All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 10, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:33
February 10, 2006, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
That's right.
I am back.
They let me try another hour of this golden EIB microphone.
Welcome to the program.
The Rush Limbaugh Program is being hosted by me because Rush is doing the golf swing thing at Monterey.
He's in ATT at Pebble Beach.
And if you want to check out what he's doing, you can go to RushLimbaugh.com and they've got photos there of round one at the ATT with Tom Pernice, the pro that he's playing with, and also video of the interview.
It was a great interview we did with Neil Cavuto.
Oh, Cavuto is going to get mad at me if he hears about it.
I was sitting there out there out there on the, if you've ever been to Pebble Beach, it's just one of the more beautiful places in the world.
And they're out there.
The Fox has set up this set for Neil Cavuto to do his show.
How did, by the way, how did he get that?
I mean, what is this?
He does kind of a financial show.
What is a golf tournament at Monterey?
Anyway, so he's out there.
He's figured out, yeah, how to hang out with all the rich guys out there in Monterey.
But Neil, lose the suit.
You're on the golf course.
It's 80 degrees.
It's a beautiful springtime feeling day.
And so anyway, just have a good time.
I know I don't want him in knickers, but I just thought maybe a golf shirt.
I mean, I don't know.
I wear a suit when I'm in a suit place.
But anyway, it's a great interview that Neil did with Rush.
And they covered a lot of territory, and it was a lot of fun.
So anyway, that's on rushlimbaugh.com as well.
You can hit the video and watch that.
And Rush, I heard him before he left on Tuesday say, well, you know, I'm the guy who runs the Sullivan Group that does the accuracy ratings for Rush.
And, well, that's true.
That's true.
I've been doing that since 1988.
Yeah, I didn't start it because he was in Sacramento with me from 84 to 88.
And so, no, I started in 80.
I already had, no, no, no.
The Sullivan Group started in 1980.
So he was, no, he was way down the list of clientele.
But this is an area that my brother Floyd is, he's a big math weenie.
He does all this.
I don't even understand what he's saying sometimes.
I mean, I do the investment stuff, but he does all this analytical mathematics permutation combination stuff that I don't even know what it is.
But right now, we're running with the accuracy rating of this program at 98.7.
And he, you know, at one point, I mean, nobody ever, he never, Rush never brings up the, where's that 1.3% gap?
What caused that?
What was that from?
Well, it was from mistakes.
It was from errors.
Oh, he's not going to like this at all.
I mean, here I am on his program talking about the mistakes.
But yeah, oh, yeah, yeah, 1.3% of the time, he's just flat wrong.
And we always correct it.
But when he's wrong, he always admits it and comes back and talks about it.
But I've been, well, Floyd actually has been keeping track of this and putting it into these formulas that he uses.
And I think one of the areas that he gets knocked down on is in this every football season, you know, he comes along and he's got these environmentally correct NFL picks.
And, well, sometimes they just don't work out.
And so, you know, he gets the, I'm sorry, he pays a penalty when he gets those wrong.
And I think the big one, he was up to 99.9.
And this was back six years ago.
And he said Hillary, he thought Hillary would not run for the U.S. Senate.
So here I am.
I'm just here to bring the truth to you faithful ditto heads out there that, yeah, 1.3% of the time, I'm telling you.
All right, Rush is a very humble guy.
He understands that there's not perfect, so he's like all the rest of us sometimes.
But I don't know if a lot of 98.7 anyway is the current ranking that we have on this program.
The margin of error, I'd have to ask Floyd, it's in a fraction of 1%.
So it's pretty close, pretty tight.
After all, we've got how many years?
17 years?
Is that right?
17, 18 years of history on this stuff.
So the numbers, he can make a mistake and it doesn't move the numbers that much.
The other part is trying to get back to that 99.9.
It's going to be very difficult because there's a lot of data to try to move to that percentage signup.
So anyway, I just wanted to make sure I address that with you folks who have been wondering about this over the years.
In fact, you know, if HR, I don't know if you remember, but I originally made a visit to the New York studios of the EIB with the two senior vice presidents.
We were in New York.
Oh, gosh, that had to have been 1990, something like that, when we were doing the original.
Yeah.
Yes, that was quite a whales ago.
All right.
Speaking of accuracy, our old friend Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader, has, and this is getting interesting because in my district, there's a local congressman that is also, he's a Republican, and he is also being a lot of innuendo about ties to Abramoff and Jack Abramoff and the fact that he got some donations,
some campaign funds from Abramoff and that the Abramoff clients, he wrote a letter in favor of something for Abramoff clients.
You know, the thing about the Abramoff story is I think most of us don't like the whole kind of schmarmy way that Congress is lobbied and money is passed around.
And I mean, the thing that I always go to is, if I was a member of Congress, here's what you do.
I see these things because I live in the capital of California.
We see these things all the time.
You go by some high-end club someplace, and they've got the place closed for some reception.
And the reception is a whole bunch of lobbyists lined up with their checkbooks to go in and get two minutes of time with some member, some elected politician.
Two minutes of time, they get some crackers and some cheese whiz and watered-down drink, and then they get to go get two minutes of time with whoever the elected person is, and they write a check for $1,000.
Now, I don't know about you, but there's not too many of us that would go over to somebody's house for a party and pay $1,000 and get crackers and cheese whiz and get two minutes of time to speak to people, and then out the door you go.
But that is kind of the standard.
I'm not exaggerating that much.
I mean, these are $1,000 checks handed out all the time by lobbyists to members of elected representatives of the Congress or your state legislature.
And so it is swarmy, in my opinion.
And I think most people look at this and go, it just seems dirty.
But as a friend of mine in Congress says, I don't know of any other way to do this.
They have the right to raise money.
It's a business.
They're in a business like you and I are in a business.
They have chosen an occupation.
You have chosen an occupation.
You go out and you make money, however you do it.
They make money to fund their campaigns and to stay in office by a way that has been deemed to be legal.
The other choice is public financing of campaigns.
And I'm the last guy who wants my tax dollars going to pay for somebody to run for an elected office.
I don't want to do it that way.
I still like the idea that we have the freedom in this country to be able to support whoever we want to support.
So Harry Reid is the only thing about Harry Reid comes into this is on one hand, he's part of the process that everybody in Congress and every state legislature go through, and that is raising money for his political pet causes and also his campaigns.
The problem is that when you start being higher and mightier than thou and start pointing the finger and saying it's a culture of corruption on the Republican side of the aisle, you've got to be careful.
And I'm wondering if this story that is out came out late yesterday afternoon after Roger finished the show yesterday.
Here's his story about Harry Reed wrote at least four letters helpful to Jack Abramoff clients, and Harry Reed's staff had frequent contact with Abramoff's lobbyist team about various specific legislation.
And the activities are detailed in, as Associated Press is reporting, previously unreported billing records and correspondence.
Now, I suspect when we get through this whole Abramoff thing, there are going to be three or four members of Congress that have violated the law.
That's my guess.
I think there's probably three or four.
Out of 535 members, I think that is probably just, you take a barrel full of monkeys, you're going to find a certain small percentage of them are bad.
And in this barrel full of monkeys, I think you're going to find three or four that are going to come down on Abramoff saying, look at, I gave them money in exchange for a vote.
And here's the difference.
If you're an elected member of Congress and I come to you and I say, I'd like to talk to you about that bill, that Senate Bill 123, I'm for it, and I sure hope you support it too.
And oh, by the way, let me give you this campaign contribution here for $1,000.
Believe it or not, that's legal.
If I come to you and I say, I'm pretty interested in that Senate Bill 123, and if you vote yes on it, I'll give you $1,000.
That's illegal.
And there is the line.
And I think most members of Congress, I've been told again by a number of friends of mine who have been members of Congress, if you have money you want to give to them, they'll figure out a way to get it.
There's plenty of loopholes and plenty of laws.
The problem with Reed is that he's been higher and mightier than thou, and yet he is up to here in specific money and specific campaign contributions and specific contacts and specific correspondence and letters tied in with Jack Abramoff.
And all of a sudden, I wonder if this is all going to go away very quick.
I told you.
I rushed told you.
Everybody knows that this is going to bubble up and it's going to bubble up on both sides of the aisle.
And the more that you scream, I'm clean, but they're dirty, nobody in this country believes that about politicians in general.
We need to take a short break and come back.
We'll take your phone calls.
The phone number to join the program, 800-282-2882.
I'm clean and you're dirty.
800.
Makes me laugh just to say it.
282-2882.
My name is Tom Sullivan.
This is the Rush Limbaugh Radio Program.
Talking about dirty money in Washington, and we've got, oh, as we go through the program, I'm going to try and get in today.
You've heard ad nauseum about minimum wage, but there's some great new studies that are out showing that minimum wage, yep, it does.
It does.
It does.
In fact, it does help.
It helps rich people.
It's just the opposite of what all the social do-gooders are.
It's a fascinating study by a very legitimate institute that's done the study.
And we've got also some lessons again because Congress is talking about maybe not keeping the tax laws that we have currently permanent and the repercussions if they don't.
But right now, Jack Abramoff and Harry Reed, Abramoff hired one of Reed's top legislative aides as a lobbyist.
Reed's office has acknowledged having routine contacts with Abramoff's lobbying partners.
Reed intervened on government matters in ways that Abramoff's tribal clients would deem very helpful.
Four times he sent letters pressing the Bush administration on tribal issues that had nothing to do with Nevada.
So here's one that although Abramoff never donated personally to Reed, he was smarter than that, the lobbyists did instruct one tribe, the Louisiana, oh boy, I'm making everybody in Louisiana mad at me today.
Cushatas, is that right?
Cusatas?
To send $5,000 to Reed's tax-exempt, tax-exempt political group.
Hmm.
At the same time, Reed miraculously sent a letter to the Interior Department to helpful, very helpful to the tribe.
And it was about pressing the agency to reject a casino proposed by a potential rival.
And Reed, along with his Senate counsel, met with Abramoff's deputy to discuss timing on a minimum wage bill.
And three weeks before the meeting, Abramoff's firm, Political Action Committee, donated $1,000 to Reed's Senate re-election committee three weeks after the meeting.
The guy that they met with donated another $1,000 to Reed.
It's just, there is no connection, he says.
No, no, no, there's no connection.
But they're doing this with the Republican leadership.
They've been saying, well, you've had contacts with Jack Abramoff.
You've taken campaign contributions.
You've written letters in their support.
It's all innuendo.
But Reed has held himself out as it's all Republicans.
And in fact, he's been doing exactly the same thing that he's accusing the Republicans of doing.
Tom in New York City.
Hello, Tom.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Yeah, hello.
You know, politicians need so much money for their re-elections that it's very hard for them to acquire it, let's say, honestly.
And there's been all sorts of regulations and finance, campaign finance rules, which they try to avoid.
But most money goes to media buys and advertising.
It goes for TZ commercials.
TZ political commercials never tell the truth.
They mislead you or they're down and out, completely dishonest.
That's the way America votes by those 30-second commercials.
It's ridiculous.
They should go back to the old way where they have to shake hands, go to meetings, go to public halls, and do a thing like that.
They could use TV when it's like done in a nonpartisan way where you get a few candidates from each thing like they do with the debates.
But the big money goes for all that sloppy media advertising.
And it's not negative.
How much did your Mayor Bloomberg just spend on his wheels?
Exactly, exactly.
And there was a recent study where 77% of New Yorkers think he's doing a good job, and 63% of blacks think he's doing a good job in a city where it's six to one, Democrats or Republicans.
But he still spent all that money.
Money talks.
Money talks.
And here's the problem.
You know why Abramoff went through all these tribes and everything else instead of dealing directly with the member of the House of Representatives or the Senate is because of the McCain fine gold super duper will fix political corruption law.
They can't do it the way they used to do it.
So all it did was it just changed the direction on their little map quest.
How do I get the money from my pocket into that elected member's pocket?
And that is why the McCain fine gold law did not stop it.
All it did was detour it.
Still gets there.
Yeah, that's it.
Same bottom line.
They're very creative when it comes to how they can get money.
And I think if you take away the reason for that money, they wouldn't be going out after it.
It wouldn't be the need for it because what are they going to do?
Spend it on mailings?
Well, what do you, what's so, Tom, but if you take away that, what do you, so you're saying don't let them advertise?
Don't let no political ads at all whatsoever.
The TV is the medium that you need, so you have debates that are, you know, non-biased debates that have, you know, the women voters can run them or something like that to be on TV.
And not so many of them.
They'll get interviewed in the newspapers.
Maybe they might write articles.
Maybe they'll give a lot more speeches at larger forums of Kiwanis or whatever the groups are.
But you'll get to know what their basic ideas are.
And the incumbents, you know, they have a lot.
You know, here's the problem, Tom.
That might work for your local congressman or your local alderman or your local city council person.
But for a senator who's got to cover all the way from Albany up to Buffalo, down to New York City, I don't know how that's going to work.
I've got to bolt for time here, but no, it's free speech.
There is the First Amendment out there that does allow people to get up and buy whatever they want to buy in order to say what they want to say.
You just got to be smart enough to figure out whether they're telling the truth.
We'll be back.
Tom Sullivan sitting in for Rush.
Just watching the weather forecast.
Boy, you people are going to get it good, aren't you?
That Nor'easter is really building up big for the Northeast.
And again, if you sit in this weekend and NBC's got to be happy because they've got the Olympics starting tonight.
But have you seen some of the previews?
Katie's been over there and it's sunshine.
I don't think they're worried about the fact they don't have a lot of snow.
Maybe you can ship some over to our friends in Italy.
Talking about Jack Abramoff and the innuendo about the fact that he did this and he did that is one thing.
And they're using it on the Republican leadership, but it is the guy that's using it, Harry Reid, is just as guilty of it.
Carol in Mariposa, California.
Hello, Carol.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hey, Tom.
Thank you for being there.
My God, this is wonderful.
I met Matt Rice on his 40th birthday cruise when the Gulf War came out.
But my thing is term limits.
I would just I know the Congress would never do it, but if we could just get the people to say, enough is enough.
Come on, let's get these guys out.
They've been there forever.
It's a tragedy.
It's an embarrassment.
Yeah, but see, look at, but Carol, you live in California, so you know.
Darn right, we do it.
You know.
And the problem is I was all for when we first came up with California term limits for our elected representatives.
Well, I was all for it until I'll tell you something.
Take a look at what's happened.
The local state senator all of a sudden gets termed out and shows up running for Attorney General and then gets elected there and then goes from there to run for some other office after they get termed out there.
All they do is they're still professional career politicians that never seem to get out of the power seat in the ruling class.
They think they're the ruling class and so they stay in the ruling class.
And what's happened is I have seen some really, really, really honorable, good people that were elected representatives get bounced out and a bunch of lightweights come in.
So I like the concept, but I've got some specific troubles with the fact that there are people out there that are good members of elected bodies that are tossed out only because of the time.
And as much as I used to be for it, I'm now to the point of going, let the people decide.
I know the incumbent has an advantage.
I know they can raise more money.
But they don't go anywhere, Carol.
They just stay there.
They don't leave.
They just move the chairs around on the Titanic, you know?
No, they move on and somebody else gets in.
Now, I know how bad it is.
I ran for Congress too many times.
And it's not.
You did?
Yeah, sure enough.
Do you remember Tony Quello?
Yeah.
Well, he and I are friends.
I see.
But before that, it was Bernie Sisk, so I don't know how old you are.
You're friends with Tony Quello?
Well, wasn't he beat him up?
Oh, I see.
Well, I ran against him three times.
He had to leave, and I'm trying to remember the scandal in which he had to leave.
And he was a big Democrat.
It was a culture of corruption at the time, I think, on the Democratic side.
I know.
I understand.
He was out of there like a shot.
Yep, and that's why when these politicians say, I'm clean, but they're dirty, it's that other party.
It doesn't, you know, we do have memories, folks.
Mo in Brooklyn.
Hello, Mo.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Yes.
Hey, Tom.
How are you designed?
Hi, Mo.
I'm doing terrific.
Listen, you know, I think our infrastructure has been neglected in this country.
We don't get what we pay for.
When you have people building a bridge in Alaska, sure the levies of New Orleans are going to suffer.
And a part of that is the Senate.
I think we should abolish the Senate because it's non-representational.
We in New York City send out $14,000 per citizen to the federal government that we don't see.
What do you think of that, Tom?
Look at it.
You're talking to the choir here because I also happen to live in a highly taxed state like you do, and we send a lot of money out that doesn't come back.
And I'll tell you what you're talking about.
And I think this is where John Boehner is going to, he has an opportunity here.
Let me put it this way.
He has an opportunity to do something about these earmarks.
And the earmarks are, I think, what is the problem, and so does Boehner.
And what they are, those things where the argument is: well, your local congressman knows better about where a bridge is needed or where a traffic light is needed or where there's some sort of special need that's needed.
But you've seen the numbers, and the Republicans, I mean, sorry, I carry a Republican card in my wallet, but I am so disappointed in their fiscal mismanagement.
And they say, well, it was because of Katrina, the biggest disaster ever to hit our country.
It was because of the Iraq War.
It was because of this.
They can come up with all the excuses they want, but they've also been spending and spending and spending in other areas so much.
And they're so proud of the fact that they reduced the increase in spending by 1.5%.
Whoop-de-doo.
And I'm with you.
They're not taking care of what is needed.
They're not taking care of the basic things that most citizens are looking for our government to do.
I don't look to the government for a lot of things, but they do need to put in the roads and the sewers and the infrastructure and provide us with a defense, a military, and local police and local fire.
And that's what they need to work on.
But instead, they've got all these do-good programs that they're spending your money on.
And as a result, I'm with you, Mo, the infrastructure in this country is falling apart.
Well, Tom, I agree with you on that.
I mean, but I think it's more of an abuse of the Senate with guys like Stevens.
And of course, we have, what, how many registered lobbyists are there in the country?
When I was a kid, there were 200.
It was a rare experience to be a lobbyist.
Now every ex-politician becomes a lobbyist, and they violate the term limits of how long you have to wait.
I mean, our country is being bought and sold.
Our roads were built for national defense.
Hey, not only that, yeah, and that was Eisenhower back in the 50s.
And how many new interstates or highways do you have around?
Most people have next to none over the last 50 years.
Let me give you another example.
I did this on my local show yesterday.
There's this story going locally of these two women that were being attacked on the freeway.
They were driving down the freeway, and this crazy man comes along and ramming their car and bashing them.
And they were going home late at night after a George Strait concert.
And there were six California highway patrolmen in the area, but all six of them were tied up on booking people in jails or traffic accidents, wherever it might be, in this fairly big area.
And what came out of this from the California Highway Patrol is they were apologetic up one side and down the other.
They weren't able to respond and catch this guy.
But what came out of it was California, and you need to check this in Nebraska, you need to check this in Michigan, you need to check this in Florida.
California has the same number of California highway patrol officers today that were on duty in the 1970s.
The population of California has almost doubled, and yet we still have the same number of highway patrolmen.
So my point is, not only the roads and bridges, but your public safety, your basic function of government is to defend you, defend you federally with a military, defend you locally with a fire department and with a police department.
And if you check and do a little homework and nose around a little bit, find out how many fire and how many police are in your community today versus the number 20 years ago, 30 years ago, and then check that versus the population.
And so here are these people that, I mean, I don't like, see, I like the idea of fewer patrol cars behind me so that I can zoom down the road without fear of getting a ticket until you or your family or your wife or your daughter or your son is being attacked by somebody.
And the old line of, well, where are they when you need them?
Well, there are fewer of them today, percentage-wise, than there was 30 years ago.
So, yeah, you're right.
The basic functions of government are not being taken care of.
And this is whether it's the bridge, the potholes, the failing electric grid that's affecting the Northeast, affecting the West Coast, or the basic function of public safety, it's not being kept up.
Check it.
Go to your local districts and find out just how many.
Call your local police department, and they'll tell you.
They know exactly what their staffing is versus 20, 30 years ago.
Short break.
We'll be right back.
The phone number to join the program, 800-282-2882.
My name is Tom Sullivan.
This is the Rush Limbaugh Radio Program.
Well, I'll tell you, New York's doing something about this public safety business.
The New York PD, NYPD, has added, remember the Dukes of Hazard Dodge Chargers?
They bought a bunch of them.
They're adding the muscle cars, 15 of them to their fleet.
I'm sorry.
Why?
I mean, why would the New York ⁇ No, I'm talking New York City Police Department.
They say that, yeah, it's a car that this car does 110 miles an hour.
Where in New York City can you do 110 miles an hour?
Even if you, well, I know the cabbies do, but they've got special cab packages.
Even if you go down the West End Highway, even if there's nobody out there, it's 3 o'clock in the morning on a Sunday morning.
There's still the road can't, you'll go off the road going 110 miles an hour.
But I don't know.
I mean, I can see the state police having them.
Do they have doors that you're going through the window?
I don't know if the door's open or not.
I think you have to go through the window because these are the old Dukes of Hazard cards.
Kirk in Phoenix.
Hello, Kirk.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program with Tom Sullivan.
Good day to you, Tom.
Good day to you, sir.
I was just wondering if you were to make all donations hard money and do away with limitations so that everybody could know that George Soros gave $10 million to whoever he wanted to or anybody like that, would that cure some of the corruption and all these problems that we're having, or would that just open up a whole new can of worms?
I think it would help.
I don't know if it would, I don't think it'll cure anything, but at least it is.
You talk about transparency, and everybody keeps talking to Washington now about transparency, and Boehner's talking about transparency.
I think that's the way to go.
That way, and the way you do it, and I don't know about in Arizona if you have this or not, but in California, we've got, and well, I know there's what, openseecrets.com, smartvote.com or org.
There's a couple of sites like that that keep track of so you can look up anybody right up to the, you know, the night before an election and see not only how much money they raised, but exactly who gave them what and how much they gave them.
And even the groups that say, citizens for a better America, you click on their donation because you don't know who that is, and you find out who they are.
I'm sorry.
I think it would be a phenomenal deal because you would be able to use that against your opponent.
I know that the opponent wouldn't like it.
And that way, you would be more.
I think restrictive on who you're allowed going to allow to give you money, maybe.
There was a guy running against Arnold Schwarzenegger for governor in the recall.
He's the current lieutenant governor in California.
His name is Cruz Bustamonte.
Because of that open transparency and because of the fact that it was on websites that anybody could pick up, we saw all these Indian tribes giving huge amounts of money.
In fact, he later, I believe, they called him on the carpet and said, you violated the political laws and everything else.
But it was all disclosed, and so people knew.
And I'm with you, Kirk.
If people know, that's all I want to know.
Because otherwise, what's going on right now is, like this one friend of mine who used to be in Congress, he retired early, young guy.
He did three terms, and that was his name, Doug Osi.
And he told me I could quote him.
And he said, as a member of Congress, if you have money you want to give to me, there are ways to figure out how to do it.
He says, you can quote me on that.
And Doug Osi was as honest and straightforward and guy who didn't need money.
He's filthy rich himself.
I think he can't.
But that's the way to do it, is just to say, look at why put it in the shadows?
Why have it go through?
Jack Abramoff tells an Indian tribe to give money to this political organization so it gets back to you so that you get honored with the money.
Uh-uh, it's too hard to follow.
I'm with you, Kirk.
Put it right out there directly.
Nothing to hide.
You've got nothing to be ashamed of for taking money from whoever because they back and support and stand for the same things that you have been touting that you believe in.
I think America would just jump on that and hard people.
I do too.
And I don't care if it's hard money, soft money, I don't care what it is, as long as it's disclosed that you're running for office and here are the people that gave you contributions directly or indirectly.
Have it there so it's transparent, so we can all see what it's about.
I like the idea.
Hey, Kirk, thanks for the call.
Appreciate it.
Joe in Memphis.
Hello, Joe.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hey, Tom, how are you doing?
I appreciate you taking my call.
You bet.
I just wondered, it's a short question.
Have you heard anybody expressing gratitude from that building in Los Angeles for Bush having saved their lives?
No, did you see the news conference that the mayor, Antonio Villa Rogosa, held yesterday afternoon?
I just heard that he was surprised that.
Well, here's the problem.
I heard that too, but then his staff came out and said, well, actually, the White House did call us yesterday and tell us that they were going to make this announcement.
But I thought, because Antonio Villa Ragosa is the darling up-and-coming Democratic Latino candidate for the future.
And I thought he was going to come out and take advantage of bushbashing, do some sort of bushbashing.
And instead, no, I got to give him credit.
He did not do that.
He came out, but he did exactly as a good Democrat is known to do.
He said, well, you know, what we need is we need more money.
That's what we need.
That'll solve it.
And so his point was he needs more money for funding for Homeland Security for Los Angeles.
And maybe he's right in Los Angeles.
I don't know.
But no, nobody, I haven't heard anybody in Los Angeles thanking anybody in the White House for saving their lives.
But you're right.
In fact, I saw on local television this morning here in Los Angeles, there was a guy interviewed who's on the top floor of what's now the U.S. Bank building, was the library tower building.
And he looked pretty grim about having his office on the top floor of that building in L.A., knowing that that was in fact a target, which brings up the whole question about should they tell us about what the targets are anyway.
Hey, Joe, short break.
We'll be back.
Tom Sullivan signed in for Rush.
I got to tell you folks something.
This show is just a gas to do because I get to tap the vast library research staff at the Limbaugh Institute and the memory division.
I just checked in with them and they were telling me, we were talking about the California Highway Patrol.
And I live in California and I could not remember the names.
I said, what happened to the days when chips were patrolling the highways and byways?
Why, those were the days when everybody was safe and mothers could go out on the streets with their children.
And I said, what were their names?
What were their names?
But the library staff, the memory division of the library staff, said Punch and John, their call signs, 7 Mary, 3, and 4, and they worked out of the Bakersfield office.
I had no idea.
▲
Export Selection