Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, this is shaping up to be pretty interesting here, folks.
Arlen Specter, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is referring to the opposition to Harriet Myers out there as a lynch mob.
Yet, Senator Specter is preparing to team up with Senator Schumer to have an in-depth investigation of what it is that James Dobson knows that nobody else knows because they're going to get to the bottom of this.
And 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 anchorman, 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 Specter says that Harriet Myers has faced a lynch mob already and that we can put together some pretty good lynch mobs, but she's seeing a pretty good one right now.
Here's the audio soundbite.
Let's start with Dobson himself.
Let's show you what got this all started.
This is Dobson last Wednesday from his radio program.
He's the 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, and the media is 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 that take me in this direction, you will understand why I have said with fear and trepidation, why I have 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 he probably shouldn't know.
So what's happened here is that, see, the left, 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 going to vote against Roe versus Wade, and after that, nobody else will care about anything, or they won't, because that's a fundamental is get rid of that, and we're cool.
Harriet Myers is a good pick.
And that's why, you know, they spent some time talking to Dr. Dobson, which he admitted.
And when he says, and I know some things that I probably shouldn't know, my guess is because something that was said last week, late last week, oh, the president of his press conference was asked if he's ever discussed abortion with Harriet Myers.
I have no litmus test, he said.
So the pro-abort crowd desperately wants to know if the religious right leaders in this country have been assured by emissaries from the White House that she's going to vote no on Roe versus Wade if it ever comes up again.
And that takes us to Senator Specter.
Now, this is just, it's just, it's amazing.
He's on this week yesterday with George Stephanopoulos.
Stephanopoulos said, now you said something very provocative in the New York Times this morning.
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 Harriet Myers is not a rush to judgment.
It's a stampede to judgment.
She's faced tough, one of the toughest lynch mobs ever assembled in Washington, D.C., and we really assemble some tough lynch mobs.
Oh, yeah.
So I'm not sure what he means.
Does he mean the Republican?
Does he mean the whole Judiciary Committee is a lynch mobs?
He means us.
He means me.
I mean, he means those that have not been all excited about this nomination, that she'd been lynched.
Right?
And, of course, this is charged rhetoric, to say the least.
But I would suggest to you that as I listen to Senator Specter, I think if there's a lynch mob being formed, he may lead it over because he's bound to determine.
He's going to find out what Dobson was told, folks.
You have to understand when it comes to Roe versus Wade, they're going to do everything they can to make sure that some jurist or judge who is against it is not going to be confirmed to the court.
So next question from Stephanopoulos.
Well, Senator Specter, do you believe that senators need to know what Karl Rove told Dr. Dobson, who was, of course, a prominent social conservative?
I do.
I believe that the Senate Judiciary Committee is entitled to know whatever the White House knew.
This is a lifetime appointment.
It is a swing justice replacing Justice O'Connor.
And 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 going to vote, I think that's a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary Committee and the American people.
You know, folks, do you sense an outrage?
Are you feeling an outrage shaping up here?
Let me, there is one welling up in me.
I have to tell you, here is Senator Specter 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.
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 going to vote, I think that's a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary Committee and the 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 of People for the American Way.
And we ought to have, as public knowledge, whatever Nan Aaron and the pro-abort nags and the NAROL gang is telling Dianne 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've had memos earlier that were found in a computer.
We know that the allegiance to the Democrats in 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, they are allowed to pick their nominees, you know, peddle to the metal liberal, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, card-carrying member of the ACLU.
Nobody questions it.
Everybody, and I thought, by the way, that we're not supposed to know how people vote.
I thought that we're 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 lot of outrage to go around here, and there's a lot of, I think, irony and maybe even hypocrisy going on around here.
We don't know what Dobson knows.
He just said stuff he may not be, you know, may not be supposed to know.
We don't know what that is.
So the next question that came up, Stephanopoulos, let me clarify here.
Will you call Dr. Dobson and Karl Rove to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee?
With Pat Lay, he doesn't call him Arlen Specter, May.
I want to know what all the facts are.
I'm very fact-oriented.
And if Dr. Dobson knows something that he shouldn't know or something that I ought to know, I'm going to find out.
Oh, folks.
This is going to 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 pair of stories from the Washington Post and the LA Times about all the problems the Republican faced 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 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 country club Republicans are back.
The conservatives are fractured and they're just having a field day with this.
I'll go through all this as the program unfolds.
Got to take a break right now.
We'll be back.
Sit tight.
It's only just begun.
Hi, we're back.
El Rushball already having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Let me tell you what I think is 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 Specter 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 Karl 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 discussing.
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 part, 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 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 this.
This is a huge fight.
And Specter doesn't speak for us.
He doesn't speak for the grassroots.
He speaks for himself.
And if you want to talk about loyalty, don't forget, here's Specter now demanding to get Karl Rove up there and Jim Dobson up there.
It was Rove who helped Specter win the Republican primary, opposing Toomey.
And now he's out there gunning for Karl Rove because the thing that takes precedence over everything is Roe versus Wade.
That's Specter's favorite decision, and he's going to 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 to say.
But I know that 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.
Now, I don't see a party revolt in the party apparatus.
Like, for example, there's a story in the Washington Times.
Where is this story?
It's a Donald Lambrough story.
Donald Lambrough is normally great, but he has a story here about the, well, it's basically that point he makes is it's only the Beltway conservatives who are mad at Bush.
isn't the base.
His point is that mainstream Republicans throughout the country are all for Harriet Meyers, and they're not upset that it's just a bunch of...
In fact, did somebody...
I got a note.
In fact, I got a couple of emails on this.
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, okay.
I mean, I'm sexist and elitist.
Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, sexist and elitist.
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 Fox News?
Well, it doesn't matter.
The point is the people in Don Lambrough's piece that end up sounding as though they're totally supportive of this nomination happen to be state party chairmen.
Now, the state party chairman, God love them, they're obligated to support the president.
That's why they're state party chairman, but they don't represent the grassroots and the rank and file of conservative Republican voters who actually get people elected on the Republican Party.
You know, these are the people who think that McCain's going to have a cakewalk.
And McCain is not going to have a cakewalk in this whatsoever.
But to me, folks, 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 going to run out there and campaign for re-election or election on the current immigration and spending record of the party.
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 Denny Hastert, the former Speaker of the House, had to do a 180 and reverse his position on this because the conservatives in the House have triumphed.
We're going to have energy exploration.
It includes, well, at least in the House, they got the bill passed.
Who knows what's going to become of it.
But you can see that there is the beginning of a pushback after all these years of not doing anything on immigration, all these years of just not having any check on spending whatsoever.
So it's going to be interesting to watch it.
And it's all focused here around the nomination of Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court.
Here again is this story.
This is from, well, I don't know what story.
I don't know what paper.
It's from, Washington Bureau of Something.
But it talks about the rift.
And this is senators yesterday demanded disclosure of the secret that top Bush aide Karl Rove told Jim Dobson, but the White House insisted there is no secret to divulge.
Many politicians and activists reacted with surprise last week when Jim Dobson announced his support for Myers and said on his radio show that Roe told him things about Myers, quote, I probably shouldn't know.
Specter, Senator Leahy, and Senator Schumer said yesterday on the talk shows that Myers' confirmation could be derailed if there were what Specter 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, you have liberals.
Specter 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 going to have to fight back.
Not only must they stand up for religious conservatives, 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, I think, to continue exposing these liberals.
And by liberals, I mean Republicans like Specter and Democrats like Schuber.
A liberal is a liberal.
It's just time to do it.
Here's the Wall Street Journal 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 10 years to build a refinery, costs $3 billion.
All of that, ladies and gentlemen, is because of environmental regulations, and they've been put there by people who don't want refineries built.
Who's going to take the time, 10 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 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 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 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 been undertaken, who do you think sets the price?
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
Hey, hey, hey, did you see we've got a videotape of three New Orleans police officers beating and punching a 64-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 police spokesman in New Orleans, Marlon DeFilos, said, well, the police are promising a criminal investigation.
Troubling tape.
No doubt about it.
The tape shows an 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, another of the officers, the then Need Davis, punched him twice.
Davis was faced down on the sidewalk with blood streaming down his arm and into the gutter.
Then a fifth officer ordered the producer, the Associated Press, television news producer, Rich Matthews, and a cameraman to stop recording.
When Matthews held up his credentials, the officer grabbed the producer, leaned him backward over a car, jabbed him in the stomach, and unleashed a profanity-laced tirade.
I've been here for six weeks trying to keep alive.
Go home, shouted 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, we got the video and it's been a story, but have you seen much news about this?
Have you?
Well, no, no, no, no.
I mean, we haven't, not every second.
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 I think probably people end up saying we should understand the rage of the New Orleans police.
We need to understand the rage, folks.
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 in Democrat-run towns.
I'm just saying it's no big deal.
For example, look at the Sunday shows this week.
They went out there and 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 not the time for me 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 this is not the time.
I had a weekend from hell anyway, but this is not meaning busy.
But still, it's just a miss.
So, but by the same token, you know, when a Democrat, a bunch of cops in a Democrat town beat up a suspect, we've got to understand the rage of the cops.
They've been there six weeks, a lot of stress, so forth, 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.
I have to say that I think the response of some of the big-name conservatives, Crystal, Podoritz, Krauthammer, and even you to an extent, has been reflexively negative on this nomination.
I've been a conservative for over 40 years, and I was inclined to at least give the president the benefit of the doubt through the first couple of days, perhaps through the hearings.
You know, I think the behavior of conservatives in this matter makes them look more like a special interest group than like a popular patriotic movement.
It was reflexive.
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.
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 mine was not reflexive.
I was not just having a reflex here that was based on knee-jerk reactions.
Now, I can't speak for the others.
I don't talk to them, and I don't consult with them.
And I think I see, I think for every person you mentioned, I have my own theory for all these people.
What, what?
What?
You know, you know, well, look, the point of this, I don't want to go through all this.
I'm blue in the face explaining my opposition.
You have either not understood me when I've said it, Bill, or you've not listened and heard me say it.
But I'm not, it's, that's not the point now.
You know, I registered it.
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 was disappointing for a whole host of reasons.
The opportunity missed, the fact that it has emboldened the Democrats because it looks like it came from a position of weakness.
But the idea that the conservatives inside the Beltway are some sort of special interest group.
You haven't mentioned anybody other than me that has direct contact with the voting base of this party.
So I can't speculate.
Well, I could speculate on other people's reasons for opposing.
And I think in many cases, they're personal.
So I think, 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 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 they're 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 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 or any of that.
But look, I don't want to get, I don't want to start repeating all this.
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, the conservative, the individual and so forth.
I've dealt with all that, but I want to move on because this nomination and the fight has spawned something, folks, that 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.
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.
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 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.
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 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 reelection.
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 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 kickback or a pushback taking place now among conservatives who have for five years been back and steadfast 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 I'm going to 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 going to see Republicans who will not want George Bush coming in to campaign for them in their local districts because they're going to be talking a pedal-to-the-metal conservative agenda.
And it's going to be tough to sell that with nothing on immigration reform and campaign financial.
You know, 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, threw out 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 going to get rid of all of them.
But they're just, they've got, in fact, I've got a piece in the stack today by George Lakoff, 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 get to it.
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.
Lakoff says they got to 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.
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 this is, well, Rush, 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 going to have 100%.
Anyway, let me take a quick timeout here because time rolls on.
We've got another EIB profit center timeout.
Let's see.
Does anybody.
We got one person who wants to try to take a stab at who sets the oil price.
I'm told that big-time investigations are going on by superior media people to find the one guy that sets the gasoline because it's a cabal, you know, it's a conspiracy.
The one person that sets the gas price.
I'm 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 tells me the bench is getting thin in the old Clinton administration.
Now, one more thing.
This business that 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, New Jersey.
Now, Bill, you know, I love you being out there.
I love you being in the audience, but the fact of the matter is, and if you are a regular listener to this program, you know, we talk about the court in great detail on this program and have for decades, for years.
We've been conservatives, been thinking deeply about the Supreme Court for 30, 40 years.
It's 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 Harriet Meyer'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 – who said that?
The caller?
Well, he wants to hear her first.
The caller wants to hear her first and decide for himself.
But, well, 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 Red Bank, New Jersey.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
How you doing, Rush?
I'm pretty sick.
I'm doing pretty.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, it couldn't be better.
As far as your question on who dictates the price of gas and oil, it's the traders that do that.
They're the ones I have some kind of, it's kind of secondhand inside.
Okay, then 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.
Well, Wall Street.
I mean, they, from what I heard from Washington.
Well, then who runs Wall Street?
I'm told that there is one man, one person who sets the gasoline price.
I don't know if we can.
You've given me groups of people.
I'm told that an in-depth investigation is taking place to find the one guy.
But so far, nobody will own up to it.
Well, I think, Brush, there should be an investigation on the traders on this because, like I said, they're the ones that dictate.
And I can tell you a quick story about a little bit of an inside information on second-hand inside information about someone who went to a party.
And before this guy answered the party, they frished him to make sure that he didn't have any tape recording devices on him.
And they explained to him how they do it.
And sometimes they'll sell the same barrel of oil five, six times over to bring up the demand.
So there should be an investigation.
Okay, you see, you're talking here about the futures market.
We've delved into that.
People dealing in and gambling on the future price of oil and the futures market.
And if you look at what the futures price is and compare it to a price of oil, a barrel of oil right now, you'll find there's a huge differential between the real cost of a barrel of oil and 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'll have to give you a heads up.
There is no one person that does this.
I heard this and I couldn't.
Funniest thing I've ever heard of.
Maybe he thinks it's George Soros, but it's not.
There's not one person setting the oil price or the gasoline price for the country.
But there is somebody doing it.
We'll take a break.
Got to 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 is made?
It takes heat to make oil.
This is going to 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.