All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 24, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
January 24, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ha, are you folks?
I am Rush Limbaugh, America's anchorman, and your host for life here on the one and only excellence in broadcasting network.
There was a story, Mr. Snerdley, you might remember this.
I saw it on Fox not long ago, talking about all these groups now that want to expose the liberalism of their professors.
Somebody has said that this is a phenomenon known as Rush Limbaugh babies, that these kids that are in college now grew up listening to this program because their parents had it on, and so they're rush babies.
I am being quote-unquote blamed in certain quarters, credited in others, for this new effort to expose liberal professors.
Now, folks, this is something.
You heard, maybe you heard the conversation I had with the frustrated Democrat from Fort Myers, Joe.
Throughout the course of these 18 years of broadcast excellence and history-making broadcast excellence, I might add, one of the things I've always, well, I'm not a preacher, but one of the things I've always preached is patience.
Serious solidifying root planting takes a while.
And I can remember during the course of these past 18 years, it doesn't happen as much anymore, and it's a good sign, but I also know why.
But it used to happen all the time.
I get calls, I don't believe, do what the media said yesterday, but what is this terrible winner?
We're losing.
I can't believe it.
We're winning.
I said, just be patient.
We're not losing.
There are all kinds.
I've told people constantly, I used to get the question when I go out on a rush election tour, what can I do?
What can I do to help spread conservatism?
Just live your life according to your values.
Said, you will never know how many people you influence.
Obviously, you'll influence your immediate family, but you will never know how many people you influence just by leading your life or when you get into conversations with people, the things you say if you're informed and so forth.
And this business of calling these young college students now who are conservative and trying to reorient their professors rush babies.
Look at this, 18 years, 15 years.
Apparently, and I didn't say this, but this is not my term.
This showed up in a news story a couple or three weeks ago.
I didn't bring it up here because I don't brag and I don't like to talk about myself as you know.
But somebody just reminded me of it in an email.
Well, it may be appropriate to mention this.
Because if the trend keeps up, and it will, because the roots have been planted now.
The seeds are sprouting, if you will.
And if the trend continues in years to come, I will be known as the father of our campus on many campaign all across the country.
And there will probably be busts of me at the conservative union clubs and this sort of thing.
Now, these kids are not calling themselves Rush Limbaugh babies.
That's what people upset with what's happening are calling them.
The critics, oh, no, I can't believe it.
Rush Limbaugh babies.
It's meant to discredit them.
But it doesn't.
It simply illustrates how minds are shaped, opinions are validated, and sometimes how long it can take.
But that's, I have always felt confident that what's being built here is going to last a long, long time.
You can lose an election here and there, obviously, but these kinds of roots, they're deep and they're going to get even deeper.
And it's like I've always said, What has taken place just in the media in this country just in the last 18 to 20 years is historic.
It's just not being treated as such because the people who are losing the battle right now happen to be the writers of immediate history and the broadcasters of immediate history.
But you go out 50 years from now, maybe 35, 50 years or longer, and the people who are not even yet born, who will grow up, study what all went on in the past, start writing about this, will have the proper historical perspective attached to this whole thing called the new media.
And it will happen, but it just takes time for these things to grow.
But we're seeing the evidence of it all over the place if we just look.
And I've been warning people, it's okay, we have succeeded here in destroying the monopoly of the what some people now call the antique media.
And in the process of destroying the monopoly of the antique media, we have also destroyed the monopoly of the Democratic Party.
And what's left to the one area that is still out there where we lag way behind is academe, the college campus.
But even there, there is progress to report and progress being made.
It's just not as fast, but it will at some point take the same shape as this destruction of the old media monopoly has taken.
Not going to be easy.
These people are not going to lay down without a fight.
I think the people on college are going to be college campus liberals.
They're going to be far more aware of what's happening to them than the liberal media will.
Liberal media still doesn't know what's happened to them.
They still think they're running the show, still think they live under that whole monopolistic mindset that they have.
They still haven't come to grips with what they face in terms of competition, domination, and all of these things.
Did you people happen to see this story?
I have this little obscure newspaper here, and I don't mean to insult the newspaper, but the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin out of Ontario, California.
Mexican soldiers and civilian smugglers had an armed standoff with nearly 30 U.S. law enforcement officials on the Rio Grande in Texas yesterday afternoon, according to Texas police and the FBI.
Mexican military Humvees were towing what appeared to be thousands of pounds of marijuana across the border into the U.S., said Chief Deputy Mike Doyle of the Hudspeth County Sheriff's Department.
Mexican Army troops had several mounted machine guns on the ground more than 200 yards inside the U.S. border near Neely's Crossing, 50 miles east of El Paso, when Border Patrol agents called for backup.
Hudspeth County deputies and Texas Highway Patrol officers arrived shortly afterward.
It's been so bred into everyone not to start an international incident with Mexico.
This has been going on for years, Doyle said.
When you're up against mounted machine guns, what can you do?
Who wants to pull the trigger first?
Certainly not us.
An FBI spokesbabe confirmed that the incident occurred at 2.15 Pacific time yesterday afternoon.
Bad guys in three vehicles ended up on the border, said Andrea Simmons, a spokeswoman with the FBI's El Paso office.
People with Humvees who appeared to be with the Mexican Army were involved with the three vehicles in getting them back across.
Simmons said that the FBI was not involved, referred inquiries to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which did not return calls seeking comment.
Now, the chief deputy out there, Mike Doyle, said that deputies captured one vehicle in the incident, Cadillac Escalade, reportedly stolen from El Paso, found about 1,500 pounds of marijuana inside.
And Mexican soldiers set fire to one of the Humvees stuck in the river.
Deputies faced a similar incident back in November on the 17th when agents from the Fort Hancock Border Control Station in Texas called the Sheriff's Department for backup after confronting more than six fully armed men dressed in Mexican military uniforms.
The men carrying machine guns and driving military vehicles were trying to bring more than three tons of marijuana across the Rio Grande.
So it's either one of two things.
Either, well, one of three things.
You've either got the Mexican military working in tandem with smugglers on the take.
You either have smugglers dressed up as Mexican military with Mexican military vehicles running the operation to make it look like it's Mexican military so that our border patrol is intimidated to fire, or else you've got the Mexican military, which is the smugglers.
But this took place inside the border of the United States, and apparently it was not the first time.
Quick time out.
We'll be back right after this.
Eisley Brothers fight the power Rushling boss serving humanity, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
Here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, populations of boys born in stressful times enjoy an advantage their whole lives.
They live longer on average than males born in times of peace and prosperity, according to U.S. researchers.
Now, the study adds to earlier findings that pregnant women are more likely to miscarry male fetuses than female fetuses during times of stress.
It shows that this tendency to miscarry males has a culling effect, said Ralph Catalano of the Scruel of Public Health at Berkeley, who led the study.
He said populations are hardier because they lost the weak ones earlier, Catalano said in a phone interview.
No individuals got stronger.
It's just that the weak ones aren't there.
The findings published in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences also solidify what biologists have long known, that males are the weaker sex.
That's one thing I can say, Catalano said.
Statistically, it's clearly true.
Compared to men, women are biological fortresses.
Catalano and colleague Tim Bruckner were following up on earlier studies that showed fewer boys are born during times of stress, such as economic recessions or depressions and natural disasters.
They used data from Sweden, which has a database of birth, life, and death information dating back to 1751.
Demographers have certified that the database can be extrapolated to the global population in absence of more precise information from other regions.
So, stress results in stronger boys.
Populations of boys born in stressful times enjoy an advantage their whole lives.
Now, we'd have to define stress and stressful times.
I wonder if we could extrapolate from this that having stress in your life also toughens you up and makes you live longer, rather than having a pasty little existence with no challenges and no swings, no ups and downs, this sort of thing.
It reminds me, I've mentioned this story a couple times.
I was at a friend's house on a weekend in New York many, many moons ago.
A little Indian lingo there.
After the, it was a volleyball, water volleyball thing.
There was always barbecue lunch afterwards, and after people sit around before everybody left and just talked, and There was this lovely, oh, and by the way, I erred, I got an email shouting at me I was wrong.
It was not critics of new conservative students on campus that came up with the term rush babies, rush limbaw babies.
It was actually a conservative student on a campus somewhere said, yeah, we are all rush limbaugh babies.
So that's even babies.
This is long as better, as long as I'm not paying child support.
That's the deal.
Anyway, there was this young woman, 26, 27 years old, teacher.
And I don't know how we got onto this, but she was talking about how, you know, I just, I think we really need to stop pressuring students.
We need to slow down.
We're not, we're pushing them too hard and we're pushing them too fast.
And it's causing all kinds of problems.
We need to just slow.
And I'm listening to this and she seemed perfectly nice, just adult, you know, just an idiot.
And I'm thinking, how do I deal with this?
You know, because it's a social occasion.
I mean, in some cases, okay, let her say it.
Don't even engage in a discussion.
I couldn't help myself.
I said, I got to get in.
I can't help this.
I said, this is precisely, she's a high school teacher.
I said, and high school junior, this is precisely the time to push them.
This is when they can take it.
What are we preparing people for when they get out of school?
What are we preparing them for?
Well, you think life is going to be something that they can just coast through?
There's going to be a lot of compliments.
I went through all of these arguments and she got rather heated about it.
And it spawned a much larger discussion.
And it wasn't long after that that we started seeing stories pop up on the news that school starts too early, that kids getting up at six and seven to go to school, why, there's too much pressure on them.
Why they don't go to bed till 11 o'clock or midnight.
Hell, they haven't even gotten out of the bars before one.
How can you make them get up at seven or eight o'clock or six or seven o'clock?
And I said, for crying out loud, look at how can you look at the history of the country and saying starting school at eight o'clock has been a bad move up until recently when you add all the other things, the lack of actual teaching anything, the coming up with oddball curriculum like conflict resolution, teachers always wrong, students always right, all these crazy things.
Now we get this.
U.S. study shows stress results in wronger boys, stronger boys, which doesn't surprise me.
In fact, in Sweden, after the most stressful times, such as a famine, men's lives were four months longer than in happier times.
So the question we have to ask ourselves is this.
Do we want to put up with stressful times for an additional four months of life?
Or would you rather have no stress and lose four months of your life?
Snirdly, actively considering it.
Which takes me to Rich Lowry's column today, National Review Online, Biology's Revenge.
It says, the surest way to get attention in American society is to become a crisis.
Boys are now on their way to achieving this dubious but indispensable distinction with the new cover of Newsweek, the boy crisis.
It is to be hoped that the crisis establishes a simple truth that is astonishing anyone ever forgot.
Boys and girls are different.
Or as Newsweek puts it, boys are biologically, developmentally, and psychologically different from girls, and teachers need to learn how to bring out the best in everyone.
Now, wait a second.
It's been within the last 15 years, I don't know exactly when, but how many stories did we hear about how girls are getting a short end of the stick in school because they're nervous and they don't have confidence and they won't raise their hands and ask questions because they're afraid of being embarrassed.
And so we've got to change the whole way we teach in order to accommodate girls.
And who was responsible for that?
The feminazis who wanted everybody to believe that if you had a little boy paint his room pink and put some Barbie dolls in there and he'll turn out no different than if you put a baby girl in there, which they tried.
Some wacko-liberal parents tried this and they ended up with Brokeback Mountain.
You know, I mean, it's just, well, that's just, but it didn't work.
Boys are boys and girls are girls, and it is biological.
And this is one of my primary arguments with the feminists all along.
They're trying to change basic human nature, trying to change basic biology for whatever reason, maybe because it was so unkind to them at some point.
Who knows why?
But it was, nevertheless, these exercises have just been a futile.
We got Time magazine's cover seven or eight years ago.
Shocking new evidence.
A cover story.
Shocking new evidence.
Boys and girls are actually born different.
Now Newsweek, seven or eight years later, coming out with the boy crisis, based on the fact that, you know what?
Boys and girls are born different.
They're not the same.
And to try to teach them the same way in schools is not going to work.
See, a crisis always needs its own politically correct argot.
Neurologist, a neurologist, pardon me, quoted in Newsweek, takes a step toward establishing one here with this statement.
Very well-meaning people have created a biologically disrespectful model of education.
Thus, the boy in crisis has a rallying cry.
Don't disrespect my biology.
That's what's been happening for years.
Feminists have wanted to believe that given the right socialization, boys would give up their stubborn fascination with earth-moving equipment and guns.
As someone once said, you can have your own opinion, but you can't have your own facts.
Similarly, you can have your opinion about what gender should be, but you can't have your own brain chemistry.
Newsweek notes how in the womb, the brain of a male fetus is bathed with testosterone.
And as any parent knows, that makes him different from a girl.
And if trying to raise children systematically ignores those differences, it will be a disaster.
Newsweek recounts the indices.
Boys are twice as likely to be diagnosed with learning disabilities than girls in elementary school.
The number of boys professing a dislike of school has risen 71% from 1980 to 2001.
Men constitute 44% of undergraduates on college campaign, down from 58% 30 years ago.
And there are fewer and fewer men, and we've seen these stories.
And I, without even reading further, I can explain all of those numbers because I know this stuff.
It's common sense.
Everybody else is.
It's just not politically correct to say.
But I'll say it when we come back.
Stay with us.
Truth.
That's what you get on this program.
A daily, relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth here on the EIB network.
Okay, so let's take a look at these numbers here.
Boys are twice as likely to be diagnosed with learning disabilities than girls in elementary school.
And hello, Ritalin.
I know this angers some of you people out there.
It's called hello ADD.
And I'll explain that in just a minute.
The number of boys professing a dislike of school has risen 71% from 1980 to 2001.
That coincides with the feminization of the classroom.
Of course, I was, I'm such a forerunner and leader.
I hated school back in 1958 when I was in the second grade.
I hated school in the first grade.
So I've been a leader of the pack here.
I was one of the early trendsetters, and I never did like it.
There wasn't one aspect of it I liked.
I'm not kidding.
I can't think back to one pleasant memory about it other than getting out every day and then getting out at the end of the year.
I just, ugh, I really don't.
A couple classes.
I like the government classes and that stuff.
But I mean, just the thought of going, I woke up every day depressed.
I'm being sent off to prison.
It's like, you know, Johnny Cash, the song Folsom Prison Blues.
What really gave him the blues is he's a prisoner in there and he can hear the train whistle blowing.
He can look out his prison cell and see the train and all these people, fat cats smoking cigars, having dinner.
The train just keeps on moving further and further away from the prison and he's never going to be on it because he's, that's how I felt in school.
I'd look out the window, see all those cars and all those people.
I'm thinking, they're living.
I'm in here in prison.
Couldn't get out.
So I, you know, I became a practical joker, and that didn't help me.
I'd do anything I could to entertain myself in there, spit balls on the chalkboard.
Any number.
And that is, in fact, back in the old days, they might have given me Riddling.
They might have said I was attention deficit disordered.
All I was was bored.
And it's gotten even worse with the feminization of the classroom.
And there's nothing wrong with feminism in the right place in the right time.
I am all for it.
Don't anybody misunderstand.
But you can't, you can't, after years and years of expertise in educating people in classrooms, all of a sudden start listening to a bunch of political liberal social activists like the feminist leadership and say, girls are getting the short end of the stick because they're intimidated and they don't ask questions and so forth.
So what do we do?
We introduce new curriculum.
Consciousness raising.
Let's talk about how we feel all the time when we fail the math test.
And then, of course, in addition to consciousness raising, we got conflict resolution.
And then we got outcome-based education where if you didn't know anything, it didn't matter because we didn't want to humiliate you.
So it all ended up, I think, with just giant 100% boring, eliminated recess.
Can't have recess.
Why these kids are going out there and destroying the swing set?
Can't have that.
Then physical education became, well, anything but physical education.
PhysEd became just a, I don't know.
And I just, I think what you end up here with, now you've got 44% of undergraduates on college campuses are men.
And that's down from 58% 30 years ago.
44%.
And then we hear, then we see stories about how guys are going to basically home ech in college.
They're taking home ech courses.
They don't call it home eck.
I forgot what it was.
Something like calling a window washer a vision control coordinator.
It was some highfalutin name.
But basically, the guy's learning how to bake cakes, you know, in college.
Well, I know he's got to because his wife isn't doing it anymore.
You know, one of my favorite jokes, one of my all-time favorite jokes, a man and wife have to go to marriage counseling because they're just having trouble.
And a therapist, a counselor, says to both of them, you've got to learn what each other's likes and loves are.
For example, sir, what is your wife's favorite flower?
And he goes, he looks at, is it Pillsbury?
Love that joke?
I just.
I just absolutely love that joke.
But bottom line here is, is that despite all of this, Despite all of this, I have a story.
Friend just sent me this.
This is from the Washington Post two days ago.
Holding it here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers.
Study, girls tops in school then fail.
Study credits superior results in school to better self-discipline, but factors afterward give men the lead.
Angela Duckworth and Martin E.P. Seligman will have a study in an issue of the Journal of Educational Psychology, publication of the American Psychological Association, reporting on self-discipline and the gender gap.
Some verbatim excerpts and blah, blah, blah.
Here's the money quote, the money paragraph.
If female students earn higher grades than male students at every grade level through college, why do more men than women earn medical, law, and other first professional degrees?
And why do men earn higher salaries than women in equivalent occupations?
One researcher concluded that relative to gifted men, gifted women have lower aspirations.
They aspire to less.
They have fewer mentors.
They have more pressure to assume family responsibilities, and they have lower self-esteem.
There is also experimental evidence suggesting that women are not as motivated as men in competitive winner-take-all environments.
Hey, they knew this back in the days of Bertha Butts and the Butts sisters.
They knew this back in the days of Cro-Magnons.
It's just the way we are.
People are just different.
There are exceptions to this, of course.
There are all kinds of competitive women out there.
You've probably met your share of them.
And as a man, you don't want anything to do with them.
Well, do you?
I mean, in the workplace, you can't get by, but who wants to marry a competitor?
I mean, who wants to have a relationship with a competitor?
So, despite the fact that fewer men are undergraduates in college, and despite they're getting horrible grades in grade school, because they're just bored and they're being put on Ritalin, and they're put on Ritalin because they're bored, and they act out because they're bored.
and this is said to be an attention deficit disorder and a learning disability, so they drug them up and they zone them out so they won't be a bother to anybody in the classroom.
They'll just sit there and learn nothing, and they'll get interested in nothing.
And then people, I wonder what happened to old Fred there.
And it's all because society's gotten caught up in this stupid notion of equality of outcomes and equality from man to woman, person to person.
No two people are equal.
Men and women certainly aren't.
And it doesn't say that there's something inherently inferior about either one.
They're just different.
So we've had all this experimentation in the classroom, and look at where it's gotten us.
It's gotten us two magazine covers.
Time eight or nine years ago, Newsweek, yes, this week.
Men and women are different.
And these are the learned leaders of our society of journalism.
Why, these are the people supposed to be more informed than anybody.
And this is just now news to them.
So I don't think there's any mystery to this whatsoever.
Rich Lowry concludes his piece.
Well, one quick thing before his conclusion.
Newsweek reports this.
One of the most reliable predictors of whether a boy will succeed or fail in Haskrule rests on a single question.
Does he have a man in his life to look up to?
An increasing number of boys, now a startling 40%, are being raised without biological dads.
And who gave us that?
Who gave us that?
Well, who are the people trying to redefine what a family is?
A family can be whatever a bunch of liberal wackos want it to be.
Does he have a man in his life to look up to?
40% are being raised without biological dads.
Psychologists say that grandfathers and uncles can help, but emphasize that an adolescent boy without a father figure is like an explorer without a map.
On riddling.
Other educational theorists argue that boys would be fine if they could be more touchy-feely.
Really?
Other educational theorists argue that boys would be fine if they could just be made more touchy-feely.
But Christina Hoff Summers, who wrote the prescient The War Against Boys five years ago, calls boys the last of a vanishing breed of Americans who don't want to spend a lot of time talking about their feelings.
Instead of trying to change that, we should accept boys for who they are.
There's plenty of time after they get married for them to talk about their feelings, but don't make them start doing it when they're five and six and seven and eight years old and just want to get muddy and dirty and go out and learn how to play cowboy and in or whatever, G.I. Joe.
What we have witnessed recently with more evidence of the differences between men and women and the importance of the old-fashioned two-parent family is biology's revenge.
If we deny what is deep down in our nature, people get hurt.
In this case, the rambunctious boy is missing out on the great adventure that is learning.
Quick time out.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us.
Here, folks, let me give you my idea of a good teacher.
When Joshua Vanoy decided to wear a Denver Broncos jersey Friday to school, he knew there'd be some joking from diehard Steelers fans at Big Beaver Falls Area Senior High School.
But he never expected to feel humiliated by his teacher during a midterm exam and become so shaken up that he could not finish the test.
I feel awful like I was dehumanized, said Joshua, 17, a junior, self-described honor student.
He's made a complaint to the principal against the teacher, John Kelly, who teaches an honors class on ethnic relations, saying the teacher made him sit on the floor to take his test and instructed other classmates to pelt him with balled up sheets of notebook paper just because he wore a Broncos jersey to school on the game day on the Friday before the big game the Steelers had with the Broncos.
Donna Nugent, superintendent of Big Beaver Falls Area Schruel District, said she's investigating.
We're not making light of this at all.
Mr. Kelly, the teacher, had little to say on the subject yesterday.
We won the game, Sunday, didn't we?
It's all I was worried about.
The school principal said what happened was intended as a joke and that the matter was getting out of hand.
But the student said his feelings were hurt, his nerves were shattered, and his teacher's reaction to his Elway No. 7 jersey was anything but humorous.
He had a dead serious face.
He never laughed at all.
I have to tell you, Mr. Lee, I agree with you.
I think if you're in Big Beaver Falls, this is Joe Naman territory.
If you're in Big Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, just sort of Pittsburgh suburbia, and it's Friday before the AFC Championship game with the Denver Broncos, and you show up wearing a Broncos jersey, you're asking for, I mean, you're saying notice me.
Hey, look at me.
I'm a Broncos fan amidst all you Steelers fan.
Look at me.
Notice me.
Okay, fine.
We'll notice you.
Here, we're going to throw some paper at you while you take the test.
Bam, bam, bam, bam.
Stressful situation.
Whatever happens in this incident, this kid's going to live a long life.
We learned that today on this program.
Jeff in Mansfield, Ohio, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Thank you, Rash and Dittos.
First time, Carler.
Quick point here.
With the feminization of education over the last 20 years, that also parallels our slippery slide in math and science scores.
Wonder how much of a correlation there is.
Well, that's an interesting point because one of the complaints the feminists always had was that math was tough for girls to master.
It was just because it's based in logic, and that's challenging.
And it's very, very hard.
In fact, Barbie, remember the Barbie doll?
We had this on the TV show.
You pulled the string in the back of the Barbie doll and said, math class is tough.
Remember that?
So they did.
Look, folks, we have been lowering standards in this country all over the place in the name of equality and political correctness.
And if we lowered standards for math and science scores in school, it will obviously lead to our losing ground in a competitive nature to other places.
Let's go up to, yeah, Blacksburg, Virginia.
This is Scott.
Welcome, sir.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hey, Rush, proud Steelers fan and a proud Limbaugh baby.
Just call me dad.
No, it's my dad, I think, for being the Limbaugh baby.
He always turned me on to 810 WGY back when Clinton was in office and I got hooked on the Paul Shanklin songs.
It's been wonderful.
Well, terrific.
Well, it's great to hear from you.
Let's see.
You are going to sort of VTech, Virginia Tech.
Yeah, I go to Virginia Tech.
We're all glad to be rid of Marcus.
Marcus Vick, yeah.
What are you majoring in at Virginia Tech?
Business Information Technology.
Good.
At least that's not home ech.
Yeah.
But listen, I think the problem here, you know, with all the wacko liberals here at Tech is that we're just part of the MTV generation.
And, you know, most of the students here, you know, think that Kanye West and Dave Matthews are politicians.
And I just wish that they weren't.
I wish that they were smart enough to realize that.
Let me tell you something.
Those people are, you're always going to have those people in life.
You're going to surpass them in life in all kinds of different ways.
You're always going to have them around you.
But, you know, just remain who you are.
Don't let those people change you and understand there are going to be more and more people like you.
And if you look at it from a competitive nature, one of the things I always liked when I was growing up, if I saw people doing stupid things and aiming for stupid things, then I thought there's just one less competitor for me.
You're not controlling their life.
You don't lead their life.
If they want to worship Kanye West, you should encourage them.
Just gets one more person out of your way on the way up.
Let's see.
One more.
I've got to go, but I'll take a quick break here, but let me get one call before that.
Alan in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Hello and welcome.
Hi, Rush.
Alan here from Fayetteville, home of the Arkansas Razorbacks and some of the most god-awful liberal feminists in the world.
That's every campus.
It's nothing special there.
Hey, my question for you, my friend, is you're articulating this feminist thing perfectly.
Men everywhere understand this, how the culture has changed against us.
But the question is, who are the women who still really understand the traditional roles of men and women and how good men ought to be?
I mean, Ann Coulter, maybe, maybe Michelle Malkin.
Who are some of those women?
Tell us men so that we can follow them.
All right, that's a good project for me.
I can't, I don't have enough time to run through the list.
You want publicly known women, or do you want a description of the kind of woman that equals a real woman?
I think it's a both and deal, Rush.
The kind of woman?
And then specifically, who are those women in the public eye who are speaking uh oh, okay.
Well, I can handle.
I can handle that, but the only problem is there are a whole lot more real women out there than just women that are publicly known, that have some fame uh, and that's why it'll be important to sketch the profile of uh, a real woman.
I will consult with Dawn on this before tomorrow's show and we'll we'll get, we'll get started on answering it because it's a, it's a key question for kids in college and uh, because there's a lot of confusion out there.
Women want you to be one thing.
You think you got to be something else to please women based on this and nobody's being who they are.
We'll change that back after this.
Stay with us.
Okay, somebody make a note.
Speaking of Denver Broncos jerseys, remind me to tell you a little story of what happened between me and a couple babes on the golf course at the Bob Hope Tournament who were We're both wearing Denver Broncos jerseys when I was coming off one greed and heading to the next T-Box.
Don't have time to tell it now, folks, because here comes the ear-splitting tone, meaning we're out of here.
Look forward to seeing you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection