All Episodes
Previous Next
June 6, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:24
June 6, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
By the way, my friends, just want to assure everybody out there, it's all quiet on day six of hurricane season.
However, volcano season appears to be heating up.
Did the volcanoes sign the Kyoto?
No, the volcanoes did not sign the Kyoto Protocol.
And even if the volcanoes had signed the Kyoto Protocol, they would have been exempt, like the Chikoms.
Our greetings, folks.
Welcome back.
As usual, your harmless, lovable little fuzzball, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have day in and day out.
It's an adult Christmas every day here on the EIB network.
Telephone number, if you'd like to join us, is 800-282-2882.
The email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
All right, it's a fairly interesting election day today.
Eight states have elections.
The most watched congressional contest is the only one that'll actually put somebody in office.
That's the special election in Southern California to replace Duke Cunningham.
California 50.
This is Francine Busby, local school board member who was polling even with Republican Brian Bilbray until she blurted out this nonsense on Thursday of last week that illegal aliens didn't need papers to vote for her or to work on her campaign.
Democrats obviously hope to win this seat using their culture of corruption mantra out in California 50 San Diego.
Interesting to see what will take place in this.
The Democrats have already said that even if Francine Busby loses, that it will be a moral victory because they're making inroads in these safe Republican districts.
It's sort of like Paul Hackett when he lost in a Republican district in Ohio.
They said it was a moral victory.
Can I tell you about moral victories?
A little football news.
Since so many of you are upset today, let me just go full bore.
A little football story.
Charlie Weiss, great offensive coordinator for the New England Patriots and their Super Bowl teams, head coach now at Notre Dame.
And last year, Notre Dame hosted number one USC.
And Notre Dame played one of the best games of Charlie, well, one of the best games this season.
It was first season last year.
It was just exciting and almost won the game.
USC came back on the arm of Matt Leinert and a running back Reggie Bush in the closing seconds of the game to win it.
And after the game, the sports media gathered around Charlie Weiss.
And he said, well, you got to feel good about this, Coach Weiss.
You're going to tell your players that you appreciate their effort.
It was a great moral victory.
And Weiss looked at him like he was looking at a collection of idiots.
And he said, did you look at the scoreboard?
You find the word moral up there?
We lost the game.
I'm not going to tell our players to feel good about losing a game.
Yeah, we might have played well, but we lost the game.
The scoreboard is what counts.
There's no such thing as moral victories.
I've never heard of a champion in moral victories of you.
Next question.
So I would say to you Democrats who want to continue to redefine victory as when you narrowly lose, keep it up.
Because for all the moral victories in the world you think you're having, it's just a bunch of sophistry.
You're just stroking yourselves trying to tell yourself something good happened when you lost.
And of course, for the country at large, it is a good thing when liberal Democrats lose.
In addition to the race to replace Cunningham, there are primaries today for governor in Alabama and California.
And the Democrat that wins that primary for governor in California is going to emerge beaten up, will be accused by his opponent of having been, or Democrat opponent of being a tax raised and corrupt himself.
Schwarzenegger has looked statesmanlike in comparison to Phil Angelides and the area Wesley, I think, is his name.
Also, what else we have?
We have a Senate seat in Montana and a handful of House contests.
In Montana, revelations of a three-term Republican Conrad Burns ties to Jack Abramoff have made him one of the most vulnerable members of Congress, inspiring a vigorous contest among Democrats for the right to face him this November.
Burns has blamed the Eastern liberal press for his troubles and predicted that Montana voters will make the right judgment call.
The issues in Alabama include tax policy, social conservatism, and immigration, as the Republican governor Bob Riley's failed tax increases have spurred both a Republican primary and a heated contest among Democrats.
The former Judge Roy Moore challenging Riley for the GOP nomination.
Now, Schwarzenegger, California, is at no major primary competition and has benefited, as I say, from the mean-spirited competition between Phil Angelitas, who's the state treasurer, and the state controller Steve Wesley.
Also, in California, adding intrigue to the state's vote is the fate of Proposition 82, the Meathead proposition.
This is a measure that would tax the rich to pay for universal preschruel.
And it would do even more than that.
It would put the government totally in charge of preschruel, even those of you in California who are paying on your own to send your kid to whatever preschruel you want your kid to go to.
Sorry, kid gets, isn't this right?
Kid gets pulled out of there or is put under some state control for this, for the agency.
Until late last week, Prop 82 held a slight advantage on Saturday.
However, polls showed that voters may be turning away from the idea.
It is just prop it has cost them, it's cost them billions already.
Didn't Meathead have to resign from this?
A little bit of conflict of interest problem that they had.
Yeah, he's throwing the money to, yeah, that's right.
He was throwing the money that you used for this to his Hollywood ad agency buddies.
And it appeared to be a conflict of interest.
Make no mistake what this is all about.
I've heard the meathead talking about Rob Reiner.
I've heard him talking about this.
And he gets up there, starts wringing his hands over, oh, we're leaving our kids behind.
Preschool is so important.
That's where they, you know, we have first grade through 12th grade, and it's apparent that that's not enough time to educate kids.
So now we've got work training centers for when you graduate from high school but don't know diddly squat.
We have places teaching you to go how to read when you graduate from high school but can't read your diploma.
Job training centers here and there.
Now it is so important to learn to read before you get to the first grade that we need preschool.
And they wring their hands and they talk about how so sad it is that kids are being left behind.
This is nothing more, folks.
Remember, I know these people.
I know these libs, like every square inch of my glorious naked body, and all they want is government in charge of as much as possible.
And the more years of your kids' education they can put under their control, they will do it.
It's inculcation time.
It's indoctrination time, all under the guise that we can't leave the students behind.
We just can't leave the children behind.
We wouldn't need all this attention to preschool if what should have been going on in grades one through five was actually happening or one through 12, period.
So instead of fixing and shaping up the primary years of education, we are going ahead and going to go ahead and proclaim, yep, yep, well, they're failures.
We've got to fix this by educating them before they get there and educating them after they leave.
And it's just, it's absurd.
Plus, it's always a way, as this case and story illustrates, to get even more money from you for government.
This is California, one of the highest tax states in the country.
And regardless what the left gets, it's never enough.
Back in just a second, folks.
We have more news, thanks to our buddies from Newsbacks, about the anger and the outrage in New York City over the $80 million in funding cuts at the hands of Michael Cherdoff and Homeland Security.
Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer have been complaining for a week now about the $80 million cut back in New York City's anti-terrorism funding, but it turns out they both voted to make substantial cuts in the city's anti-terrorism funding last year.
According to Newsday, the Democratic duo, this is Clinton and Schumer, backed a $95 million cut last December in funding from the Centers for Disease Control for bioterrorism programs around the nation.
Of that amount, approximately $3 million would have gone directly to New York City.
Mrs. Clinton and Senator Schumer actually wanted to cut bioterrorism funding even more.
In October, they both backed a preliminary proposal that would have slashed the CDC grant by $123 million.
And on Sunday, Schumer staged a press conference to complain about a proposed $7 million cut from the CDC and the city's bioterror programs, saying it was like rubbing salt in the wound after DHS announced cutbacks to the city's terror funding last week.
But he failed to mention his own votes in favor of cutting bioterror funding last year.
Here's Carl in West Hartford, Connecticut.
Welcome, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Thank you, Rush.
It's an honor.
Thank you.
I was watching a news story this morning, one of many, about the reconstruction in New Orleans.
And it occurred to me that, you know, it's been almost a year and the progress hasn't been that great that if the drive-by media and the liberals were being consistent, they should be calling for us to give up right now, throwing the towel the way they are in Iraq.
I was wondering why that hasn't happened.
Yes, but see, this is, you've got a good point, but there's nothing consistent about them if you look at it this way.
New Orleans is a liberal Mecca.
New Orleans is a liberal city.
Of course they want that rebuilt.
New Orleans, they can blame on Bush.
And they have, and they've done a pretty good job of blaming the whole thing on Bush.
And it's got to be rebuilt.
It's the only moral thing to do.
But look at it's the same thing I've been talking about for a couple of weeks now.
You have, all of a sudden, the Haditha episode, where 24 Iraqis are dead.
And the drive-by media and the Democrats are going to try to use this episode as the final push to get us out of Iraq and proclaim defeat for the United States and the Bush policy.
Pure and simple.
And they're doing this under the guise, this is outrageous.
How dare we sit here and tolerate this?
Why, look what the U.S. military does.
The U.S. military kills innocent women and children as though they care about Iraqis.
I'm here to tell you that the last people on this planet who care about the Iraqis are the drive-by media and the Democrats who are having conniption fits over this Haditha.
When Saddam Hussein was wiping out his own people in the hundreds of thousands, not a peep from these people.
When Rwanda was genociding 400,000 of its own, not a peep out of these people.
800,000 in Rwanda.
Excuse me, pardon me.
Now we have 24 deaths here.
I got some Abu Grab stuff.
I got Club Gitmo going on.
By the way, the hunger strike down there is over.
I guess they came through with some jell-o or something.
I don't know what the hunger strikers started eating.
At any rate, they don't care about these people, folks.
They couldn't care a whip about them.
So you wonder, Carl, why they're not worried about rebuilding Iraq and so forth or want to throw in the towel and verse visa when it comes to New Orleans.
If they could figure out a way for Iraqi citizens to vote for them, it'd be a whole different matter.
Give them the vote.
It'd treat them just like the illegal immigrants pouring in from all over the world.
It'd recruit.
They don't care a rat's rear end about the people of Iraq.
They hate the U.S. military.
They blame it.
It's the focus of evil in the modern world, and this is just the latest opportunity, and perhaps in their minds, the best opportunity to finally secure defeat.
This is Bob and Staten Island.
Glad you called, sir.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
How are you doing, Rush?
Pleasure.
Thank you.
Diddles from the only conservative borough in New York City.
Well aware of that, sir.
Yes.
That's why you face a higher, steeper tax increase as a result of the Department of Homeland Security budget cutbacks.
And our lovely mayor.
That's right.
Yeah.
Listen, I'm glad we're getting away from this Plan B for a little while.
You know, that's just another vote Chelsea Clinton's not getting in 2040.
I'd like to get into Michelle Wee on the front page of the New York Times today.
I missed that stuff on Chelsea, but I think that's probably okay.
What about Michelle Wee?
Michelle Wee on the front page of the New York Times.
She's out there to qualify.
Not only does she not qualify, how does that rate a front page article of the New York Times?
Aren't there more pressing issues of the day they can cover?
I mean, the woman hasn't even won an LPGA for yet.
Why are you bothering to read that, Rag anyway, Bob?
I stand my gosh with a rush.
You can tell it sends your blood pressure.
Now, you know full well why Michelle We is on the front page of the New York Times today.
Yeah, but I mean, what happened if she qualified?
Would they dedicate a whole section to her?
Oh, yeah, probably a whole section, maybe the whole front page.
Maybe, right?
At least the whole thing above the fold.
Absolutely.
I mean, to me, I mean, it goes right to what you said about Charlie Weiss, that story I love that I've heard before.
You know, I mean, how about, you know, put her on the front page when she does make the cut.
And Rush, she's not even qualifying against Tiger, Mickelson, Couples, you know, guys like that.
Let me tell you a little story about all this.
Back in, what was it, January?
Yeah, January, I was out in Palm Springs for the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic.
And at the end of the round one day, I forget which day I played four days, I was approached by a reporter who just started asking me some questions about a bunch of things.
And at the end of it, it threw in this, hey, what do you think about Michelle Wee?
Well, frankly, I don't think about Michelle Wee.
I hadn't thought about a whole lot.
I do know, I should tell you that I know her parents are big fans of this program.
I don't know that she listens.
She's a tyke.
She's a teenager.
But she may be a rush baby someday.
But her parents and her agent are big fans of the program.
I didn't know that then.
And I said to this guy, I said, well, I meant this as a compliment.
In a way, Michelle Wee right now is a triumph of marketing.
She's huge.
She's big.
She's got a major endorsement contract from Nike, and she has not won a tournament.
To me, it's time to get some wins.
Well, you would have thought that I had just leveled the most hurtful, harmful criticism.
There were golf blogs that took this up and tried to make me out to be the biggest, sexist, racist pig on the face of the planet.
Triumph of marketing.
So that bred its own controversy, and that survived.
It was its own little news story outside of the golf blogs.
I think it even showed up in a 60-minute interview with her Rush Limbosses, Triumph of Marketing.
She said, who?
I don't listen to the radio much.
So, okay.
Time to qualify for the U.S. Open, and that was in New Jersey yesterday, and there were 152 people out there qualifying.
They played 36 holes each, and she had a pretty good round up to the last four or five holes.
Even if she had finished at one or two, she still wouldn't have qualified even at one or two under.
But her putter just gave out on her late in the round, and she didn't qualify.
Now, the reason that this is front page news to the New York Times, you have to say that whoever's in charge of marketing, Michelle We has done a marvelous job.
There were galleries over there with the kind of treatment that only Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson get.
She does attract a crowd.
Had she qualified, it would have added a whole new dimension to the U.S. Opening.
People like Jack Nicholson are saying, hey, anybody can qualify is good enough to play.
I don't care what sex they are.
Bring them out there.
But she didn't qualify.
The reason the New York Times puts her on the front page, though, is the same, it's, we'll use this as an analogy, but it's the same liberal look at it.
Michelle Wee, a woman in a male-dominated culture.
White supremacist culture.
Here is a woman, 16, trying to find her way and just do her best.
And look how close she got.
And it is a way to build up diversity, equality, feminism.
Remember, the New York Times is the paper, Bob, that ran, what, 18 stories on the front page about Augusta National not allowing female members.
There's an agenda.
It's a pure leftist, feminist-oriented, feminized agenda at the New York Times.
And the foundation of putting Michelle Wee on the front page when she loses is to simply promote that agenda, create awareness, and to chronicle her effort.
Ooh, wasn't it wonderful, 16-year-old girl?
And in some ways, you know, you have to, you people that don't play the game, you probably get bored by the talk.
But it's one of the few games where 90% of it's played between the ears.
And for her to go out there and do as well as she did with the pressure that was on her, I mean, if she loses, she's got a lot of money and so forth.
But the performance pressure, it's one of the things that's always amazed me about Tiger Woods in the year 2000, or actually any year.
He knows what his own expectations are, what the hopes and expectations of fans are, and he still is able to come through and perform more often than not.
Same in Michelle.
We hasn't gotten there, but she still maintains her composure out there.
So I can understand, in a sense, some of the attention she gets.
But it is time for a win.
Exactly right.
Real life, exactly what you get here on the EIB network.
Hey, get this.
Get this, folks.
Democrats are seeking ways to reach out to military families, hosting a discussion yesterday to help congressional staffers better communicate with men and women serving in the armed forces.
Kathy Roth Duques and Frank Schaefer.
Authors of AWOL, The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service and How It Hurts Our Country, spoke in a Capitol basement office filled with Democratic staffers who shared their personal stories of military service and examples of being part of a military family while trying to relate to elite colleagues who dismissed their experiences.
To trivialize, this doesn't win any friends or sense of understanding, Mrs. Roth Duques said of the great disconnect between liberal and military culture.
Mr. Schaefer describes himself as someone from Massachusetts who usually votes for the Republicans, adding that he thinks the disconnect that he and Mrs. Roth Duque describe comes from a guilty relationship between Democrats and the military after Vietnam.
You know, I don't, it's amazing.
You get these people go out and write a book, they become experts, and then they sit there and do seminars for congressional Democrats and their staffers on how to relate to the U.S. military.
Now, what in the world does that tell you?
I mean, the Democrats have to have meetings among themselves to figure out what it is of what they believe they can admit to and what it is they believe that they have to hide and what it is they believe they have to lie about.
Now they're having meetings with so-called experts to explain to them how to relate to people in the military.
It's too late for that.
Now, when you got Jack Murthy out there and Schumer and Ted Kennedy and all of them on the Democratic side for the last five years, it's too late to try to relate to the military.
It's not possible.
And, oh, and Carrie for crying out loud.
You guys, this is what you get when you try to relate to the military.
You bring back a war hero who was a fraud, put him in a uniform, send him out to retake Boston Harbor as part of his convention ceremony, and think you're relating to people who love the military.
You can't simply divorce yourself from your votes, from your rhetoric, from your actions.
I could help these people better than Pam Parliament, these authors, like this line here.
Well, nothing against Mr. Schaefer.
I mean, I don't know him, and he's a Republican here, but he describes as somebody from Massachusetts, usually votes for the Republicans, adding that he thinks the disconnect that he and Mrs. Roth Duque, the co-author, describe comes from a guilty relationship between Democrats and the military.
It's not what it is.
Guilty relationship, Democrats and media from Vietnam.
It's very simple.
They hate the military, and it's gone on since before Vietnam.
Vietnam may have been where that hatred coalesced, but certainly since Vietnam, the military is the focus of evil in the modern world, the American left and the worldwide left.
And they have thrown parties and they've celebrated it every American defeat because they want it to, all these defeats to contribute to less use of the U.S. military.
They resent the whole notion of a military, resent the whole notion of use of force.
There's no guilt.
Well, I mean, guilt's the underlying thing, but it's the idea that you can have some seminars with these people and tell them how to relate.
Once again, it's like saying we're going to inject some spirituality into our campaign this year.
If you have to inject it, you ain't got it.
And if you have to tell people you're tough, you ain't tough.
And if you have to tell people that you relate to them and you have to have a meeting to try to figure out how to relate to people in the military, you don't relate to them.
I mean, all of these meetings that they're having are quintessential proof of the elitism and the out-of-touch nature that American liberals are in.
Brenda in Muncie, Indiana.
Great you're on the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Hi.
Hi.
I would like to start by saying for my husband, Mega Dittos, he's listened for 16 years, and I think he now has IED because he's been trying to get through to you, and I pick up the phone one time and dial it and get through.
So he's very upset right now.
Is he there with you?
No, he's already left for work.
Oh, okay.
Well, that's too bad.
I understand how that could result.
By the way, you're just tuning us.
IED is intermittent explosive disorder.
One of the symptoms of this is road ridge.
16 million of you have it.
We discussed it in the first hour, and Brenda here is referencing it.
I'm sorry your husband experienced a temper tantrum over this, but he should be happy for you that you got through.
Oh, he is.
He is.
Well, he's a good guy then.
What I called about is because I'm not sure of the difference between IED and ADD, because I have a 16-year-old that just recently came to live with us, and he was diagnosed with ADD at kindergarten, and he's more frustrated with the fact that he can't spell and read at 16 years old than he is a problem child with ADD.
Well, you know, maybe he's got the maturity to be frustrated over not being taught to read and write by the time he's 16.
He was diagnosed with ADD at age six.
Yeah.
Makes sense.
I mean, you know, I think ADD is misdiagnosed.
I think it's parents and teachers that have it.
I think it's parents and teachers unable to focus on kids as they are.
And so blame and blame.
I don't want to deal with this hyperkinetic kid.
What have I got to deal with, make it a problem the kid has and so forth.
I think they're diagnosing the wrong people here.
Well, the only time that he has to take medication is when he goes to school.
Now, upon dealing with these schools, I found out that the child can't read because I had him sit down and try to read to me, and I found out that he can't read.
He can't spell, but he's going into the 11th grade.
And when he takes an I-STEP test, they read the test to him so that he can pass it so they can get their government funding instead of teaching them like they're supposed to do.
No, I hate to say this, Brenda.
You're out of touch.
It's been this way for years now.
I'm obviously very out of touch because I didn't go through this with my children.
Well, I know, but it's been this way for you.
I mean, the numbers of people that graduate high school that can't read would astound you.
The number of programs we have for kids who've got high school diplomas who don't have any education would astound you.
It really is amazing.
What are you going to do?
What are you going to do about this young man living with you?
What are you going to do to fix the reading and writing problem?
Well, he and I have devised a plan that until I can get him into the Sylvan Learning Center, which has agreed to help us here, we're going to sit down in the evenings, and we have three hours in the evenings every night during the summer that we're going to spend reading, doing current events, watching the world news, you know, things like that, so that we can help.
Because as far as math goes, the child is a genius in math, but can't read or write.
He's a genius in math.
Yeah.
Can't read or write.
How does he write math formulas and do equations and that kind of thing?
I get into algorithms and all that.
I have no clue.
I'm dumbfounded here.
Well, I got to tell you, I have a nephew.
The kid's name is Scott.
How is he now?
4-5, 4-3.
This kid is a whiz-bang on a computer.
He can sit there and he can go through the computer and hit the keyboard and do things, play a lot of games, and he's just a whiz-bang at it, but he doesn't know how to read yet.
I don't understand that.
I just how does that happen?
Well, he's being taught to read now, but I mean, he doesn't have the reading proficiency that his use of the keyboard would tend to indicate.
It's sort of stunning to watch.
Well, you know, you got to go out and get the see the Dick and Jane books.
I mean, that's what we all learn to read on.
See Dick run, see Jane run faster, C-Spot mess the carpet, whatever it was.
Those are, that's, I remember how I started.
Bambi.
You know, it's a tough thing.
Education, if, if, um, I wouldn't know what to do.
If I were just starting out, if I had, if I had a young child living with me, say, four years old or five, and I wanted to teach him to read, I wouldn't know what the first thing to do would be.
There's got to be a progression.
You have to start someplace.
I guess it's the alphabet.
But that's why it's important.
There are people trained to do this in the most efficient ways, and it isn't being done in schools, as you have found out.
Yeah, and I just don't understand that.
The lack of education in the schools.
Well, let me Brenda.
Let me give you the one of the most common explanations for it is that we live in a culture that refuses to be judgmental, particularly of people who either underperform or underachieve.
We have concocted a scenario where we can't humiliate them or embarrass them by pointing out what they don't know.
That led to a period of time where we had outcome-based education where the student thought 2 plus 2 is 5 was okay until he learned that it was actually 4.
And we're going to tell him it was not 5 because that would be humiliating.
It'd be embarrassing to tell a kid, no, you're wrong.
2 plus 2 is 4.
And so I think this ongoing liberal obsession with not being judgmental and not hurting people's feelings and not harming them emotionally and scarring them for the rest of their life leads to a lack of proper authority.
And the inmates ended up running the asylum.
And plus, you mentioned another thing with so much federal money coming in, you turn the kids out and poop them up one grade to the next just to keep the money flowing in.
It's why so many people want to take their kids out of the public school system.
But again, the liberals stand in the way of that.
They'll send their kids to private school, but you can't send yours because that would destroy the public school system.
Brenda, I appreciate the call.
A quick timeout.
We'll continue much more straight ahead right after this break.
Get these next two stories, but you've got to hear these.
Both out of Congress, hoping to speed approval of funds for the war.
House and Senate negotiators were to meet last night on, well, no, tonight, sorry, tonight, on legislation to pay for the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan and for hurricane relief along the Gulf Coast.
Now, in order to do this, they got to cut money from other places in order to get, because the Army is in danger of not being able to meet payroll real soon if they don't get this done.
So they found an additional $648 million to cut.
It was obtained by Senator Robert Byrd to beef up security at U.S. ports.
That money is going to be cut.
The $648 million to beef up security at ports is going to be cut.
Not going to be spent so that the money can go to the fund the war effort.
Now, after this brouhaha over port security and everything, and what everybody was saying, the Senate is now going to cut this out.
Next story.
U.S. lawmakers urge more steps by the United Arab Emirates against terrorism.
The United Arab Emirates should cooperate more with the U.S. against nuclear proliferation to help ensure terrorists do not hijack its vulnerable economy and threaten global security, according to a group of U.S. lawmakers.
A June 5th letter obtained by Reuters was signed by Representative Sue Kelly of New York, the Republican vice chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Florida Republican Iliana Roslatman, Massachusetts Democratic Representative Stephen Lynch, Florida Republican rep Mark Foley, and California Democratic rep Diane Weinstein.
They sent a letter to the UAE.
They sent a letter to Dubai saying you guys better share what nerve.
You guys aren't doing enough for and finally there's a new study out there.
U.S. Latino youngsters are more likely to become obese by age three than either black or white children for reasons that cannot be explained by factors such as income and maternal education.
A study report from Mathematica Policy Research Research at Princeton, New Jersey, said today: So, a new obesity problem out there among Latinos.
Jose, Rio Linda, California, nice to have you on the program.
Welcome.
Rush.
Oh, my God.
Rio Linda, garbage man, picking them up, putting them down, dudos, Rush.
Thank you, Jose.
Hey, wouldn't Michelle We getting on the New York Times front page, wouldn't that be a moral victory?
Well, for who?
For feminists, for Michelle We.
It's a great victory for Michelle Wee.
Yes, she didn't.
I see your point.
It's a great moral victory for her, yes.
Well, then it's not just a complete waste of time.
I never said it was a complete.
Who said what was a waste of time?
No, not a waste of time, but who said it was.
Wait, wait, wait.
Who said what was a waste of time?
Well, I was thinking it was.
What was a waste of time to put her on the front page or a waste of time her playing in the tournament?
Well, her playing in the tournament, but it got her on the well.
I guess it wouldn't be a waste of time playing in the tournament.
What are you doing?
We're talking to somebody from Rio Linda here.
Why am I even trying to engage him?
I mean.
Indeed.
It's a pointless exercise.
But you know, Sam, an optimist.
I wanted to give you a shot.
I wanted to give you a chance.
What else is up out there, Jose?
One more chance here.
One more chance.
Since I love you all from Rio Linda so much.
It's Riolinda.
It was almost Rio Limbaugh.
Do you remember that?
Yeah, except I volunteered to buy property out there if they'd change it to Rio Limbaugh, California, where they said no.
They said no?
Well, they should have said yes.
Yeah, too late now because I'm not coming back.
Rio Limbaugh would have been so much better than Rio Linda is.
All right.
Well, Jose, it's great to hear from you, pal.
I always love getting calls out there from Rio Linda.
You never know what you're going to get.
Well, you do know what you're going to get.
Jenny in Staten Island, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
How's it going?
Good.
All right.
It's Jerry.
I'm sorry, I misread that.
Jerry, welcome to the program, sir.
Quite all right.
You were talking about how road rage has been a problem.
Road rage isn't a problem, it's a solution.
If it gets people out of my way so I can get to where I go, it's a good thing.
How do you do that, though?
How do you exercise and engage in road rage?
What do you do?
Well, I just want to make certain that they know not to be in my way.
Otherwise, I'll have to really hit them with the high beams and get the cow catcher in front and just gung-ho.
Okay.
You know what?
He's from Rio Linda, too, isn't he?
And you just put Staten Island up there.
But you gave me two Rio Linda calls in a row.
Scott in Putnam County, New York.
Welcome to the program.
Hello?
Yes.
Hi, how are you?
Fine, great.
A third one, perhaps, here.
I'm not from Rio Linda, I promise.
Now, I know why you say what you say.
Yes.
Now, it says, Here, you want to talk about the Kilo evictions?
Yes, I was driving home, actually.
I'm on my cell phone, and the news, I get the Connecticut news.
And I just said that they either, I'm not exactly sure, but they said either they're ready to evict or they just evicted the last two persons from the eminent domain.
They're going to take action to get rid of the last two.
The last two refused to go.
I was just, I mean, I was appalled when I first heard about it, and it's been out of the news for a while.
But for them to bring it up again, it's just, it's insane.
I mean, it's insane.
It makes me crazy.
I have to say, it just makes me nuts.
These four people are losing a house to give it to somebody else to own their property.
I mean, that's unbelievable.
Is this the first you've heard of this?
No, no.
It's not the first I heard of it.
Actually, after I heard of that case, he's having an IED moment over it then, because this has aggravated you even more.
Well, it should aggravate a lot of people, but it's, hey, look, this is big government standing with big government, not the little guy.
This is liberal standing with government.
In this case, the city of New London, Connecticut, not the little guy.
A lesson to be learned there.
Be right back, my friend.
The fastest three hours in media have just gone by.
Show prep for the rest of the media to follow has taken place.
And so our job today is done, but it never ends.
See you again tomorrow.
We'll look forward to it, my friends, then.
▲
Export Selection