turned into dependents.
They don't know how to live on their own.
Okay.
I take it back then.
Pat, we do need their help to rebuild.
They're smarter than we are.
We can just understand them.
Pat in Canton, Michigan.
Welcome to the program.
You're next.
Howdy, Rush.
How are you doing?
Never better, sir.
Thank you.
I very much appreciate your optimism in the wake of President Bush's speech last night.
And I think it was a classic case of Bush taking lemons and turning it into lemonade.
Pardon the expression, of course.
Yes.
And the fact is he's going to be exposing a lot of the people there of Louisiana to these opportunity zones.
And he said, essentially, fine, we've identified a problem here.
We can't handle catastrophes of this magnitude.
So guess what?
My job is to provide solutions.
And here's going to be the solution.
And I think it offers great promise, not only as a model of what to do in the wake of disasters like that, but as you've expressed here, it's kind of a stepping stone into how Democrats approach problems of poverty in general.
Well, here, it's exactly right.
It's going to illustrate how they've been trying for 60 years in New Orleans, and Louisiana doesn't work.
That's why there's such a great opportunity.
But the Democrats are on a prowl last night, even before the speech.
Speaking hours before Bush's televised address last night, dingy Harry Reid of the Senate and Miss America, the House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, said the government must be prepared to spend on education, health care, and other services to make the region whole again.
When do we not spend on education, health care, and other services?
And when do they people never think we spend enough?
Note what they don't mention.
There's no plan for jobs in that litany.
And that's interesting to point out, but we don't need a Marshall plan.
We need an entrepreneurial capitalism plan.
And with luck, that's what we're going to get.
When we come back, I'm going to tell you some of the good news from New Orleans that is not being reported.
Sort of like the good news in Iraq that doesn't get reported.
We have that.
We've got more audio sound bites and, of course, more of your calls on Open Line Friday.
So sit tight.
It will not be long.
▲
Export Selection