All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 21, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
December 21, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I only need three switches to turn on one microphone.
It's called redundancy.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
Thank you, Brian.
It is the EIB Network, the award-winning thrill packed, ever exciting.
Increasingly popular growing by leaps and bounds, Rush Limbaugh program, the program that changed the face of American media.
Happy to be with you.
Our telephone number 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
You know, sometimes, frequently actually during all these breaks, I go to the email.
I check things out, and I go to all the various accounts from which I receive mail and the uh rush at EIBNet.com is where to kooks send me mail.
Uh you know, well, I get eight, 10,000 shots a day in the 24-hour period in this account.
And and uh I you know sometimes I just subject, you know, peruse the subject line.
And um this one caught my attention, so I thought I'd read it.
The subject line is 9-11 explanation is a lie, lie lie.
I said, oh, okay.
So um here's the note.
Uh to me, everybody in a country except you know and understands a Bush official explanation of 9-11 is a cover-up in a lie.
The truth is being told, and the people are starting to wake up and realize that Bush and his minions are pushing the big lie.
When they can no longer cover their rear ends with lies, they will be held accountable for their crimes against the people of this country.
Goes on to give me two links here to show that Bush blew up the World Trade Center.
So I wrote the guy back.
Hang on and don't leave.
We are sending the men in the white coats over to retrieve you and help you now.
They'll arrive in the little yellow bus.
P.S. We know where you are because of legal tapping of your email accounts.
Be patient.
All will be well soon.
We only want to help you.
I'll tell you.
This this clown probably used to be a normal red-blooded, common, ordinary, every, and I don't mean anything negative by that, common, ordinary, everyday American citizens.
And his mind has been polluted with some of this propaganda from his left-wing buddies, and now it's it's that that's where they're headed, folks.
Uh that's where they're headed.
If they ever did get these impeachment hearings, by the way, let's talk about that.
If they ever got hearings on this NSA bit, can you imagine what that would be?
I don't believe they ever really want hearings.
I don't think that's what this is about.
They would not be able to withstand any hearings.
The facts would come out and bury them.
They'd be buried by the facts.
You call Bill Clinton up there, you call Jimmy Carter up there, you call their attorney generals.
It's over.
Call this guy Schmidt that wrote the piece of Chicago Tribune today, call Richard Pott.
It's over.
I mean, it it it's it's it's amazing.
There literally, folks, news is being censored in order to facilitate propaganda.
Let's step back for just a second, shall we?
We know that George W. Bush is an honorable and decent and law-abiding man.
But his enemies in the Democratic Party in the media, and a f a few fools who uh claim to be Republicans, nevertheless argue with a straight face that he has authorized unconstitutional eavesdropping on U.S. citizens.
And these are the same Doomkoffs, the same idiots, who insist that our troops systematically torture detainees.
Just to step back to take away all of the minutia and all the propaganda and just strip it bare.
And what do you have?
You have these people who want to defend terrorists, grant them constitutional rights, who want to invest in our defeat in Iraq, claim that Bush, and they argue this with a straight face that he's authorized unconstitutional eavesdropping on U.S. citizens.
The main reason it isn't going to work is because it is not believable.
They would have to pound this for a considerable time without any opposition, and they would have to successfully come up with examples of this, and they can't.
They would have to successfully come up with a number of examples to incite legitimate fear, but there aren't any.
They've taken leave of their senses in their reality.
Just stop and think what they're arguing here.
They are argued that our troops torture, and because of that, we need to confer legal constitutional rights on Al-Qaeda terrorists.
Law enforcement breaks the law, so they can't be trusted to follow the Patriot Act.
So we got to gut the Patriot Act, because we can't trust law enforcement.
We can't trust the feds.
We can't trust Bush.
We can't trust Chady.
We can't trust Gonzalez.
We can't trust Rice.
We can't trust Rumsfeld.
They all stink and have to go.
So we got to gut the Patriot Act.
And the president wants to spy on innocent U.S. citizens, so we need to impeach him.
What is the purpose of spying on somebody who's innocent?
What are you going to get?
What's it worth to you?
Why would George Bush care what innocent people in all this are doing on a day-to-day basis?
These are the same people who want no restrictions on any kind of illegal immigration into this country because they want those people to vote for them.
We know we used to ask what ideas the liberal Republicans and Democrats proposed for winning the war on terrorism, knowing they had none.
What are you for?
What's your plan?
What are you going to do if you ever get power back?
That's not the question anymore.
Now the question is, how can we stop them from undermining critical aspects of the war?
Because it's they don't care to win it.
They're invested in defeat.
The major concern is stopping this people from sabotaging our ability to wage war on this enemy because that's what the media and that's what the Democratic Party and the far left of this country has become saboteurs.
You call them traitors if you want.
You can use the word treason.
Go ahead.
They are sabotaging the effort that is underway.
And they're doing it with some of the most ridiculous, baseless claims that will not bear up under any kind of scrutiny whatsoever, which is why I maintain they don't really want the scrutiny they're demanding.
They don't want hearings.
That would kill them.
That would blow up in their face.
Unless every member of the commission doing the hearing was a Richard Benvanista or a Jamie Corellick.
If they could arrange that, but they won't be able to arrange that.
It's not going to happen.
There's another New York Times story out today.
The third installment in this scam.
And you know what the main point of this story is?
Some domestic telephone calls were accidentally intercepted.
And the story makes it plain and clear as day that the calls were accidentally intercepted, and that nothing was done with the information, and they found out they were accidentally intercepted, and they took steps to see to it that it didn't happen.
May I brief you on some reality.
People in this country are accidentally imprisoned for years, even after due process.
If you listen to the Reverend Jackson and that coterie of celebs that went out to the Tukey Williams funeral.
Tookie Williams, right?
Yeah.
The founder of the Crips ended up doing the Crypt Walk.
In the crypt now, from the Crips to the Crypt.
Anyway, all these celebrities out there, wrongly imprisoned, they will say.
Shouldn't have been there, didn't do it, maintained it till the end.
People are accidentally imprisoned for years even after due process.
And let me introduce the New York Times and his bogus story today to something called echelon.
This happens all the time.
Echelon intercepts everything out there, searching for keywords, looking for anything that the computer might spit out through a human being to say, oop, you might be interested in this.
It happens every day, yet they run a story here that's accidentally intercepted some domestic phone calls.
And by the way, the echelon program first reported during the Clinton administration.
It is becoming overwhelmingly clear, without even a shred of doubt that this program is legal, the NSA program that Bush is utilizing, legal, and it's important.
All the opponents can do here is yell that the law was broken and that the FISA court regulations weren't followed.
But if you if you take take a look now, more and more every day, virtually every intellectually honest legal scholar is coming to a contrary conclusion.
From former Clinton administration types to former Reagan administration types.
Haven't heard from former Carter people yet.
Um still slaying rabbits out there under rivers, probably.
All they do, all they do is yell that we didn't get a warrant.
You didn't go to the Feindsick coin.
You can't do it illegal.
They're relying on their argument to have the one thing that they think will permeate the confusion out there, and that is simplicity.
And simplicity is the characteristic that most bold-faced lies have.
They're so simple, they're easy to believe.
Bush spied.
Bush secretly obtaining information on innocent Americans on purpose to cover up his lies for Iraq.
The real question to me remains this.
I want to know who leaked this classified information in the first place.
I don't care about Valerie Plane posing in her pajamas in her living room with her bedraggled husband looking like he's faking tear.
I don't care.
That's not a leak that damaged anything or anybody.
We've got an investigation open now with Pat Fitzgerald, and I'll tell you some of these leaks that have shown up in the New York Times and the Washington Post lately, throw them in the hopper, because I want to know who leaked this classified information.
I want to know who's sabotaging our effort to wage war on this enemy.
The media don't care about this, but we do.
The media censoring news, actually censoring news in order to publish propaganda.
They are ignoring all these past presidential executive orders that you can read on Drudge.
Drudge has in their PDF files if you want to look at them, go well, they're not PDF files on it, but you can they're they're essentially copies of the exact actual executive orders.
Go look from Bill Clinton and from Jimmy Carter.
They're right there.
Go look at this column from Mr. Schmidt today in the Chicago Tribune.
Ignoring all that, censoring them, censoring all of that to get quotes from ignorant politicians who they know will call for Bush's head, and ACL lawyers and garelic who will say this is horrible, this is terrible, this is unprecedented.
Somebody's, I was up late last night working on today's program because all this stuff was coming in last night as the as the uh morning papers today went to the website publishing early, and I'm I'm assembling all this and amassing my thoughts on it.
I get an email, apparently John Jonathan Turley's on nightline calling for Bush's impeachment.
So why are they going to get Turley?
Because they know what he's gonna say when he gets there.
They know what Turley's gonna say.
They want some legal authority to go out and say, and since Turley was good during the impeachment, they think Turley will have credibility across the board.
They want to impeach Bush, turly go out and say, yep, this is impeachable defense.
Bamboa, he's there.
I'm also curious about something else.
Jay Rockefeller, in that famous letter that he released, a secret letter, handwritten letter, wrote to himself so troubled he was by this policy, released a letter in which he complains about this NSA program uh about which he had been briefed.
He said that the letter dated July 17th of 03 had been sealed and secured in the offices of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
So he goes to great lengths concealing his views.
Because to voice them might reveal classified information.
So he can't publicly release his views.
He handwrites the letter and puts it a vault.
In that letter, he expresses frustration that he can't even consult with his staff or counsel, and he can't draw on independent legal or technical expertise.
Complains that because of the severe restrictions, and he's on the intelligence committee, he can't even talk to anybody about it.
And Diane Feinstein goes on television and says she hasn't discussed the matter with Rockefeller because he's not on the Senate, she's not on the Intelligence Committee, and that's not right.
Every member of Congress ought to be able to be briefed on this program, and she can't hear about it from him because he can't talk about it.
Okay, fine so far.
I think this is all a pile of you know excrement, but fine so far.
But he went to such efforts to conceal his views.
If he did.
Now, all this is he this is a planned little scenario.
Rockefeller writes the handwritten letter, puts it a vault, then Feinstein goes out and complains, I wish I could have seen it.
He can't tell me about it.
They create the impression that this is deathly secret, Rockefeller is excellent at keeping secrets.
Rockefeller doesn't leak anything anything to a fellow Democrats, right?
Well, if that's true, if he went to all these great lengths to keep this such secret, and even if a fellow Senator Daify insists that she can't discuss it with him.
Then from where might the New York Times have reported the following little tidbit in its original story.
Quote, according to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Wait a minute.
If he can't tell anybody about this, if he can't even tell Dify, if he can't tell staff, if he can't tell Senate lawyers.
Then how?
In the name of God did the New York Times find out about his letter.
Hmm.
I can't imagine this trail would be difficult for leak investigators to follow.
Who knew that Rockefeller had reservations?
He wasn't telling anybody.
Maybe Rockefeller was a leaker.
Something doesn't jibe here, folks, but we know that he started this whole scenario with his little memo back in 2002 about how to execute this whole plan.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
You know, folks, uh you never know what you're gonna get when you start wiretapping phones of innocent American citizens.
I was just made aware of this.
We received this uh over the transom this morning.
The following National Security Agency Wiretap was recorded on 72705 at 1 a.m. from a hotel in Bang Pan, Thailand.
Hello.
I am Siberian Taiga.
Yeah, I see your picture here on the web.
So you're a Russian.
Yes.
But are you over 18?
Yes.
Well, where can we meet?
Because I please into your credit card number now for more time with our swimsuit model.
Oh no.
Uh it's around here somewhere.
Uh oh, it's over there.
My pants.
I'll have to call you back.
Never know what you're gonna find with an illegal wiretap, ladies and gentlemen.
Just in a sample international call, picked up by who knows, Echelon, the National Security Agency.
To the phones to Boise, Idaho.
Hi, Kevin.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hey, how are you doing, Rush?
Good, sir.
Thanks very much for calling.
Hey, really appreciate you take my call.
Can you hear me okay?
Yeah, here you just find wire.
You in a barrel or something?
No, I'm talking on a Bluetooth headset, and it's a little bit quieter than I'm used to.
And so, hey, I really appreciate call.
I'm a listen to you a lot, Megadiddos, by the way, and first time calling your show or any show for that matter.
And you know, I really depend on your show and other shows for for a balance in the news.
I'm a small business owner here in Boise, Idaho, and I heard about um Senator Craig uh, you know, voting against the Patriot Act here from your show, and so I started doing a little bit of research that that caught me, and I've just been reading the Patriot Act a little bit online.
It's so hard to, you know, go through that there's so much of it, and um I was uh going on Senator Krepp's website to look at that, and this is the one concerning question that I have for you that I've been kind of tossing around in my mind, which is you know, the Patriot Act seems to give a lot of power to the government, and I trust Bush.
I I voted for Bush, I really like him, I like all that he's done.
Um it's just my major concern is is what if that power was to be for a long period of time, or if they vote on it and then all of a sudden it gets into the hands of somebody who's in the office that you don't trust.
I mean, especially with you hearing about your medical records, uh that is the major thing I think that concerns me, and maybe a lot of people out there is just uh, you know, the Patriot Act seems to be able to do that.
Let me I can explain this very easily.
I I appreciate the concern.
What you're what he's asking is, okay, Bush, honorable guy, but what happens when Bush leaves office, and let's say the next president's Hillary.
And what about the Patriot Act?
Don't to worry.
The Democrats will kill it and keep spying.
She had the 500 FBI files.
This is their normal option.
They will kill the program and tell you they're getting rid of this horrible Bush plan, it's way overdue to get rid of it.
Horrible, and then it'll just keep doing what the Patriot Act allowed him to do while nobody's aware of it.
Pure and simple.
Now, as for Larry Craig, Larry Craig is one of the four Republicans that did vote with the Democrats on the filibuster of the Patriot Act uh reauthorization vote, and he has called this program, his office did, and asked to appear on this program to explain his position.
And we s gladly, uh if we're misrepresenting what his vote's about or what want to be uh told so, so he will be uh guest here for ten minutes or so at the top of the next hour.
Uh Larry Craig will be joining us to explain his vote on the uh on the Patriot Act.
Uh as uh not Mr. Snurdy, do you think that call was a you think a seminar caller?
Yeah, yeah, I think I I I I think I think that's a seminar caller.
I might have even been somebody from Larry Craig's office.
I I I I don't I'm not gonna speculate on that.
But um uh I know it was just it was just too clean, you know.
All the right talking points, just a rope and loop in an unsuspecting host.
Uh but uh I think the answer is one they weren't expecting.
The Clintons will just keep this program up while they've canceled it.
And we'll be more unsuspecting than ever.
See you in a minute here, folks.
That's what we do here, folks.
I, as your host for life, have more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Now look at this headline.
This is from the uh the Newark, New Jersey Star Ledger.
Random steroid testing aimed at high school athletes in state tournaments starting next fall.
New Jersey will become the first state in the nation to test its has scroll athletes for steroid use.
Acting Governor Richard Cody announced yesterday.
Well, I don't see anything in here about search warrants.
It's gonna start steroid testing without search warrants.
How can this be?
The Democrats know this.
It's a New Jersey is a Democrat state.
This a Republican government well, no, he's not a Republican he's an interim governor, right?
Democrat without search warrants doing this.
I'm appalled.
Speaking of steroids, you heard about what's going on in West Palm Beach, Florida.
What are there, nine or thirteen members of the West Palm Beach Police, nine of them?
Nine members of the West Palm Beach Police Department are under investigation or facing suspension or whatever because they were illegally purchasing steroids from some chop shop uh now where?
Fort Lauderdale, where was it?
Somewhere down there.
I don't know if it's Boca or but but uh uh so we got we got substance abuse.
Wonder what will happen here.
I wonder, I wonder what's gonna happen to these nine West Palm Beach police officers.
Now they've got an excuse.
They say they didn't do it, that they were misled, or they were fooled, uh, but there are illegal prescriptions being uh involved here.
There are the doctor that was not a doctor writing them, the cops say they didn't know that.
Um Hillary Clinton, you know, this deficit bill that was passed yesterday, uh about 40 billion dollars in deficit reduction.
Harry Reid's out there, we got a 2.6 trillion dollar budget.
Harry Reed's gonna talk.
In fact, we might have a soundbite on this.
I let me check the roster here very quickly.
Yeah, uh so I had it for a minute.
Uh not on page two.
So on page three, not on page three.
Stick with me here, folks.
We either have it or we don't.
I thought we had it.
There's no big deal.
Harry Reid's out there saying that this is that this well, basically, this is gonna terrorize the country.
The food food stamp program's gonna end, and Medicare is gonna end and uh with a 40 billion dollar deficit reduction, but it's just totally absurd.
And Mrs. Clinton, Senator Hillary Rodham Rodham, waited back into the highly charged abortion debate yesterday.
She charged that this deficit reduction bill, she called the GOP cost-cutting measure, will boost the number of abortions in the U.S. Well, isn't that a good thing in her mind?
I mean, I uh the pro-choice people abortion, the more abortions that happen, the more the political issue is advanced.
She's well, she said that a piece of a pending uh deficit reduction measure would indirectly raise the number of abortions in the U.S. by leaving poor women with less Medicaid coverage for contraception.
I sadly predict that if this measure stays in the bill, the number of abortions will go up.
The human and financial costs will go up, and many women will be really out of luck.
I don't know.
I thought that's right.
I thought condoms were the number one.
What are we talking about here?
I thought condoms stopped abortions.
We're not raising the price of condoms.
I don't I I I know that this is this is I I can't figure this out.
This is not gonna sit well with the base.
The base doesn't want to hear a liberal Democrat upset that the number of abortions are gonna go up.
That makes the base of the Democratic Party happy because that equals freedom to them.
That equals no prying eyes.
That equals women's right to choose.
What is Hillary upset about here?
A remarks coming from a longtime supporter of abortion rights...
Was seen by many as an effort to reach out to voters who oppose abortion.
Well, she's triangulating abortion.
Where's the great center on abortion?
Is there a great center on it?
Yeah, go ahead and have one.
I don't care.
Is there that?
There might be some, uh most of them beaten down men who don't dare speak up.
But uh right, Brian.
But this is confusing story to me.
She says, are we not in this body, meaning the Senate, are we not in this body committed to reducing the number of abortions?
Apparently we're not.
In the first place, the whole argument's bogus.
There aren't enough cuts in anything here to reduce anything, folks.
This it it's just Democrats is so funny.
It's just absolutely nothing in this bill that is I I'm not sure there are even real cuts here.
This is just enough reductions in the rate of growth, so that the deficit's going to be less than what it was projected to be.
We're still spending more on Medicaid.
Anybody thinks we're not.
Ha ha ha ha.
Here's uh here's Craig and Peoria.
Craig, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Thanks for taking my call, Rush.
Anytime, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Let's not forget that these are the same Democrats that weren't concerned when the Martins intercepted Mr. Newt's phone call.
Yes.
That's fascinating.
Let's retell that tale, shall we?
I'm glad you re I'm glad you reminded me of that.
Craig and Peoria, Illinois.
Uh there was this around Christmas time, in fact, uh, sometime back in the 90s, Newt Gingrich was speaker of the House.
And there was this just darling little scene senior citizen couple.
The uh what was their name?
Uh the Martins, yes, the Martins.
How could I forget?
The Martins.
And the Martins were driving around in their Cadillac, uh, going Christmas shop Christmas shopping for the grandkids.
And like everybody who's driving around Christmas shopping, they had a radio in their car that could hear cell phone calls.
Everybody has these.
You just turn it on, dial around wherever you are in the cell, and uh the it's just like a police scanner, it'll zero in on whatever active frequencies are being used in that particular cell.
And they were doing this because who wants to listen to music at Christmas time?
Who wants to listen to anything else?
They're monitoring the cell phone calls, it's their entertainment.
They probably have a police scanner at home doing the same thing.
And as they're driving, I think they're heading to a between Tampa and Jacksonville.
They're headed to shopping center someplace, and they get this phone call.
They hear this phone call between Newt Gingrich and John Boehner, who was one of his lieutenants at the time in the House.
Now the Martins are just cogity old grand folks, just out there Christmas shopping.
They said, woo, they're listening into history here.
The phone call was about strategy that the Republicans are planning for the next session of Congress.
Don't remember the specifics, but the Martins heard this.
They said, Well, why we're in on history here.
So then they turned on the tape recorder that we all have in our cars that connected to our cell phone receivers in our cars, and they recorded the conversation between Mr. Newt and John Boehner.
And then they said, what this is history.
We can't just keep this to ourselves.
This is history while we're listening to the workings of the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives.
So the Martins, in the midst of Christmas shopping in their car with their cell phone receiver and their tape recorder, dubbed a copy of what they recorded and sent it to uh was it Jim Moran?
Who it's right, they sent it, they sent it to Baghdad Jim McDermott, uh Congressman from uh from Washington.
They sent the tape to Baghdad Jim.
And Jim McDermott heard this and said, Well, this you're right, Martins.
What great citizens you are.
Uh and and McDermott called the New York Times and said, look what a couple of American citizens driving around Christmas shopping happened to hear and record on their cell phone in their car.
And the New York Times said, and so McDermott says, I've got it and I'll get it to you.
So McDermott sent it over there, and lo and behold, the New York Times published a transcript of a private phone call between Newt Gingrich and John Boehner, and the Martins, this cogity old grandparent couple.
Why they were American heroes as they should have been, because they were out there listening in accidentally on their cell phone receiver in the car with the tape recorder attached to strategy among the Republican leadership in the House.
And that transcript appears all over the New York Times, and then it becomes the big news.
And it was just there was nothing, you know, they weren't plotting anything other than how to achieve legislative victory on the items that they're going to be brought up in the next session of Congress.
I don't know whatever happened to the Martins.
I don't know if they got a plaque, I don't know if they may be even a monument to them inside the DNC building somewhere.
But uh there was there was a pretense of a legal case involved here, uh, because it was illegal.
The point is, let me eliminate the laughs here.
This was totally illegal.
This was a total setup.
Nobody has cell phone receivers in their cars and tape recorders, particularly grandparents.
The privacy of Newt Gingrich and John Binners' phone call didn't count for anything.
The New York Times couldn't wait to publish it.
Jim McDermott couldn't wait to give it to them.
And so the the point here on the caller from Peoria is don't believe the Democrats are worried about your privacy, and that's what I said earlier.
They'll violate it, whether you know what's happening or not.
A quick timeout and be back right after this.
Stay with us.
Okay, back to the phones we go.
And Robert Grand Rapids, Michigan, you're next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Megadetos Rush.
Merry Christmas.
Same to you, sir.
Well, here was my comment.
Um, it's regarding Senators Levin and Stabenov from Michigan.
Obviously, they voted with the Democrats to um vote against the uh defense appropriations bill, which contained NR drilling.
I'm I'm sorry, I'm uh kind of nervous.
But what that does is put an upward pressure on the price of gasoline.
If we have less domestic oil, then we're continuing to have to um tap into the the global supply.
And what we see You don't need to tell me you're exactly right.
I mean, I uh these these are this these are the first people start complaining about the gas price going up when we have any kind of supply or distribution interruption.
Well, I mean, what they're doing is they're killing the economy of Michigan.
Uh SUV sales go down when all the prices go up.
So they're voting against their constituents.
Uh the constituents don't matter as much as the contributors, and the contributors in this case happen to be mad cap, insane environmentalist wackos.
Uh Democratic Party is a mixture of a various group of coalitions.
You got feminists, you got the mad cap out of this out of this world, environmentalist wackos, you have the uh civil liberties groups, get the uh NAALCP, and they got to keep all those groups happy.
Uh and then they're gonna the new base now is this anti-war left.
They've got a key happy.
So uh the constituents in Michigan are not that big a deal.
These uh your senators are not really voting your interest, they're voting uh their own national interests.
Well, that's a shame, Rush.
Well, it may be, but that's that's I mean, that's the way of the world in the Senate.
True.
That's that's just the way I mean you got a choice.
I mean, you can vote them out.
I know it's gonna be tough in Michigan.
It will it won't be in ten or fifteen years after enough people leave and move.
Uh but but until that time, you're you're stuck with these people until you can mount a way to get them out of there.
I mean, let's can't we get real Debbie Stabanow in the U.S. Can we get real here?
How does that happen?
How does it happen I don't know, Rush?
Well, yes, I don't live there, but you tell me.
How does this happen?
Well, uh, apparently Detroit's the the most democratic city in the nation, apparently.
But uh Well, the competition is pretty tough for that one.
Uh Detroit, New York, uh, San Francisco, I have to say San Francisco.
These people, they've got you haven't heard anything until you've heard this.
They've the murder rate is at an all-time high in San Francisco, and they can't figure out what to do about it.
Now, what is that Alone tell you.
The murder rate, their solution to toying around with is community policing.
But they don't know who would administer it and who would run it and how it would play out.
I'm not even sure I know what community policing is when you're talking about murder.
I I don't even know what it is, but uh apparently the cops are afraid because of political correctness to arrest anybody or to pursue anybody because San Francisco is the capital of radical egalitarianism.
If somebody killed somebody, they had to have a reason, and we better find out.
They were upset for something.
And it might be because they were unhappy that uh they're in the minority on an issue.
And if that's the case, we've got to understand it.
But you've got you've got Well, I mean if well, it's it's it's it's got that you've got that's a big problem, and you've got the uh people running around there telling the military they can't recruit on college campus.
You've got, I mean, San Francisco, it's you if I mean if you want the title as most Democrats city in the country, I'll be glad to let you think you've got it.
But the competition is uh is is is pretty tough.
I'm glad you called though, Robert.
I'm sorry I'm not able to help.
It's got I went on Sacramento uh a couple years ago to do a speech.
And I there's only so much I can do here.
And I'm I'm uh the question and answer session.
What are we what are we gonna do about that?
I mean, we got this wacko governor, we've got this is before Schwarzenegger was in there.
We got the Democrats to totally run this state.
Our taxes are going up, we can't afford to live here.
What are we gonna do?
And I said, your problem.
I'm leaving and going home after tonight.
I don't have to deal with it.
Uh well, I don't know what we can do.
I mean, uh you got people to state voting this way.
Uh do our best.
Uh, but I mean, if you had guts, you'd do what I do and leave.
Oh, we can't, it's our home.
Well, I understand that sentiment as uh as well.
But a lot of people are voting with their feet in a lot of these places uh for these various reasons.
But speaking of, you know, I'm gonna save this for the next hour.
I've got the most sad sack story in my stack here, folks, about how journalists in New York can't afford to live there, and yet the people they cover make all the money in the world, and it's a real problem for journalism.
I've got this, I'll have to find this, because I don't have an oh, it's it's it's it's one of the biggest cry pieces that I have seen in uh in a long time.
They get these great educations from Harvard and they go here and there, and it's all about this typical journalist couple.
He works at the Wall Street Journal, she works the New York Times, they make 250,000 a year, and it says because of New York taxes and because of this, because uh they can't afford to live in Manhattan.
They can't even afford to live in Slope Park.
And blame the city for pricing them out of the market.
You chose it to what two 250,000 a year, and they can't afford to live in Manhattan.
That's where you chose to live.
You knew it going in, and you knew what the profession you were going into pays.
And well, I uh I'm saying that they say they can't.
The point, I'm everybody in my ear is that you can too live on a quarter of a all I can tell you is I wouldn't want to try it.
But yeah, just kidding, folks.
Just kidding.
I've lived there on less than that, much less than that.
But I'm just telling you that this is what they say, not that but here a bunch of liberal journalists complaining about taxes, complaining about the whole housing price, but as it affects them, they consider themselves part of the elite.
They're Harvard graduates, and this just isn't right.
The people that they're covering and the people about they're doing stories are the elite and the wealthy, but they can't even afford to hobnob with them and get close to it.
It's an amazing thing.
I don't even remember where it runs.
I think it's slate.com.
I'll find it.
And I mean before that we get Larry Craig at the top of the next hour.
Be right back.
Yeah, you know, I'm figuring a lot of people are gonna sleep a lot better uh tonight, knowing how strong the Democrats feel about protecting the privacy rights and the constitutional rights and the security of all Americans and all those living within our borders.
Uh those who once survived Ruby Ridge, they'll be sleeping well tonight.
The uh survivor were there any survivors of the Waco invasion.
Well, I'm sure the survivors of the Waco invasion will be happy to learn of the Democrats' policy or not spying or attacking uh any innocent American simply because of their religious views, and of course, Elion Gonzalez uh sitting now at the right hand of Fidel Castro.
I never knew how much Democrats cared about security matters and constitutional rights to these issues, Ruby Ridge, Waco, have Yon Gonzalez, so sleep well tonight, folks.
So we'll be back.
Senator Larry Craig at the top of the hour.
▲
Export Selection