All Episodes
Previous Next
May 10, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:58
May 10, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program make more sense and anything anybody else out there happens to be saying is the things I say are right.
Great to have you with us.
Broadcast excellence, all yours for the next hour.
If you want to be on the program, easy 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Well, hallelujah.
Republicans, Capitol Hill, finally did something worth talking about yesterday.
Agreed to a $69 billion bill on tax cut extensions, which could be approved by both chambers by the end of the week, handing President Bush one of his top tax goals.
The House expected to vote late today on the extension package.
The Senate Republican leadership aides it yesterday they hope the Senate will follow suit on tomorrow or Friday.
Basically, what this is going to do is that extend for two years the 15% tax rate on capital gains and dividends income, which was otherwise set to expire in 2008, would also extend a one-year fix to save millions of Americans from having to pay the alternative minimum tax.
That's a start.
I mean, we'd hope for permanent extensions, but at least it takes us beyond the 2008 sunset of this.
And under these rules, by the way, the Republican tax bill is protected from a filibuster because it's within a preset $70 billion limit.
They came in at $69 billion on the tax cut.
And the reason, folks, this is important, especially this capital gains business.
I know 15% sounds low to people, but you take a look at what's happening in the stock market today, getting ever so close to busting the record.
The take to the Treasury has just outpaced anything anybody expected, and the capital gains rate reduction is one of the primary reasons why.
There was a story I had in the stack yesterday.
We were in Los Angeles, and I didn't get to it.
But in the month of April, tax receipts in the state of California went through the roof like double-digit billions more than they were expecting.
Now, they chalking it up to the fact that a bunch of Google employees sold something like $4 billion worth of stock.
But so what?
Let that show you.
$4 billion worth of stock at 15% capital gains in the state.
With that low rate, look at the money that came pouring in.
The old capital gains rate was, what was it, 28, I think, before it went down to 15%.
So progress there.
This is, I don't know how much it's going to mean in lighting the fire into the base, but at least it's continuing on a campaign promise that was made.
I talked about Democrats and their problems unifying and how they're not connecting with the middle class by their own admission.
And here's just this giant see I told you so.
The same coalition of, and this is from the Washington Post, the same coalition of labor leaders, Latino activists and Catholic priests and radio DJs responsible for massive pro-immigration demonstrations in L.A. described a new coordinated campaign yesterday that they hope will register 1 million new voters before the November elections.
Under the umbrella of the newly formed We Are America Alliance, organizers will make similar announcements in the Wevoork, Chicago, and other cities, including a news conference in Washington that's supposed to happen today.
It might have already happened.
In Los Angeles, they gave details for the first time of a strategy voiced repeatedly during marches.
Today we march.
Tomorrow we vote for the Democrats.
We need to reach out to our youths, the first, second, and third generation, to make sure they vote, Spanish radio DJ Orinan Almendaris Coelho, better known as El whatever, said at a news conference.
Many of those who participated in the street protests can't vote.
About 60% of all that's going to stop them?
About 60% of all Latinos in the U.S. are ineligible to vote because they are not citizens or because they are too young.
So?
So the Democrats are going to make sure we can't ask anybody for an ID anywhere.
So what's to stop them?
Told you this was in a game plan, folks.
In fact, this is what it is totally all about.
And how about this?
Yesterday, the United States military, actually on Monday, I guess it was, the U.S. military released documents that it seized during an April 16th raid in an area 12 miles south of Baghdad.
Significant and revealing find.
The al-Qaeda author is unknown, but officials believe him to be of significance within the terrorist organization.
If you read the document, it's helpful to bear in mind the author often refers to the elected government of Iraq as Shiites.
Al-Qaeda's own self-assessment finds that A, it is disorganized and lacks a comprehensive strategy.
That B, the Mujahideen are not considered more than a daily annoyance to the Iraqi government.
The terrorists lack the proper equipment.
They have very small numbers compared to American and Iraqi military personnel.
American and Iraqi troops are strong and resilient.
American outreach to Sunni leaders is harmful to the terrorist cause.
And finally, the policy followed by the brothers in Baghdad is a media-oriented policy.
These are al-Qaeda.
This is an al-Qaeda document written by an unknown writer, but it clearly indicates that these people think they are losing and losing big time.
Here, let me give you some of the following statements from this document.
What is fixed in the minds of the Shiite and Sunni population is that the Shiites are stronger in Baghdad and closer to controlling it, while the Mujahideen, that's the backbone of the Sunnis, are not considered more than a daily annoyance to the Shiite government.
There's a clear absence of organization among the groups of the brothers in Baghdad, the terrorists, insurgents, whether at the leadership level in Baghdad, the brigade leaders, or their groups therein.
The policy followed by the brothers in Baghdad is a media-oriented policy without a clear, comprehensive plan to capture an area or an enemy center.
Now, that is key.
It is exactly what we've always thought.
Al-Qaeda is playing to the U.S. and the worldwide media without really achieving anything.
They want stories in the media in this country and around the world every day that make it look like utter hell on earth is taking place.
The Americans can't do anything to stop it.
Whoa, is if they're doing it, a car blew up, an IED blew up, 14 more bodies, blah, But they're not accomplishing anything by this man's own admission.
They're not achieving anything because they're fighting a war in the media.
They're not taking any territory.
The significance of the strategy of their work is to show in the media that the American and the governments do not control the situation and there is resistance against the Americans and the government.
This policy dragged us to the type of operations that are attracted to the media, and we go to the streets from time to time for more possible noisy operations which follow the same direction but don't achieve anything.
Another item, most of the mujahideen groups in Baghdad are generally groups of assassin without any organized military capabilities.
And get this.
The Americans and the Iraqi government were able to absorb our painful blows, sustain them, compensate their losses with new replacements, and follow strategic plans, which allowed them in the past few years to take control of Baghdad as well as other areas, one after the other.
That is why every year is worse than the previous year as far as the Mujahideen's control and influence over Baghdad.
Now, we've intercepted previous al-Qaeda correspondence that tells the same story, but nobody wants to listen to it.
It doesn't fit the action line and the template that the drive-by media country in this country and the Democratic Party have established.
One of the most unreported stories of the Iraq war is that al-Qaeda terrorists are failing militarily and in terms of winning public support among the people of Iraq.
Where they're succeeding is in promoting a carefully thought-through Western media strategy.
Their aim is clear.
They want to engage in a type of operations that are attractive to the media in the hopes that coverage of the war will drain American public support for it.
Now, I've waited for this.
This came out on Monday, late Monday afternoon.
Here we are at Wednesday.
We're almost 48 hours.
And I wanted to wait to see if anywhere in the drive-by media, the substance of this has been reported.
And it hasn't been.
And it won't be.
But the bottom line is, Al-Qaeda says they are losing.
Their internal documents to each other, their own analysis, they are losing, and we are winning.
Can you imagine?
That is not news fit to print in the United States of America.
Look at this.
I just found this.
And we talked about Martin Frost's bunch of people, the third way, and how they have discovered that they don't have any connection.
The Democratic Party just does not connect with the American middle class.
And I mentioned, okay, there's that group.
They got their thing.
And then they got the Kooks have their thing.
And the Democratic Party is not going to unify these groups because they all disagree with each other about this.
Here's another one.
You know, we talked about this yesterday.
Evan Bayh and Mark Warner and these 17 hacks and pollsters.
And they've written this book out there.
And the headline, The Washington Post, centrist Democrats urge party policy with muscle.
Democratic hawks said yesterday that their party can win a war of ideas with Republicans over national security, but only if Democrats move beyond simply criticizing Bush and convince voters that they support strategies to defeat Islamic jihadists.
Who's going to believe them?
Well, I hope they try.
But that's going to anger the Kook base.
That's going to anger the moveon.org crowd.
It's going to anger the Dadiacs.
Let me sum this story up for you.
There are varying themes of strategies of retreat that are mentioned and peppered throughout this story.
They're reluctant to set a timetable or have one outright for getting out of Iraq.
But here, the key here is the end of it.
We cannot abandon.
Who said this?
I guess this is the group, the statement from the group.
We can't abandon support for democracy simply because the Bush administration has embraced it.
In other words, we just can't oppose everything because Bush is for it.
Well, that's not going to sit well with the fringe and the kooks.
San Francisco Chronicle anti-gouging laws do not cut gasoline prices.
State of California probed 50 potential cases, no charges.
The gouging law is anti-gouging laws too specific.
Rarely is somebody prosecuted.
Only station owners are the targets, not big oil.
Great piece, by the way.
Wall Street Journal today praising Rex Tillerson, the CEO of ExxonMobil.
Actually, it's a column.
I can't remember the guy's name.
I've just got to hear some.
I'll find it.
But Ed points out he's the only guy with guts to tell the American people the truth about oil prices and gas prices today.
Mealymouth politicians don't.
Dick Morris has the most incredible piece today.
I don't understand this, especially given the data that I've just shared with you about all these different Democrat groups that all have different strategeries about how the Democratic Party needs to unify to win elections.
The headline sums it up.
To win this year, Republicans need to run like Democrats.
Sometimes Dick Morris comes up with some really brainy and insightful stuff, but I don't get this one.
He gets caught up in the so-called swing vote out there.
And the moderates, I think this inside the Beltway crowd is just obsessed.
They think they have their base.
Both parties think they have the base.
They've got to figure out a way to get the swing vote.
I guarantee you, that's not how conservatives win.
It may be the way blue-blood country club Rockefeller Republicans want to win, but it's not the way the Republican Party is going to win.
We already have a party that produces people like Rick Santorum and Lincoln Chafee.
We have a party that produces Mike Pence and Susan Collins.
What more do we have to do?
We've got enough Republicans who act like Democrats.
And they confound everything.
The idea we've got to go out and act like Democrats?
We need to run like Democrats?
I don't understand this.
Why would he tell a winning and governing majority to go out and run like a minority?
The only thing I can think is to counter media perceptions out there, but it's really, really, really perplexing.
You know, I that just boggles the mind there.
I think he's why, and in fact, I know they've all, let's let's go to audio soundbite number 10.
Because the Democrats, the media, Snerdley says, already swallowed the Kool-Aid.
They're out there.
They're doing everything, but already calling the elections in November for the Democrat.
What?
He said ready.
He said he's ready for the bite.
You know, you people, I hate to keep interrupting myself here.
I'm on a roll.
And the staff here, afraid I'm blown something.
The engineer just said, I'm ready on Cuck 10.
Everybody on the other side of the glass looks panicked, like, uh-oh, did Limbaugh do something else wrong now?
You're ready on number 10, right?
Here we go.
This is a montage.
Bob Schieffer talking to Gloria Borger on the CBS Evening News.
Are we about to see a dramatic shift in the political landscape?
If the findings of a new CBS News New York Times poll are accurate, the answer may well be yes.
President Bush's ratings have hit another all-time low, and the Republican-controlled Congress gets even lower marks, an approval rating of only 23%.
Our national political correspondent, Gloria Borger, has the numbers.
Bob, our new poll shows just why Democrats are starting to believe, as opposed to simply hope, that change is in the air.
Democrats are viewed favorably by 55% of Americans.
Just 37% favor Republicans.
That's a complete turnaround from 1994, when Republicans dominated public opinion just before taking control of the Congress.
And it's a crock because the very day we get this poll out, we also get Martin Frost's piece at FoxNews.com talking about their own survey, a bunch of Democrats survey, and they find out they aren't connecting with the middle class, and it's not just a trend, or it's not an aberration.
It is a trend.
Gore didn't win the middle class, white or otherwise.
Carrie didn't, lost even more of them.
If you're going to choose which of these to believe, believe the Democrat internals.
Yeah.
Right, right.
These are not likely voters in these polls.
Americans say, blah, So it's using a poll to make news that they hope comes true.
Here's Jim in Orange City, California.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Well, Rush, it's a pleasure to be on your show.
Loved it for years.
Don't get to listen off enough because I'm in an inside job type thing.
But I want to tell you, yes, the government's getting a lot of tax receipts because of capital gains.
But in the news out here in California, $5 billion towards unexpected money.
But nowhere in the stories is the fact that they're the unwanted or they're the beneficiaries of higher gas prices, man.
Their sales tax out here on fuel is 8%.
Oh, so the tax in California on gasoline is pegged to the retail price.
It's not just a certain number of cents per gallon.
Right.
What they have out here, of course, there's the federal, I believe the excise tax, federal is 18.
Then there's a state excess tax of 18 cents a gallon also.
But on top of that, there's sales tax and has been for many years.
And at over tech, $350 a gallon.
I can't even do the math right now, but at $3 a gallon, 8%, which a lot of the counties are at 8%, and I believe LA County is 8.25.
It's $4 in Malibu.
I know that because I went out there to fill up on purpose, so I can say I spent $4 a gallon.
Yeah, and the local government gets about the top 1%, but I mean, the state's getting at least 7% for every gallon.
Now, I know New York does that, but some states just have a flat X number of cents per gallon, regardless what the retail price is.
New York is different.
I guess California is too.
Well, if that's true, then you would have to factor in the rising gasoline price in these reports that states are giving out, that they're earning much higher tax revenue than was ever expected.
Why?
We're stunned at this.
It's a combination of factors.
But if that's accurate, if you're describing how the gasoline tax, I know the sales tax is.
I just didn't know that the gasoline tax in the state of California floated upward or downward based on the retail price.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back.
Stay with us, folks.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
Cleveland and Jerry, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program.
Rush, thanks for picking my call.
How are you doing?
Yeah.
I have a question.
Last hour, you had a story that a woman could tell a future good father by his face or something like that.
Yeah, just look at the guy's face and know instantly that he'd be a good father.
Exactly.
And then your comment is what sparked my calls because your comment was, you know, you get it all the time.
You'd make a great father and everything like that.
And I get that too, and I do take that as a compliment.
I'm 39 years old now.
I've never been married because I don't want kids.
It's literally come down to the ultimatum.
If you want me, you've got to have kids.
And I've said no.
And even to take it farther, to take the issue off the table, I'm out of vasectomy.
So now when they meet me, they know it's not going to happen.
My question is to you.
Most women that I say this to, they can't accept this.
They have a lot of trouble accepting that I'm so certain that I don't want kids and everything.
And I know you feel the same way because I've listened to you for years.
I was wondering, why do you think that women have such a hard time dealing with the fact that a lot of men don't want kids at any cost?
That's not hard at all.
I mean, I think it's nature.
I don't mean I'm not trying to describe this scientifically.
I just, because when I do that, scientists call and tell me I'm an idiot.
But there's a why is there the phenomenon of the biological time bomb?
Why do you think it?
Time clock, time bomb to me, time clock, whatever.
Why do you think it is?
Let's take a look.
Give this thing a little historic.
Get a historical perspective here.
You have the feminist movement starting in the late 60s or 70s.
They told women to go out there and be like men.
Be in a career.
Rise to the top.
Don't let your sisterhood down by just having a relationship define your happiness in your life.
You don't want a man to be the sole reason for that.
Go out there and full potential.
And so a lot of them bought into it.
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to do that.
And they get out there and they start climbing the corporate ladder and they work hard and they start getting heart disease like men do and all this.
And then the biological time bomb starts ticking.
And in the late 30s, I want a baby.
I want a baby.
It's quite natural to me.
Women are the only ones that can do it until we get the artificial womb.
We're stuck with the way things are.
And then what's happening, and this is to the great disgust of feminists, a lot of these women, after the birth of the child and their maternity leaves, you know what?
I kind of like this.
And a lot of them are choosing to just punt the career and stay home and raise the child.
I think nature is a big factor in that too.
As long as the economics make it possible, nature's a big factor there.
Now, if I were Snerdley answering this question for you, it'd be real simple.
From his perspective, you're being hassled to be a father is nothing more than a woman trying to control you.
Well, I, yeah, I was, yeah, let's put it this way: put both of you.
I think you think Snerdle is right.
I think both of you are right.
The two there.
You've said, because you were, and I was, when you were talking, I'm thinking, well, maybe I'm looking more deeply or sinister into this.
So I think my answer to what I'm saying.
Jerry, Jerry, look, you got to allow for this possibility, too.
I don't know these women that have been trying to pressure you, that forced you to go get your vasectomy.
But it could also be that they just love you and that they really want to marry and they really want to have a family and they really think you'd be a great dad.
It could be no more complicated than that.
This may be a little personal, nothing, but I'll tell you what, I've listened to you a long time and everything, and I look at it this way, and I know nothing's perfect, but I go, damn, if Rush has trouble making marriages work, I think I would have even more trouble because of your situation and everything.
What do you think about it?
Well, you shouldn't do that.
Don't make the mistake of, don't just compare yourself to me.
Don't compare yourself to anybody.
Yeah, especially Snerdley.
Don't start comparing yourself to people.
That's the recipe for disaster in anything.
I don't care whether it's economics, jobs, don't start doing that.
In my case, I think I've just concluded that I don't know how best to say this.
There are some of us, and I even had a caller once.
In fact, I had a caller, a woman call me and say, don't ever get married.
Your work is too important to be distracted from.
And I think there are some of us to whom that applies.
I don't know what you do for the country, Jare.
But I'm out there saving America and so forth.
And that's a full-time job.
Understood.
Hey, thank you, sir.
I appreciate it.
All right, Jer, I appreciate it.
Well, okay, that's what I...
Okay, George, you go.
Snurdle's reminding me of George Gilder.
George Gilder got thrown off the Oprah show for saying what I'm about to tell you.
George Gilder is a genius.
He is brilliant.
And his big mistake was tying this in with the destruction of welfare families.
He says, George Gilder, in a societal sense, that he's looking not at individuals here, he's looking at human civilization over time.
And he says that women are the civilizing force in our culture.
A woman by agreeing to marry man X and then give birth to his children is a powerful statement of trust.
And because he says that in the vast majority of people, regardless their socioeconomic circumstances, the vast majority of people having children, raising children is, whether they're aware of it or not, an instinctive, most important thing they do in their life.
And woman is the one who says yes in normal circumstances.
I mean, I guess there's some women that propose these days, but it's the woman that says, woman has a power to say no.
And when she has that power and exercise it to say yes, it is quite a statement.
And so Gilder said that it is women who says, look at what's happened when families have been busted up by the welfare state.
It is the women, the grandmothers and so forth that keep those kids who are fatherless as best they can on the right track.
They don't always succeed, but they're the orienting factor.
So he says this on Oprah, and Oprah just got livid and literally threw him off the show before it was over.
That's when I knew I had to meet George Gilder.
So when I say nature, that's really what I meant was the Gilders.
I don't think there's anything wrong.
I hope nobody misunderstood this.
There's nothing wrong with woman A wanting to get married and have a kid or three.
Just not with me.
But I don't think there's anything wrong with it.
I mean, now I'm 55.
Let's say I got seduced into changing my mind about this.
All right.
And let's say it happened tomorrow.
Well, by the time Rush IV is born, Rush III's 56.
So by the time Rush III is 70, the 14-year-old kid has a grandfather for a father, not a father.
And I've just, I know, I've talked, you remember the, I talked to, when I first moved to New York, not long after starting work at WABC, Robert Vaughn, man from UNCLE, big talk radio fan, lived up, he came.
He came down to say hello to a bunch of us that were there, and he was 56 and just had given, his wife just given birth to the greatest thing that ever happened to him.
The greatest thing that ever happened.
I have another friend who didn't have his first kid until he was 60.
Plays basketball to the kid.
The kid's three years old.
Plays basketball to back.
The greatest thing that ever happened to him.
Fine.
That is absolutely wonderful.
I'm not China.
I'm not out there trying to establish a no-child policy for the country or even a one-child per-family policy for the country.
Okay, do we have now?
Let's take a time out here.
We'll come back.
Get this 12 species of flies.
Flies.
Flies.
Insects have now gotten federal protection.
Endangered Species Act.
Back after this.
All right.
12 species of rare flies known for their elaborate courtship displays and found only in the Hawaiian Islands are now protected under the Endangered Species Act.
The Fish and Wildlife Service announced the protected status for the highly valued picture-wing flies on Tuesday.
Now, you just wait.
Developers and others are now going to be stopped because a fly might be courting on their property.
This is absurd.
Freaking flies are being protected now.
Flies.
I don't know what you damn well, if one of these things starts courting on me, slap the thing.
Absolutely swat it away.
I can't believe this.
The next thing you know, they're going to ban the fly swatter.
Mark in Port St. Lucie, Florida.
Welcome to the program.
Welcome.
Nice to have you.
Thank you, Rice.
As they say on the golf course, long and straight.
Yes, sir, absolutely.
Doesn't happen enough.
There is no swing vote.
There is no middle anymore.
You know, everybody's playing to the middle, but there is no middle.
That's been proven by the last three elections.
And conservatives don't respond to polls.
They're too busy raising families, earning a living.
But what they do do is they vote.
And the grassroot comes out about 60 days before an election.
And basically, the Republican Party only needs to get out the grassroots.
They don't have to convert anybody.
George Bush won in 2004 with 51, 52% of the vote.
So there's no need to swing anybody.
Well, no, it's tricky.
I think there are some people who vote who actually don't know what to think, even Election Day.
Not everybody's like you and me, Mark, and out there committed to what we believe.
The vast majority of people are on both sides.
Country is more polarized now than it's been a long time, which doesn't leave a whole lot of room in the middle.
You're pretty much right about that.
But we still have people who call themselves swing voters.
We have people who call themselves moderates because it makes them think that they're smarter than everybody else.
They don't want to be considered partisans.
And I think they identify themselves this way in much greater numbers than they actually exist.
And Ergo polling data tends to reflect that.
John, I got a little time here, so I want to get as many on as I can.
Modesto is next.
And John, you are up.
Hello.
Ditto's from Modesto Rush.
I wanted to show you in Santa Claus County, California, there is no problem with illegals registering to vote.
I actually asked the Registrar of Voters here in town what he did to make sure that that didn't happen.
He assured me that they had to sign in three separate places on the form they applied to register to vote, that they were eligible.
They had to sign in three different places.
So we have no problem.
Yeah, it doesn't.
In fact, this doesn't totally relate to what you're saying.
One of the guys I played golf with on Monday afternoon was telling me the story.
This is Los Angeles.
He came from Minnesota.
So he had to go out there about two or three years ago.
He had to go out there and get his driver's license to change.
So he went to the DMV and he got up to the window and he started talking to the person and letting us talk to him for 45 or 50, maybe a minute about small talk.
And I came here from Minnesota.
Yeah, I got to love it out here.
I got to re-register and I got to get my driver's license switched over.
The first question he was asked: In what language would you like to take the test?
And what do you mean?
What language would I like to?
I've just been speaking to you in English for a minute at least.
He couldn't believe it.
And I said to him, It's not the guy's fault.
There's probably some bureaucrat requirement that he has to ask you that.
And so there's if these stories about illegals signing up to vote, that doesn't surprise me.
Democrats wouldn't be out there recruiting him at these rallies if it weren't the case.
Here is David in Kingsport, Tennessee.
Welcome, survey.
Tornadoes heading for you.
CNN's been telling us the last three hours tornadoes are going to cream Memphis.
No, I'm on the other end of the state.
I'm up here in the Smoky Mountains, east of Knoxville.
Ah, you're safe then.
Yeah, yeah, we're pretty safe from tornadoes here.
Dittos, I've been listening to you for years, Rush.
It's a pleasure to speak to you.
And I'd just like to say, you know, I was listening to the call earlier about purchasing television shows on the internet.
And I just got a degree in communications and I've worked in the field for some time.
And I just, people are awfully entrenched in the way they watch television.
They love to sit there and flip through the channels.
And I really don't believe that they're going to give up their surfing shows.
If I may interrupt, men are into surfing.
Yeah, if they can find the remote control.
No, it's true.
Women do not surf.
They surf a little, not as much as men.
Dawn, do you sit there and surf?
You do?
She says a little.
Okay, yeah.
My mom surfs a fair amount.
Usually the girls I'm dating surf a little bit.
But, you know, it's just the money to come up with new programs.
It would be difficult to produce a brand new show without being able to guarantee the advertisers it was going to be on TV, that you were going to have to rely on people to find it on the internet and purchase it.
And I think it would really hurt creativity.
You know, every time there's new technology, they predict the demise of the previous technology.
Radio was going to kill motion pictures.
TV was going to kill radio.
And now internet's going to kill TV, newspapers, and magazines.
And I just don't see it happening.
Well, probably not.
Although there are technological changes coming.
One of them is portability that's going to matter in a lot of ways.
But here's the bottom line to all this.
And this is what I tell people in this business when they start talking about, you're going to go to satellite.
You're going to go, you're going to say terrestrial.
You're going to do television.
It doesn't matter where I do it.
Content, content, content.
If people have to listen to it on two tin cans and a piece of string, if they want to, they'll find it.
The question is going to be: programs with great content have to be discovered, and you generally do that by surfing, and a word of mouth starts.
And so the people that produce these programs know all of that.
And they're going to find ways to maintain that way of having a program's popularity grow because that doesn't cost you anything.
Word of mouth is the best advertising there is.
That's what's killing Mission Impossible 3.
Everybody says it's a pretty good action movie, but it's dying.
And in this case, the content doesn't matter because the star has gotten so loopy.
All right, two things.
I'm going to not be here tomorrow.
I've got to go to Dallas.
Big Rush to Excellence appearance there tomorrow night.
Be back here on Friday for Open Line Friday.
We've also put up on the website the stories from the New York Times and Life magazine, post-war Germany.
So you can check the parallels, the way the media is reporting what's happening in Iraq today versus how they reported aftermath of World War II in Germany.
Dovetails very nicely with the al-Qaeda documents released this week that show that they are losing and that we are winning.
Have a nice middle-of-the-week Wednesday, folks.
See you in Dallas tomorrow night.
▲
Export Selection