All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 24, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
February 24, 2006, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program, now documented to be almost always right 98.5% of the time waiting on the new opinion audit from my official opinion auditing firm, the Sullivan Group in Sacramento.
It should be in, I'm hoping, by the middle of March.
But whenever I'm sure that it will show an increase.
It's Friday, folks, and let's keep going.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line.
Ready!
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Rush Limbaugh here at the distinguished Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, firmly ensconced here in the prestigious Attila the Hun chair.
Remember, there are no graduates from our Institute.
There are no degrees because the learning never stops.
800-282-2882 and the email address rush at EIBnet.com.
If you're just joining us, Rasmussen reports latest polling data, not good for President Bush.
The Rasmussen poll says that Americans now trust Democrats in Congress more than President Bush on the issue of national security by a margin of 43 to 41 percent.
Only 17 of those polled favor the port deal.
64 percent oppose it.
However, something like 61 percent either don't know or are wrong about how the ports are owned and operated, and so they don't know beans about it.
So the giant panic here, let me give those exact exact numbers.
Just 39 percent of Americans know the operating rights are currently owned by a foreign firm.
15 percent believe the operating rights are owned by America, while 46 percent aren't sure.
So 46 and 50, yep, 51 percent.
51, no, 61 percent have no clue.
And yet, on the basis of this alone, according to this poll, they now trust Democrats on national security more than, I mean, it's hard to believe.
It's hard to believe, but it's the poll.
Well, it's a Rasmussen.
We have respect for the Rasmussen poll here.
But I don't think, I think all these polls are as a reaction to news at the moment.
I don't think it really reflects what people's sincere thoughts and accrued wisdom truly are.
All right.
Mike Rice of the Boston Globe has a story.
What happens when everyone's a winner?
You remember this trend started, at least in my knowledge, back in the late 80s, early 90s, Pop Warner football team down here in Florida was just creaming every other team in the league.
I mean, slaughtering them.
And so the grand poo-bahs of the league got together.
So this team is so good, we're going to have to penalize it before the game starts.
So we're not going to start the game at 0-0.
This team's going to start 35 points or 28 points, whatever it was, in the hole.
So that the other teams have a chance.
So that they're not discouraged.
So they think that they can actually win.
And that became symptomatic of other such movements in the classroom outcome-based education.
We couldn't destroy anybody's self-esteem.
And in order to protect their self-esteem, we had to make them think they could win when they couldn't.
And how do we do it?
Not by making them better.
We penalize the people.
Pure liberalism.
The liberalism will see economically people at the top, the winners of life's lottery, and at the bottom, the poor, the downtrodden, the victims of the winners of life's lottery.
And they'll see this gap.
Call it an income gap, a wealth gap, or whatever.
And they'll try to narrow the gap.
Liberals will do that, but they will not do it by elevating the poor, the thirsty, the downtrodden, so that they become more prosperous.
They'll do it by punishing the achievers, punishing.
the winners of life's lottery, raising their taxes, making it harder for them to do business, more regulations, so that the people at the top are lowered down.
The people at the bottom stay where they are, and everybody becomes equal, equally miserable.
Well, that's the same thing at work here.
Penalize the good people.
Penalize the...
What are you frowning at?
What?
Don't...
Don't get me in the handicaps and no, it's not the same thing.
It is not the same thing because everybody playing golf is already an achiever.
And there's just different levels of talent and how good you are.
The handicap system in golf is really not what you think it is.
Nobody can play to their handicap.
Very few people.
If I'm a 10 handicap, it's just because I happen to have a run where the last 10 scores average came out to that, a handicap of 10.
But maybe I played over my head three or four times in that run of 10.
Better than I'll ever play again.
Doesn't matter.
I got a handicap I can't play to.
Most people don't play to their handicaps.
And it's built into the system that way.
So, you're just trying to yank my chain with this handicap.
Everybody brings up the handicap system in golf when I get on my roll here about how liberals deal with the inequities of life.
But I had an answer for you, as I always will.
Now, back to the story.
When a youth basketball league in Framingham finishes its season next month, every fifth and sixth grader will receive a shiny trophy, even those on the last-placed team.
We want them to be happy and come back and play the following year, said the Temple Betham Brotherhood Leagues director, Rick Stekloff.
Notice the voice I use is that of the castrati.
We've heard the term the castrati.
These are the men who have been feminized by militant feminism over the course of their lives.
And so had some guy call here accuse me of being a homophobe because he thought that this voice was supposed to represent effeminate gay.
Nope, nope, it represents the new castrati.
Men without.
Yes, we want them to be happy and come back and play the following year in communities across Boston's western suburbs.
At the end of long seasons on the soccer pitch, on a hoop court, or the baseball diamond, kids are getting trophies not for winning championships, but for simply showing up.
Trophies for showing up.
Some say there's no harm in awarding trophies to all, that it's a reward for playing a sport that keeps them fit.
And it's hard to argue with the warm feeling a parent gets when their wide-eyed child receives a prize.
But others have raised questions about whether getting trophies so easily is the best thing for youngsters.
There is something inherently good about trying to raise kids' feelings about themselves, but there has to be a balance, says Leonard Zykowski, a Boston University professor and director of its sport and exercise psychology training program.
We have to teach kids to be mentally tough, to take criticism, to experience failure, to learn that somebody wins and somebody loses.
We have to take teachable moments to reach kids and explain that there are going to be setbacks and losses and to be able to cope with that.
Roy Ballmeister, professor of psychology at Florida State, said the trophy explosion was a product of the self-esteem movement, which began in the 70s and gained momentum in the 80s with promises of more successful children.
The movement started to unravel a decade later when questions were raised about its results, said Ballmeister, who has specialized in self-esteem issues.
Ballmeister said, feel-good trophies don't serve any purpose at all.
The trophies need to go to the winners.
Self-esteem does not lead to success in life.
Self-discipline and self-control do.
Sports can help teach those.
Yes, finally, somebody said it.
I don't know how this got past the editors of the Boston Globe.
Self-discipline, self-control, sports teaches it all.
Losing is part of it.
Learning how to cope with it.
Learning how to overcome it.
It's all part of it.
To say that it just hasn't manifested itself in sports.
How many stories have we done over the course of the recent past in which ideas have been floated to actually pay kids to do their homework?
Because we want them to show up and we want them to experience doing well in school, Mr. Limbaugh.
That's why pay them to do their homework.
Now we're going to give them a trophy to show up and play sports because we want them to play.
If they don't like it, they should be doing something else with their time.
We presume they like it because they're out there playing.
It could be that they have oppressive fathers, Mr. Limbaugh.
You know about that.
Where their fathers want them to be the athlete the father never could be and is pushing an unsuspecting child into an area of ultimate humiliation, Mr. Limbaugh.
That's why we have to protect against abusive parents.
So this is the liberal worldview out there.
Nobody's happy.
They aren't happy.
Everybody's a victim of something.
Everybody doing something would rather be doing something else.
And so, since everybody's being forced to do what they really don't want to do, we got to pay them to keep doing it.
I realize I've just described jobs for many of you, but I hope that's not the case.
It's the best thing in the world if you end up doing loving what you do.
At least one area league, though, is cutting back on the trophies here in Boston.
In the Northborough-Southborough Pop Warner program, President Mike Volcano said that each player this fall will get a medal rather than the engraved trophy each of its nearly 200 participants received last year.
We're talking about eight to 14-year-olds here.
Volcano, who turns 50 next month, said it's okay for children to experience disappointment.
And that, I'm sure, was tough to write.
It's okay for children to experience disappointment.
We would rather they not be disappointed.
We'd rather they not experience it, but it's okay if they do.
I'm not sure where the mentality came from or how it got to this point, but the stuff given out to kids, the thanks for participating in trophies, seems we're more worried about not hurting feelings.
Exactly.
Exactly right.
But the problem is, the feelings aren't yours.
The feelings belong to the kids.
You didn't make them lose.
They lost.
They're feelings.
They have to experience them and deal with them.
This whole notion that you can make other people feel a certain way is so wrong, folks.
I know it's hard to believe.
And you think I'm nuts again and lost my mind, but your feelings are yours.
You have the power not to feel sad or unhappy no matter what somebody else does.
It's a tough call.
He says, I don't know what the right answer is, but I certainly know it's not a good idea to keep rewarding people day after day when they don't earn it.
They lose their workmanship.
I don't know if we're doing kids justice in the way we're handling it.
You're not.
I guarantee your instincts are exactly right.
You're not.
You are rewarding people when they don't earn it.
And guess what?
Help a subset definition of liberalism.
If you're going to give these kids a trophy, then I suggest you give them all an A. Don't make any corrections on papers, especially in red ink.
Red ink sends signals of violence and confrontation to the student.
Use purple ink.
We heard about that in Minnesota, I think.
Don't ever make the most slightest disparaging remark between students aloud.
You're not going to have it.
Everyone is special, and everyone is perfect, and everyone will have high self-esteem.
And then we're going to send them off to college where this is all reinforced.
They're little skulls full of mush.
And it is no wonder when they come out of college, half of them are mind-twisted little socialists who haven't the slightest idea what reality is.
I think this actually comes close to describing the current mentality of the Democratic Party.
They have an entitlement to power, an entitlement to victory.
Democracy isn't working, so we should just give them power.
They think they have some inherent right to it.
A quick timeout will be back.
They will not accept the reality of their position right now.
Back after this, folks.
Stay with us.
Everyone's a winner is the title of this song.
This is hot chocolate.
Traverse City, Michigan.
This is Ryan.
Ryan, I appreciate your patience.
Thank you for waiting.
Thanks, Russia.
I enjoy the show.
I've got a brother, Chris, and he thinks that the lotto programs and these state lottos, like that Powerball one that was won this week, are a great program.
I was wondering your opinion on it.
Well, you know, I love state lotteries.
I have to tell you, Ryan, I think state lottery is one of the greatest things that have ever happened to America.
Look at all the good they do for education.
Duh.
We have so much money being spent in these state lotteries, and still we're spending more on education at the federal and state level than ever.
And it's not, it doesn't matter.
Actually, I think state lotteries are an evidence that we will never, ever be thought of as being too high taxed.
A state lottery is simply a voluntary tax in those states that have them where the legislature has no spending discipline.
When they ran into big deficits and when they ran into problems, especially no income tax states, but other states, when they just didn't have the guts to go back and call it a tax increase, they set up the lottery with the big pipe dream that you too can become a millionaire just by going into your local convenience store, sidestepping the mess on the floor and buying one or 20 tickets.
It has been shown that the people who spend most of the money in the lottery are the people that least can afford it.
And so it is a tax on the poor.
It is government taxing the poor.
It's a voluntary tax because you don't have to buy a lottery ticket.
But it's all been sold on a myth, and that is we are going to fund education and we're going to build our education system to where it is a shining city on the hill, best education system in the country.
And if you ever audit one of these state lotteries of the education, you can't find where the money goes.
But you can get a pretty good idea that it doesn't go where it's intended because how often, how many times a week do we hear we're not spending enough on education in this country?
I'm sorry to sound like Castrati so often today.
I'm just tired.
That's all it is.
Dana in Glen Arm, Maryland.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi.
Oh, Mega Ditto's Rush.
I have been listening to you since about 1989 and might need the mint glove if you remember using that years ago.
Oh, yes, yes.
I still have some in stock that I use personally.
Well, if I sound a little bit nervous, it's all excitement.
It's not nerves.
All right.
I appreciate it.
But you don't sound nervous at all.
Okay, good.
I was calling because the scenario that you had given regarding the baseball, the children playing baseball and getting a trophy.
I'm a mom of two boys.
They both play the recreational baseball.
Neither one of them are selected to play this baseball.
They're not trying out for it.
We pay a fee as the parent.
They get a uniform shirt.
We, you know, get, they go to the games and all of that.
So it's really, it's an everybody play scenario.
So at the end, when they're all given a trophy because they've all played and they've all done their best.
Wait, your kids are giving, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Your kids are given trophies too?
I have had my kids in basketball during basketball season.
My little one got a trophy and really never understood the basics of the basketball game.
And he was, you know, he played all season and all that.
But just think about it.
I'm not sure if I can do it.
I'm not one of these people.
I always, the whole time I was growing up, when I was a young, smart adolescent and then a really mischievous teenager, I always said to myself, I am not when I get older because I've always wanted to be older.
Even today, I can't wait till I get older.
The older I get, the better things get.
It's always been the case.
I knew it'd be the case.
I hated being 20 and 30.
I despise it.
I hated going through all that, but I had to to get where I am.
And I knew I'd be where I am if I just wanted to get there.
I always vowed that when I got old, whatever that was, I would never be an old fuddy duddy.
I would never be one of these people that said, well, son, you may be complaining, but I had to walk five miles in the snow with no shoes some days just to get to school.
You know, you hear all that growing up from your parents.
I said, I'm never going to become one of those people.
But this issue makes it tough because these everybody plays things.
If these are part of school, the schools can do what they want, I guess.
But in the summer, I was in the Little League.
This had nothing to do with school.
And this was 10 to 12-year-olds.
And then after that, it was a Babe Ruth League.
And then beyond that, it was better.
And it got harder and harder to make a team as you increased in age.
So if you're team 10 and 12, you had to try out.
It was not automatic that you would end up on a team.
And sometimes you didn't make it.
And you had to try out every year.
It was just nothing was automatic.
There were no trophies.
I don't think there might have been a trophy for the team that won the championship.
I don't think my team ever did.
So I don't recall.
All I know is I didn't get one for losing.
But, I mean, I went out for the high school baseball team.
I thought that was a lock.
I thought that was automatic.
My dad knew the coach.
They were big, but I was in the first cut.
I was stunned.
It was one of the biggest wake-up calls of my life.
It turned out to be a good thing because it was the least expected.
This everybody plays business is getting ready some exercise.
If that's what it's about, find and dead.
One of my all-time favorite thinkers and writers, Victor Davis Hansen, is back from Iraq and has written of his visit.
The insurgency in Iraq has no military capability either to drive the United States military from Iraq or to stop the American training of Iraqi police and security forces, or for that matter, to derail the formation of a new government.
The insurgency in Iraq has no military capability to do it.
Baghdad is impenetrable to serious attack.
Camp Victory is there.
The United States Air Base at Balad is one of the busiest airports in the world.
Even forward smaller bases at Kirkuk, Mosul, and Ramadi are entirely secure.
Instead, the terrorists count on three alternate strategeries.
First, the use of improvised explosive devices, IEDs, assassinations, suicide bombings.
They hope to make Iraqi hinterlands and suburbs appear so unstable and violent that the weary American public says enough of these people and calls home its troops before the country is stabilized.
And that's where the Democrats come into play.
In such a quest, the terrorists have invaluable ally in the global media, whose if it bleeds, it leads branded journalism always favors the severed head in the street over the completion of yet another Iraqi school.
Second, the al-Qaedists think that they can attack enough Shiites and government forces to prompt a civil war.
And indeed, in the world that we see on television, there's no such thing as a secular Iraq.
An Iraqi who defines himself as an Iraqi or a child born to a Shiite and a Sunni.
No, the country, we are told, is simply three factions that will be torn apart by targeted violence.
Sunnis blow up holy places.
Shiites retaliate, and both sides can then blame the Americans.
Third, barring options one and two, the enemy wishes to pay off criminals and thugs to create enough daily mayhem, theft, and crime to stop contractors from restoring infrastructure and thus delude the Iraqi public into believing that the peace would return if only the Americans left.
One of the great lapses in world journalism is investigating what happened to the 100,000 criminals let out by Saddam Hussein on the eve of the war.
Thus, the terrorists have succeeded in making all the daily mayhem of a major city appear to be a political violence, even though much of the problem is theft, rape, murder committed by criminals who have had a holiday since Saddam Hussein freed them.
The terrorists are far more frustrated that so far they can't inflict the sort of damage on the Americans that will send them home or stop the political process entirely.
During this sort of waiting game in Iraq, the American military silently is training tens of thousands of Iraqis to do the daily patrols, to protect construction projects, assure the public that security is on the way while an elected government reminds the people they are at last in charge.
Who will win?
The Americans I talked to this week in Iraq, Baghdad, Balad, Kirkuk, and Taji, believe that a government will emerge that is seen as legitimate and will appear as authentic to the people.
Soon, 10 divisions of Iraqi soldiers, over 100,000 cops, should be able to crush the insurgency with the help of a public tired of violence and assured that the future of Iraq is their own, not the Husseins, the Americans, or the terrorists.
It's an odd war.
And here's the money quote.
It's an odd war because the side I think is losing garners all the press, whether by blowing up the great golden dome of the shrine in Samarra or blowing up an American each day.
Yet we hear nothing of the other side that is ever so slowly, shrewdly undermining the enemy.
The enemy is admitting that it's losing by blowing up these shrines.
The enemy is admitting it.
Just like in this country, when liberals are out of power, that's when they go nuts.
That's when they're funny.
That's when they just lose their minds.
Same thing with al-Qaedists.
They're losing and they're going crazy.
And they're getting desperate and they're pulling out all the stops.
Their biggest allies are the United States media and the American Democratic Party, which is articulating things that have to be a dream to al-Qaeda members.
They are saying the things they want the American people to eventually believe.
Most would agree that the Americans now know exactly what they're doing.
They have a brilliant and savvy ambassador and a top diplomatic team.
Their bases are expertly run and secured where food, accommodations, and troop morale are excellent.
Insufficient body armor and unarmored Humvees are yesterday's hysteria.
Our generals are astute and understand the fine line between using too much force and not employing enough and that the war cannot be won by force alone.
American colonels are the best this country has produced and they are proving it in Iraq under the most trying of conditions.
Iraqi soldiers are treated with respect and given as much autonomy as their training allows.
So the question is an existential one.
Can the United States or anybody in the middle of a war against Islamic fascism rebuild the most important country in the heart of the Middle East after 30 years of utter oppression, three wars, and an Orwellian totalitarian dictator warping of the minds of the populace?
Can anyone navigate between a Zakawi, a Sadr, and the Sunni rejectionists, much less the legions of Iranian agents, the Saudi millionaires and Syrian provocateurs who each day live to destroy what's going on in Iraq?
Can do Americans courageously go about their duty there, mostly unafraid that a culture of 2,000 years, the reality of geography, the sheer forces of language and religion, the propaganda of the state-run Arab media, and the cynicism of the liberal West are all stacked against them, that they go about their duty.
Iraq may not have started out as the pivotal front in the war between democracy and fascism, but it has certainly evolved into that after visiting the country.
I think we can and we will win.
But just as importantly, unlike in 2003 and 2004, there does not seem to be much of anything we should be doing there, in fact, that we are not.
Victor Davis Hansen.
That's available today at National Review Online.
Little brief story here.
Momentum is building within the Air Force to sell the service's prized F-22A Raptor loaded with super secret systems to trusted U.S. allies.
We've built this new fighter plane.
It's a state-of-the-art, all kinds of secret stuff in it.
Now the Air Force wants to sell it to our allies.
Japan is viewed as the most likely first buyer, say service and industry officials.
And this is from inside the Air Force.
It's their website.
I just wonder how long it's going to be before we sell some to the United Arab Emirates, ladies and gentlemen.
Just how long it's going to be.
Joe in Richmond, Virginia, you're next.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
How are you today?
Fine, sir.
Never better.
Fantastic.
Dittos from Richmond, Virginia.
I wanted to let you know that I've coached soccer for about 30 or 40 seasons with my son and others.
Dangerous, dangerous, dangerous, dangerous sport.
Far more dangerous than anybody ever knows.
Well, it is a dangerous sport.
In fact, my son broke his leg one season.
However, we always started out with kids around 12 years old.
We asked the kids, do you want to have equal time?
Do you want to play?
Make sure everybody plays?
Or do you want to win this game?
And the kids, we put it to a vote.
You know, so much for democracy.
We put it to a vote.
And the kids said, no, we want to win the game.
Parents didn't appreciate that too much because some didn't get to play.
But the kids loved it, and that's the way we went with it.
We still got a trophy.
Everybody gets a trophy, but at least we made it more competitive and we taught them what it was to win and what it is to lose and what the best you lose.
Let me tell you, that's important.
One of the things that I worked with the Kansas City Royals from 1979 to 1983, and three of those years made the playoffs, and one year went to the World Series.
And it's a championship team, especially at the professional level, a Super Bowl champion, a World Series champion, NBA champion.
That is an experience that vast majority of people will never feel, have, never understand it, never experience it, only dream about it.
It's totally unique.
To deprive that at any age group, like you're talking about your soccer league or you've got a Pop Warner Football League, and you take a vote of the kids, kid, do you want to win?
Or do you just everybody want to play?
You know, we'll give everybody a trophy just for showing up.
The natural inclination of the kid is going to be to win, even the kid that doesn't play or doesn't play all the time because he's still on the team.
There's still practice.
There is still camaraderie.
And there's still, at the end of the day, when you win the championship, you were part of it.
You were on the team.
And you will get a trophy or a ring or whatever, even if you don't play or don't play that much.
But that's a unique experience to be on a at any age group, to be on a championship team of anything in a little league all the way up to college or professional athletics.
It's something that I would love to experience it myself.
I never will.
I'm not an athlete.
I would love to find out what that's like.
You don't experience it when you work and you're just around it.
You have a sense of the achievement because you work them.
In my case, I worked there, but I didn't do anything that contributed to the on-field results that led to the championship.
But the people who did and were part of it, it's something that they will never, ever forget.
And not even all who play the games experience it.
So it's to deprive kids of this at any age, because obviously they're all not, even with the wildest dreams they've got.
They're not all going to grow up and be good enough to make little league or make their high school, baseball team, football, whatever, college and professional.
I mean, it's rarefied air, these people are breathing.
And you couple that with the fact that athletes are an equivalent to royalty in this country.
And people have these dreams about this.
But being on a championship, if anything, and by the way, not just sports, being a champion in anything, being acknowledged to be the best that year at what you've done is part of the pursuit of excellence.
And when you're handing out trophies to everybody who just plays, and when you say, Do you just want to play?
You want to come?
I get some exercise, are we going to win the kit and caboodle?
I think if you do anything other than try to win, and I don't mean cheating, if you're just out there letting people run around to burn some calories and tell them that's what we're doing, but don't get into we got to win and all this pressure sort of stuff because you're not motivating them that way.
There's a carrot that gets dangled out there and it'd have anything on the end of it that represents the ultimate prize.
Thanks for the call out there.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Okay, I've been saving this for near the end of the program, and I have to issue the usual warning, ladies and gentlemen, that we issue here.
We don't shock anybody.
We're not trying to surprise you and subject you to programming you would find offensive.
When we're going to present offensive programming or that which could be, we warn you, particularly if you are having your little crumb crunchers running around and they're home today instead of in school where they ought to be.
Or is this some holiday that I'm working again that I don't know about?
So this is a school day.
It was when I was a kid.
So get your kids out of the room.
And if you have a problem with explicit sexual discussion, please, I'm going to count to five.
You can turn the radio off or turn it down and then come back in a couple of minutes.
Because if you stay here and you're offended, you can't complain.
You can't call anybody.
Nobody will listen because you have been warned.
I'm going to play you a soundbite from the Oprah.
It is the February sweeps.
And the Oprah had on a female sex addict who graphically described the 90 different men with whom she had relations.
And Oprah indulged this discussion with her own choice of words.
Clearly, a ratings show on the Oprah show yesterday.
So I'm going to count down five.
It's about a 45-second soundbite.
Five.
And I'll tell you at the outset, Oprah doesn't need to do this.
And the Oprah could have done this without doing it this way.
She wants to do a show on sex addiction.
There is a way to do it.
But that was just the so-called good works reason for doing the show.
The real reason for doing the show was to get this language on the air in such a way that she herself will not be subject to fawns.
Where was I?
Four, three, two, one.
If you're still listening, you do so at your own risk.
I can't imagine myself having a sexual addiction because I just think strange penises would bother me.
89 of them.
You know what I mean?
I thought it was interesting when you said I'm pretty much shut down.
Oh, yeah, all the time.
Because I've known that there have been instances where I'm eating and I'm not feeling.
I'm just eating to repress the feelings.
But the idea of a differentness, literally, the idea of these are strangers.
You don't know where they've been or who they are.
And you've done some pretty, I mean, you've had, you know, men in your face who you don't even know who they are.
Yeah.
Now, there was a guest there, but you didn't hear the guest.
That was all Oprah.
And the words that we whistled out of there were penis, penises, and ejaculation.
And this, this, this, just the tip of the iceberg on the Oprah show yesterday.
It's February sweeps, but she didn't need to do it this way.
Well, that's another thing.
I don't know.
This woman, his name is Jennifer, and she is supposedly 25, and she has had sex with 90 men.
I do think it's worthwhile to check the authenticity and veracity of every guest of the Oprah.
No, no, no, at once.
I mean, okay, let's find out if this babe actually did all this.
If she actually is a sex addict, find out if she has actually had relations with 90 different penises.
That's what she said.
Not 90 different men.
Oprah's out of it.
There were 90 different.
And she mentioned a couple of three different orifices, by the way.
We didn't even get into that.
So I just wanted to let you know.
Hartford, Connecticut, Tony, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi.
How are you doing, Rush?
I just wanted to say about that port thing.
The one thing that bugs me now is that it's been advertised so much about the arguments that are going on.
It'd be too tempting, but they have to try to do something with a firecracker going off.
It'd be too tempting to do something.
I'm having trouble understanding every word you're saying, so let me run it back by you.
Are you saying that all the attention on port deal is illustrating our lack of security there and making it a bigger target?
No, it's just too tempting.
They'd have to try something.
If I was Osama, I'd be like, they're arguing so much, let's embarrass the United States and try something.
Oh, well, look, they can do that no matter where, no matter what's going on here, no matter what's being discussed.
That usually is not the way of al-Qaeda.
The way of al-Qaeda is to hit in a surprise attack, both date and location.
It's only afterwards that we connect the dots and figure it out.
9-11, they went after our two greatest symbols of power, the Pentagon, the World Trade Center, symbolizing our economy, and the plane that was forced down to Pennsylvania, they say was either headed to the White House or Capitol.
But that's where they were headed.
What they do next time, who knows?
That's the job.
That's the job of senators on the intelligence committee to deal with the intelligence agencies, to find out what's going on out there.
Then, when we try to find out what might be the next attack, they want to impeach the president for spying.
Lots of people are asking me if Bill Clinton was one of the 90.
Well, I haven't warned anybody, so I can't use the word now.
One of the 90 men that this 25-year-old sex addict, female sex addict, had betted.
It was on Oprah yesterday.
I have no way of knowing.
I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton saw the show and called Oprah wanting to find out how to get in touch with Jennifer.
I remember Clinton playing, got a video clip of Clinton playing golf, watching an errant shot one day, and I can imagine he would shout the same thing if he were watching the Oprah show.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, baby.
Stay up.
We got to go, folks.
Have a wonderful weekend, and we will see you back here Monday.
Can't wait for it, too.
▲
Export Selection