Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I can't get over this notion I'm still in the twilight zone.
I did something this morning I really very seldom do anymore because it's so unnecessary and worthless and pointless.
But I actually watched a little television news today.
And anyway, I'll tell you about it here in a minute.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
We're great to be with you.
Great to have you with us.
It's a delight, a sheer pleasure and honor.
The EIB network rolling on another three hours today.
Great to have you with us.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
One of the things I always noted about the press, and the reason why for so many years I have been referring to the press as willing accomplices of the Democratic Party, is over the years, the Democrats could allege anything.
It could be specious.
It could be false.
It could be true.
It could be pointless.
It could be a myth.
And it doesn't matter what it was, the media would carry that charge as though it had validity.
And that's what's happening now.
I watched as Dingy Harry and what's his name, Senator Turbin, came out trying to still make sure that they don't lose what they think is the old mo momentum here.
They really do.
They're living in such an illusion.
They think they've turned the momentum here to their side, that they have the momentum on making sure that the world knows that Bush lied about pre-war intelligence to get us into the war in Iraq.
You know, they shut down the Senate two days ago.
They sent Bush a letter demanding he apologize and Rove apologized and Rove quit and whatever.
Did that yesterday.
And they came out today to try to keep this alive.
And of course, their kook base thinks that the whole country is now on their side in this.
And the dirty little secret is I'm even a little leery of leading off the program with it because most people don't care.
More people, more people are fascinated with the fact that what's her name, Camilla Parker Bowles, are traveling around with 50 dresses than they are in this scooter Libby thing or the CIA leak case.
We've had phone calls from people about it.
That people out in the hinterlands in the heartland, they don't really care about the Democrats, though, think they've shifted the momentum on this.
And I'm watching today the, it was Bill Schneider, old buddy Bill Schneider on CNN.
And they were, this is Libby indictment day or arraignment day.
They tried to portray this as Libby pleading guilty or being found guilty.
They're already talking about jail terms, got stories in the paper about what a tough judge this is when it comes to sentencing.
He's a fair judge in trial, but he's got, he's really tough on sentencing.
They're just salivating over this.
And this whole notion that intelligence was manipulated to get us into Iraq nuked it yesterday, nuked it last week.
There are reports, there are investigations which have already found that there was no manipulation of pre-war intel.
Not only was there no manipulation of pre-war intel, there was no attempt to influence the analysts by administration officials to bias the results in a manner that would favor the administration's desire to go to war.
It's already been done.
There are two investigations have already been done.
The most recent one was the Rob Silberman report, Silberman Rob Report came out March 31st of this year.
Well, you would think that somebody like Bill Schneider would know about the Silberman robb report.
He may not know about it.
But you just don't know.
You would think he would know.
But when these Democrats come on, start talking about this, the Democrat Schneider just carried it forward as though, hey, this is true because the Democrats say it's true.
And he said, there's a big word.
I can sum up the administration's problems in one word, and it's a big word, accountability.
And I'm sitting here, I am in, it's no wonder, it is no wonder that the mainstream press continues to lose reputation, that the mainstream press continues to lose trust factors and all with the American people.
It is just, it's breathtaking to watch this.
So we're going to spend some more time on this today, but I've got a couple of soundbites here from Victoria Tensing, who is on Fox and Friends today.
She's got a great piece in the Wall Street Journal today, and also Clarice Feldman has a piece at one of our favorite blogs, theamericanthinker.com, on the real need here for an investigation of the CIA.
Exactly what I said I would do yesterday.
If I had been the Republicans in the Senate when they tried to stunt the Democrats, what I would have fired back with, all right, you want to do this?
Okay, we're going to hold hearings.
We're going to start hearings on the CIA, and we're going to have hearings on Joe Wilson, and we're going to find out who lied.
Did he lie?
Did his wife lie?
We're going to get to the bottom of what happened with this whole CIA thing.
That's what I would do.
Well, some people are calling for that now, particularly Victoria Tensing.
And I wouldn't be surprised.
Well, I don't know if it'll happen, but sure be nice if it would.
Let me, I got an email from my buddy Vince Flynn today, whose latest book is Consent to Kill, the latest Mitch Rapp novel.
You'd love these books, Dawn.
You'd absolutely love these books.
And he sends me this note.
He says, hey, hey, Rush, a quick thought on media hypocrisy.
Which of these two things will have a bigger negative impact on the national security of our country?
The outing of an undercover CIA operative who had not traveled abroad in years, or the outing of a series of highly secret CIA detention centers, where the most dangerous and high-ranking terrorists are taken to be debriefed in a very thorough manner that may or may not involve torture.
Terrorists who do not don a uniform, do not fight for a sovereign nation, have not signed the Geneva Convention, and who intentionally target women and children.
These detention centers are crucial to our success in the war on terror.
They are a big part of the reason that we have not had a Madrid or London-style train bombing here in the States.
Where are the Democrats demanding to know just who the Washington Post reporter talked to?
Certainly his sources signed national security non-disclosure documents if they were involved in such a sensitive operation.
Where's the demand for the investigation and prosecution of these leakers?
Keep the faith, Vince.
Excellent question.
Really, seriously, what does Pose and the biggest negative impact on national security to our country?
Whatever the hell happened to Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson or the outing of these detention centers in the Washington Post yesterday.
It's a no-brainer.
Oh, breaking news out of Austin, Texas.
Let me see if it's still...
Let me hit the reload button here and see if there's any more on it.
This...
This Ronnie Earle guy, this Ronnie Earle is the biggest glittering jewel of colossal ignorance I have ever seen.
Delay's people and Delay are trying to make the case that this is a political prosecution, right?
And Ronnie yells, oh, no, no, no, we're going after money and politics.
We're trying to keep the country from being divided up into the Sunnis, the Shiites, and the Kurds, which he said in his closing argument yesterday.
Well, the American statesman, the Austin American Statesman on her website, has a little breaking news box.
You know, Delay won his bid to get the Democrat hack judge thrown off the case, the guy that contributed to carryandmoveon.org.
So Ronnie Earle is now challenging the new Republican judge saying he's a new judge saying he's a Republican.
District Attorney Ronnie Earle wants the delay judge Schraub thrown out and a new judge to name a replacement.
So they had an independent retired judge come out, hear the case.
He threw out this bud what's his face.
What's this guy's, I forget his name, the Democrat hack judge down in Travis County, threw him out.
Now Ronnie Earle wants the judge that's been appointed thrown out because he's a Republican.
Now, way to go, Ronnie.
Just make sure everybody knows that what you're really doing is a political persecution here by demanding a Democrat judge of a Republican judge be thrown out.
Oh, Delay has got to be thanking the Lord for his enemies here.
I mean, who better?
If some lame brain's going to make trouble for you and charge you, what better candidate for an absolute absurd idiot could you be?
Could there be, but Ronnie Earle?
Quick timeout, folks.
Sit.
Bob Perkins, that's a Democrat hack judge's name.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us.
I got a little debate going on here amongst ourselves.
Saw this picture of Bill and Hillary at the Rosa Parks funeral yesterday.
And I said, you know, this is the first time I've seen these two together in public.
I started thinking back since when?
2002, when Chelsea graduated.
And then Snerdley said, no, They were together at the unveiling of the portrait in the White House.
I said, well, that was longer ago than you think.
I mean, that was in the first term, 2002, 2003, somewhere around there.
And then Dawn said, well, Reagan funeral.
Okay, so the year and a half ago, the Reagan funeral was in, what was that, May or something, a year and a half ago.
And then Snerdley said, no, no, no, it was the unveiling of the library and double-wide massage parlor at Little Rock when it was raining and Clinton would not hold the umbrella over her.
So I guess that is.
When was the unveiling of the opening of the library and a double-wide massage parlor?
When was that?
Because that probably is the last time that we've seen them pictured together other than at the Rosa Parks funeral.
Something else we're going to get into today because I've got this story here.
GOP warms to tax on oil.
Bush administration clashed with Senate Republicans yesterday over proposals to use oil company profits to beef up heating assistance for low-income households this winter.
Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said the administration opposes a proposal by Charles Grassley, the Senate Finance Committee chairman, urging oil and gas companies to devote a portion of their nearly $100 billion profits in the last quarter to families who need the money to pay heating bills.
Bodman said, no, sir, I wouldn't support it.
It's similar to a tax.
Bodman said the administration would propose an alternative that is expanding offshore drilling and establishing emergency national reserves of gasoline and natural gas, the most prevalent heating fuel, to augment the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
And then, you know, Drudge has a story up that people getting very upset about oil company profits, which is common.
People always do.
But the thing that let me know that I had to talk about this and try to, once again, shed some light and truth on this whole thing.
I went over to a friend's house last night, and this guy is a responsible, multi-businessman, multiple businesses.
He has been in and in his investment banking and all this stuff.
He got talking about the oil companies.
He said, you know, these profits these people are making.
It's really obscene.
And I said, whoa, if it's even getting to this guy, I got to move fast.
Because this guy ought to know as well as anybody that there's no such thing as a windfall profit or an obscene profit.
There really isn't, folks.
They exist on paper, but here's an example.
Alan Reynolds, by the way, has a great piece, a column on Town Hall that gets into great detail about this.
But let me give you an example using something that you might understand, something that you might be able to relate to.
How many of you have been living in a house for quite a while?
And let's just ballpark figures, not even trying to approach reality here.
I'm just trying to make this understandable.
Let's say that 15 years ago, you bought your house for $100,000.
Today, you've kept it up.
Your house is pretty good shape.
It's a nice neighborhood.
Today, you can sell that house for $1 million.
You think, wow, a windfall profit.
You're going to get a windfall profit of $900,000 on the sale of your house.
What if the government decided to tax that?
What if they decided to tax windfall profits on your house?
But here's the problem: you're going to live in a sewer?
You're going to live in a hole after you sell your house?
Nope.
After you sell your house for your million bucks, you've got to go buy something else.
Well, guess what?
You're not going to go buy a brand new house for $100,000.
It's going to take a large part of that million that you just got because houses and everywhere have escalated.
There's such a thing as inventory oil and old oil.
And when you have the windfall profits tax, you know, it's this is so we've I've done so much economics education on this program, and I'm surprised people don't retain more of it.
It's just like baseline budgeting.
I explained that once, and everybody seemed to get it.
Let's talk about wage and price controls, shall we?
Windfall profits tax is just a price control in its own bastardized way.
Let's talk about wage and price controls.
Let's go back to the 1970s.
Richard Nixon, wage and price controls, okay?
We had inflation of what?
Inflation was 3%, 4%.
People were panicking.
Wage and price controls.
Well, what happened was management said, ooh, goody.
And they told all of us employees, the government says we must freeze your wages, and we can't do anything about it.
And for as long as that's the case, there'll be no raises.
And they smile as you walk out of the office.
And you think, well, okay, no big deal because prices are frozen too.
Until you went to the grocery store.
And then you saw a bunch of things that were more expensive than the last time you went.
And you said, well, they're violating the price control.
How do they do that?
Very simple.
Let's use beef as an example.
Let's use the butcher counter as an example.
In the average American supermarket butcher counter, you have your filet, you have your, well, I don't know what you have, you have ribeye, you have flank, you have chopped steak, all this.
Okay, so all of those specific cuts of beef, the price controls were on.
All a butcher had to do is come up with a brand new cut of beef that had not been categorized.
Call it flank steak prime or chop steak supreme.
And he could charge you whatever he wanted for it.
And therefore, the price control was meaningless.
And any number of businesses found ways around it.
Windfall profits tax.
Okay, we're going to put a windfall profits tax on an oil company.
Yeah, because those SOPs, they are raping us and they are taking the price up.
And they know when we're weak and they got to do it and they can take the price up.
If that's the case, folks, if the oil companies are manipulating the price of gasoline, how come the price of oil was 12 bucks 10 years ago?
How come it was 15 bucks 10 years ago?
And how come the price of gasoline is coming down now?
If they can choose the gas price to be whatever they want, why the hell bring it down?
Well, because they're responding to public pressure.
Why do they have to care about that?
Why have to care about public pressure?
Where else are you going to go get it?
You can't get on a plane and go to Britain and buy it any cheaper.
Well, Rush, it's just part of the game, you know, to make us think that there's market forces involved.
No, no, if they're greedy SOBs, folks, and if all they do care about squeezing us just to death, then why ever lower the price?
Once they got gas up to six bucks, why lower it?
Well, because people go elsewhere and buy.
Why?
Where else could you go if they're controlling it?
Well, the oil companies don't control all gas stations, Rush, only their own.
Okay, so the oil company, what the oil companies would do then is raise their price because they can.
And then the other stations they don't know, what would they do?
They would lower their prices, and guess what would happen?
Everybody would go there, and pretty soon there'd be a shortage, and prices would have to come back up, and the oil companies owned the stations.
They welcome back.
We didn't cut our prices.
We're still here at $5 a gallon.
Screwed you.
There is this conspiracy theory around big oil that there's somebody around that sets the price of gasoline based on what they think they can get away with.
Now, the windfall profits tax.
Let me just get into this because if we put this windfall profits tax on, it isn't going to work.
Here's how the oil companies would get around it.
We import most of our oil, right?
The windfall profits tax will occur, basically, as this is written, on only certain types of oil and transactions.
So all you got to do to avoid it is get your crude from a different source where the windfall profits tax doesn't apply.
And that's what'll happen.
All they got to do is drop their domestic consumption and refining of domestic oil, domestic crude by 1.5% or 2%, and replace it with oil that's not subject to the windfall profits tax.
And they beat it.
Happens every time that this is tried.
Have you ever known the oil companies to be put out of business despite every government politician's effort to try?
We've really tried to punish these people, folks.
We have really, I mean, we tell them where they can drill and where they can't drill.
We tell them what kind of ships they can put their oil on and what kind of ships they can't.
We give them the sea routes that they can travel.
We give them how many formulations of gasoline that they have to refine.
We've made it really tough on these people to do business, and yet they're still there making obscene profits.
Obscene profit.
Yo, these horrible obscene profits.
And everybody thinks that this is because they can, that they are immune to market forces and so forth.
And I'll just share here with you Alan Murray's column on this.
He's a writer at the Wall Street Journal or has been.
I don't know.
He's got a television show, some business TV show.
But he has a pretty interesting piece here.
Now, even people who normally, this is what I don't understand.
I've been here.
I'm into my 18th year now.
I've had bang up programs the past two weeks destroying all these attempted lives with the Democrats.
And you put your faith and trust in me.
Now, all of a sudden, I come along and tell you the truth about oil prices and gasoline prices.
And you think I'm in somebody's back pocket.
You think I have already been compromised.
You think yesterday, nobody with more integrity than me.
Today, I'm just a stooge for the oil company.
Well, it doesn't matter, folks.
I kind of stick with what I always know to be the case.
Back in just a second.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
I'm going to try.
Try to make the complex understandable.
And we will have the DittoCam on the program today.
First off, listen to this story.
The uniform of a San Francisco police officer caught fire after a Molotov cocktail was hurled nearby as an anti-Bush protest Wednesday afternoon in downtown San Francisco.
A large crowd made its way from the Civic Center down Market Street, blocking traffic during the afternoon commute.
In fact, Reuters reports the story, but doesn't mention the Molotov cocktail.
This is a peace story.
Reuters, thousands of protesters, staged rallies Wednesday across the U.S. in San Francisco.
But it doesn't mention the Molotov cocktails, Molotov cocktail that was thrown in San Francisco.
But my point is this.
You have a Molotov cocktail flying at an Abby Bush rally in downtown San Francisco.
These are the constituents of Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, and Diane Feinstein, and they say we are out of the mainstream.
They say we are out of the mainstream, and it is their constituents that are making absolute fools of themselves as an aging, decrepit, anti-war movement that has lost its muscle.
If there were a genuine and real anti-war movement in this country, there would be millions, and they would be burning buildings, and they would throw more than one Molotov cocktail.
They'd be burning the American flag.
Where are you people from my era in the 60s?
Now, that was an anti-war movement.
These people were killing people.
They were bashing people on the head.
They were setting cars on fire.
They were setting bank buildings on fire.
Now, that was a real anti-war movement.
You people today are a bunch of pansies.
You can't even gather more than a thousand people in an anti-war citadel like San Francisco.
And they think the momentum has shifted in their favor.
Stay with San Francisco, the U.S. Ninth Circus Court of Appeals.
They dismissed a lawsuit by elementary school parents who were outraged that the Palmdale Schruel District had surveyed students about sex.
Now, Palmdale is down in Southern California.
It's where the B-2 bomber was built, by the way, and maybe still is.
While the survey has asked students how often they thought about sex, among other questions, the Ninth Circus said that parents of public school children have, quote, no fundamental right to be the exclusive provider of sexual information to their children.
The parents maintained that they had the sole right to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex.
Now, you tell me we don't need judicial reform in this country when the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals gets, you tell me, all you pro-choicers out there, government, stay out of our bedroom, government, stay out of our private lives, government, stay out of these choice.
Government can clearly educate your child on sex now, and you, as parent, do not hold that exclusive right, according to the U.S. Ninth Circus Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
Yes, yes, it's just hilarious out there, folks.
Sometimes you just, all you can do is sit back and laugh.
Would this go to the U.S. Supreme Court?
I don't know, but if it does, it'll probably end up being one of the many such cases that eventually get overturned, overruled, the Ninth Circus, the most reversed circuit court of appeals in the country.
Bob in Port Jefferson, New York.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Hey, Ditto's Rush.
Thank you, sir.
This is Bob Whaley over in Port Jefferson.
I'm really upset about this stealth tax that Bush is coming up with.
The what tax?
The what tax?
I think it's a stealth tax.
You mean these new tax recommendations?
Yeah.
I mean, I'm in the business.
I'm an insurance professional and registered representative for the last 20 years, and I sit down with people from all walks of life, from businesses to you name it.
But anyway.
What upsets you most about this?
What upsets me most about this is they're going to do away with the tax deductibility of my property taxes, number one.
And I live on Long Island.
This is, you know, tax me up to Yin Yang, USA to begin with.
And then they're going to cut down the percentage that I could write off my mortgage.
That's going to kill a lot of people on Long Island and New York State.
I mean, we're taxed to the hills.
I was so upset I called the White House this morning and I got their Info line, so to speak, and I let them know what I feel.
But who knows?
Since everybody is into conspiracy theories today, I'll say this.
I think this plan is designed to affect people just like you, so you'll leave Long Island and leave New York and move to no-tax states and become Republicans.
I am a Republican.
Okay, then you leave New York where your vote doesn't count.
You go to Florida where it will count.
It's a bush rope of dope.
Yeah, food for Thorn.
Now, I was suspicious because it was the local news.
Well, let me be serious with this.
If you don't mind telling me, and I don't know everything there is to know about this proposal, but that's all it is.
I did read something about it last week, and I alluded to this on the program that they were looking at eliminating or really cutting the deduction you get for your home mortgage interest and property taxes.
Could you tell me what tax bracket you're in?
I'm over 28%.
You're over 28%.
Well, okay, so you're either at 33 or 36, one of the two.
Now, the plan is for 80% of U.S. taxpayers or 75% of U.S. taxpayers to pay no more than a 15% tax rate on their earned income.
Capital gains would be even tax that they gave even less, and that rate's been going down recently, too.
The trade-off is that, okay, we've got to say goodbye to some deductions.
If we're going to lower everybody to 15%, we've got to say goodbye to some deductions.
And one of the big deductions would be property tax.
State and local tax might also be a go-by-the-wayside and some of the mortgage interest deduction.
Now, that doesn't seem like a fair trade-off to you.
You know what?
I mean, once you get a program that's on the books, it's very hard for them to go back and say, oh, you know, we're going to take this away and we're going to give you that.
I'm very used to them just taking stuff away.
Now we're going to get rid of this, just like the government program.
This happened in 1986.
We had tax reform 1986, which actually led to the SNL crisis because you had certain tax laws that people had ordered their lives around, both businesses and individuals.
All of a sudden, we got rid of the five tax brackets and basically got down to two, 28 and 15%.
But for some people, there was a bubble, and they ended up paying 31% on the last dollars they earned.
In exchange for getting the rates down from 50 to 28%, it was buy-buy certain real estate deductions.
And that's what sent the SNLs over the edge.
And people were saying, how can you do this?
I mean, we've ordered our lives according to the tax code, and then, bam, one day it's just over.
Well, you've been demanding tax simplification.
And this is the conundrum or the dilemma is everybody's demanding tax simplification.
And so, okay, here we're trying to do it again, responding to it again, and come up with a 15% rate for 75, 80% of the people, and just pay 15%, and then no deductions.
And I'm going to tell you something, folks.
Anytime there has been a discussion of a flat tax, 15, 18%, the vast majority of these flat tax proposals have done the same thing.
They have gotten rid of some of these deductions.
When you start factoring in deductions, there's when you complicate the tax code.
And the whole point has been to simplify it.
And it's one of these things, be careful what you ask for because you may get it.
One of the things that happened in the 86 tax reform was credit card interest was no longer deductible.
I remember, I will never forget, we had a call on this program from some poor woman in Chicago.
Kept her on the phone for 45 minutes trying to explain to her that going out and spending a lot of money on her credit cards just to be able to deduct the interest was costing her money, costing her more money than if she didn't spend money on the credit cards.
But she was one of these people that thought she wanted to be like the big guys.
And everybody thinks that there are more powerful, wealthy people playing all kinds of games of the tax code that you don't get to play.
And I'm here to tell you folks, it ain't the case.
It is not the case.
So one of the things that people do is they think they can, well, I need deductions, man.
I need write-offs, write-offs.
They hear the big guys talking about write-offs.
So they go out and use their credit cards and they would pay the minimum payment just to keep that interest that they were paying high so they could deduct it.
Because they thought they equated deductions with screwing the government, deductions with lowering their taxes.
And if you ever got around to looking at how much you were spending on that interest and you weren't being able to deduct all of it anyway, if you got it looked at this, you find out you were spending far more keeping your interest payments up so you could deduct them than if you didn't spend a whole lot of money on the credit cards and just paid your taxes at a lesser rate.
But it was just tough for people to understand.
It's sort of like it's the same argument that I make when people plan their income taxes so they get a big refund every first of the year when they write their tax, send in their tax form.
I've known people all my life that they get a refund of whatever $1,200, $1,500, sometimes $4,000.
I know single people who have had money withheld as though they were married with 20,000 kids or whatever the max is.
And then every April or whatever, they'd get their huge refunding.
Ha ha, look at my check here, man.
Did I screw the government or what?
You didn't screw the guy screwing you.
They kept all of your money that you had earned.
They're not paying you any interest on it.
Yeah, but I got this big lump, man.
I'll never have four grand in my life.
I'll never have $1,200 in my life, but I've got it.
Well, if you just save it, you would have it.
If you're letting the government take it away from you, you obviously don't need it.
No, no, man, I do need it.
I'm waiting for that big refund.
It's when I go out and buy my new washer and dryer TV.
Okay, fine.
So you want to orient your life that way.
That's fine.
Now, but then at the same time, people complain and moan, it's just too complicated.
We need to simplify the tax code.
It's outrageous.
So they come up with a simplification plan.
Simplification plans always include eliminating some deductions and people.
Wait a minute.
I need my home mortgage interest today.
I need my property tax deduction.
You can't.
Well, we're giving you 15% rate.
It's going to be real simple.
Just pay 15% and that's it.
No, man, I need my deduction.
So this is why this stuff never ends up happening.
And I'll tell you what my fear is.
My fear is none of this stuff.
My fear is that I don't believe tax reform will ever be permanent.
If, and this sort of happened in the 86 reform, and it'll happen again unless there's a total revamp of the system.
They totally throw this out and start anew with a new one, which is not going to happen.
It ought to, but it won't.
Once they lower the rate to 15% and they do get rid of these deductions, what's to stop them next year from saying, you know what?
Treasury is a little light this year.
We need more tax revenue.
We can't raise the rates because the well, yeah, we can because we've gotten rid of those deductions.
We'll just raise the rates.
We'll say we need to rate that 15%, 18%.
And then the rate starts creeping back up, just like Bill Clinton did.
Slick Willie did it in 1993, took office.
The 15 and 28% tax rate, guess what?
Came 39, 35, whatever.
And the deductions were gone.
They didn't put the deductions back in.
So this stuff is a slippery slope, folks.
It's one of these things, be careful of what you ask for.
And it's just like every other bill in Washington, just because it's law this year doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.
And that they can't change it next year.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
I am not avoiding the countless numbers of you on the phones that want to disagree with me about oil company profits.
And we'll get to you soon.
Before I take your calls, though, I want to read Alan Murray's piece at townhall.com.
And I'll do that in the monologue segment the next hour.
In the meantime, let me grab Todd here in Detroit.
Next up, you are, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Mega self-employed diddles from Detroit Rush.
Thank you, sir.
I was wondering, we had wall-to-wall coverage of the Rosa Parks Memorial yesterday, and I was wondering if you were able to hear of Clinton's whopper about moving to the bottom.
I got it here.
Yes, I've got it.
You got to love this guy.
By the way, that thing went on seven hours, right?
It was unbelievable, nonstop, not even a commercial break.
Seven hours.
Well, forget, I mean, I'm not talking about just the radio coverage in Detroit, but I mean, just the funeral itself.
JFK didn't get that.
Well, I'll tell you, I actually heard the hearse ran out of gas because it took so long.
Well, what?
The hearse, how could the hearse run out of gas?
I guess they left it running.
This is what they say.
But, you know, it was just the whole thing.
I think that's probably a story to illustrate just how long it is that the hearse was left running outside.
It ran out of gas in idle.
Here's what he's talking about.
This is Bill Clinton speaking at the Rosa Parks funeral yesterday as part of Clinton's eulogy.
I remember as if it were yesterday, that fateful day, 50 years ago.
I was a nine-year-old southern white boy who rode a segregated bus every single day of my life.
Oh, yeah.
I sat in the front.
Black folks sat in the back.
When Rosa showed us that black folks didn't have to sit in the back anymore, two of my friends and I, who strongly approved of what she had done, decided we didn't have to sit in the front anymore.
Please still my beating heart.
No, no, no.
This is, folks, the pathological lying on the left, it just keeps growing.
I'll never forget Clinton's story about he saw all these black churches burn when he was a kid growing up.
I vowed I'd never set a church on fire because I saw so many of the churches burn.
And they went back and they talked to people in Arkansas at the time Clinton would have been a young boy.
There weren't any church burnings in Arkansas.
He could not have seen one.
He could not have seen it.
Now, I'm nine years old, and Bill Clinton had the presence of mind to go to the back of the bus with two of his buddies as a show of solidarity with Rosa Parks.
As though a nine-year-old is even paying attention to such things at the time.
But this is Bill Clinton, and this audience lapped it up.
They fell for it, every word of it.
They want it to be true, so it is true.
There you have it, the nation's first black president.
Meanwhile, Clarence Thomas, according to the Milwaukee Urinal Sentinel yesterday, deserves an asterisk because he's not really black.
He's an African American, but he doesn't represent what real African Americans think.
So he doesn't deserve to be called black, but Bill Clinton does.
Who?
Who?
You think, Sterling, what are you losing your mind?
He just asked me if I think Clinton was joking or if he was.
He wasn't joking at a funeral like this.
You think this guy go tell a joke like they don't, those audience members were not laughing, they were applauding, they ate it up, they bought every word of it from the guy who said, I never had sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky, not a single time, not ever, and I never asked anybody to lie, not a single time, not ever.
I mean, a joke?
You think he's telling you're going soft here in your post-Clinton.
I'm he's there's there's no, oh, come on, he is not joking.
This is this is not an attempt to be funny.
He's not telling a little white lie that everybody knows is a little white lie.
He's telling a lie that he wants everybody to believe.
It's not a joke.
I can't believe you're asking me this.
Seven hours of the Rosa Parks funeral yesterday.
I doubt that anyone actually watched or listened to the whole thing.
And I'm told that something happened that you may not know about during the funeral yesterday.
We have tape of that.
I didn't see it, but I have a pretty good authority.
We'll let you hear what it is at the next segment.