All Episodes
Previous Next
July 6, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:03
July 6, 2006, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, we're back, folks.
Short broadcast week for us here at the EIB Network giving the Independence Day holiday.
And despite that, the fastest week in media, the fastest three hours in media.
Here we are already at the final hour of the busy broadcast today.
And a special welcome to those of you watching on the DittoCam today at rushlimbaugh.com.
It's a shared delight to have all of you with us.
I can't tell you what a thrill this is every day to be able to sit down here and tell you what to think about things that matter to me.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address rush at EIBnet.com.
Well, it looks like a Texas judge has just handed the Democrats a seat in Congress.
The Texas Republican Party must keep Tom DeLay's name on the November ballot, even though he's not running.
A federal judge made the ruling today.
DeLay resigned on June 9th under indictment, won the Republican primary for his district in March, but decided against re-election a month later.
GOP leaders want another Republican to replace DeLay on the ballot and say that state election law allows them to select one because DeLay has moved out of Texas.
Democrats sued the Republicans to try to block them from picking a replacement nominee.
Lawyers for the Texas Democrats argue that DeLay still owns a home in Houston, where his wife Christine lives and where DeLay does spend some time.
Democrats also argued it couldn't be shown conclusively whether DeLay would be an inhabitant of Texas on Election Day on November 7th.
Democrats want Delay on the ballot.
They want him on the ballot.
They want his legal troubles on the minds of voters.
And they hope to wear they will be able to win his seat in the 22nd congressional district where the Democrat Nick Lampson is running.
So at any rate, going to be on the ballot.
What happens if DeLay gets more votes than the Democrat?
Convoluted.
But, well, I know this is, if you compare this to what happened in New Jersey with Torricelli, now, unfortunately, the feds never got there.
They cited this in New Jersey Supreme Court.
But, you know, the torch was losing in the polls, big.
And the Democrats are getting scared.
And they sent Bill Clinton out there to his farm wherever he lives.
And Bill Clinton reminded him what happened to Andrew Cuomo and brought some papers for him to sign getting out of the race.
Clinton telling him what's good for the party and what's good for Clinton is what tortzelle should do.
And Torricelli quit.
He resigned.
It was after a date in which the Democrats were allowed to put a substitute candidate on the ballot.
That didn't stop the Democrats.
Well, that's not fair.
They said, we're depriving voters of this state of a choice.
I mean, you can't just say that there's nobody going to be on a ballot.
So the case went to the New Jersey Supreme Court.
New Jersey Supreme Court said, you know, this is absolutely right.
This is not fair under our Democratic rules.
I mean, you can't say that one party can't have a candidate.
Well, the rules do say it.
If a candidate drops out after a certain date and it was specified in the law there, then that's tough toenails.
But the New Jersey Supreme Court allowed them to, and the voters of the state didn't even choose the candidate.
Who was it?
McGreevy did?
Was it McGreevy?
Well, I think it was Jim McGreevy who chose the candidate, or the Democrats got together and chose who the candidate was going to be to replace the torch.
And it was the lout.
It was Frank Lautenberg who was retired and sipping the piña coladas clipping the coupons, and they brought him back, and he's in the U.S. Senate today.
Now, look at what happens in Texas.
DeLay's name's on the ballot, even though he resigned.
And the Republicans, I don't know if they asked for another candidate, wanted Delay's name off the ballot.
Probably did, but the federal judge said, nope, no way stuck with this.
So Delay, who's not running, will be on the ballot.
As long as we're discussing electoral politics, Deborah Oren has an interesting piece today in the New York Post.
Suddenly, it looks as if Hillary Clinton is running scared over 2008.
A batch of Hillary land moves over the past few weeks suggests a nervous Nellie president wannabe rather than a confident Democratic frontrunner.
She hired a lefty blogger and cozied up to anti-war activists by pledging to desert her friend, Senator Joe Lieberman, if he loses a primary over speaking of that.
Speaking of that, I was reading a piece today in the New York Sun.
Bill Buckley had a column in the New York Sun, and Buckley is largely responsible for Joe Lieberman being in the United States Senate.
Buckley and some buddies of his at National Review got so fed up with Lowell Weicker that they started Buckpack.
And Buckpack was a political action committee that raised funds to actually support Lieberman because they were just tired of Weicker.
Now, it's being portrayed out there in some circles that Weicker was defeated because he had moving too far to the right.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
So Buckley is now, he's upset at the way the Democrats are treating Joe Lieberman.
It was just six years ago he was their vice presidential nominee.
And now the Democrats are throwing him overboard, throwing him under the bus, like Kofi Annan threw his own kid Kojo under the bus and over the board.
And Buckley writes that back in October, he's wondering if he might be somewhat to blame for what's happening to Lieberman because the 50th anniversary celebration in Bash and Gala was in Washington.
And Joe Lieberman was at our table.
I was at Bill Buckley's table and Lieberman was at the table.
And I had a wonderful conversation with Lieberman, talked about Buckpack and this sort of thing.
And there were rumblings after this.
What's Lieberman doing there?
Well, Lieberman owed his election in part to Buckpack and two friends getting together and nothing more than that.
And apparently at the dinner, Buckley writes that Lieberman, I forget who was, Lieberman saw some Republican and they embraced and kissed each other, something on cheek, you know, one of these facial rub jobs, whatever it is.
And you've seen these things have these phony baloney plastic banana going, oh, wonderful to see you.
Why is he here?
Kind of things.
And at any rate, Buckley, a humorous piece, but wondering if it could be that Lieberman's prominent display at the National Review bash.
You never know with these leftists.
You never know.
You've got John Kerry throwing Lieberman overboard.
Kerry not endorsing Lieberman in the primary.
And their basis for this, they say, is, well, Hillary, too, well, we're going to support nominate a party.
What's happened, Lieberman's got a Democrat opponent in the primary, and the Democratic Party is just, they're angry at Lieberman because he's not at the right position on the Iraq War, and they want to drum him out of the party.
And Lieberman has said, if I lose the primary, I'm running as an independent.
I don't care.
And that's when the Democrats, Hillary and Kerry and some others, have said, well, we can't support Lieberman in that case.
Support the party.
Loyal to the party.
Blah, blah, blah.
Never mind their personal friendship.
Never mind.
He was the vice presidential nominee.
That's right.
The guy at Ned Lamont is big anti-war.
Oh, huge anti-war guy.
Wealthy lib media tycoon.
And in the last poll, there was a six-point differential.
Was he up?
Lieberman's by six over the in Connecticut.
I don't know what's going to happen in the primary, but I'm just going to tell you this.
Let's play a little game, ladies and gentlemen.
Imagine that it's the year 2000.
And let's say liberal Republican Senator John Danforth was running for re-election to the U.S. Senate.
He retired in 94, but I'm just playing a little game here.
Now, imagine further that a bunch of wacko conservatives from the hard right started to present a real threat of defeating Danforth in the primary.
And imagine further that then-Governor George W. Bush announced that if this right-wing kook wacko happened to win the primary and beat Danforth, he'd have no trouble supporting it.
Do you think it would be covered with as little criticism as Hillary's expressed intention to throw Lieberman overboard is getting?
I mean, if this were happening in the Republican Party, if a Republican Party, if a president, if a senator, governor, whoever, threw over a loyal Republican senator because he wasn't fitting the...
I mean, look at what the Republicans did with Spectre.
They hung with him and they're hanging with Link Chaffee.
Imagine if Bush, can you imagine if Bush had gone with Pat Toomey and thrown Spectre overboard?
Do you know what the media would have said about Bush?
But in this case, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and a number of other Democrats are throwing a loyal, a very, on issues other than war, this guy has been fabulous for the party, Joe Lieberman, throwing him overboard and signing up with this wacko, wealthy lib media tycoon simply because he's anti-war.
Now, this is they're operating out of fear because this is what their base is trying to drum Lieberman out.
And now you've got John Kerry and Hillary Clinton not even with the guts to support Joe Lieberman.
It's just amazing.
If this were happening in the Republican Party, you would be seeing headlines day in and day out, profiles.
You'd be what's going on with the Republican Party?
How come it can't stay unified?
Blah, Is the right wing is the far right taking over the party?
Blah, blah, blah.
When it comes to talking about the far left and this kuk fringe base, we still get puff pieces about them.
When they have their conventions, the New York Times, everybody goes out, who are these wonderful people?
And who do they meet with in the Senate?
Harry Reid?
They meet with Nancy Pelosi.
I didn't get to it yesterday.
I must have four more stories.
Who's running the Democrat plan to win back Congress this year?
It's a piece on Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer.
Democrats doing this.
Everything's oriented toward what do the Democrats have to do to regain power.
And in this case, if they have to show fealty to these nuts and these fruit loops on the anti-war leftist fringe, well, then they'll do it.
And of course, there's no scrutiny of this once.
Speaking, it's going to sound bite number 10.
I don't know if you saw this last night.
You probably didn't see this last night.
Number 11.
Well, let me take a break here first.
Some of the stuff is not from last night, and I've got to figure this out first.
And it's time to take a break anyway.
Let me do that.
We'll take a brief time out.
Come back after this.
Okay, back we are.
Cindy Sheehan on July 4th.
Just a couple days ago in Washington.
American soldiers are raping Iraqis.
We are here to declare independence from war and occupation and oppression.
And we are standing in slaughter with our brothers and sisters who can get raped by our soldiers just living, whose families can be killed.
This war is a war crime, and our soldiers trying to survive are committing war crimes.
We need to bring our troops home.
We need to do everything we can to save our soldiers and to save the people of Iraq from our George III.
All right, so there you have it.
And this reason I'm playing these because I'm wondering if she's out there on her own now.
The drive-by media had her on last night, Nora O'Donnell, but raped her over the coals last night.
Cindy Sheehan did not get this favorable kid glove treatment.
She got raked over the coals.
And I am under the impression, ladies and gentlemen, that the word has gone out that the Democrats realize this woman is not helping us.
She is a liability.
Here's an example.
Nora O'Donnell says, Americans may hate the war, but they don't necessarily hate the president.
I mean, how do you expect to get changed by going around the world and trashing the president of the United States?
Actually, I don't hate the president either, and I don't trash the president.
Stop the tape.
Recue this.
Folks, I just want you to understand here that you are, if you've ever heard somebody called an airhead and you're actually wondering what one is, you're listening to one here.
This is an airhead.
Here's the answer from the top again.
Actually, I don't hate the president either.
And I don't trash the president.
I trash the president's foreign policy, which is fundamentally and inherently wrong and immoral.
And I don't tell people around the world anything that they don't know.
He says a terrorist is somebody who kills innocent men, women, and children.
And there have been over 100,000 innocent men, women, and children killed in Iraq on his orders.
Right.
Okay.
Now, in the old days, they loved this, and they would egg her on, and they would have her say more and more of this.
But that's not the way it's going.
Nora O'Donnell says, Cindy, you've just begun a two-month hunger strike.
Isn't this really just more of a publicity stunt?
No, actually, it's not.
It's a moral reaction to an immoral war.
Thousands of people all over the world are joining us, and hunger strikes have proven to be effective tools in civil disobedience and changing policy.
Okay.
Airhead.
Nora O'Donnell says, Why go stand by side, side by side with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela?
Why do that?
I mean, it sounds like, would you rather live under Hugo Chavez than George Bush?
Yes.
You know, Hugo Chavez is not a dictator like you introduced him.
He's been Democratically elected eight times, and he's not an American.
He has helped the poor people of America.
He has sent aid to New Orleans.
He has sold heating oil to disadvantaged people in America, in the United States of America, at low cost.
And the people of his country love him.
And for us to say that we have some kind of influence over Venezuelan policy is wrong.
The people of Venezuela have elected him overwhelmingly eight times, and it's his country, and it's their country, and they should have the leader that they deserve.
Well, what about us?
Elected Bush twice.
Should we not have him?
Anyway, my point in playing this is that it may be a little premature to surmise this, but my guess is based on this Deborah Oren story with Hillary being sort of jittery.
Polling data doesn't look good out there.
James Carville had a very defensive piece in the Washington Post on Sunday defending her.
Yes, she can win.
Of course she can win.
Let me tell you how type of piece.
I think that Cindy Sheehan is going to be cast aside officially now, if not by virtue of appearance, but by virtue of the way she's treated on these programs.
And I, of course, ladies and gentlemen, airheads show up at a disadvantage.
They really do not.
And that's her problem from the get-go.
She doesn't know that she's been exploited and used from the outset.
And I think these people who have exploited her and used her and have created expectations in her own mind and heart about her importance and relevance, if they just cast this woman aside, there's no telling what she'll do.
They cast her aside and basically say, all right, Cindy, 15 Minutes of Fame is up.
Your usefulness has maxed out.
Go back to be a nothing in your Birkenstocks.
I don't know what the woman would do.
I know how fleeting fame is.
I know how much average ordinary loser types desire it.
And when they acquire it, every dream has come true.
And then when it's taken away from them, because they haven't genuinely earned it, then we're talking serious potential psychological problems.
So I am going to take it upon myself in an act of humanity and compassion to see to it that Cindy Sheehan survives as a voice of the Democratic Party and a voice of the left.
I will not allow her to be discarded like a used shoe or an overdone piece of beef from the barbecue grill.
Cindy Sheehan will remain front and center as a face and a voice of the Democratic Party, excuse me, the anti-war movement.
Cindy Sheehan will indeed live on this program because I have love for humanity, understanding, and compassion.
And I am frankly worried what she might do to herself or what otherwise might happen if the Democrats, if I'm right, I could be wrong about this.
This is all predicated on my theory that based on this treatment last night, they're getting ready to throw her overboard.
It may be too late to throw her overboard anyway.
If they think that they can rid themselves of kook identification, if they think that by throwing Cindy Sheehan overboard, they can make the American people think they are not kook, anti-war, anti-American freaks.
It may be too late for that.
But that doesn't mean that they will stop at throwing her overboard.
And I think the process has begun.
And I'm just, you know, folks, we all have huge hearts, all of us in the conservative movement, all of us on this radio program.
And I, as an American with a big heart, boo-boom, boo-boom, bo-boom, am not going to sit here and watch a fellow citizen used and exploited and then tossed away as human debris.
It will not happen.
She will live on this program.
And we're back on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
Rush Limbaugh, highly trained broadcast specialist behind the golden EIB microphone at the distinguished Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies to New York City and a bus driver.
James, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Rush?
Yes, sir.
How you doing, Megan?
Couldn't be.
Thank you very much.
Quick question.
Is Bloomberg going to run a Republican or a Democrat?
He'd probably run as a Republican.
You almost have to.
Okay, but I don't know how he would get the nomination.
We got a bad cell phone here, James, and I'm having trouble.
Here, I think you asked me about the nomination.
Look, stranger things have happened.
I saw that he's toying with the idea of becoming president.
And it's a good question.
He used to be a Democrat.
And what?
What?
What are you saying?
I know he doesn't stand a prayer, but this thirdly says he doesn't stand a prayer.
But the guy used to be a Democrat.
Then, when Giuliani became such a successful mayor of New York, Mr. Bloomberg became a Republican and won re-election.
He has a Democrat with a Republican as his party affiliation.
I can't see him getting in the face-off against Mrs. Clinton or John Kerry or any of that bunch, unless all those people.
You never know.
Folks, I'm telling you, it's like anything else in life.
You never know what's going to happen, no matter how much you think you do.
You never know.
Now, the conventional wisdom is that Bloomberg wouldn't stand a prayer in a Republican primary.
And I don't see anything to argue against that.
By the way, speaking of which, and this is, I'm not sure what his position on this has been, but I can pretty much guess.
This is a stunner.
New York's highest court ruled today that gay marriage is not allowed under state law.
They're going to have to go in and change state law to make this happen.
The Court of Appeals in a 4-2 decision rejected arguments from gay and lesbian plaintiffs that their inability to get marriage licenses in New York violated their constitutional rights.
Georgia just did the same thing, by the way.
Plaintiff Kathy Burke of Schenectady said it's a sad day for New York families.
Kathy Burke of Schenectady raising an 11-year-old son with her partner, Tonya Elvis.
My family deserves the same protections as my next-door neighbors.
You know, this is a firecracker just waiting to be lighted.
But nobody's stopping these people from getting married.
They want to get this marriage is what it is.
Judge Robert Smith said New York's marriage law is constitutional, clearly limits marriage to between a man and a woman.
Any change in the law should come from the state legislature, he said, which is a good ruling from the court.
If state legislature wants to change it, people in New York want to change it, let their elected representatives do it.
And if it happens, then it happens.
But you just can't run around and saying, I don't like this.
I don't like the way that's not fair and do it anyway.
Now, what is Bloomberg's position on gay marriage?
I'm not sure that I recall.
But he's for civil unions.
Okay, civil unions.
So it's still a.
I guess they're replaying Dan.
Yeah, they're replaying Dan Rather on CNN from last night with Anderson Cooper.
You don't need a tune there.
We've already shared the audio with you.
Remember the urban garden that was taken over by the new arrivals and the illegal immigrants and that Daryl Hanna was in a tree and they were chainsawing all the trees down trying to get her.
Well, there's an update here.
Workers began bulldozing a 14-acre urban garden yesterday, and 10 protesters were arrested as they attempted to stop the demolition.
Eight protesters broke into the site shortly after noon and rushed the bulldozer as it made its way in.
Several demonstrators climbed on but were forced down by security guards and they were arrested by the police.
One protester chained himself to a bulldozer and firefighters were called to cut him loose.
Another was arrested for lying in front of the bulldozer, said Dan Stormer, a lawyer for the farmers.
What was once a beautiful set of gardens, if this goes through, will now be a pile of rubble, said Stormer, who was the lawyer for the farmers.
They're illegal immigrants.
They're squatters.
Farmers, my rear end.
Anyway, there was no sighting of Daryl Hanna.
I don't know where all the celebrities went.
Danny Glover wasn't around.
I don't know where all of these people went.
And then there's this from the Boston Globe.
Recent Endicott college graduate, Kristen Bradshaw, has found the perfect pad.
There's no rent.
Most of her meals are prepared, and she doesn't have to do much cleaning.
There's just one drawback of sorts.
Her housemate is her mother.
Yes, college graduates bringing it all back home.
No job, big debts spur many to seek refuge.
Because the 22-year-old Kristen Bradshaw doesn't have money socked away or a full-time job to support herself, her only option for the moment is to bunk at home in Stowe, and she's not necessarily happy about it.
I never thought I'd move back in with my parents.
I feel like I'm taking a step backward.
You are.
In some circles, young adults who ricochet home after college are known as boomerang kids.
They're also called adolescents or thresholders.
Their families are said to suffer from cluttered nest syndrome.
Oh my God, I've not heard of that.
Have you heard of that cluttered nest syndrome?
You can get that before the kids move out.
Anyway, Americans are not alone in this trend.
The British have coined a rye acronym to describe them, Kippers.
Kids in parents' pockets eroding retirement savings.
Now, they've got it right.
Brits have it right.
Phenomenon was first noted in the late 1990s.
Is this the first time the Boston Globes reported on this?
This is what I mean.
This is cutting edge of societal evolution.
We've been on this for a year or more.
And the Boston Globe's just now getting around to it.
Let's see.
Oh, I got a lot of grief yesterday.
Not a lot, but a fair amount.
In the email over this story in Newsday, push for simpler spelling persists.
When say, they, and way, W-E-I-G-H, all rhyme, but bomb, comb, and tomb don't, wouldn't it make more sense to spell words the way they sound?
Those in favor of simplified spelling say that children would learn faster and literacy or illiteracy rates would drop.
And of course, I think this is just, this is akin to Senator Moynihan's definition of defining deviancy down.
Okay, we can't teach kids to read.
Fine.
It's the languages problem, and so we need to make the language easier.
It's not, never mind the fact that up until about 20 years ago, 15 years ago, we were able to teach anybody who wanted to learn how to read.
We're able to do it.
And we didn't need job centers after people got out of college.
We didn't need job centers after they got out of high school.
We didn't need remedial reading sessions.
They can learn to graduate and read the diploma.
This is a modern occurrence.
But somehow, all of a sudden now, the language is too tough.
Kids can't spell.
We've got to simplify it.
It's sort of like, what else has happened in this regard?
People have, oh, kids can't learn.
They had to get up too early.
Kids, they stay up late.
You can't expect a kid clubbing.
High school, senior, junior, clubbing, getting in at one o'clock to get up at seven and be in class by 7.45.
You can't expect that.
I actually think the teachers are the ones that don't want to get up early, but they're blaming it on the kids.
But regardless.
And our backpacks are too heavy.
And of course, in Half Moon Bay, California, they had to ban homework because the homeless don't have homes.
And of course, if you can't do homework, if you don't have a home, it was unfair.
Other students got an educational advantage doing homework.
I'm not making this stuff up.
So I got peppered with email.
So, Rush, what's wrong with phonetics?
Nothing's wrong with phonetics.
This is not to teach people to read.
This story is about changing the way words are actually spelled.
Like tomb, T-O-M-B, would be spelled T-U-M-E.
Tom.
And then, well, what?
Somebody might think it's TUME.
So how would we, Jeff Forens?
You want to start messing with the language this way.
Do we actually want to start changing the way we spell words to accommodate people who, for some reason, haven't learned it or are not being properly taught, whatever, probably a combination of both.
No, as far as I'm concerned, because once that starts, you let a bunch of liberals start plowing around in that field.
And remember, these solutions are never solutions.
They are just the beginnings of brand new problems.
What else are the liberals going to say is too complicated for people that we need to change.
I mean, you got to watch it, folks.
There's an all-out assault on traditions and institutions, including the language in this country.
And make no mistake, you think I'm being jocular about this to a certain extent I am.
But you travel around and see all the multilingual signs in government institutions.
You tell me that English as a language is not prevailing here.
Well, and it's prevailing, but that there aren't people out there that are trying to infringe upon its dominance, shall I say?
This is just simply absurd.
I mean, what are we going to do?
Are we going to spell wouldn't, W-U-U-D-N apostrophe T?
How come there's an L in there, teacher?
Because when I don't say wouldn't, and I don't say could.
I say could.
Okay, fine.
We'll spell it C-O-O-D.
Well, no, that would be could.
I want to spell it C-U-U-D.
Oh, okay.
So that could would become C-U-U-D.
K-U-D, right?
Could.
K-U-D.
Exactly right.
In fact, some of you people that use this kind of shorthand in email, you grate on me.
Just grate on me.
It takes me twice as long to read this gibberish as if you just use the language.
What I did basically, Dawn, I basically praised a four-year-old kid for giving a bunch of people a finger because he'd been named Little Mr. Apricot.
And I said yesterday that if my mother had made me enter at four years old something like the little Mr. Apricot and I happened to win it, I'd be flipping mad too.
A poor kid, 18 years old, if this hadn't happened, I mean, he's going to be a hero when he's 18.
If he was 18 and little Mr. Apricot, can you imagine the way this kid would have been made fun of?
Oh, look, there's little Mr. Apricot.
He'd be flipping people off his whole life if he hadn't done it when he was four years old.
Besides, it's learned behavior.
And his mother said, so what?
It's just a flip-off.
Just a four-year-old doesn't even know what it means.
He may not, but I doubt it.
I think he does.
He's probably learned the behavior somewhere.
But kudos to the kid.
Who wants to be little Mr. Apricot?
Little Miss Apricot?
Fine.
This little Mr. Apricot business.
This is out in California, folks.
We heard about this yesterday, and Dawn was not here.
She was in airport hell in Atlanta.
It didn't involve customs.
It just involved normal rigors of commercial travel.
Here's Michael in Provo, Utah.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
What an honor it is to talk to you, Rush.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
I've been listening to you since the late 80s.
You've been an inspiration throughout my life.
Thank you very much.
I really do appreciate that more than you know.
You're very welcome.
Here's my comment, what you're talking about with the new spelling and the libs and all that kind of stuff.
It's simple that we have seen it before.
We saw it back in the 70s when they came out with new math.
And you're exactly right when you say it doesn't solve problems.
It only creates more.
And how difficult it is for our kids now to even get math because they've changed it and changed it and changed it.
This is just they're just opening the door now on language and spelling.
You know, that's right.
I was close to being victimized by this new math stuff.
I got out of high school, fortunately, in 1969.
And new math was just on the horizon then.
But I forget what it even was.
I remember hearing people talk and complain about it.
It was supposed to make learning it easier, and all it did was make learning it harder.
And it ended up a whole generation of kids that didn't learn basics of math.
Don't know how to do division, don't know how to work in fractions or anything of the sort.
Now I've got calculators and so forth have come big on the scene since then.
But I don't know.
I've forgotten about new math.
You're absolutely right.
Thank you.
I appreciate it, sir.
All right.
Thanks for the call.
And Alan in detroit.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Mega Dittos, Rush.
Thank you.
I'm just wondering, the liberal point of view that they advocate that we need a group of people who are underpaid, paid under the poverty level, and underhoused and underappreciated because they're doing all the jobs that we don't want to do.
Why don't they call this slavery or indentured servitude?
Well, I can't call it, I mean, that's, you can't be honest about this.
Well, I mean, they're such big-hearted people.
And aren't they advocating?
They say our economy will collapse.
That sounds like the South before the South.
You know, that is an interesting way to look at it.
Grab, where is, what is the Bloomberg by 16.
Grab 16.
We got some time.
Let's stay on the phone there, Alan.
This is an interesting observation.
Let's listen to Mayor Bloomberg, Senate Judiciary Committee field hearing in Philadelphia, Philadelphia.
Darn it.
Philadelphia testifying about illegal immigration is what he said.
Although they broke the law by illegally crossing our borders or overstaying their visas, and our businesses broke the law by employing them, our city's economy would be a shell of itself had they not, and it would collapse if they were deported.
Alan, it's an excellent point.
Basically, the mayor of New York is saying, we want you underclass people, and we want you here, and we want you to stay that way.
We can't get along without you.
We can't get along with people that work for little or nothing.
We can't get along.
This city would literally crumble, and we celebrate the fact that they have broken the law in order to...
That's an interesting take on this.
Basically, because you're not hearing anybody advocate for these people to do better, they are wanted precisely for the value they offer.
And I think that's an excellent point.
Man, coming from you, thank you, Russ.
That's what you're supposed to say.
Alan, thanks much.
I appreciate it.
Great to have you on the program.
What else in the try this news from ABC?
Here's the headline.
Bird droppings survive space launch.
Bird droppings on Shuttle Discovery's right wing edge appear to have survived launch and orbit.
And they have pictures of bird droppings on the right wing, on the edge of the right wing, claiming that you can't get rid of this stuff.
What's that?
Didn't hear what you said.
What did you say?
Well, there's not enough of it to be a heat shield.
One other thing here, ladies and gentlemen, from USA Today, fat people are not more jolly, according to a study that instead found obesity strongly linked with depression and other mood disorders.
This accompanies a story.
Experts debate labeling children obese.
Is it okay for doctors and parents to tell kids and teens that they're fat?
Because if you do that, you might harm their self-esteem.
All right, don't bother telling them that.
Just tell them you're miserable.
You get science and studies to prove it.
And don't see a fat kid in a good mood.
Hey, can't fool me, kid.
I know you're miserable.
I read it in USA today.
Well, another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence in the can on its way over to the museum warehouse.
All artifacts secretly housed for the future Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.
A thrill and a pleasure, as always, to be with you.
Look forward to seeing you tomorrow on Open Line Friday.
▲
Export Selection