All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 10, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
October 10, 2005, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, this is shaping up to be pretty interesting here, folks.
Uh Arlan Specter, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is referring to the opposition to Harriet Myers out there as a lynch mob.
Yet Senator Spector is preparing to team up with uh Senator Schumer to have an in-depth investigation of what it is that James Dobson knows that nobody else knows.
Because they're gonna get to the bottom of this.
And the uh the opponents of Harriet Myers, according to Specter, the lynch mob.
Gee.
This is heating up, folks.
Great to have you with us, and we're back for a full week of broadcast excellence.
I am Rush Limbaugh, America's anchor man, and we are ready to go with broadcast excellence for three hours at 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
Yes, my friend, Senator Spector says that Harriet Myers has faced a lynch mob already, and that uh we can put together some pretty good lynch mobs, but she's seeing a pretty good one right now.
Here's the audio sound bite.
Let's start with Dobson himself.
Let's show you what got this all started.
This is Dobson last Wednesday from his uh radio program.
He's the uh founder and former president and chairman of the board of Focus on the Family.
Here's what he said.
It was leaked to the media that I've had conversations with Carl Rove in the White House, which is true, but I have not revealed those conversations in the media's uh trying every way from Sunday to get me to address those conversations.
When you know some of the things that I know that I probably shouldn't know, uh that take me in this direction.
You will understand why I have said with fear and trepidation, why I have uh said that I believe Harriet Myers will be a good justice.
Okay, now the red flag in that is when he admits to knowing things that uh he probably shouldn't know.
So what's happened here is that see the the the left and and frankly a lot of people in the White House, I think, think that all they've got to do to get support for Harriet Myers is to tell the Christian conservatives that she's gonna vote against Roe v.
Wade, and after that nobody else will care about anything, or they won't.
Get rid of that, and and then we're we're cool.
Harriet Myers is a good pick.
Uh and and that's why, you know, they spent some time uh talking to uh Dr. Dobson, which he admitted.
And when he says it, I know some things that I probably shouldn't know.
My guess is uh, because uh something that was said uh last week, late last week, uh oh, the president of his press conference was asked if he's ever discussed abortion with uh with Harriet Myers.
I have no litmus test, he said.
So the uh the the pro abort crowd wants desperately wants to know if the religious right leaders in this country have been assured by emissaries from the White House that she's gonna vote no on Roe v.
Wade if it ever comes up again.
And that takes us to Senator Spector.
Now this is just it's just it's amazing.
He's on this week yesterday with Senator with uh with uh George Stephanopoulos.
Stephanopoulos said, Now you said something very provocative in the New York Times this morning.
Uh you said that she needs a crash course in constitutional law.
Why would you even consider voting for someone in the Supreme Court who needs a crash course in constitutional law?
Because that person might have potential to be an outstanding Supreme Court Justice if given a chance.
Look, George, what you've had here on uh Harriet Myers is not a rush to judgment, it's a stampede to judgment.
Uh she's faced uh tough one of the toughest lynch mobs ever assembled in Washington, D.C., and we really assemble some tough lynch mobs.
Oh, yeah.
So so I I'm not I'm not sure what he means.
Does he mean the Republic?
Does he mean the whole Judiciary Committee is a lynch mobs?
He means us.
He means me.
I mean, he means he means those of that have not been all excited about this nomination that she'd been lynched.
Right?
And of course, these this this is this is uh charged rhetoric to say the least, but I would suggest to you that that if I as I listen to Senator Specter, I I think if there's a lynch mob being formed, he may lead it.
Over over because he's bound and determine he's gonna find out what Dobson was told, folks.
You have to understand when it would it when it comes to Roe vs.
Wade, they're they're gonna do everything they can to make sure that some some jurist or judge who is against it is not gonna be confirmed to the court.
So, next question from Stephanopoulos.
Well, Senator Specter, do you do you believe that Senators need to know what Carl Rove told Dr. Dobson, uh, who was, of course, a prominent social conservative.
I do.
Uh I believe that the uh Senate Judiciary Committee uh is entitled to know whatever uh the White House knew.
Uh this is a lifetime appointment.
It is a swing justice replacing Justice O'Connor.
And uh uh if there are backroom assurances and if there are backroom deals, and if there is something which bears upon a precondition as to uh how a nominee is gonna vote, I think that's uh a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary Committee and the American people.
You know, folks, d do you sense an outrage or are you feeling an outrage shaping up here?
Let me there is one welling up in me.
I I have to tell you, here is Senator Spector, uh, who is demanding now, he wants to know everything that went on with the White House and Rove and Dr. Dobson and whoever else Rove might have called about this.
He says the Senate Judiciary Committee is entitled to know it just as much as the White House is entitled to know it.
Uh if there are backroom assurances and if there are backroom deals, and if there is something which bears upon a precondition as to how a nominee is gonna vote, I think that's a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary Committee and American people.
Fine and dandy, Senator.
Well, I'll tell you what you ought to demand.
You ought to demand that every Democrat in that committee release whatever notes they get from Ralph Nees, a people for the American way, and we ought to have uh as public knowledge whatever Nan Aaron and the pro-abort nags and the nayroll gang is telling Diane Feinstein.
Let's find out who's writing the questions that these Democrat senators are asking when Judge Roberts was up there.
Let's find out who's actually being talked to.
Let's find out because we we've had memos earlier that were found in in a uh found in a in a computer.
We know that the allegiance to the Democrats and the special interest group exists.
And we know that it's the case when there's a Democrat president or not that this arrangement exists.
I mean, that they're they're they are allowed to pick their nominees, you know, pedal to the metal liberal, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, card-carrying member of the ACLU, nobody questions it.
Uh everybody we're we're and I thought, by the way, that we're not supposed to know how people vote.
I I thought that we're supposed not supposed to know how people are going to vote on issues.
You don't want except when it comes to abortion, or maybe when it comes to something about the separation of powers, then you're interested in wanting to know how they vote.
But there's a there's a there's a lot of outrage to go around here, and there's a lot of um uh I think irony and maybe even hypocrisy going on around here.
Uh we don't know what Dobson knows.
He just said uh stuff he may not be, you know, might may not be supposed to know, but I don't we don't know what that is.
So the next question uh that uh that came up, Stefanopoulos.
So let me clarify here.
Uh will you call Dr. Dobson and Carl Rove to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The fat lay he doesn't call him, Arlon Spector may.
I want to know what all the facts are.
I'm very fact-oriented.
And if uh Dr. Dobson knows something uh that uh he shouldn't know, or something that I ought to know, I'm gonna find out.
Oh, folks, uh, this is gonna be it's it's gonna be amazing.
This is causing this whole Myers nomination.
You should read the papers today.
It is causing, I think there's it looks to me like a coordinated uh pair of stories from the Washington Post and the LA Times about all the problems the Republican faced uh in 2006 and 2008, that Bush has blown whatever unity there was in the conservative movement and the Republican Party with this choice.
They're already starting to speculate on who the Republican nominee will be, and the the AP is excited to get the name of John McCain out there first.
And they're all talking about how this has blown up the unity of the conservative movement, and it is over.
They don't say it this way, but the uh the country club Republicans are back.
The conservatives are fractured, uh, and they're just having a field day with this.
And I'll go through all this as the uh as the Program unfolds.
Gotta take a break right now.
We'll be back.
Sit tight.
It's only just begun.
Hi, we're back.
L. Rushball already having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Let me tell you what I think's going on here, folks.
I'm usually pretty good here at figuring this stuff out way ahead of everybody else.
By the way, I should point out Senator Spector was part of the lynch mob against Robert Bork.
We're going to start talking about lynch mobs.
Let's go way back.
Now, is it any of Senator Specter's business what Carl Rove and Jim Dobson discussed?
Is it?
He has a job as a senator.
He doesn't have a right to know every such thing the White House is disgusting.
But what this means is the election has started.
That's what this is all about.
The fight in the Republican Party has started.
And what's happened here, folks, if you haven't figured this out yet, let me tell you the conservatives in the party, the grassroots, the rank and file.
I'm not talking about people in Washington, although the House Republicans on Friday came through with an energy bill and it was delay.
And I'm telling you that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats absolutely had a cow on it.
It was just absolutely fabulous.
And what's happening is that the conservatives in the House of Representatives are getting emboldened.
We're not going to sit around.
They don't want to sit around any longer and listen to all this talk about all this spending and the lack of immigration reform and all that, because the Republican base cannot run on that agenda.
Sorry, folks, they just can't.
You cannot have a conservative candidate for anything.
Local or federal or state office running around on the current Republican agenda of nothing about immigration, big spending.
And so the so the conservatives are fighting back.
They're starting to kick back now.
The elections of 06 and 08 have begun, and it's the Harriet Myers nomination.
I think that's really triggered triggered this.
This is a huge fight.
And Spectre doesn't speak for us.
He doesn't spec uh speak for the uh for the grassroots.
He speaks for himself.
And if you want to talk about loyalty, don't forget, here's here's Spectre now demanding to get Carl Rove up there and Jim Dobson up there.
It was Rove who helped Spectre win the Republican primary, opposing Toomey.
And now he's out there gunning for Carl Rowe because the thing that takes precedence over everything is Roe vs.
Wade.
That's Spectre's favorite decision, and he's uh is he's gonna maintain it to the best of his ability.
For all the years that I've seen and been observing the conservative movement, and some would say that I am involved in it.
But let me leave that to others uh to say, but I know that I for all the years that I have been observing the conservative movement, I am sensing a true revolt by the grassroots, the activists, the voters, the people that did the work that went door to door in 2000 and 2004 and got these candidates elected, and they're fed up with these candidates refusing to act like the winners that they are.
The now, I don't see a party revolt in the uh uh in the party apparatus.
Like, for example, there's a story in the Washington Times.
So, where is this story?
It's it's a Donald Lambrush story.
Donald Lambrus normally great, but he has a story here about the uh uh.
Well, it's basically that the uh he his story point he makes is it's only the uh the Beltway conservatives who are mad at Bush.
It isn't the base.
His point is that uh mainstream Republicans throughout the country uh are all for Harriet Myers and they're not upset that it's just a bunch of in fact, did did somebody I got a note?
In fact, I got a couple of emails on this.
Did some did you watch the Sunday shows?
Did some White House operative refer to me as a sexist and elitist?
I got two notes saying by name, or was I just lumped in the group?
Okay, okay, that's fine.
Okay, I mean I'm sexist and elitist.
Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, uh sexists and elitists.
I'm just lumped in a group.
I wasn't mentioned by name.
Okay.
What show was it?
Was it Meet the Press or was it uh was it Fox News?
Well, it it does it doesn't matter.
The point is uh the the people in Don Lambrose piece that end up Sounding as though they're totally supportive of this nomination, happen to be state party chairman.
Now, the state party chairmen, God love them, uh they're obligated to support the president.
That's why they're state party chairman, but they they don't represent the grassroots and the rank and file of uh conservative Republican voters who actually get people elected on the uh on the Republican Party.
Uh you know, the the the the these are the people think that McCain's gonna have a cakewalk.
And McCain is not gonna have a a cakewalk uh in this, what whatsoever.
Uh but it to me, folks, what what's happened here is that it's become clear that the Republican Party, not the conservative movement, but the Republican Party appears to be adrift.
And the reason is that there are a lot of I mean, the mainstream of this party is conservative, and it's just not gonna run out there and campaign for re-election or election on the current immigration and spending record of the party.
Uh and and so a conservative re-emergence is clearly justified.
And this energy bill in the House, Novak has a story to column today about how uh uh Denny Hastert, the uh former speaker of the House had to do a 180 and reverse his position uh on this because the conservatives in the House have triumphed.
We're gonna have energy exploration.
It includes well, they at least in the House.
They got the bill passed, where who knows what it's gonna what's gonna become of it, but you can see that there is the beginning of uh of a pushback after all these years of not doing anything on immigration, all these years of of uh just not having any check on spending uh whatsoever.
So it's gonna be interesting to watch it.
And it's it's it's all focused here around the uh the nomination of Harriet Myers to the uh to the Supreme Court.
Here again is this story.
This is from um uh well, I don't know what story.
I don't know what paper it's from.
Washington Bureau of Something.
Uh but it it talks about the uh the rift, and and this is senators uh yesterday demanded disclosure of the secret that top Bush aide Carl Rove told Jim Dobson, but the White House insisted there is no secret to divulge.
Many politicians and activists react to a surprise last week when uh uh Jim Dobson announced his support for Myers and said on his radio show that Rove told him things about Myers' quote I probably shouldn't know.
Spectre, Senator Leahy, and Senator Schumer said yesterday on the talk shows that Myers' confirmation could be derailed if there were what Spectre called any backroom deals on her votes on abortion or other issues that come before the court.
So what's happening here, just to spell this out for you, uh you have liberals.
Spectre is a liberal.
Schumer is a liberal, and they're pairing up to attack Dobson.
This is an attack on the religious right.
This is an attack on religious conservatives, and make no mistake, and that's who they fear.
Conservatives on the committee, the Senate Judiciary Committee are gonna have to fight back.
Not only must they stand up for religious conservatives, but but they ought to demand testimony from all those wacko leftists like Ralph Nees and Nan Aaron, who have been pulling the anti-religious puppet strings of the left-wing senators all these years.
We want to know what they've been whispering in the ears of those who give their advice and consent to this nomination.
We want to see the notes.
We want to know what they've been whispering and what they've been saying to the liberal Democrat senators.
It is time to push back, and the pushback has begun.
It's time for offense.
And it's time to continue, I think to continue exposing these liberals, and by liberals I mean Republicans like Spectre and Democrats like Schubert.
A liberal is a liberal.
It's it's uh it's just time to do it.
Here's the Wall Street Journal uh detail on the energy bill.
With a vote of 212 to 210, the House narrowly passed a bill that would encourage the expansion of the nation's oil refining capacity and reduce the number of gasoline blends used by some states to comply with federal anti-smog rules by holding what was supposed to be a five-minute vote open for 48 minutes.
Republican leaders avoided an embarrassing defeat on an energy measure that had already been modified to appease Democrats.
After the vote, Democrats shouted shame, shame to protest the long delay, during much of which they held a two-vote lead in the vote count.
The bill was rushed through Congress without hearings.
It requires the U.S. Department of Energy and the EPA to streamline the lengthy permitting process for new refineries and refinery expansions by imposing deadlines on state and local authorities.
Takes ten years to build a refinery, costs three billion dollars.
All of that, uh, ladies and gentlemen, uh, is because of environmental regulations, and they've been put there by people who don't want refineries built.
Who's gonna take the time?
Ten years to invest in getting one of these things built.
It also proposes the first federal penalties for price gouging by oil companies or retailers of gasoline, diesel, and heating oil.
Folks, how many how many of you think there is one person that sets the gasoline price in this country?
I didn't see it.
Somebody told me somebody is is conducting an investigation for that one person that sets the gas price.
It has to be, there has to be somebody out there setting the gas price.
Let me ask you if if you think that there's somebody setting the gasoline price, I'd like you to tell me who you think it is.
If you have any idea, now that you know that an investigation has uh has been undertaken, who do you think sets the price?
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh, only excellence in podcasting network.
Hey, hey, hey, did you did you see we we've got a uh videotape of three New Orleans police officers uh beating and punching a sixty-four-year-old man accused of public drunkenness, a third officer grabbing and shoving an AP TV news producer who helped capture the confrontation on tape?
The uh police spokesman in New Orleans, Marlon DeFilo said, Well, the uh the police are promising a criminal investigation, troubling tape, uh no doubt about it.
The tape tape shows uh officer hitting the suspect, Robert Davis, at least four times in a head Saturday night outside a French quarter bar.
Davis appeared to resist, twisting and flailing as he was dragged to the ground by four officers and other of the officers, the then Need Davis punched him twice.
Davis was faced down on a sidewalk with blood streaming down his arm and into the gutter.
Then a fifth officer ordered the producer, the Associated Press uh television news producer, uh Rich Matthews, a cameraman to stop recording.
When Matthews held up his credentials, the officer grabbed the producer, leaned him backward over a card, jabbed him in the stomach, and unleashed a profanity-laced tirade.
I've been here for six weeks trying to keep alive go home shot of the officer who identified himself as S. M. Smith.
Now, clearly, folks, we have a Rodney King moment here.
But we don't have a Rodney King moment at the same time.
Why don't we have a Rodney King moment?
I mean, I mean, we got the video and it's been a story, but have you seen have you seen much news about this?
Have you?
Well, no, no, no, no, I mean, we haven't not every second, and we haven't seen anybody getting outraged outside of New Orleans about this.
Maybe it's not a Rodney King moment because it's in a Democrat-run town and state.
And uh I think I think probably people end up saying we should understand the rage of the New Orleans police.
We need to understand the rage, folks.
That's uh, you know, what when rage is good, we need to understand it.
When rage is bad, it's horrible and rotten.
We need to put the people who rage in jail.
I'm not saying it's common city and Democrat-run towns.
I'm just saying it's no big deal.
When for for example, look at the look at the Sunday shows this week.
They went out there and they they did everything they could to find conservatives to rip on Bush.
The only time they noticed conservatives is when conservatives rip.
I was invited.
I didn't go, folks.
I want you to know.
I was invited this weekend, but this is I said, this is not the time for me uh to do it.
They want to talk about the status of the conservative movement, and I said, I'll be glad to do it, but uh this is not the time I'd uh I had a weekend from hell anyway, but I this is not meaning busy.
Uh uh, but yeah, it's still uh it's just a so but by the same token.
You know, when a Democrat, a bunch of cops in a Democrat town beat up a suspect, we gotta understand the rage of the cops.
They've been there six weeks, a lot of stress.
Uh so forth and uh and so on.
Bill in North Brunswick, New Jersey.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Great to have you.
You are up first today.
Oh, good afternoon, Rush.
Uh, I I have to say that I I think the response of some of the big main conservatives, uh, Crystal, uh, Quadorit, uh, Krauthammer, and even to even you to an extent, has been reflexively uh negative on this nomination.
I've been a conservative for over 40 years, and uh I was inclined to at least get the president the benefit of the doubt through the first couple of days, perhaps through the hearings.
Uh, you know, I think the behavior of conservatives in this matter makes them look more uh like a special interest group than like a con uh a popular uh patriotic movement.
It was reflective, it was automatic without even knowing anything about this woman.
And conservatives care about the individual.
You know, we don't make our judgments based on broad painted pictures.
We look at the individual.
This woman didn't get that chance.
Uh well, look, there's a lot you said there.
The only thing I want to object to is that my reaction was reflexive.
I don't know about anybody else's.
But uh mine was not reflexive.
Uh I was just not just having a a reflex here that was based on uh knee-jerk uh reactions.
Now I can't I can't speak for the others.
I don't talk to them and I don't consult with them, and I don't I I I think I see, I think for every person you mentioned, I have my own theory for all these uh all these people.
What, Ms. What?
Well you know you know the the the well look the the the point the point of this I I don't want to go through all this.
I I'm blue in the face explaining my opposition.
You have uh either not understood me when I've said it, Bill, or you've not, or you've not listened and heard me say it.
But I'm I'm not it it's that's not the point now.
You know that I registered it.
It's I I'm not I don't have an agenda.
I'm not trying to get the woman withdrawn.
I'm not trying to affect the outcome of this.
I'm just telling you what I think about it.
And it's it was disappointing for a whole host of reasons.
The opportunity missed, the fact that it is emboldened the Democrats because it looks like it came from a position of weakness.
But I uh you know, the the idea that that uh the the conservatives inside the beltway are some sort of special interest group.
Uh you know, you haven't you haven't mentioned anybody other than me that has direct contact with the voting base of uh of this party.
Uh so uh I can't specul well I could speculate on other people's reasons for opposing, and I think in many cases they're personal.
So I think just uh if if you want me to stir this pot even further, let me stir the pot further.
I think that there are a tremendous number of conservatives who think they do carry a lot of weight in this administration.
I think they think that the that they're at wherever they write, whatever they speak, whatever they say.
I think they think that they influence the administration.
What this decision said to them was you don't matter to us.
And that ha they taking it personally, in other words.
Some of these people are simply taking this personally because it's a rejection of their thoughts, their intellect, their advice, or what have you.
Well, that's not me.
I don't take these things personally because I don't live under any illusion.
The White House does anything I want them to do.
I have no illusions.
I am you people are my audience, not the White House.
So I'm I'm honest with you about what I think, but I'm not being reflexive about this or anything else, nor am I joining for I am certainly not an elitist uh or or any of that.
So but look, I don't want to get I don't want to start repeating all this.
I've as I say this is on the go to my website, you can find out what I've said about this.
It's crystal clear.
I've taken three to four days to explain this.
I've dealt with the just trust me issue that the president asks.
I've dealt with everything that you know, this the conservative, the individual and so forth.
I've dealt with all that, but I I want to move on because this this nomination and the fight has spawned something, folks, that uh I'm trying to clue you in, those of you that haven't sensed it yet, what it has triggered and what it has triggered is a big pushback in the conservative movement.
Can let me let me stir the pot a little further.
For five years, we've had a great president when it comes to the war, when it comes to tax cuts, when it comes to a number of things, but there are a lot of things that, as you know, we've been scratching our heads about.
Nothing on immigration.
Campaign finance reform.
Letting Ted Kennedy write the education bill.
Uh all of the federal spending, doing whatever we can after the hurricane to send the message, we'll do whatever it takes.
Meaning spend whatever it takes to keep you happy.
Now, during all of this, there are some and and by the way, let me remind you that during all of this, I have fielded phone calls from many of you who have been complaining royally.
You know who you are.
You know you have it like so.
What the But the one thing that there are two things that have kept all of us steadfastly unified behind George W. Bush, the war on terror and the fact that we cannot let the left in this country gain control of national security.
That's number one, and that's paramount.
Number two, the left in general.
Outside of national security, they're still kooky.
And they're mean spirited and they are extreme, and we they are they are attempting to mischaracterize us, an attack on the president is an attack on us, an attack on Bill Bennett is an attack on all of us, an attack on delay is an attack on all of us, and we're not going to sit here and put up with it.
We're not going to eat our own in the process.
Well, we're now reaching the midpoint.
We've got about a year to go to reach the midpoint, 2006 elections.
And people run for office in elections.
And there are a lot of Republicans who are going to have conservative Republicans who want to run for election and re-election.
And they're going to have a tough time running on the last five years of immigration, the last five years of education spending, the last five years of total federal spending, they can't run out there and defend campaign finance reform.
And so the agenda or the the list of achievements that have come from this administration when compared to what conservatives would have liked are not things that are defensible.
And this Harriet Myers thing has just brought it all to a head, folks.
The Harriet Myers nomination has just brought it all to a head.
And so there's a there's a there's a kickback or a pushback taking place now among conservatives who have for five years been back and and and steadfast and and strong in defending the president because of the two things I cited.
But the president's not running for re-election again.
He can't.
And so and you, and I'm gonna tell you what, if you think it's bad now, wait till you see all the Republicans who purposely start distancing themselves from him.
You're gonna see Republicans who will not want George Bush coming in to campaign for them in their local districts because they're gonna be talking a pedal of the metal conservative agenda.
And it's gonna be tough to sell that with nothing on immigration reform and campaign for you know all these all these issues.
I'm not saying the loyalty is gone.
I'm saying life goes on.
And if you couple this with the fact that the left, throughout all of this, all we needed was a couple of nails hammered in the coffin.
A couple of nails in the cough, we could bury the coffin.
I mean, they're still going to be around as vampires that come out at night.
We're never gonna get rid of all of them.
But they're just, they've got nothing.
In fact, I've got a piece in the stack today by George Lackoff, who has been dumped, by the way, by the Democrats, but he's got a piece talking again how accurately the conservatives frame arguments in a post-disaster era like Katrina, and how badly the Democrats do it.
And I can't wait to share this with you because he nails he gets us exactly right, even though he thinks we're lying.
He gets the Democrats exactly right, even though he thinks they ought to be doing more.
What he doesn't understand is they can't do more, which you'll understand it when I when I get to.
Meaning by more, he says all they're doing is attacking Bush.
They need to get to their deeper core values and explain, like the Republicans do after a disaster, why conservatism is better than statism in rebuilding the city of New Orleans, the state of Louisiana and Mississippi.
Democrats are only saying Bush wasn't there, Bush didn't care, Bush blew up the levies.
Lakov says they gotta get more to their core.
Well, they can't, nobody will vote for them if they do that.
They're back to the same old trouble.
That's what's the frustrating thing to me.
These people are weak, they're out of order, they're disorganized, they have no unity, they're nothing but hate-filled extremists and activists.
And there's no reason to be defensive or afraid of these people, and no reason to go out and accommodate them at all.
They wouldn't do it for us, and they haven't done it for us.
And yeah, this is Well, Russ, you sound like you're not in favor of national unity.
Yes, I am.
I'm in favor of 80% of the country agreeing with me.
That's unity.
Never gonna have a hundred percent.
Anyway, let me take a quick timeout here because time rolls on.
We got another EIB profit center timeout.
Let's see, does anybody uh we got one person who wants to try to uh take a stab at who sets the uh the oil price.
There's I'm told that big-time investigations are going on by uh by superior media people uh to find the one guy that sets the gasoline because it's a it's a cabal, you know, it's a it's a conspiracy that one person that sets the gas price.
I'm uh eager if somebody can tell me who it is.
Back in just a second.
Of all the people, of all the people the Clinton administration could send out there to defend Slick Willie against these charges made by Louis B. Free in his book, Sandy burglar.
They send Sandy Burglar out to try to read a statement refuting what Free is saying in his book.
Of all the people that they've got.
That just is getting thin.
Yeah, in the old Clinton administration.
Now, one more thing, I'm gonna this this my reaction to Harriet Myers was reflexive.
We had a caller a moment ago, the last caller that made this point, Bill in North Brunswick, uh, New Jersey.
Now, Bill, you know, I I love you being out there, I love you being in the audience, but the the fact of the matter is, and if you if you are regular listener to this program, you know we talk about the court in great detail on this program and have for decades, for years.
Uh we've been conservatives been thinking deeply about the Supreme Court for 30, 40 years.
This is one of the reasons it has been so important to get the Senate as a Republican majority and elect a conservative president, folks, because of what the court has become.
You've heard me just go on and on and on about this.
And since Harry Admire's nomination, nothing about the information we've received has changed.
There hasn't been anything new.
If you ask me, the reflexive reaction is to take trust me as the last word.
That's being reflexive.
It's uh who said that?
The caller?
Oh, yeah, he well, yep, he wants to he wants to hear her first.
The caller wants to hear her first and and and decide uh for himself, but but well, that's you're causing me here to go back, and I don't want to repeat because it's all on the website.
It's a reason for it's there.
I don't have to repeat this stuff day after day after day, because I've done it for four straight days.
Let me move on.
Here's Mike in in Red Bank, New Jersey.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
How are you doing, Rush?
Honor to speak to you.
I'm doing pretty old.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, couldn't be better.
As far as your question on uh who dictates the price of gas and oil, it's the traders that do that.
Uh they're the ones uh I I have some kind of it's kind of secondhand insight.
Okay, then wait, wait, wait, wait.
If the traders do it, then they all have a boss.
Give me the name of the person telling the traders what to do.
I mean, that they from what I heard from the Well, then who runs Wall Street?
I'm told that there is one man, one person who sets the gasoline price.
Well, I don't know if we can't.
You've given me groups of people.
I'm told that an in-depth investigation is taking place to find the one guy that so far nobody will own up to it.
Well, I think I think Rush, there should be an investigation on the traders on this, because they're like I said, that's what dictate.
And I I can tell you a quick story about uh a little bit of an inside information on uh secondhand uh inside information about someone who went to a party, and and before this guy entered the party, they frished him to make sure that he didn't have any tape recording devices on, and they explained to him how they do it.
And sometimes they'll sell the same power of oil five, six times over, bring up the demand.
So uh there's there should be an investigation.
Okay, you see, you're you're you're talking here about the futures market, and we've we've delved into that, uh, people, you know, dealing in and uh gambling on the future price of oil and the futures market.
If you look at what the futures price is and compare it to a price of um uh oil, a barrel of uh of oil right now, you'll find there's a huge differential between the real cost of a barrel of oil and what the uh what the traders, as you say, do.
But that's still not the answer.
I mean, there is an answer to this.
There is an answer.
Who I'm I'll have to give you a heads up.
There is no one person that does this.
I heard this and I I couldn't funniest thing I've ever heard of.
Um, maybe he thinks of George Soros, but it's not.
There's not one person setting the oil price or the gasoline price for the country.
Uh, but but but there is somebody doing it.
Uh We'll take a break.
Gotta continue here after this.
Stay with us.
A fascinating story from the North Pole.
The melting ice up there is opening up a new world of fish and oil exploration.
Now, oil?
North Pole?
Do you know how oil's made?
Takes heat to make oil.
This is gonna be fun to go through.
Lots of stuff still on tap.
Sit tight.
We've got Louis Free on 60 Minutes to come as well.
▲
Export Selection