All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 14, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:58
October 14, 2005, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
We have a breaking news uh flash here, ladies and gentlemen.
Carl Rove uh has left the courthouse.
Well, he left about eleven o'clock, right?
Media is still reporting that Carl Rove has left the White Uh, I'm sorry, the grand jury room.
He left the courthouse.
Which I think happened about 11 o'clock.
But they're still reporting that he left the courthouse.
And he didn't say anything when he left.
He was smiling, too, at arrogant creep.
How dare he smile when he come out of a out of a grand jury room where we're all where he's going to be indicted?
How dare he smile?
He's just trying to infuriate the media.
Thank you.
And I'd have to say it's been a pretty good open line Friday.
We've had phone calls all over the place.
The one phone call I didn't have a chance to get, well, I didn't get a chance to get to it before the caller hung up.
Want to know what I thought of the sex cruise allegations against the Minnesota Vikings.
Makes me want to set sail on a cruise.
Anyway, they're just allegations.
I'll tell you what, I folks, until something is known, I'm not going to listen to what the press tells me is happening.
And even after they tell me what's happening, I'm not going to assume it's right.
I'm going to wait for other sources.
Open line Friday, whatever you want to ask, whatever you want to say.
800-282-2882.
As you know, we let off the program today with a montage, and I'm going to play this again, of a bunch of media types just going bananas over Bush having staged and choreographed this teleconference he had with soldiers in Iraq.
And of course, it wasn't staged or choreographed.
It was the questions were not uh the the answers, the answers that the soldiers gave were not written for them.
They were not predetermined.
Uh they were not ordered to say whatever they said.
They just rehearsed it so they wouldn't look nervous.
They're talking to the president, they're on television, and they just they they were given a chance to go over their answers.
They knew what the questions were going to be.
Uh and of course, what what what all these press people fail to mention is that back in December of 2004 in Kuwait City, it was the press who staged an event with Rumsfeld.
He was having a town meeting, and he set up uh uh a guy from the Chattanooga Times Free Press, Edward Lee Pitts, got hold of a soldier and fed him a question, and they rehearsed the question, and a soldier asked the question, and then when the media played Rumsfeld's answer, they played one little bit of it that made Rumsfeld sound like he was disrespecting the soldier and telling him to get the hell out of his face.
Uh the excerpt they played from uh from Rumsfeld was you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
That was one sentence of about 20 sentences in Rumsfeld's answer, which was a substantive answer, but the media didn't play the substantive answer, and it was a staged event.
Well, I found one more.
I remember one more hugely staged event from Al Gore.
And before I get to that, want to replay this montage, this media hysteria, and this comes from NBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, ABC, and CBS.
The people are Brian Williams, Andrea Mitchell, Terry Moran, Katie Kurick, Bob Shefford, Nyan Sawyer, Lara Logan, and uh Claire Shipman.
The satellite picture from Iraq was being beamed back to television newsrooms here in the U.S. It showed a full-blown rehearsal of the president's questions, along with the soldiers' answers and coaching from the administration.
Today's encounter was billed as spontaneous.
But troops were coached on how to answer the commander-in-chief.
The fact that this was so carefully choreographed shows just how urgently the White House wants PR success at home for this embattled president.
Is the Bush administration using staged events to sell the war in Iraq?
after satellite cameras caught administration aides rehearsing the soldiers beforehand.
The new embarrassment, the White House scrambling after a photo opportunity with troops in Iraq didn't go quite as planned.
His message was overshadowed by questions about how much staging went into the event.
And a lot of other problems are giving the White House a major case of the nerves, including yesterday's slip-up, staging a photo op with U.S. troops and letting Our cameras see it all.
Yeah, that's quite a they're really trying to hide something there, aren't they, Claire?
That was Claire's shipment of ABC.
Really trying to hide this, right?
There was no hiding and there was no secret.
And there was no staging, as I have said.
Much of this program we have spent uh recounting genuinely staged events.
The Clintons dancing on the beach to no music down in the Virgin Islands two weeks before the Monica story broke.
Uh Bill Clinton finding a pile of stones on the Omaha Beach at Normandy during an anniversary of D-Day and placing them in the shape of a cross while the gaggle of photographers gathered atop the hill, a lone battleship out on the horizon within the shot of the camera.
There were no stones that were placed there.
Totally staged photo ops, left and right.
Back then the press marveled.
Practically had verbal orgasms over how good at this Clinton was.
Well, I recalled another one.
Back in the days when Al Gore was running for president.
Remember he kept reinventing himself every few months?
It was Naomi Wolfe who told him to shed the blue suit and red tie and start wearing earth tones.
Khakkies, polo shirts, hiking boots.
Then they roll Gore out as the environmental candidate.
He staged a canoe ride down the Connecticut River.
Do you remember this, folks?
Gore staged a canoe ride down the Connecticut River to illustrate his credentials as the environmental candidate, and they prepositioned photographers along the riverbank to capture the earth-toned environmental candidate knifing heroically down the pristine river.
There was only one problem with this, though.
The day before the trip, Gore's advanced team discovered the river level was so low that his canoe might get stuck, which would ruin the photo up.
I mean, it's it's hard to plow through a treacherous river to show your bravery when it's three inches deep.
So the local environmentalist wackos hosting Gore.
Remember this, Mr. Sturdley?
The local environmentalists hosting Gore arranged for the BGE Dam upriver to open its floodgates the morning of Gore's canoe ride and release 400 millions of gallons of water, which raised the level of the largest river in New England by one foot.
As soon as Gore got out of his canoe after the staged photo op canoe ride, a phone call was placed to the utility, and the floodgates were closed.
The drought was and there was a drought going on at the time, and that's why the river was so low.
The drought was so severe that local residents were forbidden from watering their lawns or washing their cars.
And yet they opened the floodgates at this dam, 400 million gallons of water to raise the water robbable in the river a foot so that Gore could have his canoe ride in his new Naomi Wolf-inspired earth tones to show what a great environmentalist he was.
Now, Bill Salmon, Bill Salmon broke this story in the Washington Times.
And then it was followed by the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, AP.
And Gore screamed bloody murder.
And the uh the Republicans had a field day with Floodgate.
They they actually issued a press release about Gore's watery dilemma, and it was headlined Roe vs.
Wade, R.O.W. vs.
Wade.
All the best.
Oh, which reminds me.
I I told a little joke the other day, and maybe I didn't tell it well enough because some people didn't get it.
Al Gore is over in Sweden.
He's making this anti-U.S.
speech, which is what Democrats do when they go to Sweden.
And after he gave the speech, this is the speech where he said how America would be different had he been elected president.
Uh he had a meeting with reporters, and one of the reporters said, Vice President Gore, did you hear that three Brazilians were killed in Iraq?
Gore said, No, no, no, no.
How many is a Brazilian?
I went to commercial break, and I went to email.
I don't get it.
We waste our time with jokes.
Gore's an idiot, right?
You got bazillions, gazillions, trisillions.
And Gore wanted to know how many was a Brazilian.
I guess you had to be there, folks.
We'll be back in just a second.
Okay, it's open line Friday and back to the phones to uh McComb, Michigan.
Sandy been waiting for a long while, and I appreciate your patience.
Welcome.
Hi, Rush.
Thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
Uh, I'm another one of those um used to be liberals that uh you helped uh convert.
Thanks.
And I thank you so much for that.
Thank you.
Um I'm a little upset with uh Ann Colter.
It seems that she has um uh grabbed onto this Harriet Myers thing, and she is taking it to a real extreme.
I mean, I think she has gone way over the top with this thing.
And I wanted to get your reaction.
Well I uh excuse me just a second.
Clearing the throat there.
Um the the reaction I think on the on the right in general has to be understood in context.
I know it's disturbing to a lot of people because it it appears as though that there is a a bust up here of the conservative coalition.
And you see, I know what's bothering you and a lot of other people, and I'll get to Anne here in just a second.
What's bothering you and a lot of people is it's bad enough that we've got the media and the Democrats just never leaving Bush alone, and it's mean spirited, it's extreme, it's near criminal in what they're saying about him.
But now here come a bunch of conservatives and they're piling on and they're saying things that they're being critical of Bush and and uh President is a very very uh respected and loved uh person on the on the right.
And uh the the people on the right uh correctly think that the in many ways that it doesn't help here when members of the president's team go off the reservation and start criticizing him too.
Now the reason for this, whether you accept it or not, is is deep rooted in uh it in substance uh and it it it's rooted in a profound disappointment over an opportunity that's been missed.
It's the Wesley Prudent had had a a pretty good summary of all this today in his piece in the Washington Times, and his last two sentences, and I'm gonna get pretty close to what they are, verbatim, just sum it up.
It's last two very short sentences.
They are this.
It's such a pity it needn't have happened.
And that really just to me says it all.
The whole thing is just sad and unfortunate because it's so unnecessary.
It need not have happened.
Uh with with with this nomination.
That there just were other choices that were better to make and so forth.
Now, you have you have to understand here, uh, Sandy, that that the conservative movement, such as it is, is huge now, and it's not monolithic.
And there are a lot of independent contractors in the conservative movement.
Uh there's a lot of competition.
Uh there and and people for com people are competing for different things.
And this leads to different degrees of conservatism, whether you can conservative purity or or consistency or what have you.
Now I know Anne Coulter, and and Ann Coulter does not hold back ever about anything.
And what she writes is exactly what she thinks.
And in that regard, I think you know, take it as it comes and take it as it is.
You can be critical of it, and a lot of people are, because they think it it's when when when a when any conservative I think this is unfair, by the way, but when any conservative happens to be just bluntly honest, the left characterizes them as over-the-top weirdo extremist kooks, and then tries to lump all conservatives in with the most outrageous example of the most prominent conservative uh speaking or writing that they can find.
But in terms of uh what she thinks about this, uh, she didn't like Roberts either, and for the for the same reason.
She didn't like Roberts because he wasn't known.
And she doesn't think there's any excuse for nominating somebody that isn't known.
A lot of conservatives believe that the left, when it comes time for them to nominate judges, they go full bore liberal.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, member ACLU, Stephen Breyer.
There were no mysteries about any of these people.
And and there wasn't any opposition to them on the Republican side.
But for some reason there appears to be this fear of being open about who we are, and so we have to nominate these stealth candidates.
And there's some people who just uh like Anne who wishes the president were as bold as she is.
Well, I would have liked to have seen the fight also, but um to you know, and uh the only thing that I know about this woman is what I've read about her, what I've heard about her.
What do you want to know about her?
I know her.
What do you want to know about it?
Don't believe it.
Well, no, I'm talking I I'm I'm talking about the president's choice.
I'm not talking about Ann Coulter.
Well, I thought you were upset at Ann Coulter.
Well, yeah, I am.
But um for her to say that she's an absolute lightweight that has absolutely no business at all uh being even considered for the court.
Why does okay, wait a minute, stop right there?
Because a lot of people, a lot of people are and I'm I'm this may not be you, but a lot of people are saying that, and then they say, what's wrong with an average American being on the court?
There's there people think that, hey, this is good.
We we don't need an elitist, we don't need some egghead, we don't need some pointy headed elite scholar that spent all of his time in an ivory tower in a university or whatever.
What's wrong with an average American rush?
And and is that your view, by the way?
No, not necessarily.
Uh I just um I guess I trust the president, maybe a little bit more.
Then maybe I should.
Uh no, no, what nope, uh uh.
Now, I'm not trying to talk anybody out of the trust out of their trust they place in the president.
I uh again, and and and and I don't think Anne is either.
She she's just telling you what she thinks, but there's no requirement that you sit out there and gobble it up and agree with it.
In the case of trust, you know, I read an interesting quote from President Reagan when he was making his uh his uh acceptance speech at the Republican convention in July of 1980, and uh he talked about trust and and he said he cited Jimmy Carter.
He said, Jimmy Carter said, trust me.
Well, that's the wrong way to look at this.
We d we're not a country that puts our trust in one man and believes everything one man says.
That's not how we're built.
What we do is put our trust in the American people, and then our leaders are invested with that trust, and if they violate it and break it, they're they're not re-elected.
Um and and I mentioned this because a lot of people do want to don't remember Reagan also said trust but verify.
And a lot of people can't verify here is the problem because there's not enough to know about Harriet Myers.
There's no opposition to her that she's an average American, there's no opposition to her that she's whatever she is.
Uh at least in my case, uh it's simply that there are others about whom so much more is known it wouldn't be such a risk.
And we don't know why we still have to take the risk.
But at the same time, you know, when you get when you get to talking about this, folks, look, uh I I don't want to retrace all the steps because I said earlier this week somebody wanted to get into this with me.
So look, uh the opposition's been stated there's nothing that's gonna happen.
W we weren't elected.
I wasn't elected.
It's not my choice to make to the Supreme Court.
I don't get a pick, and neither do anybody else.
None of the critics on the left or right.
It's not their pick either.
It's the president.
So the the focus here now has to be on the end game.
Uh uh I I the there may be some people out there with their criticism trying to quell and kill the nomination, trying to convince her to leave.
Some have said so, some have some have urged her publicly to withdraw.
Uh I I know President Bush well enough that he's not going to withdraw her name.
And I I have a tough time believing that she's gonna withdraw her name.
And I'm gonna tell you what's gonna happen here, folks.
Best guess.
Best guess is the Democrats, you know what the smart thing for them to do would be, and don't worry about me giving them this advice, because they'll never do it.
The best advice for the Democrats is just to shut up.
Be when when the hearings start, just be very friendly, be very warm, be very encouraging.
Don't ask her any controversial questions.
Don't ask her about uh original intent, federalism, Roe vs.
Wade, ask only questions that are under the radar, you know, some obscure court rulings that no one short of Chief Justice Roberts could follow.
Uh uh, you know, do what you can to to establish that you think that she's unqualified, and do it in a congenial manner, and then punt it to the Republicans.
You know, just just illustrate that she may not have the experience or the constitutional philosophy.
And and if if if she has the ability to answer these questions, then bam, then they're struck.
Uh But if she can't, then they kindly pass it off to the Republicans, and it's up to them.
That's the smart thing for the Democrats to do, but they're not going to do that.
The Democrats are already.
I've been reading newspaper editorials.
I have been reading the liberal websites, and they're they are fit to be tied over the fact that Bush picked her because there's a religious component to their friendship.
And they can't help themselves.
And what what they're going to do, folks, you they're sitting idly by now watching the the the right wing of America criticize her, but they're not going to be able to avoid getting in on this fun.
I don't know what the end game is going to be here, but but the end game is is where this is all headed, and it's it's that that's where our focus ought to be, and also setting a marker for the next nomination.
Because there is going to be another one, my guess is.
Yes, thank you.
And speaking, my good friends of staged media events.
I have this from the archives of the Rush Limbaugh website.
Never forget this.
Let me just read to you from the uh the date we posted this, February 19th of 2004.
You have to read Patrick Healy's Boston Globe piece, as Carrie Surges feistiness seems slipping to believe it.
The headline leads one to believe that Carrie's relaxing, having less anxiety, not being as provocative with the media.
It has nothing to do with the story, though.
It begins saying Kerry is wrangling with rival John Edwards over jobs and trade, two things neither of them know diddly squat about, by the way.
Story goes on to publish this quote.
The administration promised America several million jobs over the course of the next months, and I immediately said that those predictions have fall short based on the promises they made with respect to the tax cut, which was supposed to give a million jobs.
It cost a million, and the next tax cut was supposed to produce a million jobs and it lost a million.
The Globe writes that this is what Kerry told reporters, but that's not how it happened.
Carrie's remarks lasted three minutes, the Globe reports, yet it left TV reporters without a soundbite until one CBS news producer asked Carrie to try it again.
They don't know what they're talking about in their own economic policy, Kerry said of the Bush team, today it's one thing, tomorrow it's the next.
So they used take two.
So in other words, CBS didn't get a good soundbite from Kerry in take one.
So rather than use that and say this guy can't speak, he's having a tough time in the campaign trail, they asked him to do it again, telling him they didn't get a soundbite.
Senator, you need to tighten it up.
Can you try it again?
And they and he did, and they gave him a pretty good soundbite.
Staged events, anyone for the mainstream media.
James in O'Cala, Florida.
Hi, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Original intent ditto, Rush.
How are you doing?
Fine.
Thanks very much for the call.
Okay.
Hey, when you have those uh sound bites of uh questioners asking uh people on like uh what, Matt Lauer and those Sunday shows, you always have to ask the uh the the question instead of the uh the questioner asking a question during the sound bites.
Why do you do that?
You know, this is a great example of a great open line Friday question.
And I'll be glad to tell you the answer to this.
Matt Lauer is not our employee.
Uh none of these journalists are our employees.
I can't use them.
I can't use their voices uh except in, you know, little bitty bits and pieces if they occur within the text of a of an of an answer.
But so I have to read the questions here of all of these reporters and anchors, but the sound bites of the newsmakers are fair usage.
Uh it's a newsmaker on a news show.
And as long as we credit where it came from, we say Matt Lauer today on the Today Show was talking to X, then we can play whatever the newsmaker says.
But since Matt Lauer nor any of the others are employed here, we can't pass off the impression that they are or that we have access or any of that.
It's uh it's a it's just a legal question, and it's it's nothing more than that.
And it's uh, you know, sometimes it's it's problematic because some of these questions are very long and require a long setup, and I hate reading these log questions, but sometimes it's necessary.
Uh but that's the answer to it.
Um it's it all boils down to what's fair usage and what isn't.
By the same token, uh I'd say five or six times a month.
There are segments of this program that news networks want to use.
They always call and ask us for permission.
Because they have to.
I'm not their employee.
They can't just take this show and rebroadcast it without permission.
Um and there are understood agreements between all programs that do news in one way or another that you um you can use the newsmaker.
As long as there's the credit on TV, it has to be a bug um on the screen that says courtesy of.
And uh on our radio here, we have to verbally identify where we got this.
Uh unless our cameras and microphones are there, and then we can we can say it as our own because we gathered it.
But if we're not the news gatherer on this, we have to credit the gatherer who is.
But when it comes to the reporter doing the question, they're not ours and we can't use them.
Uh I for it would be no different uh if I were to say, and let's go to the sound by our Matt Lauer has the question.
Well, he's not ours.
Uh he's NBC'.
And uh so that's that's the reason for it.
It's not it's not because I have ego, and it's not because I don't like these reporters, and it's not because I don't want to give them airtime.
It's just a it's it's just something that we cannot do.
I imagine if we called them and said, You mind if we use you on the question, they probably say, Yes, but I'm to call these people every day uh to uh to do this.
And you know, they like everybody else, they like the airtime, they like the plug and so forth.
Uh, for the most part they do.
I what do we get when we get plain complaints about it?
What do you what do you what do you mean?
Tell me, give me one, give me one example.
Well, I d uh well I don't play Katie Courick on the air.
I don't I don't play Katie Curry.
Now if she wants to object to my calling her the perky one, that's too bad.
You know, if she'll clean up her act about George W. Bush, I'll clean up my act about her.
You know, but I mean hey, you know, two and three can play this game.
We had her on a sound, but we can run this montage business.
We're taking little bitty sentences here from each one.
We're allowed to do that.
You've got to like you can use five seconds or less of somebody, but you can't use any more than that.
Otherwise you get into into some uh legal hassles that you just don't want to mess with.
Nancy in Mercersburg, Pennsylvania.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi.
Hello.
Thanks for having me on.
Um I just wanted to say I'm 40 something, and I wanted to agree with your um view on feminism.
And uh I was pretty young when it started, and I remember, you know, burning the bras and not wearing it bras, but that doesn't last very long.
And I just remember going through different things and not really hating men, but I mean, to me that's what it was, and I got tired of it after a while.
But the nail in the coffin was when Hillary Clinton was on that morning show, and I went in and watched that, and I looked at her and I said, She's either lying or she's gullible.
And she's too smart, even though it's a good thing.
You mean you mean when when she blamed the attacks on her president and her husband as the vast right wing conspiracy?
I you know, I was so busy with kids and work, I wasn't really paying attention much to politics back then.
But this right wing conspiracy kept coming up with the Clintons over and over and over again.
I was so tired of that.
I tried to find out what it was all about.
That was it.
That was the turning point.
But whether for Hillary and the feminist movement not doing anything about Bill Clinton with all the other things that were said against him.
Amen.
Amen.
The feminists were gone.
I told my boys.
Yes, I tell my boys don't come home from college telling me about your feminine side.
I don't want it.
Yeah, and and how about how about here comes a woman, Paula Jones?
Well, a series of them.
You got one Eder Broderick, he raped me.
Uh uh Paula Jones, uh he exposed himself to me.
Uh Kathleen Willie, he assaulted me.
And where are the feminists defending these women against a powerful man who has total control over them, especially that intern, Monica Lewinsky.
They're out there ripping into these women.
Paula Jones was a trailer park hayseed hick, and she didn't fit the mold of the modern feminist movement.
Ivy League, elitist and so forth.
Plus she was prettier than they are.
And that bothered him too.
Yeah, they're just a political movement.
And then I can't watch the news anymore because my husband thinks it's so depressing ever since Bush was president, and he's like, watching it, he turns it off.
This is really depressing.
We don't want to watch this.
I'm like, what am I gonna do?
And then uh I was watching reading Newsweek, canceled that because all they did was bash book bash bus.
And then I had someone come work for me, and she listened to you.
And that's when I finally gotten better news.
And when was this?
Uh about three years ago.
Three years ago.
Well, we're so glad you found found your way here.
And I I'm I'm glad you called because there's no there's no better illustration of how right I am than hearing from a woman who feels totally betrayed or misled by feminism.
Now, folks, you might think that I'm just prattling on about this because I'm an opinionated guy, but let me tell you something.
I'm 54, and in the modern era of feminism, I'll never forget when I was first exposed to it.
I was doing my little radio show, my hometown in 1968, and I'm 17.
And it's a Saturday morning remote at a Sears store.
for the old days.
The owner of the station had set up this remote every Saturday morning at Sears to earn money and so I had to go out there with this little gizmo, played the records from there, did all that with people going through the Sears shop and I was like, And once a month, we had people from the local high school come in for a half hour to discuss issues.
And one of the girls that was in my class, I was a junior in high school time, came in and it was all riled up about feminism, and she was spouting it from some book that she had read or magazine or whatever.
And I'm you know, I'm listening to this.
Now and I well was hit upside the head, broadside with it, had no idea this is coming, and I'm listening to it, and the it it just it was she was mad, she was vicious, she was angry, she was motivated, and she was 18 or 17 years old.
So I trace the modern era of feminism back to 1968, 1969.
Well, I left uh home when I was 20 and I went away to Pittsburgh.
And it was in full swing, folks.
I mean, I am not making this up.
You couldn't open a car door for women without them being offended.
I couldn't compliment their appearance, Dawn, without them being offended, because that was to ignore their brain.
Now, these are not cliches, folks.
I I am uh I'm telling you, this this had a formative effect on me.
And then after after Pittsburgh, I went to Kansas City, and there I ran into trouble with the local Nag's president, because I called some woman reporter on the air deer, so I had to go to a sensitivity training seminar uh with the local chairman of the Nags, the name was Tracy something or other, came in wearing this giant straw hat and Birkin stocks and a floral dress that looked like a burlack bag, and I'm sitting in there and I had to do this because the manager was scared to death of these people.
Then one of one of my buddies at the radio station had a girlfriend, and his girlfriend had a girlfriend, and they wanted to introduce me to it.
So she's a big feminist.
And I said, by this time, you know, I'm ready for them.
By this time, this is nothing more than exploration and experimentation.
So I go out with a date in this woman, all she wants to talk about is this new book.
Susan Brown Miller has this new book out, and I can't remember the title of it, but it was it it it changed the whole perception and definition of rape.
So here I am on the first date with a woman, all she's talking about is rape.
And how she's been profoundly affected by the book, but she hasn't read it.
So I went out the next day, because I'm figuring on a second date, just for the fun of it.
So I went out and found the book and bought it, and I gave it to her, and you would have thought I'd given her a ring.
Oh, she was ecstatic, and she wanted to sit there and read it with me.
And it was all about this.
I wish I could remember the title of book.
Probably if you go to Amazon, put in Susan Brownmiller, it'll be there.
But the the it it the purpose of the book was to change the whole focus of rape was an act of violence.
Men were natural born predators.
And and so I was I became a a uh member of a class that was a natural-born predator.
And with women who believe that, the whole existence was proving that you weren't a predator, and how did you do that?
You had to act like a wimp.
Against our will, men, women, and rape, Susan Brown, but What's the year of that book?
Does it say?
Was it what year it came out?
It's in the 70s sometime because it had to be after 75 and before 1980, because that's that's um when I was it has to be 76 or 77.
And I that's when I was in Kansas City.
So I'm I'm, you know, the the I meant to you people wonder why I don't have kids.
Yeah, just no way.
Back after this.
Stay with us.
Mr. Snerdley is telling me some similar stories from his uh uh early years, when he lived in uh it was New York, right?
So Snerdley is about my age, we're about the same things.
But back in this era of militant feminism, which which was really nothing more than ultra-liberalism, and that's all it's ever been, and that's what it is today.
Uh militant feminism.
But but he's all the girls back, they got all caught up in this, like Brown Miller's book and uh whatever other related things, Ms. Magazine this stuff.
And it it it it eventuated that uh all these feminist uh playwrights began writing plays, and and Broadway productions were held of these angry uh female tirades against their lot in life, and Snerdley's uh girls and girlfriends and we want to go see the play.
So girl wants to go see the play, I mean they gotta do the final, we'll go see the play.
And the girl would get so mad at Snerdley for being a man during the play, practically hit him on the way out of the theater.
Uh now I'm sure some of you people think that there's some exaggeration in this.
Uh and over the course of years, yeah, stories do expand.
But I am I am not exaggerating at all the attitude that militant feminism gave uh women during the period of time that I was uh you know uh of that age too, and it it was not it was not pleasant.
It was it was and I and and it's it was I mean, parts that we try to have fun with it, but um can you imagine on the first date discussing rape?
I mean, I it just and have that be the proof that I cared and that I was interested.
Um forget it.
Portland, Oregon, Tom, welcome to the EIB network.
Hi.
Thank you, Rush.
I appreciate you taking my call.
You bet, sir.
Any time.
I have a question for the all-knowing Maharashny.
Yes, so you've come to the right place.
As I was paying close attention to all the storm news from Rita and Contrita, there was one thing that I kept waiting for to happen that never happened, and I'm just curious.
Out of the uh if you know anything about this, out of the hundreds of platforms and thousands of wells in the Gulf, apparently none of them leaked any oil.
There were no oil spills.
One of those rigs even had a hit a bridge.
And to me, that seems like that's pretty good proof that the guys that are designing these things and operating them know what they're doing, and that maybe it makes some sense to diversify our oil exploration areas by putting wells in other places where uh they they're proven to be uh let me just uh let me take I I gotta interrupt here because the constraints of time, but you were exactly right.
109 rigs, but were were shut down or affected uh by Hurricane Katrina.
One of the things that'll be honest, they had enough lead time to get out there and close them, shut them down, lock them.
Uh the case of an earthquake that might not be the earthquake, it probably wouldn't matter anyway.
But your point is right on.
But just to add to you this, nothing that they predicted in terms of uh the apocalypse came true.
The water is not a toxic soup in New Orleans.
There weren't mass deaths.
There wasn't mass murder.
None of what they said was true.
None of it.
Literally none of it.
Including that I'm talking about all these predictions that they were making.
None of them came true.
And it's just it's it's it, you're you're right on the money, but even now, with all this evidence that these oil rigs can withstand a Cat III hurricane or worse, without spilling oil and destroying the pressing environment.
Even today, as Republicans in Congress are trying to expand the energy bill to include more offshore drilling 25 miles offshore in the Gulf, California and off uh off the Florida Gulf Coast, militant environmentalists are out there opposing it.
▲
Export Selection