All Episodes
Previous Next
June 30, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:43
June 30, 2006, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Despite the best efforts of my brother, David, street wanderer in Cape Girarda, the transcript of the bin Laden tape of the Assembly was from January, not the one that was made.
Yeah, we still can't find it.
It's not there.
But I read this one, and I'm going to share excerpts of it with you anyway, because it's stunning how similar Bin Laden sounds to Democrats.
It's Friday, folks.
Let's head it.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
Yip, Yahoo!
Goody-goody gumdrops and all of that.
One hour to go as we head into the Independence Day weekend.
Open Line Friday.
I Rush Limbaugh.
Get out of the way.
When we go to the phones, we go to the phones.
The program is all yours.
Meaning, you can talk about something even if I don't care about it.
You can ask a question, you have a comment, whatever.
This is the day to do that.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
By the way, folks, there's a chance you're going to get hit by an asteroid on Monday.
And I just need to mention this to you because it can all end on Monday.
It's hurtling out there, Tortoise.
And it's time to party.
Time to party hardy.
An asteroid that's about one half mile wide is hurtling toward Earth, expected to narrowly miss us early Monday.
Expected to miss us.
Expected.
But of course, the same people expect horrible economic news when we get good economic news.
They're routinely surprised.
And this is not going to be that far away.
268,624 miles away at its closest approach.
That's pretty much the distance the moon is in that neighborhood.
And it's going to go hurtling past us.
This is very, very close in astronomical terms.
The asteroid, which was discovered in December of 2004, at first produced concerns it could hit Earth later in the century, but subsequent studies ruled out such a collision.
But we know that these scientists often don't know what they're talking about.
So if this thing hits us Monday, and can you imagine what that would do to global warming?
Accelerate it even more.
And if that happens, and if this is our last day together, folks, I just want to, it has been a joy, a shared delight, something that if we're all blown to smithereens, I will never forget it.
Particles of all of us will be scattered throughout the universe with our experiences forever to be told in our DNA.
In a study of sleep characteristics in 669 adults in Chicago who were compared by sex and race, investigators found that blacks got less sleep than whites, while men got less sleep than women.
Furthermore, the wealthier you are, what are you doing in there?
What are you stuffing?
Oh, you found them.
You found it.
Okay.
Oh, okay.
Well, I thought, you know, I only can see your heads and you keep leaning over there with these pieces of paper.
It look like you're stuffing them down her bra.
I'm just faith.
No, it turns out he was using their computer, but I can't see that.
And she had a big smile on her face.
I'm just.
All right, where was I?
Oh, yes.
Sleep story.
The wealthier you are, ladies and gentlemen.
The wealthier you are, the more sleep you're likely to get.
Dr. Diana Lauderdale of the University of Chicago and her colleagues found there was an expectation that people with very demanding jobs in terms of high status and high income will be getting less sleep, and that just isn't true, Lauderdale told all Reuters.
So basically, rich folks get more sleep, blacks and men get less, minorities and the poor hardest hit, even when it comes to sleep.
Well, they must not have been studied because 669 adults in Chicago, they must not have compared the we got plenty of welfare recipients that wake up at one in the afternoon and call this program.
See what else?
Look at this: Northeast U.S. floods stir global warming debate.
The hell doesn't stir the global warming debate anymore.
Listen to this headline from Al Reuters: World Cup, a big yawn in soccer-hating U.S. now.
Al Reuters is in Europe.
You've got to understand their headquarters in Europe.
If you look west from Germany these days, you'll see America stifling a yawn at the World Cup.
Despite a doubling of TV ratings for the first-round matches this month, before the U.S. squad failed miserably, soccer still ranks below televised poker tournaments in a land where baseball, basketball, and American football rule.
Only 3.9 million people in America watch the 2002 World Cup final out of 1.1 billion worldwide.
Ford Motor Company is a tragic story, folks.
Grab the handkerchiefs.
Ford Motor Company will fall short of its goal of producing 250,000 hybrid vehicles a year by 2010.
Oh, shucks, folks.
What a disappointment.
They build you up and then they let you down.
The company's top executive, Bill Ford, announced the goal in September.
He said then that gas-electric hybrid engines would be available in half the Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury lineup by 2010.
The goal of 250,000 hybrids a year would have been 10 times the number that Ford was building at the time.
Ford sent an email message to employees Wednesday, said the company instead would focus on other alternative fuels.
According to the Detroit news and the Detroit Free Press, it's going to be devastating to Lori David and other Hollywood liberal elites.
U.S. Forest Service officers were slugged, elbowed, and pelted with a rock when they tried to arrest a bunch of hippies at a gathering of the Rainbow family near Steamboat Springs.
The confrontation happened on Monday night.
It was one of at least three clashes between officers and so-called campers as thousands of the Rainbow family gather for a week-long outing, which officially begins today, tomorrow.
None of the injuries was serious.
Forest Service spokesman Kimberly Vogel said.
About 5,000 of the 5,000 members of the free-spirited, loosely affiliated band of hippies have arrived at the campsite in a root national forest about 30 miles north of Steamboat Springs in defiance of the Forest Service, which has refused to grant the group a permit, citing fire dangers.
So, hippies attack the feds.
Peace-loving communal types, long-haired maggot-infested, dope-smoking FM types out there attacking the feds.
How about our buddies at USA Today?
The drive-by media.
USA Today acknowledged in a note to our readers, it means it wasn't a big story.
USA Today acknowledged in a note to our readers that it could not establish that Bell South or Verizon actually contracted with the National Security Agency to provide it with customer calling records as it previously reported.
But USA Today spokesman Steve Anderson said, quote, this is an important story that holds up well.
At the heart of our report is the fact that NSA is collecting phone call records of millions of Americans.
What we address in the editor's note deals with the fact that we originally reported that the telephone companies were working under contract with the NSA.
We've concluded that we cannot establish that Bell South of Horizon entered into a contract with the NSA to provide the bulk calling records.
Accompanying story, the newspaper reported today that lawmakers on House and Senate intelligence committees have said that while the NSA has amassed a huge database of calling records, cooperation with the NSA by telephone companies was not as extensive as USA Today initially reported on May the 11th.
So they admit they were wrong, but the story holds up.
This is shades of Dan Rather and Mary Mapes.
They go out there, forge documents to advance the notion that Bush lied about guard service or what have you.
Find out that the documents are forged, and Dan Rather says, nobody has challenged the depth of our story.
Nobody has been able to disprove the contention of the story.
We're standing by the story.
If this story is not true, I want to break that story.
Remember when he said that?
Dan, it's been broken a bunch of bloggers.
So apparently the pattern is that you can go ahead and assert anything you want through the drive-by media.
As long as nobody can disprove it, then it's true, even when you have to retract it.
Back after this.
Stay with me.
Hi, welcome back, my friends and good buddies.
Rush Limbaugh, an excellent role model for the youths of America, 800-282-2882.
Dawn, what are you doing?
And, you know, this is starting to get distracting.
I'm going to close the shade.
I am closing the shade.
We're going to fly blind here, folks, because you guys have to pay very close attention in there because I cannot keep watching this.
It's Independence Day, so 4th of July, ladies and gentlemen, coming up this weekend.
Of course, the 4th is on Tuesday.
And there's still plenty of time for you to get fully and totally prepared.
Talent on loan from God.
Rush Limbaugh on Open Line Friday, back to the phones to Leeds Summit, Missouri.
This is just outside Kansas City.
Gary, great to have you on the program with us.
Megadoodos, Maha Rushi, what a pleasure.
I've been listening since I think 1989, 90 when I got my first outside sales job and was in a car and found you, and it's been a relationship ever since.
So what a pleasure.
Thank you, sir, very much.
I appreciate it very much.
Hey, a couple of weeks ago, you were talking about ADD and how you think it's one of those made-up diseases, which I 100% concur with you on that.
Be careful.
See, you can say you got anonymity.
You're not going to catch any grief.
Exactly.
Except for maybe from my local press if they find out who I am.
Anyway, I actually renamed the disease, and I think it is a disease, but it's called DDD, and that stands for Discipline Deficit Disorder.
And I think it develops from children lacking in discipline from their parents.
And I think basically the problem is parents today are lazy.
They want to rush, and I know you don't have kids, you don't know this, but I have four, and I have one going into college, 124.
I have the whole range.
And kids are a lot of work, man.
It's a job.
It's a 24-7 job.
And if you want to do it right, it actually involves effort.
Yeah.
And I think a lot of parents today.
They don't want to spend the energy to raise their kids to be responsible adults.
They'd rather blame it on a disease.
It's this whole generation of abdicating responsibility, I think.
Man, you're really stepping into now.
It's one thing to say there's no disease.
It's another thing to rename it and blame it on parents.
Well, you know, I mean, really, children are the products of their parents.
I mean, both both, you know, from control.
Let me see if I understand what you're saying.
What you're saying is you're calling this discipline deficit disorder, DD.
That is correct.
And what you're essentially saying is that a bunch of people go out there, they get married, and what's the next thing in a relationship?
Baby.
Maybe you have a couple babies.
But they really don't want to.
They really don't want to be parents.
They'd rather live their lives, but they've got the kids.
And the kids, I mean, they're running around their little firecrackers worth of energy and so forth.
And all these parents want to do is entertain themselves.
And I can't deal with this.
This kid won't mind this kid.
So they drug the kid up, so the kid's basically vegetating out there.
Exactly.
Like, for instance, I've got a 15-year-old boy right now, and he is a pain in the behind.
I mean, we have to be on top of him every day.
What for?
What kind of trouble is this kid getting into?
You know, it's not bad trouble, but things like you just got to keep him focused on school.
And, you know, he does a lot of the, you know, he's into the lipping off stage.
And just, you know, just not allowing stuff like that to continue and grow and just basically disciplining.
I mean, discipline is an ongoing.
Yeah, because I'm not talking about beating the kids.
You know what?
Seriously, I think you do have a point.
I think it's very difficult for parents who want to be their kids' friends to discipline them.
Oh, yeah, you can't.
You can't ever cross that line and you can't mix the two.
If you start becoming your kid's friend, then you start disciplining them.
You're not going to understand it.
That's exactly right.
I'm not saying that you don't discipline without love.
I mean, but the kids have to know.
Basically, the kids need to have boundaries.
And parents that kids need to understand, and this has far-reaching effects later on in their lives, which I think where a lot of liberals come from.
Basically, they need to understand that their actions have consequences.
And a lot of parents let kids have ongoing actions that are bad for them or bad for the family, and there's really no consequences.
There's promises of consequences, but those consequences are rarely delivered.
And to deliver those consequences, again, involves actual effort, calorie burning, work.
Let me tell you a little story.
You have reminded me of a story.
This past weekend, I went to the Dominican Republic.
Yes.
We heard.
We heard.
It's not, you know, this is so.
Everybody's making these humorous assumptions about this that couldn't be more incorrect.
Maybe someday I'll delve into it.
But one of the things we did, we went up to Santiago, which is the headquarters of the Fuente cigar family.
And let me just tell you a quick thing here.
The first thing they took us out to their farm, which is about a 30-minute drive, I guess, east of Santiago, where they actually grow the tobacco.
So it's just fascinating.
But they've set up a there are five really poor, I mean, dead poor, what they call villages that are near their farm.
And the Fuentes have been raising money from Americans and others.
And they've created a school with a baseball field and a number of things, a hospital, doctors.
And the kids are out of school now, but they met us there.
We were there for two hours last Sunday afternoon, maybe even longer than that.
And The Fuente family is trying to take the bounty that they have experienced from their business combined with charitable donations to build this city, to raise these people out of poverty.
And my point with this is that some of the guys that were with me on the trip were looking at this and they were stunned.
It was the first time they'd seen anything like this.
I've been talking about this abject poverty.
And all of them said, I can't believe, I just can't believe how entitled my kids feel.
I said, let me tell you something, gang.
This is Rodeo Drive compared to Afghanistan.
That's why I will never, ever listen to people in this country complain about poverty in the same way again.
But the point was, kids in this country have it so good.
They don't know anything else.
It's not their fault.
It's why they need the discipline.
They do develop an entitlement mentality, and parents want their kids to have more than they had.
So parents are free-flowing with love and gifts and this sort of thing.
And it does create a set of expectations or atmosphere of entitlement.
So I know what you're saying about it.
Rush, here's how mean of a parent I am.
My daughter starts as a freshman at MU at the School of Journalism next year, which I'm sure you're familiar with in Columbia.
Yes.
Yes, and guess what?
We're making her pay for her own college.
Now, is that mean or what?
Well, some people will think that it is.
I know, I know.
Some people think that it isn't, but no, there's nothing wrong with teaching the value of money early on.
It's always to travel to other parts of the world where there is real, real poverty.
And by the way, these kids from these five poor villages were some of the happiest.
They were smiling kind.
They have nothing.
They're in the process of acquiring.
They have nothing, but they were happy as they could be.
It was quite a sight.
I got to run.
We're a little long here.
Okay, Dawn, I'm going to raise the shade in an attempt here.
Have you heard any news about the president's approval numbers being up over 40%?
You heard that?
Well, okay, Fox had it at 40, but another poll has it at 41.
Are we hearing about this?
I have a little Los Angeles Times story here by our old buddy Ronald Brownstein.
The headline, though Bush's numbers edge up, war discontent lifts Democrats.
Bush's numbers edge up, but discontent over Iraq, especially among women, continues to bolster Democrat hopes for November.
That's the sum total of the stories.
As far as the media is concerned, well, yeah, Bush is still in the basement, taking a step up, but he's still in the basement.
Numbers are coming back.
But he still doesn't have a pair because the country hates Iraq, especially women.
Bolstering the chances.
So even a Bush, well, not even.
Everything continues to be viewed through the prism of the effect on Barbara Walters.
Bush.
The next story in the stack is Star Jones and Barbara Walters.
And I'm asking myself why.
Why did I even put it here?
Star Jones was never that big a deal anyway.
And that view show is, well, it's an embarrassment.
It's an embarrassment to women.
I guess it's got some kind of an audience.
But can I tell you what surprised me about the Star Jones-Barbar Wawa breakup, if you will?
It went against everything I've always been taught about women.
It goes against everything that I have ever been taught.
It doesn't go against my instincts.
My instincts, I trust, but I've been told my instincts are wrong.
I've been told various things.
For example, these are open-minded, and these are liberal women, folks.
That means they're open-minded and they're compassionate and they are caring and they support each other.
The liberals hang together.
And I am just stunned that they would act towards each other this way.
And we have to.
Star Jones is black.
The one minority on this show just got canned, publicly canned and humiliated just by a bunch of sensitive, touchy, feely liberal women.
Surely, can they not see each other's points of view?
Surely, yeah, why can't they get along?
Why couldn't a little conflict resolution been employed here?
Surely they could have just sat down, not on camera, just sat down and worked out their differences instead of all this public carping?
Shouldn't they be wringing their hands and asking, what have I done to make Star angry?
What have I done to make her so mad with me?
Can't we all just get along?
No.
No.
She's history.
She's gone.
She's out of there.
And now they're trashing her publicly.
And this is not what I'm told liberal women are all about.
That they work out their differences, that they don't fall prey to these petty little jealousies and so forth that other people do.
I'm confused.
Andy in Sioux City, Iowa.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Wow.
Thank you very much for taking my call.
It's an honor to be able to speak to you finally.
Thank you, sir.
It's great to have you with us on the program.
I wanted to thank you for what you said in December of 2003.
And I don't know if you remember that.
I'll refresh your memory.
You're talking about young adults that were still living at home.
Oh, the slackers.
Right.
The slackers.
And I wanted to thank you because what you said, I ended up moving to my parents' house.
I'm on my own now.
I just got married last fall to an awesome woman, and we just bought a house last Monday.
No kidding.
All this in three years or four years, I guess.
Right.
Three of you.
So how old were you when you finally moved out of your parents' house?
Well, I was 23.
I'd actually only been living there for about five, six months.
I had just gone out of active duty prior to that, active duty in the Army.
And so I was living with them.
I was planning on going to school for the next two years while living at home.
And I heard your program and you're talking about that, and it kind of hit me.
I remember we talk about this a lot.
This is a phenomenon.
But I mean, we were actually talking about 35-year-old guys that still live with mom and dad, sponging off mom and dad.
Well, I'm not sure.
And believe me, you know, for every guy with guts and a spine like you, Andy, there's a lot of 35-year-olds out there loving it, still living with mom and dad, getting a big kick out of gaming in the system, bringing their girlfriends home.
And parents have to get it.
And the parents are whacked out too.
They think it's cool.
No, I asked my wife what she would have thought if I still live at home.
She said, it would have been kind of weird.
I don't know if I would have ended up marrying you.
Well, I'm sure.
See, you've moved out.
You're living with your folks.
They were taking care of you.
Now your wife is.
This is a slick move on your part.
Very, very slick.
And I get the credit.
You're giving me the credit for making this happen.
I don't think I would have moved out, you know.
I was pretty nice, though.
So you were sort of shamed into this.
Yeah.
Well, shame is not a bad thing.
More people should have more of it.
And I thank you for the call and all the best.
Congratulations on your nuptials out there.
Thank you very much.
And your new house.
Andrew in Klamath Falls, Oregon.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
Giga Dittos.
Thank you.
Hey, two quick talking points.
The first one is it just really blows my mind that when it comes to liberals and the left and the U.S. and Western culture, how they tell us that with Iraq, we can't push on our cultures, such as capitalism, democracy, help them build constitutions.
But yet you turn around to Abu Grab and not even Abu Grab, but our own down here, they demand that we give them constitutional rights and their own Bill of Right.
It's just really two-faced need to make up their minds whether that's.
That is a brilliant point.
That is an outright brilliant point.
I hadn't even thought of that.
That means it has to be brilliant.
Oh, thank you.
No kidding.
Here we're in Iraq.
We're trying to establish, quote-unquote, the word is a democracy.
We're trying to establish freedom for them to determine their own way of life.
They're in the process of doing it.
And we have liberals and Democrats in this country.
It can't be done.
You can't impose freedom on people.
You can't improve your way of life.
They've not Arabs in their fair.
They don't have any experience.
They can't wait.
And yet, capture them, bring them to Club Gitmo, and we force our own system on them at the Supreme Court.
Right.
And, you know, since when is the U.S. Constitution global?
I mean, they complain we do things globally, but then want to force that globally.
Well, the U.S. Constitution apparently is global with this Supreme Court ruling.
It really, I mean, this is such an abomination of a ruling.
That's an excellent point out there, Andrew.
You're going to be a lone wolf being in Oregon, thinking the way you do.
I mean, how many conservative friends do you have?
Actually, a lot.
In Klamath Falls, it's fairly conservative.
Is it?
We're good.
Yeah, we're not over with Moscow on the side of the hill.
Well, good.
My other point, if I can take a second.
Yes, take two.
Okay, just because I never hear this, and I apologize.
I keep breaking up and losing my way here.
On global warming, I've been reading articles now for probably the last three years about how scientists say that we might be going into a new switching of the North and South Pole.
That basically our magnetic shield is controlled by the geodynamo.
And for those of you in Rio Lindo, that's the big spinning metal ball in the middle of the earth that makes your compass work.
And so they think that that's...
You lost him when you said compass.
It's the north-southeast-west thing on your rearview mirror in your car.
The cars are on concrete blocks in the front yard.
But that since they think it's starting to switch north and south pole, and part of the reason is since we've been taking care and monitoring the magnetic shield of the earth since the middle of the 1800s, it's reduced about 10% in strength.
Now, I'm not a scientist, but I was taught in high school that this shield is what protects us from the solar rays.
It protects us from cosmic rays and everything else.
Well, with that weakening along the same timeline as what they're saying is global warming, I'm fairly sure that that would also play a major part in increasing the temperature of the Earth.
No question about it.
I've read the stories about the magnetic field and its shifts and so forth.
And of course, nobody can claim that we're responsible for that.
Although they will.
They'll try.
But that's what I mean.
I marvel at the complexity of everything that makes all this work.
And the idea that we, without even trying, mess it up, is just not compute.
At any rate, Andrew, I appreciate the call.
Thanks much.
I have a brief timeout to take here, folks, that we will continue shortly.
Stay with us.
Why not?
No, no, no.
Why not?
Don't even know what I'm asking you.
Why not?
Okay, greetings and welcome back, my friends El Rushbo and the EIB network.
By the way, excuse me, will not be here on Monday or Tuesday.
4th of July is Tuesday.
Monday, of course, is the 3rd of July, and that's the day before the 4th of July.
So I'm taking a four, don't worry, Don, four-day weekend here.
We have Paul W. Smith coming in on Monday.
And by the way, we got raves for Paul W. Smith on his show on Monday.
We got a bunch of rave emails for Paul W. Smith from WJR Detroit.
So he'll be here on Monday.
We've got a best of show on Tuesday.
Democrats, who is this?
This is our old buddy Will Lester at All AP.
Democrats leading their party's midterm election effort argued yesterday that any Republican attempt to use immigration as a central campaign issue would backfire.
Well, then they should be encouraging the Republicans to do it.
Isn't that right?
But no, no, that's not the point.
They cited Republican plans to hold hearings on the illegal immigration around the country this summer rather than passing immigration legislation in Congress as a sign of the GOP strategy to motivate conservative voters.
Senator Chuck Schumer, chairman Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee, said Republicans want to use this like Willie Horton in 1988 and gay marriage in 2004.
It's no secret.
They want to use immigration as a political cudgel.
All right.
So there's just a giant red flag.
Democrats are running scared on this, folks.
If they are telling Republicans that using immigration rallies like this is going to backfire, then they should shut up and just let the Republicans do it and dig their own grave, correct?
So note to GOP, stick with the program.
Stick with the plan.
Eric and Sue Falls, South Dakota.
Nice to have you with us.
Rush, it's an honor and a privilege to speak with you, sir.
Thank you, sir.
I wondered if I could get a little politically philosophical with you.
I've been listening for a few years here now, and I just wondered if you thought you were more libertarian or conservative.
Conservative.
So fundamentally, do you believe that government's only job is to protect its citizens' freedoms?
No, I think it is.
Well, see, this is where the libertarians, and I like them.
I like all libertarians.
I have no quarrel with them.
But the basic argument is that libertarians basically, correct me if I'm wrong, got one real, government one real function, and that is to defend and protect the people against foreign incursion, attack, and that sort of thing.
Basically, the Constitution in the country.
So you're really free, in other words.
As long as you're not hurting somebody else.
Yeah, but see, let me give you an example about why I have a, this is, it's going to infuriate people.
But let's look at capitalism for just a second.
There's no question that it is quite simply, without peer, far and away the most ingenious way.
And because capitalism is essentially freedom.
Everything else that's devised as an economic system, Marxism, socialism, communism, whatever, requires pinching and reducing and destroying freedom.
Capitalism is the essence of freedom, but it needs limits.
And if the capitalists do not impose the limits on themselves, you're just inviting regulation from somewhere to do so.
And so I think, for example, Not so much this guy from Exxon, Lee Reynolds or Lee Raymond, who got the $400 million.
But there are a lot of examples where airlines and other people are losing their stock, losing their shirts, and the CEOs are still scoring big money.
And that is the kind of thing that does damage in a PR spin-wise to capitalism.
And I think the problem's actually at the board of director level.
Yeah, those airlines wouldn't be in business anymore if the government didn't keep them going.
And they would go out of business.
Somebody who could do it for the right price would.
I don't know that they're being that much propped up by government anymore.
But I think libertarianism in theory is absolutely wonderful.
But you don't think capitalism could survive without some kind of government control?
Well, not unless there was adequate self policing and accountability.
And we all know that society in every segment, white-collar, blue-collar, wealthy, poor, middle-class, criminal, are going to have ne'er-do-wells.
They're getting people to try to game the system.
It's going to be there.
It's humanity.
I mean, people don't understand why there are hackers trying to destroy everybody's computers.
Why do it?
What's the point?
Well, there's some oddballs out there to whom it's fun.
Well, I think that government should protect its citizens from outside enemies and people who would do harm to somebody else.
But I don't think that the government should be able to tell you that you can't do harm to yourself.
Well, see, here's the problem, the problem, you're talking about victimless crime.
And I understand the theory of that too.
But are you really not harming anybody?
Let's say you have a family and you're doing something self-destructive.
You're not harming yourself and your actions are not directly harming anybody else, but you're failing in your responsibility.
The idea that individuals, unless it's a hermit, live in a vacuum and have no impact on anybody else and don't harm anybody else is, I don't think it's specious.
I think there are interconnections and human interlinkage, even in populations like cities or communities or so forth, where these things do have effect.
People do not live in vacuums and they do not live as hermits, although it's attractive to some.
Anyway, I got to run here, John.
We are sadly out of busy broadcast time.
I'll be back and wrap this up right after this.
Stay with us.
All right, so Superman might be gay, and now he doesn't represent the American way anymore.
No icon is safe, except I am safe, ladies and gentlemen.
I am one American icon that they will not be able to change.
And I'm going to miss you people for the next four days.
Well, at least for three of them.
No, I'll miss the whole period of time.
I'll be back on Wednesday to gin it back up.
Paul W. Smith will be here Monday with a best of show on Independence Day.
▲
Export Selection