All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 20, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:22
September 20, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
El Rushbo fighting fatigue.
Up late last night, but still pressing on with appointed duties and rounds as America's leading media figure, speaking to the most informed audience, the most knowledgeable audience in all of broadcast media.
This, according to recent research by the Pew Research Center for the people in the press, Rushland bought 800-282-2882 on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Great to have you with us.
Hugo Chavez held a one-hour press conference, ladies and gentlemen.
In that press conference, recently concluded he warned the devil, El Diablo, President Bush, against attacking Iran or Venezuela.
He says the oil price would spike to $200 a barrel.
He has called a second news conference for tomorrow afternoon.
It looks like the press, the drive-by media, has found their new star.
Move over, Jack Murthy.
Move over, Cindy Sheehan.
You have been replaced by Hugo Chavez.
Here's that story on Cuba that I mentioned.
It's in the L.A. Times yesterday.
From the ground up, Cuba is crumbling at the intersection of Marina and Joviar streets.
More than 50 people wait along a potholed sidewalk and broken curb for a bus that wheezes up to the stop already full.
Somehow a dozen or so managed to squeeze into the windowless contraption that dates back to the days when Moscow provided much of the means to keep the Cuban economy moving.
Today, the buses barely keep Cubans moving.
Many people spend as much as two hours each night getting home from their jobs in the center of Havana.
Their homes are also in a sad state with at least 500 buildings in Havana collapsing every year by the government's own count.
Their utilities are decrepit too.
Water and power distribution systems are corroded patchworks predating the 1959 revolution and olfactory evidence of the state of the sewer system wafts throughout the city.
Means it stinks.
For those of you in Rio Linda, Cuba is falling apart, literally, even as its economy booms thanks to a thriving tourism industry, brisk nickel exports, and cheap oil from Venezuela.
The social benefits are difficult to see at street level.
Except for a few high-profile historical restoration projects, the country's structural decay seems to worsen every month.
Few Cubans will talk openly about what might be wrong with a political and economic system that even in boom times can't keep the wheels of public transportation turning and the lights on, especially since Castro turned over power to his brother.
The problem is that the government owns everything and people only take care of what is their own, says another moonlighting cab driver, Arturo, who buzzes his plastic-encased motorbike around basketball-sized craters in the asphalt where the Malecon Seaside Promenade meets 23rd Street.
Now, I have to admit, I was stunned to see this in the LA Times.
Liberals love this place.
They love Castro's got the best health care of any place in the world.
Note, they never send their own kids there, by the way.
But nevertheless, or their own sick, their only family members.
And this story doesn't contain any mention of how great the health care is.
And yet the left in this country has a profound and noticeable admiration for Fidel Castro.
Decades of stoically making do with shortages and dysfunction have engendered a paralyzing passivity among Cubans, at least among the are about the quality of their administrators and the political system that guides them.
How about protesters being shot and jailed?
Do you think that might have an impact on their behavior?
Well, the Democrats.
You know, folks, can I be honest with you?
Well, I hate saying that.
I'm always honest with you.
Let me be open with you.
As you know, I spend very little time on this program talking about inside baseball kinds of things.
I don't spend a lot of time talking about the inner workings of this business.
I get into it when we do fourth hours because people tend to ask about it then.
And I never, ever do I share any complaints about aspects of this job because they are few and they are minor.
Everything being relative, there are some things that still bug me nevertheless.
But I don't talk about them because, I mean, who's going to listen when I complain?
And this isn't one of those complaints.
It's just it's a fact of life.
I am constantly asked by authors and others to plug their books.
I'm constantly asked to have people on to interview them about their books.
And in many cases, it's the only time I ever hear from them.
Some of them ask as though it's my duty to put them on.
Some of them, when they ask, don't ask.
They simply say they eagerly await their appearance.
In the meantime, I never hear about myself from them in any of their work and so forth.
And I understand all this.
This is a large audience.
You represent a tremendous opportunity for their books to become known and recommended and heard about.
And business is business.
But in light of all that, there are countless books.
The book business has become polluted.
It's so busy.
Everybody in their uncle is writing books these days of almost every genre.
And as such, there's a lot of noise in the book market.
And it is tough for these authors to have their work stand out because they do have to go on television and radio in order to be interviewed and get publicity.
The problem for me is that I don't interview people because I'm the expert.
And for me to assume the role of ignorant dupe is not an easy one for me to do psychologically.
To have somebody in here that's going to say what I already know and what I've already told you, acting like it's, wow, that's really cool.
Why, that's a man.
Why, that's huge news, challenges my own honesty with myself and with you.
But there is a book that I would like to recommend to you for one reason, and it is a book by my brother.
And if family doesn't count for anything, then nothing does.
Now, my brother has not asked to come on the program.
My brother has not asked to be interviewed.
My brother does not contact me five times a week suggesting that his book is relevant to what's happening now, and he would love to come on the program to explain it to you.
All of the things that, you know, we sit here on this program for the last number of years talking about the Democratic Party, what their history is, where they're headed, where that might take us if they assume power.
We talk about their hypocrisy and so forth.
And my brother David, over the past year, has feverishly, amidst changing diapers, the poor guy has had an infant in his family for 13 years.
Got five kids, maybe 14.
And they range from age 14 to coming up on one in November.
So the poor guy's had an infant in his life for 14 years, but he's doing his duty to produce conservatives out there while the libs, you know, the birth rate among libs is going down as well as the abortion rates going up, and liberal replacement levels are way down.
So David has, you know, did an awesome amount of research in his book.
His book is called Bankrupt.
And if there's one book that you should read and have leading up to the election, it's this book.
Because it has on paper, on the printed page, all of the quotes, all of the facts.
For example, what the Democrats were saying back in 1998 about Saddam and weapons of mass destruction, what their comments have been about religion over the years.
They're disparaging comments.
They're impugning comments.
And it's a codification of virtually everything that you've heard over the course of the years.
But, you know, when you hear words, they go in, one, out, the other.
It's impossible to remember a bunch of things that you've heard, which is why we experts on radio continually repeat the things that are important because it's necessary to make the impression.
So if you're in a book buying mood, and this is not to disparage other authors, and I've not meant to do that with these comments.
I'm merely explaining to you why I am recommending my brother's book.
And by the way, I'm not recommending it because it's his.
I'm recommending it because it's excellent.
It's good.
And it would be something that great reference and source material for you to have at your fingertips and at your disposal.
So he's not asked to come on.
He didn't ask me to plug it.
He's the only one out there who doesn't.
And, well, Snerdley says he knows better.
But whatever the reason, he's the only one.
And so if you're in a book buying mode and this stuff has you riled up and the events of each day continue to just enrage you, this would be a way to get some facts at your fingertips, an arsenal of ammunition at your disposal to be able to fire back and just have at your ready so that you can rearm yourself at any given time.
Again, the book is called Bankrupt.
It's by David S. Limbaugh, and it's, I think it's from Rugnery.
So I wanted to mention this within the context of this crowded book market and how many people are always seeking plugs for their books on this program.
He hasn't.
Quick time out.
We'll be back and take a quick break after this.
It's not good news for the Democrats out there in Rosemead, California.
Two longtime councilmen in Rosemead, California remain in office after voters rejected a recall effort supported by opponents of a recently opened Walmart store.
With absentee ballots in all 11 precincts counted, the attempt to recall Mayor Gary Taylor and Councilman Jay Imperial was rejected by a 59 to 41 percent margin according to preliminary results released by the city clerk's office.
The election was monitored by U.S. Justice Department observers.
A court ordered the observers after Taylor and Imperial complained their opponents had violated the Voting Rights Act by distributing petitions that were only in English.
80% of Rosemead residents speak a language other than English at home, according to census records.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, they tried to have a recall effort on two councilmen who supported a Walmart store, and the recall effort went down to a stinging defeat.
California has filed suit against Ford Motors, General Motors, and Toyota, and three other car makers did so today, charging that greenhouse gases from their vehicles have cost the state millions of dollars.
State Attorney General Bill Duckyer said the lawsuit filed in U.S. district court, Northern California, was the first of its kind to seek to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by their vehicles' emissions.
The lawsuit also names Chrysler and the North American units of Honda and Nissan.
What?
This is not a joke.
Snarly thinks I'm joking about this.
This news just cleared about an hour ago.
No, no, it's absolutely true.
You know, people, when I come back in California, even when I'm out there, I love it out there.
I have gobs and oodles of good friends out there.
And whenever, I don't care, Northern California, be it Sacramento while I live there, when I go play on the AT ⁇ T at Pebble Beach in Monterey Peninsula, Los Angeles, Southern California, San Diego.
I just, I love it out there.
And people say, well, why don't you just get, why don't you just move out here?
And I said, are you kidding?
I mean, the taxes alone, the property taxes are on a par with what I pay in Florida.
Income tax I don't have in Florida.
They do have it in California.
It's going up.
I mean, and now this, I mean, they're suing every liberal state.
They're suing everybody.
Now they're adding a $50 surcharge on every piece of property out there.
It doesn't matter what it is.
They just can't get enough money in that state, no matter how much they collect and who they get it from.
It's just, it literally is out of control.
A bunch of liberals run the state for all intents and purposes.
It's a dilemma.
This is not a joke.
We've got the U.S. auto industry in trouble.
And here's the state of California, apparently because there's a budget shortfall somewhere, or they're just greedy and going to go out and sue for greenhouse gases.
Now, keep in mind, there has not, I don't care what anybody tells you, there is no conclusive, yep, definitely it has happened, global warming man-made in this country.
And yet here's a lawsuit on the basis of manufactured greenhouse gas from six automobile makers.
You want to run these automobile makers out of the state?
Do you want to cause them, if they have to pay these gigantic damages, what's it going to do to the job base out there for manufacturers in this state?
This is, it isn't going to stop.
This constant need and craving for money in that state, anywhere, in any state in this country.
No matter what they get, they spend that and more.
And the targets of all this happen to be the successful.
That's how libs operate, punish achievement, because they resent it.
Nobody's supposed to be able to achieve without them.
So, I don't know.
If you think it's a joke, it's not a joke.
What's the question?
I assume, well, who knows?
Yeah, I guess he drives a car made by one of the companies that he's suing.
Who knows?
Maybe he's got a car and driver.
He's the attorney general.
I don't know.
That doesn't matter.
It's totally ludicrous.
It's absurd.
It's ridiculous.
It's greedy.
It's everything.
Suing automobile manufacturers for greenhouse gas emissions.
The danger is, thankfully, this is not a state court.
It's a lawsuit in district court, U.S. District Court, Northern California.
But hell, what are the odds that the judge in this court is a Clinton appointee?
We'll just see whether this could get, I don't think it's federal suit, so make sure that U.S. District Court in Northern California.
I'm just trying to figure out if the Ninth Circus could ever get hold of this case.
Windmills that would float hundreds of miles out at sea could one day help satisfy our energy needs without being eyesores from land, scientists said on Monday.
Offshore wind turbines aren't new, but they typically stand on towers that have to be driven deep into the ocean floor.
The arrangement only works in water depths of about 50 feet or less, close enough to shore where they're still available.
Researchers at MIT and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory have designed a wind turbine that can be attached to floating platforms.
Long steel cables would tether the corners of the floating platform to a concrete block or other mooring system on the ocean floor like a high-tech ship anchor.
Setup is called a tension leg platform or TLP.
That would be cheaper than fixed towers.
So we're going to dump junk in the ocean.
Ten years ago, Ted Danson told us the oceans would be dead and we didn't do anything about it.
No, in 1988, he told us that.
The floating platforms to sway side to side, but not bob up and down.
Computer simulations suggest that even during hurricanes, the platforms would shift by only about three to six feet and that the bottom of the turbine blades would revolve well above the peak of even the highest wave.
What if they're 30-foot waves, which are not uncommon?
Another advantage of using floating platforms is that the windmills could be moved around.
If a company with 400 wind turbines in Boston needs more power in New York City, it can unhook some of their windmills and tow them south.
Does anybody stop to think of the energy necessary to move these damn things?
What is the risk-reward ratio on this?
How much money is it going to cost to build these things, to build these concrete anchors, to tether these things to the concrete?
Then when you want to move them, you got to tow them.
You got to tow them out there.
How long is it going to take for them to produce energy to make back that cost?
And then that cost keeps going up because you've got to make provisions for towing them.
Yeah, no, how many seabirds are going to be killed here?
But I mean, they're not used to seeing these wind turbines out there.
What are they going to think?
How many extinctions are these things going to cause?
This is irresponsible.
Hey, I just got an email from a friend.
It says, about this silly lawsuit that Bill Walker, the Attorney General of California, is launching against these six U.S. automatic, well, not automakers, for polluting the state by emitting greenhouse gases.
It says, hey, wait a minute.
Does a car pollute and emit anything unless a driver gets behind a wheel and starts it?
Why not sue the drivers?
Your car's not doing anything.
It's an inanimate object until some greedy, polluting American gets in the thing and starts it up.
And by the way, if it's not, if you're going to sue cars, how about the manufacturers of buses?
Have you ever seen the garbage comes out of the back of them?
And liberals love buses.
Liberals love mass transit.
They want everybody on buses.
How many miles a day are liberals bussing their kids in California instead of having them walk across the street to go to school?
I'll tell you why our gas stations are the ones that put gasoline in the cars.
How come they're getting a pass?
Well, the answer to this is obviously the manufacturers of automobiles are the deep pockets.
This is strictly a money grab on the part of Bill Lockyer.
And as Mr. Snerdley said, he drives in a car, whether he's being driven or whether he drives it himself, he's polluting as well.
You know what this is like?
This is like the way we profile now to find terrorists who want to blow up airplanes.
You know who we consider the enemy?
Baby formula, shaving gelatin, other liquids.
Yep.
As long as we can keep those off airplanes, why, by golly, we'll be safe.
We don't profile the people who use all that to blow up the airplanes or try to.
No, the enemy now is baby formula and other liquids.
It's just like the enemy is the automobile.
How many global warming deaths have there been, Attorney General Lockyer?
We know there are about 43,000 deaths in automobile accidents over the course of a year in this country.
But how many global warming deaths are there?
Why don't you sue the auto manufacturers for death?
Sue the inventor of the wheel or the descendants of his family, because without that, the automobile wouldn't be possible.
Idiots, just plain idiots.
All right, now I want to address this before we run out of time because I mentioned this at the top of the program.
I'm reading the New York Times last.
I was up very late last night, ladies.
I had to go out to dinner with some people, and I just cannot come home and go to bed.
Well, I wasn't reading the New York Times.
I have an RSS reader, and it pops out all the latest gibberish to me.
People send me things.
I don't read the New York Times.
I see an interesting story that I think will suit the purposes of this program, and this one did.
It's by Kate Zernicki.
White House drops a condition on interrogation bill.
Now, the point of the story is that the White House has blinked against the dissidents, McCain and Graham and Warner.
They are not dissidents.
Natan Sharansky is a dissident.
He was in prison for disagreeing with the Soviet Union.
That's a dissident.
These people are not dissidents.
They're merely obstacles.
Now, here's the opening paragraph of this story.
Seeking a deal with Senate Republicans on the rules governing the interrogation of terrorism suspects, the White House has dropped its insistence on redefining the obligations of the United States under the Geneva Convention, members of Congress and AIDS said today, yesterday.
So I read the rest of the story, and it doesn't say what happened.
The theme is the White House blinked, but it doesn't say what they gave up, what they dropped.
It says the White House has agreed to work within the War Crimes Act to refine the obligations under common Article 3.
Developments suggest that it says that the White House had blinked first in its standoff with the senators McCain and Warner and Vice President Lindsey Graham.
But all it says there that the option that the White House put forward was to seek changes in the War Crimes Act the administration said was necessary to provide interrogators of the CIA protection and so forth, but that there's no evidence in the story.
The White House has caved on anything.
And yet the White House drops a condition.
They haven't dropped a condition.
They simply shifted focus in a way to get this done.
And my point is that the McCain crowd is being really heard from.
You are being heard from.
I'm sure their phone lines and their computer lines are burning with phone calls and emails from people who are dissatisfied with this.
And I told you yesterday that as the heat mounts on McCain, the drive-by media has as its duty to make sure the White House is the one seen as caving in this.
Because as far as the media is concerned, when this is all said and done, when it's over with, McCain will be the one, as far as they're concerned, who is seen to get something out of this.
They will never ever suggest that McCain caved.
But I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that's what's going on here because I think he's overshot with us, thinking he's, I think he just made a miscalculation here.
Now, there's another story that backs this up in the Washington Post.
Dissidents' detainee bill may face filibuster.
And John Warner says we're considering revising the War Powers Act in order to clarify Common Article III rather than the original way we're going to do it.
Well, there's no cave in that.
So, my question is: who's blinking?
Who is actually blinking?
Listen to this: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist signaled yesterday that he and other White House allies will filibuster a bill dealing with the interrogation and prosecution of detainees if they can't persuade a rival group of Republicans to rewrite key provisions opposed by President Bush.
Frist's chief of staff, Eric Uland, called the dissidents' bill dead.
Now, the New York Times doesn't say that.
And the New York Times says that it's congressional sources, members of Congress and aides, who told him that the White House had dropped its insistence.
But the Washington Post tells us that Frist said, screw that.
You guys don't get on board, and we're going to filibuster this whole thing.
So McCain's getting a taste of his own medicine, i.e., gang of 14, assuring there won't be a filibuster on this.
Frist struck a jarring tone, it says here, telling reporters that the TRIO's bill is unacceptable despite its majority support.
For a bill to pass, Frist said it's got to preserve our intelligence programs and it must protect classified information from terrorists.
He said the president's bill achieves those two goals, but that the Warner-McCain Graham bill falls short.
Yesterday, Warner said negotiators were considering revising the Federal War Crimes Act to clarify acceptable interrogation methods by non-military officials.
His bill embraces a similar approach, which would sidestep direct references to the Geneva Convention's meeting.
It was unclear whether the White House would accept such language.
Who's caving?
It's not the White House caving.
If it's the White House idea, they would accept it, right?
So, once again, the New York Times is a slavish tool, along with Chris Matthews and MSNBC of John McCain.
And I knew this was the case.
To the phones, Dick Macedonia, Ohio.
We had him on the phone yesterday, ran out of time.
You were talking about inflation.
Let me set it up for us, Dick.
USA Today yesterday runs this story about falling gas prices and this linking to fears of rising inflation.
And you called to say that consumers have no impact.
It's impossible for consumers to impact inflation, right?
That is correct.
Of course, we have to define inflation, and inflation is very simple, very easy to understand.
It is an increase in the money supply, and it causes all prices generally to rise pretty much.
That's true.
And disinflation would cause prices to go down.
Do we lose him?
We lost him.
No, don't sweat it because that's brief.
We got a break coming up, and he covered it well.
Dick, we're sorry we lost you out there on the cell phone, but it's not our fault.
Blame your self-service, your cell tower.
That's what I always do.
At any rate, disinflation causes prices to go down, oftentimes below replacement levels, meaning the production cost can't even be met.
Disinflation is a bad thing.
Some people think we went through a lot of that in the late 80s and early 90s.
But nevertheless, the one entity that creates inflation is the government.
They're the ones that print money.
They're the ones that control the money supply, Federal Reserve.
So if the money supply goes up and there's a lot of money out there, it affects the whole process of supply and demand.
You can either have too few goods being chased by too much money or vice versa.
I cannot create inflation, HR.
I'm not the federal government.
That's the whole point.
The USA story was entirely ignorant of economic fact, not theory.
There were lower prices will cause inflation.
If anything, lower prices lead to disinflation, but that's even esoteric as to this particular example.
You, the consumer, feel the effects of inflation, but we don't cause it.
And it was disingenuous of the USA Today reporter attempting to inflict guilt on you because lower gas prices are benefiting everybody, other than maybe the producers.
But isn't that fair?
Don't we want to get even with these ruffians at big oil at ExxonMobil who screwed us the first half of the year?
I'm being facetious, of course, but the, I mean, I didn't see one story when the price was going up about how it might have affected the consumer and how it affected the economy, how bad it was.
All I saw was Bush's fault.
It's going to harm Bush politically, and they reported that with hand-rubbing glee.
Now the price is going down and it makes them unhappy.
Not good doesn't fit the post-Labor Day scenario of chaos the Democrats wanted to create.
They have post-Labor Day chaos, the exact opposite of what they wanted.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
MSNBC asking if global warming is cooling down because we haven't had nearly as many tropical storms or hurricanes this season.
You idiots.
I've got some scientists on actually talking about the premise.
You know, I'm sitting here, ladies and gentlemen, I can't get this Chavez stuff out of my mind.
I know that he's a pip-squeak tinhorn, but he's in our hemisphere, and he's ramping up militarily, and he is aligning himself with Iran and China, and that is serious stuff, and he's off his rocker.
Third world pip squeak, trying to become the big guy among all these non-aligned third world nations against the evil United States, finding comfort and solace in the Democratic Party's own criticism of this country and its president, Hugo Chavez and Ahmadinejad, come to this country on our soil and basically express similar sentiments that the left in this country, the Democrats express, and leftists around the world express.
Different words, but basically the same sentiment.
George W. Bush is the enemy.
He's the devil, and so forth and so on.
And it just struck me.
Hugo Chavez is for real what the left thinks Dick Cheney is.
A madman, a lunatic, personifies evil, nutcase in control of oil.
Isn't that what they think of Dick Cheney?
Isn't that what they try to say to the people of the world in this country that Dick Cheney is a megalomaniacal, evil, mean-spirited little guy behind the scenes trying to corner the world's oil market?
In reality, Hugo Chavez is that personage they associate with Dick Cheney.
In an absolutely nutcase ruling, a state judge in Georgia yesterday rejected a Georgia law requiring voters to show government-issued photo ID, writing in his decision, this cannot be.
Fulton County Superior Court Judge T. Jackson Bedford Jr. said the law published and or pushed by Governor Sonny Perdue to fight voter fraud violates the state constitution because it disenfranchises citizens who are otherwise qualified to vote.
Let's see.
What do we need a photo ID for in this country?
You've got to have it on your driver's license.
You can't drive without one.
You can't get on an airplane these days without one, right?
Unless you own your own airplane, unless you own your own airplane.
You need a photo ID to drink.
You need a photo ID.
What if I had to show it off?
I've had to get insurance for the automobile.
They have to see a copy of the driver's license.
You need it to cash a check.
Well, I'm glad you told me, but I wouldn't know that.
I never cash checks.
But, I mean, what is it that you need?
Why are you frowning, Brian?
Trying to figure out how that's possible?
It's not true.
I mean, I cashed you, but yes, we just do it differently.
It's like you watch the show Boston Legal.
It premiered last night.
I love that show.
I think, I know William Shatner's a big lib and all that, but he's funny as hell on this show.
He plays a character called Denny Crane.
I mean, I never watched it until I got the DVDs of season one.
I watched them.
I just thought it was hilarious.
I even like Candace Bergen in this show.
The writing on this show is really good.
But like Denny Crane said last night, he was talking to somebody in the show.
He said, the thing you have to understand is we rich people get what we want.
Who's next on this program?
Jerry in Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Thank you.
Yes.
Thank you for taking my time to call.
One thing I was commenting on is you were talking about those wind turbines.
Yeah, floating wind turbines.
The off-coast floating ones.
I think it's the best idea because they stand about 500 feet off the water.
And the technology is there.
I mean, they have floating oil rigs.
So it gets it out of the way of boats and everything else.
And the biggest, I think, technology problem is transferring the power to land under the water.
Well, that's kind of crucial, isn't it?
I mean, that's the biggest problem.
Yeah, I mean, right now they can do it like 50 miles out.
I'm currently looking at setting up a 1.5 megawatt tower, and it makes a lot of money.
They have about a million and a half.
I know, but like you're in Cape Cod, and all this is happening because people like you don't want them within your eyesight.
So energy is not that important.
It's the aesthetics that are.
Yeah.
How many birds get killed by these turbines on Cape Cod?
Well, wherever they are.
You could.
Well.
Well, that's kind of direct.
You sound like a rich Republican capitalist.
I would agree with you.
The birds of seagulls are nothing but rats that fly.
At any rate, look, Jerry, I appreciate the phone call.
I got to run here in a short period of time.
As I've told you, I've lived in California.
And when I first drove out there, I took the southern route, went south to avoid a snowstorm because I went out after Thanksgiving.
I got a snowstorm in Flagstaff, Arizona, but had to take I-5 all the way up the state.
And I saw these windmills on the side of the mountains and the hills.
And the first time I got some, what are these windmills for?
Power.
Do they work?
No.
Half of them, the blades weren't even turning.
The wind wasn't that powerful.
I don't know about the efficiency of this.
I think this is about as brilliant a liberal idea as the electric car or the hybrid.
Back in just a second.
Heads up, folks.
Tomorrow is International Peace Day.
We'll all get along for 24 hours.
But then at midnight, the hate, the war, and the ravages commence again.
Don't be late for that.
See you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection