All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 24, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:31
October 24, 2005, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this show make more sense than anything anybody else out there happens to be saying the views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right 98.5% of the time greetings and welcome back.
It's great to have you rush limbo as we kick off a brand new week of broadcast excellence here on the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network Little Walmart news here.
Always, I love Walmart news.
Something about news and Walmart that I just, oh, folks, I have to tell you this story.
I hope I can make this as funny as it was.
There was a golf tournament fundraiser, big, big, big do out at Steve Wynn's new hotel in Las Vegas this weekend for CapCure, the Prostate Cancer Foundation.
And this is an annual event.
And this is the third time that I've been to it.
All kinds of celebrities show up and play golf and people come out and make donations and they give pairing party on Friday and Saturday.
I play two days of tournaments.
And Mike Milken just does this thing up like nobody else.
And he's, you know, he shows up every year at our cigar night dinner because all the proceeds from that, there's a big auction every year go to prostate cancer.
And he shows up and matches everything that's donated.
And this is his, and they do a lot of events, but this is the big golf event that they do every year.
I met a bunch of new people.
This time are great, great people.
I keep running into more Hollywood conservatives who come up and whisper it to me in my ear.
I'm not permitted to mention names here yet.
But they come up to me.
If I didn't know better, a number of people that come up to me and Hollywood are conservative, I'd say they ran the place.
But anyway, after dinner on Saturday night, there was a performance by, and this will interest you, HR, because you're into this stuff, the Alvin Ailey Dance Troupe.
Now, I had never seen the Alvin Ailey Dance Troupe.
They had, they had, the first, there were two phases of the performance.
The first phase literally still has me in awe.
Was a guy, and I met him afterwards, and I told him I was in awe of what he did.
I call him Strobe Light Guy because this performance featured this guy dancing and running around the stage with movements timed perfectly to strobe lights flashing in such a way that he, you know what a strobe light does?
It looks like stop action.
It looked like this guy suspended in midair, differing parts of the stage.
You never see him touch the ground.
It's beyond description.
It would take Hollywood a month of post-production to produce this as make-believe.
And I asked this guy, have you ever seen this?
I mean, have you ever seen videotape of yourself doing this?
He said, oh, yeah, it's part of the learning process.
But he didn't think it was any big deal.
I mean, he accepted the compliments and so forth, but it's just what he does.
He didn't think it was any big deal.
But I'm telling you, I've not seen anything like it.
Anyway, as we're walking out after dinner and so forth, after dessert, big, I mean, this hotel's huge, and I made my way about halfway down this long hallway, longer than even the hallway in my estate.
And all of a sudden, all of a sudden, this little 10-year-old girl, I think it was a 10-year-old little girl, comes running up to me up to my left and runs in front of me and stops, puts her hands on her hips and stops right in front of me.
Are you a Republican?
Well, now, this has never happened to me.
Walking along in a hotel and a 10-year-old gets in my way, blocks my way, and says, are you a Republican?
And I leaned down and I said, yeah, have you ever seen one before?
No.
And then shortly after that, one of the dancers in the Alvin Ailey troupe came up and said, oh, I'm sorry.
When I saw you walk by, the little girl was the daughter of one of the technical directors of the Alvin Ailey Dance Troupe.
And she said, when I saw you walk by, I said, whoa, there goes Rush Lindbaugh.
And little girl here, said, who's that?
Oh, you know, he's a Republican.
He has a radio show.
I said, little girl ran after me.
Are you a Republican?
And not as though it was a crime.
It's just like she was at the zoo, you know, and she'd not seen one before.
So I post her a bunch of pictures with her, the little girl.
And so years from now, when she grows up to know what happened, she'll be able to say that she actually had a picture taken with a real Republican.
I was her first.
I was the first at age 10.
And she'll have that picture for the rest of her life.
But I was hitting the ball so sweet yesterday.
Oh, Saturday and Sunday.
I was hitting the ball like you just, I mean, it was just, it was just so much fun.
I had a totally fantastic time.
And everybody at the Prostate Cancer Foundation, I actually, for the first time, met and had a chance to talk at Link with Steve Wynne, who's and his wife Elaine.
And they're just nice people.
It was just fun.
I just had a great time.
But in my mind, all day Sunday was this hurricane, whether I'm going to have to come back here to New York and pay these saps tax money every day that I'm here, or whether I can get home to where I live.
And I was told, well, we can get you in, but there's no guarantee of tomorrow.
And I said, well, let's go ahead and go to New York because if it's really bad, it's going to put people at risk if they have to cross the bridge and come into work.
And if the island has power problems, there's no guarantee we'll keep the phone lines up.
So I made the decision to come to New York.
And it looks like I've been calculating how much this is going to cost me in addition to repairs down home with the New York tax money.
It's going to be a close wash as to which costs more.
Because I may have to be here till Wednesday.
And folks, I'm not whining.
I'm not complaining.
I am doing what I always do, sharing my life with you.
I hold nothing back.
Well, I hold some things back for people's privacy.
But at any rate, that's the scoop.
On the weekend, the Harriet Myers business, what I wanted to get to, I was telling you in the previous hour of a senator that she met with before even this questionnaire had been filled out and turned back in.
And I guess this actually, I don't know if this appeared originally in the Washington Post or if this is original reporting from the American Spectator.
But apparently what happened is there's been a lot of talk about how poorly Harriet Myers performed in her private meetings.
One U.S. senator, unnamed, who met with her early in the process, says he asked her what he considered to be the easiest question that she'll get throughout the whole confirmation process, which is, why do you want to serve on the United States Supreme Court?
And the senator said her response was something you'd expect from a Miss America contestant.
The poor performance prompted the senator to meet with Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, who passed along the senator's concerns to the White House.
So the piling on continues.
As you know, Chuck Schumer says that there's no way she has the votes.
It's hopeless.
They said I'll meet the press yesterday.
They said if the vote were held today, she would not win a majority on the Judiciary Committee or in the full Senate.
And Fox News Sunday reported, I don't know if we have this.
Yes, we do.
The audio soundbites.
I told you this last week.
You know, I told you this last week, and I go all this email.
Rush, rush, rush.
You should have seen what happened at Fox News Sunday yesterday.
You should have seen it.
You should have seen it.
I didn't have to see it because I predicted it.
Fox News Sunday revealed, it says here, that Senators Sam Brownback and Lindsey Graham have requested that the White House provide documents about Meyers' work there.
I told you last week that they had done that.
It's not a big secret anyway.
I mean, nothing against Fox News, but nothing was revealed on Sunday.
This has been known since at least last Thursday.
And the reason that it's important is when it's two Republicans, the Republicans know the White House isn't going to release these documents.
The Democrats can request them all they want, but the Republicans know that the White House is not going to give up private papers between the president's lawyer and himself.
Executive privilege, lawyer-client privilege, all these things are going to give up.
So the theory is that this move by two Republicans is seen as a message to the White House.
Look, without us knowing more about this woman, we can't vote for her, and we need your documents to do it.
And so the theory goes that, and this theory came out last week.
I know I'm not living in the Twilight Zone on this, and I mentioned it to you.
The theory is that when Republicans signal that they can't vote for the nominee in this way, that neither of these guys have said, we're not voting for her.
Neither Brownbach nor Lindsey Graham have said, uh-uh, can't vote for it.
But they're sending the signal.
And it is the theory that the signal is meant to provide the White House or Harriet Myers with cover to withdraw, rescind the nomination.
I think we have sound on this from Brownback.
And we've got some meet the press stuff with Chuck Schumer.
So we'll come back after the break and get started with some of those bites so you can hear it for yourself.
Don't go away.
Okay, before we proceed here, I forgot the Walmart story, but I'm going to get to it.
But I have a quick question because you guys have more TV monitors in there than I do.
I only have two, and I haven't bothered switching channels.
Has anybody seen in any part of Florida?
I don't care if it's Naples, Florida City, Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, has anybody seen a mass looting or criminal activity going on out there?
Have we seen stranded people barely alive outside shelters waiting for the FEMA people who have not shown up yet?
No school buses that are flooded or underway.
Okay, I just wanted to make sure before I went public with saying that there wasn't any of that, because you guys have more monitors in there than I do.
All right, Walmart.
Now, they just keep confounding people.
As I say, I love Walmart news.
Walmart has long been criticized for the benefits it offers to its workers.
And then I hate its employees.
Workers is a socialist word.
Socialist Workers Party is a socialist communist word.
It's employees, associates, or something like that.
Walmart, which has been criticized for the benefits it offers to its workers, is introducing a cheaper health insurance plan with a monthly premium as low as $11.
The company hopes will greatly increase the number of its employees who can afford coverage, jumping into a new area.
Walmart also offering health savings accounts.
No wonder they're hated.
Health savings accounts, which the federal government introduced last year, few employers offer them.
The new benefits, which Walmart calls the value plan, follow years of complaints that at Walmart, the nation's largest employer, health insurance is out of reach for many of its 1.2 million workers in the United States, forcing thousands of them to turn to state-sponsored programs or forego health coverage altogether and just die.
We are lowering the costs to make health insurance more affordable, said a Walmart spokesman, Dan Fogelman, who, because he works at Walmart, lied.
He declined to comment on how much the plan would cost the company.
Asked if the new insurance plan was in response to growing criticism, he said, it's fair to say that we're listening, but more to our associates than anybody else.
Health insurance specialists generally praised the new plan, saying its lower premiums were likely to attract more employees and thereby reduce the ranks of the uninsured.
Generally praised it?
They all, because they also noted that the plan's $1,000 deductible would be high for Walmart workers, particularly older employees who are likely to visit doctors more often or die and might not cover expensive treatments, particularly in its first year.
You know what the purpose of this is.
The purpose is you get a very low health care coverage premium, put a deductible up there, and make sure you don't go to the doctor at the first sign of a hangnail.
There's got to be some effort made.
We talked about this last week.
We've talked about it at Infinitum.
To bring some sort of market forces to bear on health care costs.
The changes will be closely watched by Wall Street and Walmart investors who will want to know how the company can afford to offer lower price benefits at a time when soaring health care costs are pinching profits across the country.
Well, my guess is that if anybody can do it, they can do it.
And I hope people do watch it.
And one of the tricks is going to be this high deductible.
Tracy, by the way, here's, love this name, Uve Reinhardt.
U-W-E, and I know it's pronounced that way because I'm a highly trained broadcast specialist.
Uwe Reinhart, the health economist at Princeton, said that by allowing workers several visits to the doctor before requiring them to pay out of pocket, Walmart had removed a big financial barrier between doctors and patients, adding that critics would have trouble attacking this plan.
No, they won't, because they don't need to be telling the truth to attack it.
It's the nature of liberal critics.
Tracy Seffel, a spokeswoman for Walmart Watch, a coalition of community groups that's been highly critical of Walmart, had not seen details of the plan, but said that a plan that is characterized as a healthy person's plan doesn't fully address the needs of a majority of their workforce.
Oh, I get it.
So the majority of Walmart's health workforce is sick.
The majority of Americans is sick.
See, this is the liberal mindset.
The majority of Americans is sick.
We need to go to the doctor all the time.
We don't have good health.
Republican policies have led to pollution, have led to non-organic foods, have led to all kinds of rotten things in our water and our food.
Bird flu is all over the place.
Oil is seeping into your backyard and you don't even know it.
And we got helicopters flying around rescuing the wrong people.
You don't have a chance, folks.
And now, if you really work at Walmart, you really don't have a prayer.
This is the sum total of the criticism.
All right, let's go to the audio soundbites on Harriet Myers and get started.
Here's Tim Russert and an exchange with George Allen.
He also had K. Bailey Hutchinson on the program along with Chucky Schumer.
Russert and Allen had this exchange yesterday.
You have heard the criticisms about Harriet Myers' nomination from Rush Limbaugh, George Will, who wrote a column today, George Will saying that any Republican senator who votes for Harriet Myers can never be considered presidential material.
Do you agree with that?
I like that anybody running for any office is always looked upon by the voters on their whole body of what they have done, their past performance, and their record.
One's stance and determination, final determination on this particular Supreme Court justice, as well as others, certainly will be part of what people will look at for anybody running for any office.
That's just a great answer.
It might have snuck past you.
You know why it's a great answer?
It's because of what he first said.
I think anybody running for any office is always looked upon.
Well, last I looked at, I'm not.
George Will isn't.
And none of the other critics are running for office.
So Allen's basically saying, screw them.
They don't get a vote.
I do.
And it's up to me to blah, blah, blah, as an elected person running for office.
I mean, he didn't say screw them.
That's not what he means.
But, you know, he's basically saying critics are critics and they're going to say what they're going to say, but I'm an elected senator, maybe running for office.
I have a different duty here.
So Russert says to Senator Allen, you did say that you did not believe Harriet Myers was the most qualified person to replace O'Connor.
You said that's his description, meaning George Bush.
It would not be mine.
That's correct.
The president said she was the best qualified, and somebody asked me, Do you think she is?
I said, no.
I would have somebody else.
I'd recommended other people from the Fourth Circuit that I know, such as Judge Wilkinson, Ludig, and Karen Williams.
The reason why conservatives, Tim, are so concerned about this nomination is this is an opportunity for us to gain ground.
Right now, there are three conservatives, four activists, liberals, two swing votes.
This is one to gain ground.
We recognize that it is the president's right to make these decisions.
He was elected.
He gets to call or make this nomination.
As a senator, we have responsibilities to advise and consent.
I want to make sure that when they put on that robe, there are going to be judges who take away the Bill of Rights, as the court did in this New London, Connecticut case, where they took people's homes, not for a school or a road, but because they wanted to derive more tax revenue from that property.
Heck, that's amending the Bill of Rights by judicial decree.
Here, here, exactly right.
And that's not how you amend the Constitution.
There is an amendment process for this.
So, you know, as I listen to George Allen, I have to tell you, I like hearing what I hear, hearing what he says more and more and more and others.
We don't have time to squeeze this next minute of Chuck Schumer.
We've got two Chuck Schumer bites coming, and this is about how he doesn't think that Myers has the votes as of now if the vote were held today.
By the way, big news out there, the Lundberg survey, they survey gasoline prices.
Gasoline prices have fallen 25 cents.
Well, yeah, that may be well and good, but I mean, how is this possible?
I thought we were headed to $4 and $5 gasoline.
There's nothing to stop it.
You people had to go sell your SUVs.
You had to start driving around these little lawnmowers they call hybrids.
Now the gas price continues to come down.
Who told you this was going to happen?
We'll be back in just a moment.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
Hey, folks, have you heard about the new Zogby poll that's got Bush's approval rating up to 45%?
Now, I just ran a little test here because I found this over the weekend.
I haven't seen it anywhere other than UPI.
So during the commercial break, and those of you watching on the ditto cam may have seen me talking to the staff on the other side of the glass and said, hey, do you guys hear that Bush's approval number is up to 45% in Leigh Law Sogby?
You should see their faces.
Mouths fell open, thought I was teasing them for a while.
And then when I said, Yatska is the Iraqi Constitution, they just started laughing.
But that's what it says.
President's job approval hits 45%.
Voters optimistic about Iraq after Constitution passage.
This from New Zealand America poll.
President Bush's job approval rating beleaguered by poor marks in the wake of Hurricane Katrina rebounded from historic lows this summer to 45% in Zogby International's latest poll.
Job approval numbers bumping back up into the range where they had hovered for most of his second term.
Now, I wonder how many people believe that.
Just the Zogby poll, but I wonder if your reaction wasn't identical to my staff's, just given all the barrage of negative news.
And then when you hear the reason, the Iraq Constitution, I'd chalk it up more to the gas price down a quarter of a gallon, but who knew that when the poll was going, all right, here's Chuck Schumer.
By the way, I have to tell you, Howard Dean, if you're just joining us, Howard Dean was on Stephanopoulos' show yesterday and was asked if he would accept it if there were no indictments from Patrick Fitzgerald.
He said, no.
I won't accept it.
So the chairman of the Merlot Democrats will not accept no indictments.
I don't know what this means.
I think you listen to Dean talk and you listen to Chuck Schumer.
I don't think these guys have the slightest idea how they sound to people in the Red States, the heartland of America.
Outside the East Coast and the Beltway, I really don't think they realize how insignificant they are and how irritating they are to people.
Schumer is asked this question by Russet.
You think the White House should consider pulling her nomination?
George Bush, say whatever else you want about him, does not back away from a fight.
I will say this.
If he were to withdraw the nomination, it would be a stunning defeat for George Bush.
And here's what I think it would show.
I think it would show that a small group way over at the extreme had power over the White House.
After all, not a single Republican senator has at this point called for Harriet Meyers' resignation.
And so if President Bush is going to march to the drum of a group that I think most Americans would consider out of the mainstream, it's going to be a real revelation to the American people.
In your dreams, this is typical characterizing mainstream conservatism as extreme.
But if Bush is not going to pull the nomination, if this happens, that's not going to be how it happens.
And I don't, and by the way, Schumer would love for the scenario he just described to take place.
He would love for that to be the case.
The next thing he would love is for the Democrats to kill this number, or the Republicans to kill this nomination in the Judiciary Committee or in the full Senate.
And the third thing he'd like is for the Democrats to kill it.
But make no mistake, he has, whatever the biggest, largest embarrassment for Bush possible on this is what he supports.
So next question from Russert to Chuck Schumer says, well, what are the odds of her being confirmed?
I think if you were to hold the vote today, she would not get a majority either in the Judiciary Committee or on the floor.
I think there's maybe one or two on the Judiciary Committee who have said they'd support her as of right now.
And I think you have concern on these three areas, qualification, independence, judicial philosophy by people of both parties in all political stripes.
Now, having said that, the hearings are going to be make or break for Harriet Myers in a way that they have not been for any other nominee.
And she's going to have to do real well there.
Right now, she has a rough road to hoe.
Now, what does he mean by this?
Having said that, the hearings are going to be make or break for Harriet Myers in a way that they have not been for any other nominee.
What do you suspect that the gallant senator from New York means by that?
While you ponder it, let's go to Naperville, Illinois.
Hello, Tim.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi, Rush.
Yeah, with regard to Myers' response to the senator's questions, sounding like it was an answer on the Miss America pageant.
That's because his question sounds like it was something formatted for the Miss America pageant.
I mean, there's no substance to it.
Well, now, wait, wait, wait, wait.
For people that don't know what you're calling about, the question was asked of Harriet Myers, and this is an unnamed senator.
We don't know who who asked her this, but he's talking.
Whoever he is, he's just not been identified in the American Spectator, which was the source.
Question was, why do you want to be Associate Justice on the Supreme Court?
And he said her answer was let him down like a Miss America pageant contestant.
And you don't think that's a good question.
No, it's weak.
It's a generic Miss America-style pageant.
She might as well have answered, you know, to establish world teeth.
Well, you know, she may have said that.
It may be what he's talking about.
But are you an employer?
Do you interview people to come work where you work?
No.
Okay.
Well, I have done that in the past.
After I got to keep people, I turned over the interview process to somebody else to deal with the insignificant hires.
I haven't hired anybody since.
I always ask, why do you want to do this?
Because you learn a lot with just that one.
I mean, that question will elucidate and illustrate whether there's any passion for really wanting it.
And the reason you ask that is because, at least personally, I believe that desire is 80% of achievement.
And with all other things being equal, I mean, if your IQ is intact and you have a reasonable education and so forth, desire is 80% of achievement.
Remember when Ted Kennedy was asked this question by Roger Mudd during the, whenever it was, he was trying, I guess, 1980, he was trying to wrest the Democratic nomination of Jimmy Carter.
Why do you want to be president?
He's still answering it.
His answer, nobody can figure it out.
And that answer doomed him because it was considered then, well, he just thinks he's entitled to it.
He doesn't know why he wants to be just because his name's Kennedy and it's his turn.
So do you think the senator just didn't think that she was sincere?
No, now we're speculating.
Okay, so I will clearly say that I'm speculating.
I think what the senator heard was an answer that did not convey any desire, that she had really thought about it, that was sprung on her.
She was asked to do this, asked to be nominated, and that maybe not has held a long desire to be on the Supreme Court or a judge anywhere, period.
That's what I'm thinking.
And that question can be very valuable.
It's like, why are you here?
You're doing an interview and, you know, job prospect income.
Why are you here?
And you will learn a lot.
You'll learn if they're just there to get a check to pay the bills.
You'll learn if they love the kind of work your company does.
You will learn if they have a true passion and a commitment to doing what's necessary to realize their dreams.
I'll give you a little hint.
A friend of mine used to work at Merrill Lynch.
Now, this goes back 20 years, and I don't know if this is still applicable to Merrill Lynch, but they'd bring in potential new hires.
And one of the questions in the interview process, how much money do you want to earn?
It was a trick question because whatever the applicant said, the interviewer assumed that at that point, the worker would stop working.
The employee stopped working.
He'd be satisfied.
So I want to make a couple hundred thousand a year.
And probably the applicant, I'm taking a risk saying this, but a couple hundred grand.
And the interviewer did not say this to the applicant.
That's bad news.
We want people here to want to earn all they can.
The answer is as much as I can.
But that's not the whole answer.
Well, you know, sir, I'm here to do as well as I can, but I want to get the experience and I want to be justified when I earn it and so forth.
You give them a number when somebody asks you that question in a job like that, which is basically a commission sales job, you're sinking yourself.
Now, if you walk into Walmart and they say, how much do you want to earn?
$100,000, you are out the door.
You know, there's certain, there's differences here, but you got to know how to do this.
But these questions are time-tested.
They generally are pretty productive.
These interview questions, and they're really genuinely designed to ferret out motive and passion.
You know, in a lot of places, what gets you in is your education.
If you've got a college degree, they get you in the door, but after that, it doesn't mean anything.
They use a college degree to weed out applicants because they can't interview a million people.
So they throw out the 500,000 to 600,000 using rough numbers here that don't have a degree, and it just reduces the number of applicants.
But that's, you know, gets you in the door.
But after that, I mean, the interview is key.
I've always told young people who ask me, your education is fine.
It's fundamental.
Go for it.
Learn as much as you can, obviously.
But the interview is key.
If you're serious and you really want something, it'll be known.
If you're just there because you want to show up, it's time to get a job.
You've got to go to the right place for that.
There are job, entry-level jobs, but you have to go to the right place.
This question could have been pretty illustrative of something.
And by the way, this all boils down to how she'll do in the hearings.
She really wants this job.
She will be working very hard right now to be able to get through these hearings and prove everybody who's been criticizing her wrong.
So we get there, we'll find out.
The truth will rise to the top of something like this.
A quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue here in just a moment.
Look at this headline from the Los Angeles Times today.
Wealthy Haven has its share of anxious hours.
This is from the Los Angeles Times.
It's about Marco Island, Florida.
It's off the west coast, about fairly close to Fort Myers and Naples.
Her jitters showed in the trembling of her upper lip.
Her bad nerves said Olga Smith.
But the Florida grandmother was intent Saturday on harvesting the times.
I'm sorry, harvesting the limes off a friend's tree before Hurricane Wilma could roar in and ruin them.
What is this?
A rich person picking her own limes?
She's giving the rich a bad name.
Heck with the rest of this story.
What's this story?
Oh, yes.
I mentioned this one.
Well, how can she do that?
Rich people don't pick their own limes.
L.A. Times is just misrepresenting everything.
No, it's not that don't.
I've just been, don't they have illegals?
No.
You just don't go pick your own lime.
I mean, maybe you do a couple of them to make some lime aid.
You know, have the staff make lime aid in the afternoon.
You go pick.
Jen and Tony said, no, and you go out and you pick it just for some exercise.
But you don't go out and pick limes before the hurricane hits.
You know, the rich just can't get a fair shake in the media no matter what.
They're either picking limes before a hurricane comes or the hurricane never hits them.
What's this?
Enemy body counts revival.
Oh, yeah, I told you about this one earlier today.
This Washington Post press upset here because we're giving enemy body counts to eager to demonstrate success in Iraq.
The U.S. military has abandoned its previous refusal to publicize enemy body counts and now cites such numbers periodically to show the impact of some counterinsurgency operations.
Really, that's what we're counterinsurgency.
We are at war with terrorists.
Now we're counterinsurgents.
During the Vietnam War, enemy body counts became a regular feature in military statements intended to demonstrate progress.
But the statistics ended up proving poor indicators of the war's course.
Pressure on U.S. units to produce high death tolls led to inflated tallies, which tore at Pentagon credibility, thanks to Walter Grunkite.
Conrad Crane, director of the Military History Institute at the U.S. Army War College, said in Vietnam we were pursuing a strategy of attrition, so body counts became the measure of performance for military units.
But the numbers got so wrapped up with career aspirations, they were sometimes falsified.
That's not why this is going on.
The reason this is going on is because the mainstream press is holding a party as we get close to 2,000.
It's like a countdown to some sort of shuttle launch.
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
2,000 dead in a rocket.
Let's have a party.
Bush sucks.
Where's Cindy Sheehan?
Well, let's see.
Do we have...
Yeah, Bernie in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania.
It's great to have you with us and welcome to the program.
Hi, Rosh.
How are you?
Fine, sir.
Thank you.
I wanted to ask you a question.
I saw on CNN the estimate is already $2 billion on this new flood or the new hurricane.
Yeah.
And I was wondering what your opinion is of who should pay for this.
I heard you last week saying that, you know, they should take responsibility themselves.
And I was wondering if you had an opinion on, you know, this devastating loss of whichever state it is.
I was just wondering what your feeling was.
Bernie, I want to answer this honestly, but I first have to know something honestly from you.
Is this a trick question?
A trick question?
No.
No, okay.
I mean, are you, you know, you heard me say, because you heard me say last week that what I was doing was quoting Max Mayfield, and he was talking about the preserving of your life.
Max Mayfield was talking about saving your life.
He said it's ultimately up to the individual to take responsibility for his actions when we tell you plenty ahead of time what's coming your way.
And that was his point.
He wasn't talking about damage or any of that.
So if you want to talk about damage, I'll talk to you about damage.
It's $2 billion is what it's been estimated to be.
That's what I'd like to know, what your opinion is.
Who should pay for this?
Well, is there some controversy about this?
Well, evidently, everybody's saying that the individuals should take care of themselves.
And I was just wondering, should the taxpayer pay for this?
Or I don't see how the local or state or the individuals can handle it.
It has to come from some other source.
Well, it depends on what damage that you're talking about.
I can only address this personally, but again, I want to remind you, Max Mayfield was not talking about paying for damage.
I wish he would have been.
Max Mayfield was talking about getting the hell out and saving your life.
It was a direct message.
Don't be like New Orleans and wait around for somebody to not come get you.
It's up to every individual to take responsible action himself, pure and simple.
Now, when it comes to damage, there's insurance, and it will cover as much as possible.
Some people have insurance, some people don't.
Some people choose, like, I bought hurricane insurance for the first time this year myself, only because in previous years, the deductible was $2 million.
Well, they didn't want to sell it.
Obviously, they didn't want to sell it.
I didn't buy it.
Self-insure it.
The premium came down to something a little bit more reasonable, so I bought it, but I don't think I'm going to use it because I didn't have any damage, but landscape from what I know now.
Now, it may be that we got some water in there and I won't know it for three weeks until the wood floors start buckling.
If that happens, you know what, I'll just call the people in and come in and fix it.
Now, I know not everybody's fortunate enough to be in that circumstance or that situation.
And for this, we rely on FEMA.
All I know is that people had some big damage in Vero Beach last year, about 13 months ago, and they're still waiting for some of the promised aid.
So it is a challenge.
It is a problem.
With as much hurricane damage as there's been this year, with all the other spending got going on, it is a problem for a lot of people.
And it's a very big source of concern.
Quick time out.
We'll be right back.
I was just asked if my floors do buckle with water damage and I have to move out, would I accept a FEMA trailer as temporary housing?
No.
I just buy a temporary house and live there until the current one got fixed.
▲
Export Selection