Anybody out there in the sales department listening in, the air check for e-harmony is being prepared even now.
We'll have it in your hands by the end of the business day.
Greetings and welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Oh, yes.
Living legend Rush Limbaugh and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network sitting impatiently here behind the golden EIB microphone from the prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
All right.
Some news here about the Democrats, other political stuff.
We got the little lifestyle news to throw at you, too.
You know, the Republicans in the Senate are playing a dirty trick on Dingy Harry.
The Republicans say, all right, hey, you want to raise the minimum wage two bucks?
Fine.
We've attached it to a bill to lower the estate tax.
And Dingy Harry's fit to be tied.
All the Democrats are.
Well, you can't do that.
Why, that's cheating.
Why?
That's deceitful politics.
The Democrats have a question to ask themselves.
What do you really care about?
You want your constituents to get this $2 increase in the minimum wage, which is just a hidden tax on business.
It's not even hidden.
It's right out in the open.
You're going to deny your constituents teachers, single mothers, soccer moms, hamburger flippers, entry-level job workers, whoever there's earning the minimum wage, are you going to deny them a chance to move up in life?
Just because the estate tax rate might be reduced?
What does that say about you?
Do you actually think that minimum wage earners really will care what happens to the estate tax?
In fact, many of them might dingy Harry.
They might be thinking someday the estate tax cut will be relevant to them.
They probably, as Americans, have pretty high hopes.
They probably have a lot of ambition, probably have some dreams that maybe someday they'd have an estate large enough for the estate tax rate being low would be attractive to them.
You think two things are possible here at the same time?
Anyway, Dingy Harry, the Democrats faced with a monumental decision to make.
The Republicans have proposed it.
Now, Dick Morris yesterday said if they don't pass the minimum wage increase that Republicans in the House and maybe even the Senate can start looking for work.
And he's basing this on polling that says 80% of the American people think the minimum wage ought to be raised.
And I know Dick is a respected pollster, but I have to tell you, I don't know too many people.
You're minding your own business.
In the first place, anybody still using a landline phone is a little old-fashioned anyway, and that's who pollsters call.
So you're sitting at home, ding-a-ling-a-ling, phone ring.
Yep.
Hello.
Hi.
I'm calling from the ABC Polling Company, and we're taking a survey here on the minimum wage.
You want to play?
Yes, of course I'll participate.
The minimum wage right now is a paltry, unbelievably low, $5.15 an hour.
It hasn't been raised since 1997.
Do you think the minimum wage ought to be increased?
Do you really believe that most people are going to say, hell no, I want them to suffer?
Most people are going to say, yes, raise it because it's not going to cost me anything to say that.
And you hang up and you're through with a pollster.
And the pollster thinks you have a big heart.
And the pollster thinks that you have lots of compassion.
And that's what you care about.
The pollster goes away, reports it, 80% of the American people, I throw the result out.
Doesn't.
If anybody really thinks really thinks that the upcoming election is going to hinge on the minimum wage, why I have a lot of property that I would like to sell you in the Middle East.
Uh, you get caught up in the media bubble here folks, you slap yourself out of it when it happens because it's not real.
It's an alternative universe.
The Democrats have have their own trick.
Senate Democrats fought for political coverage yesterday by trying to attach to a spending bill the same popular tax cut extensions Republicans have included in their contentious estate tax relief proposal.
Democrats vow they'll defeat the estate tax bill, but they're trying to fight their way out of a politically difficult corner that Republicans have backed them into.
Republicans crafted the bill uh, already approved by the House and it's scheduled for a showdown in the Senate tomorrow.
By the way, it includes a state tax relief, which Democrats oppose, but includes a popular minimum wage increase and widely supported package of tax cut extensions for teachers, for businesses and college students.
Republicans are daring Democrats to vote against these popular items, warning this will be their only chance to address them this year.
It's not clear if Republicans will have the 60 votes tomorrow to overcome the Democrats attempt to block the Bill.
Dingy Harry fought back yesterday by trying to attach the same popular tax break items to the defense spending bill.
Now his amendment fell on a technicality, and that is it wasn't related to the spending bill, but it allowed Dingy Harry to make the point that the Democrats will fight to approve these tax cut extensions this year as long as they aren't part of the Republican bill that Democrats hate.
Dingy Harry said my amendment shows that the Senate will not be blackmailed and provides an opportunity for every member of this body to show the American people that we hear and are prepared to respond to their needs.
How can the fact that your amendment didn't see the light at day and fell because it's not even legal under a technicality have any impact at all?
Dingy Harry, if it weren't for me talking about it, nobody in the country would even know you pulled this stunt.
They're really they're between a rock and a hard place on this.
I I only fears Republicans cave.
That's been my experience at the UH, at the at the last moment.
I hope they don't now.
Democrats can't decide what they want to do with Iraq.
They can't decide what they want to do when it comes to Uh in terms of policy.
I mean they don't know what they want to do to get votes out in terms of an agenda, in terms of a policy.
They're clueless, they can't figure it out, don't know what to do.
Yet another story, Democrats revise strategy on Iraq.
Democratic strategists yesterday said a revised proposal to begin withdrawing some troops from Iraq by year's end is a more appealing campaign position than an immediate pullout that draws little voter support.
John Cowan, former Clinton administration official, said this is how the Democrats are going to frame this debate for the voters and that's the choice For them in this election.
Don't pull out now.
Pull out later.
Some choice.
Some choice.
With polls showing that only a third of Democrat voters support immediate troop withdrawals.
Democrats yesterday said that their latest plan would offer voters a deadline-free choice between Bush's indefinite stay-the-course approach and a new strategy to pressure the Iraqi government to handle more of the fighting on their own.
These guys, their sense of timing is just beautiful.
Here we are in the midst of earth-changing and transformational changes in the Middle East with the Israelis and the Hezbos, and the Democrats want to get out.
And how many times have these resolutions failed anyway?
In the last three months, how many Kerry had one?
Feingold had one.
How many have there been?
And none of them got more than 13 votes.
And Dingy Harry's on television the other day.
Get out of Iraq.
What is it Mr. Bush doesn't understand?
What is it that the Senate doesn't understand?
What is it that you don't understand?
Only one-third of your loany-toon voters want to pull out of Iraq right now.
Politically, this is, I mean, these people are, this is all aimed at their kook fringe base, and that's going to blow up on them.
Mark my words, it will blow up on them.
And then if you couple all this with the story we had yesterday in the Washington Post, they don't even have any get out the vote effort.
They've just assumed all this time, ladies and gentlemen, that hatred, rage, and anger at Bush was the national sentiment, and that that would be enough to motivate voters to get out.
Some Democrats say, you know something?
We're not seeing this pent-up emotion.
They'd have us believe that Democrat voters are being restrained in their homes by electrical fences, so eager to get to the polling place that the Democrats are having to hold off.
No, no, no, don't do it now.
Don't do it.
November will be here soon enough.
Such is the hatred for Bush.
Such is the opposition to the war.
Such is the hatred for Rice.
Such is the hatred for Cheney and Rumsfeld.
The Democrats just can't wait to get out there and except there's one little problem.
Their get out the vote effort.
Somebody at the DNC dropped the ball.
There really hasn't been one.
So back to the drawing board.
I'm telling you, I've told you all along, hatred and rage lead to the early stages of madness, but not huge voter turnout, especially when the hatred and rage is artificial and manufactured and attempted to be spread to people who don't authentically feel it.
Back in just a second.
Let's see.
A couple more things here about the Democrats, ladies and gentlemen.
We told you not long ago that the Democrats are monkeying around with their primary.
They wanted to reach out more to blacks and Hispanics in the primary in order for the blacks and Hispanics to think that they were having more power and influence in the early stages of the party nomination process.
So they wanted to sandwich something between the Hawkeye cauckey, which goes first in a New Hampshire primary, was the first actual primary.
They wanted to put something between those two where there are what they said were significant numbers of black voters, Hispanic voters, that could feel more involved, less taken advantage of.
So they, of all the states in this country where you could go find a robust black and Hispanic population, they zeroed in on Nevada.
And they said, this is what we're going to do.
We're going to do the Hawkeye Kaucai, and we're going to do Nevada.
Well known as a southern state in a civil war, well known for its Jim Crow laws, well known for slavery, well known for its ties there to union armies and so forth.
Nevada was going to be the state where they're going to empower minorities.
Well, this has not gone over well with the people in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire Democratic Party said that it's going to schedule its primary in late 2007 if the Democratic Party moves ahead with plans to add a caucus to the early nominating calendar.
William Gardner said he hopes he won't have to take that step, but he expects even more challenges to New Hampshire's tradition of holding the nation's earliest presidential primary.
At a forum Monday night, this past Monday night in Nashua, New Hampshire, Gardner said he hopes nothing happens to require him to move the primary from January of 2008 to late 2007.
We don't want that to be the case, but if it has to be, it'll be.
He noted that New Hampshire amended its law this year to make the task easier for him should it become necessary.
The old law required candidates to file for the primary during a three-week period the previous November.
Now Gardner can schedule the filing period earlier.
So a lot of unity out there, the Democratic Party, as they prepare to take over the House, to take over the Senate, to win back the White House.
In Los Angeles, the city council there has passed a rules of decorum.
They did this on Tuesday.
The rules of decorum bar people at city council meetings from using profanity, from making offensive comments, or expressing themselves too loudly.
Violators will be warned once and then thrown out of the hearing if they don't stop.
The action comes after supporters of a community garden in South Los Angeles.
It was raised.
Lamb-based at a city councilwoman whose district includes the property.
This is the thing of Daryl Hannah was up there in a tree until they chopped her down and chopped it down.
The measure also cuts the time afforded speakers from two minutes to one minute and requires that comments must be directed at the council as a whole rather than any single member.
Councilman Bernard Barks said, although it doesn't go as far as some of us would like, we would like nobody to be in these meetings.
And if somebody is in there and says something, we want to be able to smack them down and shut them up.
We couldn't get that.
Gives us clear guidance anyway as it relates to the prospects of public comment.
Some speakers were miffed but refrained to speak up for fear of being thrown out.
Now you see what's in here, Mr. Snerdley?
Do you see?
You cannot say anything that might offend the count, though.
The doctor in New Hampshire just got away with saying something that offended his patients, but not before the L.A. City Council.
You can't offend them.
You can't speak too loud.
You can't offend them.
And you can't curse them.
This has three words.
There's just three words to describe this.
This is the don't, the four words.
Don't dare criticize us resolution.
That's what it is.
Don't dare criticize us.
We're the L.A. City Council.
You criticize us.
You will pay.
Greenville, South Carolina, this is Gary.
You're next, sir.
Welcome.
Nice to have you with us.
Nice to be with you, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
Mega Mega Rush, baby Dittos, by the way.
My point is I would like to say that I feel like the drive-by media has created an axis of ignorance.
And I think the first aspect, and probably the most dangerous, is their utter failure to recognize the enemy we're up against right now.
And the second is their absolute hatred of this president and his presidency.
And the third would be their absolute obsession with seeing any policy he puts forth fail.
And I must say, if I wasn't on the cutting edge of societal evolution, I may have fallen for it.
A lot of people have fallen for it.
The media bubble attracts everybody.
You could add a lot of things.
You could just make the list a mile long.
The parallels they try to draw between the war in Iraq and the Vietnam War.
Well, let's go through your three.
The axis of ignorance by the drive-by media.
That's pretty good.
Thank you.
That's pretty good.
Number one.
I say what sparked me is your brilliant opening monologue about the Hesbos and the moral relativism they try to draw between the Hesbos and the Israelis.
Dan, did you hear Dan Rather soundbite from the O'Reilly factor last year?
Yes, I did.
He admits that, yeah, we got a problem in journalism today.
We do establish a moral equivalence between the Hezbo's and the Israelis.
It's a problem.
Of course, it's easy for Dan to say this now when he doesn't have an audience and he's not reporting anymore, so he can't go fix it.
Exactly.
Nice timing, Dan.
At any rate.
At any rate, let's go to your first one.
Your first in the drive-by media axis of ignorance was what?
Their utter failure to recognize this enemy we're up against.
It's worse than that.
They do identify an enemy, and it's us.
It's Bush.
It's the United States.
We are creating these terrorists.
Bush's bombs are killing innocent Hesbo children and so forth and so on.
What's the next one?
Their absolute obsession with bringing, their absolute hatred with this president and his presidency.
They just despise anything he does.
They're still living in the year 2000.
We're in, what was this, 2006, and they still feel like the election was stolen from them.
And it's just, it's carried over and fermented through the present day.
It's disgusting.
Well, I'll tell you what, you're right on the money, and I like that.
Axis of ignorance.
Are you a subscriber to RushLimbaugh.com?
No, sir, I'm not.
Well, you are now.
Hold on, and Mr. Snowdeley will get to you and tell you what we need in order to make you a complimentary subscriber to the website and the Limbaugh letter.
Rush, thank you very much.
Which means you are going to also get your own, your very own free Rush Baby on Board window sign.
Yes.
Thank you.
It's got a little suction cup in there so you can put it on the inside of the car so that liberals, when they see it, will not steal it or desecrate it.
As needed, too.
All right.
Thanks, Gary.
Appreciate it.
Yvonne in Walbridge, Ohio.
You're next.
Great to have you with us.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
Oh, it is so nice to talk to you.
Oh, it's wonderful.
Hey, you haven't given your profile?
The e-harmony profile.
I want you to consider this one.
4'11, 105 pounds, blonde hair, green eyes, and two bonuses.
You ready?
Wait a minute.
What about, do you say two bonuses?
Okay, this is...
Everybody, put your finger on the...
No.
You know.
All right, okay, I'll bite the two bonuses.
Okay, the first one is, I'm probably the only one who really does want you for your mind and not your money.
And number two is, I had a tubal 12 days before my 19th birthday.
Wow, so you're risk-free.
I am risk-free.
Wow.
All right.
411-105.
Well, I hadn't even gotten to the physical characteristics yet, so I'll keep that in mind.
You have a great mind.
I can tell by talking to you, you do.
And it might matter on some days.
A man, a living legend, a way of life.
Rush Limbaugh, America's real anchorman and a highly trained broadcast specialist serving humanity, executing host duties superbly, zero mistakes, flawlessly.
How many times in my life I have seen this story, and it just gets recycled every now and again.
Researchers followed about 5,500 human beings, 65 and older, recorded their medical histoi and alcohol consumption over seven to ten years.
An adult beverage or two a day, beer, wine, booze, may help protect against heart failure.
New studies suggest there's nothing new about this.
I've heard about this ever since I was 17 or 18 years old.
This gets recycled.
Just mentioning it for that reason alone.
Also on the lifestyle front, ladies and gentlemen, new research suggests that people between 30 and 69 who live alone are almost twice as likely as those who live with a partner to suffer angina, heart attacks, or sudden cardiac death.
That means if you're alone and you're between 30 and 69, you have twice the opportunity of dying from your heart going than if you are living with someone.
Danish researchers studied more than 138,000 subjects in Aarh, Denmark's second largest city over a two-year period ending in March of 2002.
The report appears in the August issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
The best predictors of acute cardiac syndrome were age and living alone.
Dr. Kirsten Milgard Nielsen, the lead author of the study and an internist at Arhas Sieg, forget it, some hospital, said that it was not living alone itself that increased the risk, but the health practices of those who lived without partners.
They're less likely to exercise.
They eat more fat and they're more likely to smoke and have high cholesterol.
Yep, that's me.
But they're also, yeah, well, less likely to have drama in their lives.
Now, that's not guaranteed.
It's just you can shut the drama out.
You don't have to take it home with you.
For women over 60 and men over 50, the risk was even greater.
Researchers concluded that they were almost three times as likely to suffer heart problems if they had no partner.
And one, get this.
Now, all along, what you're thinking is, folks, that the reason for this is that you just have no discipline.
Why, this story has set it up.
So if you live alone, you're a guy, you live alone, nobody to tell you you can't have that, you can't drink that, nobody to tell you get off of that chair and do something, nobody to say, why don't you clean the gutter like Brad does next door?
Why don't you, nobody to tell you that?
They want you to think that you'll eventually just evolve into a life of sloth.
Do you want to know the real reason heart attacks are killers for people who live alone?
If you live alone and have a heart attack, nobody knows until it's too late.
You can't get to the phone, dial 9-1-1.
You can't.
No, this is what it is.
They're trying to make it out to be some lifestyle thing, but it's not that.
It only stands to reason.
Even if you're at home alone, you have a partner, partner's out somewhere.
If you're alone anytime in this age group at home and have a heart attack and there's nobody there, and if it's a major heart attack, it's over.
You're sunk.
Same thing with slipping in the bathtub or the shower.
And if you knock yourself out and have a concussion, you drown.
Water keeps running.
Nobody there.
Nobody knows.
That's the real reason.
But the story doesn't get to that till the very end, beyond where most people would read.
That's why I'm here to put this in perspective for it.
Now, this next story, this goes against virtually everything I've ever been told.
Headline: Women like tech toys more than shoes.
An oxygen network is Oprah's network, right?
An oxygen network survey released Tuesday of this week found that more than three out of four women said they'd choose the TV over a diamond solitaire necklace, a plasma TV, a plasma TV over a diamond solitaire necklace.
Women preferred a top-of-the-line cell phone to designer shoes by a similar margin.
A little white iPod narrowly trumped a little black dress.
These are among the results of the Girls Gone Wired survey by market researcher TRU for oxygen.
They surveyed 1,400 women and 700 men, 15 to 49 years old, to compare tech attitudes.
The findings suggested advertisers need to address a broad audience.
Wait a minute, that, let's see, who wrote this?
A guy wrote this.
An audience of broads is the way it reads.
And that's given the context of the story, but it means a wide audience, which could also mean abroad.
And not talk down to women.
Advertisers are best served communicating lifestyle benefits of tech products by showing what's useful about them rather than focusing on specifications.
Steve Koenig, the senior manager of industry and analysis for the Consumer Electronics Association, said there have been some missed opportunities to market consumer electronics to women.
In the oxygen survey, 59% of women agreed with the statement.
Women are much more tech-savvy than they give themselves credit for.
Among the men, just 38% agreed.
This totally stuns me.
It's just, I'm not buying it.
I'm not buying it.
I told you people about this new projector that I just got.
I've invited two women.
Do you want to come by and see my new projector?
Yeah.
Do you want to go?
It's not they know me.
Don't tell me it sounds like a line.
They come over anyway.
It's not that they've never been there.
Do you want to come over and see a new projector?
Eh, want to go shopping?
Yeah, yeah, where can we go?
Well, the women, phone versus shoes, cell phone high-tech cell phone versus shoes.
I can see where that would be a toughie.
Well, I don't know you can talk on a shoe yet until they combine the two.
I can see the women going for the high-tech phone on that one.
Get the shoes in the afternoon.
Who says it's not a zero-sum game?
So you buy the cell phone in the morning.
Doesn't mean you can't get the shoes later on.
Stupid survey.
Tom in Rapid City, South Dakota.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi.
Thank you, Rush.
You bet.
This is wonderful.
You had some callers earlier, Rush, that were trying to appeasement mentality towards these radical Muslims that were fighting.
And I'm just sick and tired of it.
These people are indoctrinated when they're two years old, and the only thing they learn how to do is kill Jews and kill Americans.
So there's enough of it.
I'm tired of it.
The only thing we can do to appease these people is die.
That's exactly right.
That is exactly right.
But these people that you're talking about think that we can, if we just stop supporting Israel and just retreat, that they'll leave us alone.
Other beyond that, we're no threat to them.
We're going to be a threat until we're all gone.
Well, that's not going to happen.
Exactly.
We're not going to be all gone because the people that would bring that about are never going to win elections in this country in order to facilitate that occurrence, despite whatever conventional wisdom there is to the contrary.
Andy in central Ohio, cell phone call.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Hi.
Good afternoon.
Hey.
I just got a comment on this Los Angeles City Council vote that's coming up.
Our question, actually, has the ACLU voted in on this or weighed in on this?
Taken away their freedom of speech?
No, not yet, but they have weighed in down in Jackson, Mississippi.
Oh, really?
You want to hear this?
This is an update, by the way, of a story that we did not long ago.
The National ACLU on Tuesday accused the city of Jackson, its black mayor, of civil rights violations, including racial profiling, in his crusade to stem crime in Mississippi's capital city.
The mayor's name is Frank Melton, and the accusations against him and the police are based on complaints from people who say they were pulled over on the basis of their race and searched without probable cause.
For me to leave my office and come into one of the states means that there is a very serious problem, said King Downing, the National Racial Profiling Coordinator, the ACLU, his office is in New York.
There are problems here that it's going to take the attention of the nation in order to solve.
In other words, King is saying here for me to leave my office and go down to Mississippi, it's going to take quite a lot.
I don't want to go to Mississippi ever.
But if I have to go there, you know it's a biggie.
Melton said in an interview on Tuesday he wasn't interested in the ACLU's complaints against him or the cops and denied he had violated anybody's civil rights.
We have 26 people that have been killed in Jackson this year alone.
We have 300,000 people killed across America every year.
The majority of them are African Americans.
It's time to do something different, Melton said.
I want to know what the ACLU wants to do besides criticize.
The city's population of 184,256, nearly 71% black, 23.5% live below the poverty level.
Since his election, federal authorities have told a mayor to quit packing his pistol on commercial airline flights.
Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood told him to stop wearing police gear because he's impersonating a cop.
And Faye Patterson, the district attorney in Jackson, has said the mayor was breaking the law by impersonating the police officer.
Melton criticized the ACLU's plan to hold meetings in Jackson to inform residents of their rights if they're stopped by the cops.
I hope they don't obstruct justice and give people false information because if they do, we're going to be focusing on them and we'll come after them.
I think Mr. Melton is a Democrat.
He's black.
He's got a huge crime problem in his city.
He's going about trying to solve it In a city where the majority of the population, 71%, is black, and the ACLU is trying to stop him on the basis of racial profile.
This guy is courageous.
The attack on the mayor continues, and the mayor says, Fine, ACLU, when I clean up this town, I'm going to clean you up.
Back in just a second.
Breaking news, as they say, a Texas federal appeals court, rather, in New Orleans, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, has upheld a lower court ruling and refused to let Tom DeLay take his name off the ballot, refused to let the Republican Party in Texas take DeLay's name off the ballot.
So DeLay can run.
He wants to reverse his decision that he made to resign.
He can run because his name is on the ballot.
He wanted to get name off the ballot so another Republican could run down there.
The original judge in this case, a Clinton judge.
And the Democrats want Delay, even though he's not running.
To go down to a stinging defeat.
Of course, they want the seat because they figure Delay doesn't run.
Whoever's the Democrat is unopposed.
Here's Greg in Texarkana.
Well, welcome to the program, sir.
Nice to have you.
How's it going, Rush?
Yeah, never better, sir.
Never better.
I just wondered if you might be interested in a 6'1", 220-pound male who's basically just interested in your money.
You know, I love golf.
I'd be a good golf partner for you.
I'd never nag on you.
We could go out and have a few beers.
It'd be great.
In fact, you probably wouldn't even care to see me that much.
Just give you a moment.
Yeah, you had an affair on me.
You're out of money.
The more, the merrier.
Absolutely, man.
We could double date with when we were cheating on each other.
I don't know, or broke back mountain or something.
Well, we'd have to go to Massachusetts first, and even then, it wouldn't.
Well, Greg, it's a great point.
Hey, screw all this phoniness, Rush.
I just want your money.
Juanita.
By the way, ladies and gentlemen, there is so much interest in the e-harmony profile.
To be honest with you, I've got so much mileage out of this.
I'm not going to announce the profile today.
I'll hold it over tomorrow's Open Line Friday.
You know, we're going to build this thing up.
It's not that big a deal, but it will have some specifics on it.
At any rate, Juanita, in Wheaton, Illinois, you're next.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Oh, hi.
Say, thanks.
I want to respond to that person who was concerned about getting their hearts and minds of the Hezbollahs and all those people.
He should take a cue from Dean Rusk.
When he was Secretary of State, I saw on the news he was being hammered by some congressional committee.
And I think it was a woman said, there must be something wrong with a country that can't blah, blah, blah.
And he said, did it ever occur to you there might be something wrong with them?
Yeah, what is it about this collective guilt that we have?
See, I think it's all rooted in Shelby Steele's book.
We're just so powerful and so big and so affluent.
It makes sense people would hate it.
It would make sense they hate it.
Why do they, we wish they didn't.
We've got to change their minds.
We've got to win their rights and mind so they'll stop attacking us and so forth.
And the real attitude, the real attitude of confidence is who the hell are they to hate us?
And why do we care?
As when they're trying to kill us, what does it matter?
To me, it's irrelevant totally why they hate us, if they hate us.
Deal with all that psycho babble later.
But why the assumption that they're always justified?
Why is the concept that we are hated and despised justified in people's minds?
It's because of the collective guilt we have.
This is Walt in Royal Oak, Michigan.
Hi, Walt.
Nice to have you with us.
Thank you very much.
And Neil Dittos, I'm very frequently everyday listener.
And I really hate to spoil your 98.5 percentage of being right.
But on eHarmony, you're 180 degrees wrong.
You do not post a profile of either yourself or what you're looking for.
Rather, you answer a very lengthy questionnaire, and they will match you up with a lady or ladies that they feel your personalities will be harmonious with.
Hence the name eHarmony.
And when I say it's a lengthy questionnaire, I think it's about 400 and some questions.
So expect to spend anywhere from an hour and a half to two hours to do it.
But it's well worth it.
Walt, I've only got a precious few seconds here.
And that may be the way it is for you and everybody else.
That's not the way it'll be for me.
I am a powerful, influential member of the media.
It's never for me the way it is for you.
Never will be.
Sadly, my friends, we are out of busy broadcast time, but open line Friday, we will wrap it up.
I really love this bump.
Saturday Night Live used this for those two geeks.
They're dancing.
At any rate, have a great Thursday, and see you tomorrow at the same time.