All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 14, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:06
November 14, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Broadcast Excellence is all yours.
You are in the midst of yet another excursion into Broadcast Excellence, hosted by me, L. Rushbow and the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
Limbaugh Institute, Advanced Conservative Studies.
Happy to have you along.
Telephone number, if you'd like to be on the program is 800-282-2882.
If you want to go the email route, uh, that's rush at EIBNet.com.
All right, so I I know it started uh polling for uh the Republican presidential nomination.
Fox News opinion dynamics got a poll out.
Uh Giuliani leads among Republicans 27, uh McCain is 25, Newt's at 24.
Other candidates are in there, and you know what it means?
Nothing.
It means zip zero nada.
How can it mean anything?
Besides, Giuliani is only formed as exploratory committee.
I know that's the first step.
Anyway, uh ladies and gentlemen, does the name Ross Perot uh ring a bell uh with you?
Uh Ross Perot had this uh he had this uh phrase that he popularized during the Republican uh well the presidential primary campaign back in 1992.
And that was that giant sucking sound.
Well, they crazy ant in the basement.
That was other popularized uh phrase, but the one that everybody remembers is the giant sucking sound uh that you hear um of jobs being uh uh sucked south of the border to Mexico because of NAFTA and CAFTA and and um all those all those other horrible things.
So I'm reading the New York Times, and this is um two days ago.
Uh I've has anybody have you seen anything about Perot in the news in the last two days?
Well, it's in the New York Times, and that's two days ago.
I'm sorry, yesterday.
I'm sorry, it was yesterday.
It was published, but the story is No, actually, it did run on the 12th.
They ran a little bit of a correction to it today.
Ross Perot, Texas billionaire, one-time presidential candidate, railed against a North American free trade agreement, early 90s, arguing it would create a giant sucking sound of good American jobs pulled down to low-wage Mexico, but things changed.
Last week, Perot's company announced that it was hiring in Mexico.
The Perot Systems Corporation, which manages information technology for companies, is setting up a technology center in Guadalajara, where it expects to employ 270 engineers by the middle of next year.
Neither Mr. Perot, who is now chairman emeritus of the company he founded in 1988, nor his world-class son, Ross Perot Jr., uh the company's chairman was on hand for the announcement in Guadalajara last Thursday.
But a company spokesman, Joe McNamara, said that lower pay for engineers was only one of several reasons.
Lower pay for engineers is only one of several reasons why Perot Systems decided to set up in Mexico.
Guadalajara is a fast developing technology center in Mexico, said the spokesman, Joe McNamara.
There's room to grow down there.
Company also looking at other places in Mexico to set up new operations.
Mexico, very important strategic location for us.
Got to love it.
Just have to love it.
Folks.
So the giant sucking sound uh is the sound of Perot systems.
High tailing it to Guadalajara and uh and and hiring uh engineers down there because you can get them cheap.
Now, when the story excuse me.
When the story originally ran, there was something wrong in it, so they had to issue a correction in the New York Times, the corrections issued today.
An article in Business Day yesterday about plans by Perot Systems to set up operations in Mexico referred imprecisely to the clients the Guadalajara office will serve, while a Mexican operation will provide desk and engineering support to Perot clients in Europe and the U.S. It will not do work for the U.S. government.
All work for federal agencies is done in the United States.
So um I will leave it uh to you who voted for Perot to make your own judgments on this.
I have never set up a business in Mexico, and so as such, I'm not qualified to comment.
A Florida Democrat says that he will not concede defeat in his race to unseat Republican representative Tom Feeney until every vote is actually counted.
We are talking about Clint Curtis here.
Clint Curtis said he is considering a legal challenge to the election results.
In this election, he said, the results didn't match the Zogby pre-election poll.
The results didn't match our internal vote now 2006.net polling, nor did it match exit polling.
These anomalies need to be investigated and cleared up, not just in my race, but for every district where the count just doesn't add up.
Curtis said he has informed the election officials in all four counties in Florida's 24th district that he is considering a challenge.
According to a news release put out by his campaign, Curtis has worked tirelessly over five years to correct issues in America's broken election system.
Now, as a congressional candidate, Curtis finally has the legal standing to pursue an investigation into the anomalies.
Here the uh here's the here's the vote count.
Now listen to this.
The Feeney Curtis race was not close.
With 100% of the precincts reporting Feeney had 52%, 123,557 votes, to Curtis's 48%, which is 89,672 votes.
So after all the votes are counted, 100% of the precincts then, Feeney, 123,000 votes, and Curtis 89,000.
And yet he's challenging it.
He's not going to give up until every vote's counted because the results don't match exit polling.
They don't match Zogby pre-election poll, and they don't match his own internal polls.
They tried this in 2004.
You know, all the exit polls had Carrie winning big.
And uh they were thinking of challenging on the basis that it once again the Republicans had uh had stolen the election.
Here's a story from Al AP in New York.
A man fired a machine gun into the air Monday as he walked along streets in a commercial area.
He was shot by the fuzz after he wouldn't drop the weapon, witnesses said.
No other injuries were reported.
Vincent Hull, who was at a dentist's office and said he heard at least seven shots, said it was just pow pow pow pow shoppers and commuters on a busy strip.
This in the Jamaica section of Queens scrambled for cover.
The uh fuzz, who received uh several 9-11 calls, said they confronted the gunman around 540.
I read this and I said, This can't be.
This can't be well, because they outlawed L Wad guns in New York.
That I it just can't be.
There's something has to be wrong with this story.
Having guns like this is against the law in New York.
It it just it just can't happen.
I'm wondering if it was a real machine gun, maybe a semi-automatic weapon.
I mean, even it's a semi-auto.
Uh calling it a machine gun serves the purpose of creating hysteria among liberals and their chance for even more uh gun control.
And of course, with this new Congress, they'll probably happily oblige.
Uh I also read the story.
I can't find the name of the gunman.
Um, you know, I've I've watched a lot of video uh in, say, since 9-11, and I see uh Saddam out there, and he's a Muslim and he's out there just firing bun guns in the air, his pistol and so forth, and bin Laden's doing the same thing, and Zarkawi was doing that.
Uh it's the way they celebrate uh in many cases.
You ever wonder those bullets they fire in the air come down and hit somebody?
I've often wondered they have what goes up has to come down.
They have to come down somewhere.
At any rate, there's no name mentioned here.
No name, no identity of the gunman whatsoever.
I still don't have my doubts about the whole story because you just you're not allowed to have guns like this in New York.
Washington either.
And welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh, cutting edge of societal evolution.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
What a zero in for those of you watching on the Ditto Cam, and this is going to be tough to see.
Well, maybe not.
Looks pretty clear on my monitor here, but my monitor looks nothing like this actually looks out there.
One of my often level complaints at engineering that uh always go unanswered.
What you see here are two pictures, uh, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm sorry for those of you not watching on the Ditto Cam, I will describe them for you.
Uh two pictures here from the groundbreaking yesterday at the Martin Luther King uh Center.
In uh wherever this was in Washington.
And now the picture on the bottom is uh the the new brothers, uh George W. Bush and Bill Clinton smiling and mugging for the cameras.
The picture above on the uh on the right, as you look at that, that would be former Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young, who, of course, in the story accompanying these pictures, his racist comments and his former association with Walmart were not mentioned.
Were he white, they would have been.
Next to Andrew Young is the uh Reverend Jackson, and I can't I can't decide here.
I need to zoom tighter.
Do I need to zoom?
Okay, let's that's that's that's I think it's as tight as I can go.
Uh that that picture there, I can't decide if that is the uh Reverend Jackson crying or being attacked by his hand.
I'm I'm not sure.
To me, it looks like his hand is attacking him.
Uh, but everybody else around is smiling.
That's why I'm thinking the hands attacking him, because I see smiles all around.
He appears to be the only one that might be in um in in tears there.
So we'll see if we can find these.
I've I um got these in an email out there, and I will uh see if we can get these up to the website so you can decide for yourself.
Interesting story from the Scotsman, uh, ladies and what, Mr. Snerdley.
Uh well.
Oh.
They were worried in there when they said I was going to describe it on the Ditto Cam.
They got worried last time that happened.
It didn't go well out there in the drive.
That's that's what you're telling.
You're talking about the Michael J. Fox flap, right?
Yeah, see, I um my hand has never attacked me, so I don't know if I'm qualified to discuss this in the case of the uh Reverend Jackson.
Um nevertheless, story from the Scotsman.
Fears of a skinhead earth, devoid of any trees, appear to be unfounded, according to new research, which shows forests making a comeback in China and India.
An international team of scientists, including Aberdeen University academic professor Alexander Mayher, found that twenty-two out of the world's fifty most forested countries were now increasing the amount of woodland, and predicted that a great restoration of the landscape could begin by 2050.
Uh what has happened, they have discovered, ladies and gentlemen, this research team has discovered something shocking.
Trees grow back.
There were parts of the research team was stunned because they were there were members of the team that actually once a tree was uprooted or felled, that was the end of it.
Once the tree's gone, it's gone forever.
They have discovered that trees grow back.
Uh almost like a crop.
They I mean they don't grow back as fast as corn or strawberries or artichokes or peanuts, but they do grow back, and this has given them new hope in their research that the earth will not be skinned alive by others.
Now, here's the thing.
This story even says the earth did suffer an epidemic of deforestation, but now humans may help spread an epidemic of forest restoration.
The bottom line is these researchers say we now have more trees.
I am not buying it.
I don't believe it, ladies and gentlemen.
There is nothing ever happening as far as the environment is concerned.
It's good.
There is no good news in the environment.
We're destroying the planet.
We're ripping it to shreds.
We're burning it alive.
We're wiping ourselves out, slowly but surely.
There is never any good economic news and such.
I don't believe this.
There's something screwy behind this story.
There has to be there's a gimmick.
They're playing a trick on us.
Something's happening here.
I cannot accept this, just like I cannot accept that somebody open fire with a machine gun in New York.
Guns are illegal there, illegal.
I cannot accept that we're win we're winning the forestation battle because no good news ever gets reported.
Listen to this.
Correct me just a second, but listen to this.
Global warming could wipe out most birds, world wildlife.
Now that's more like it.
That's the kind of news I expect.
That's the kind of news I trust.
That's the kind of news that I have come to know and love from the uh environmentalist wackos.
This is an Al Reuters story from Nairobi.
Unchecked climate change could drive up to 72% of the world's bird species into extinction, but the world still has a chance to limit the losses, said the World Wildlife Federation, from migratory insect eaters to tropical honey creepers and cold water penguins, birds are highly sensitive to changing weather conditions, and many are already being affected by uh global warming.
Birds are the quintessential canaries in the coal mine.
I thought it was frogs.
I thought it was frogs that were the canaries, you know, three-headed frogs and so forth.
Yeah, I'll tell you what, I was where was I?
Golf course.
Yeah.
Golf course was.
I saw the biggest damn grasshopper I have ever seen.
I thought it was, I saw it hopping along, and I thought it was a frog.
I thought the thing was a bullfrog, and I and I saw what the guy was playing with was trying to catch it in his hat.
He's trying to force it to jump into his hat.
And I finally got up there and said, look at that thing.
It must be going to town on all the fertilizer up there.
We're creating mutant grasshoppers here on the golf courses of Florida.
Now, what am I missing about the forestation story?
What am I?
Well, no, that don't be silly.
Sturdly, he's telling me that the forest is responding to the Democrat win.
Uh trees do not grow that fast.
Trees.
I don't think there's no truth to the story anyway.
I mean, the environmentalists say that there's more forestation out there.
Can't be.
There's never any good news new.
I'm not buying it.
There's a gimmick here, something happening.
Uh I have learned from these people.
You know, I I'm not I'm not old gullible rush like I used to be.
Two things here at work.
A, it's in the drive-by media.
B, it's the environmentalist C, it's good news.
That doesn't wash.
Doesn't make sense.
Rusty, Orlando, Florida.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Romeo did us to you, Rush.
Thank you.
Uh in this uh Florida 24th, the uh Democrat running against Phoenix Let me add a little background for you that you may have missed.
Uh this guy is a member of the tinfoil hat brigade.
He claims that five years ago he had.
Who is that?
You're talking about this guy Curtis?
Yeah.
He claims that five years ago he had a meeting with Feeney when they were switching over to uh touch screen machines, and that Feeney wanted him to find a way to reprogram the machines to rig the election, and basically ran on the fact that Feeney uh has been spent the last five years trying to rig election.
Uh well, that's that's that's not the tin foil hat crowd.
That's the mainstream of the Democratic Party.
Well, he's uh he he claims, though, that that it's Feeney that was behind it all in the whole state of Florida.
Hugo Chavez, what's the difference?
You know, I mean it's still people out there monkeying with the machines.
Anyway, it didn't help this guy.
He's down 89,000 votes to 123.
That's that's 33,000 votes, roughly 34,000.
He didn't have a prayer.
Um, but he is saying that his uh his pre election polls, the Zogby poll, the uh exit polls don't match the results, and so there's obviously something wrong here with the real count.
I tell you folks, uh, in a in a sort of detached way, there's there's something about these people you just have to love.
Because they come through for you.
They come through for you every time.
When you want somebody to act stupid, crazy, wacko, and insane, just look for the next Democrat to walk down the street and your wish will be granted.
All right.
A little uh little economic news here, uh, ladies and gentlemen.
This is from the Globe and Mail uh up in Canada.
The Quebec government says that last summer's out games, which uh which featured thousands of gay athletes from around the world ended up losing more than five million dollars.
The uh municipal affairs minister, uh Natalie Norman do Norman Dow, Norman Doe, not sure how he or she put I it's Nathalie, by the way, NATH Who knows?
Oh, it's it's a she says she's disappointed with the outcome, especially as the province gave organizers more than three million.
So wait, if they gave them a three million, they ended up losing five, it's a total of eight.
Eight million in the what could they possibly?
Organizers initially announced a $200,000 surplus, but an auditor hired by the Quebec government found the games, the out games are actually in the red.
Many of the cultural and sporting events drew far fewer spectators than expected.
Well, it shocks me.
Country like Canada, the gay games, the out games, and not very many spectators.
How can that be?
How do you lose eight million bucks on this?
You can't spend that much in Vaseline.
Cannot fool me.
Ralph and Louisville, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Sunny autumn, good afternoon from Derby City.
Great to have you.
Still summertime down here, man.
I mean, the humidity is up.
We're driving around with the windows up and the air conditioners on.
It's great.
Well, glad you like it.
I kind of like the fall here.
Well, I like fall now and then.
Um I like all the seasons, but it's still green and lush down.
You you would think it's you'd think it's August down here.
I worry.
Well, what I had today was a question.
I wanted to get your comments and thoughts, if I may, on a couple of articles that have been printed in the National Review uh by Jonah Goldberg, who his position is that um the way we should go in Iraq would be to have a put eskite, a vote, get the people to vote on whether or not they actually want to have Americans there.
Uh want our troops to be there, want us to be doing what we're doing there.
Um I must say I find his talking on the subject persuasive.
I would like to hear your opinion, sir.
Well, I don't know that Jonah is qualified.
I don't know he's ever run an election.
I don't know if he's ever been to Iraq.
Uh as I don't know if he's if he's qualified to uh make a policy suggestion like this.
Um the the the idea of a uh of a plebiscite is I guess it's I guess it's intriguing.
Uh but it uh it must follow the assumption that we might lose that.
Where the people don't want us to.
What happens if they vote that they do want us to stay?
And uh the Democrats have pulled us out.
What what I mean?
You know, I I don't think right now we can do anything that would challenge the Democrats.
The American people spoke.
Uh the American people want the Democrats to run the country.
That includes get us out of Iraq.
That's what the vote means.
And if we take any steps uh that would indicate the Democrats uh are wrong about this, uh, we'll be held a pay.
I mean, and besides that, what let me ask you this.
Which vote is the more important?
A vote of the Iraqi people or a vote of the United States and its population?
In the United States, the United States vote.
No, I mean I would be able to say the Iraqi.
No, no, no.
Determining policy in Iraq.
The American people have voted.
They want the Democrats to pull us out.
They want to get out of there now, they want to get out of there yesterday.
They want this situation solved.
They don't care if we lose, they just want us out of there.
Uh uh, what if the Iraqi people in this plebiscite vote, No, no, stay.
Then what do we do?
We do nothing.
We wait and see what the Democrats do.
Because I think this would spike them.
Uh well, what makes you think the Democrats have any respect for the Iraqi people?
I don't I'm not saying that trying to be funny.
I mean the Democrats the Democrats haven't once cared about what I mean, they're out there saying the place would be better off with Saddam back and I'm I'm not kidding here, Ralph.
I mean the what w what what what what Democrat that won't put the Democrats on the s that'll just show how the they'll just say the Iraqis have been brainwashed or the military stuff the ballots or or what have you.
Or they'll say the election problem.
Yeah, the election was rigged and uh and that sort of thing.
Uh I don't know.
I uh I I think it's moot point right now.
What what is Jonah I haven't read Jonah's piece.
What's his reason for suggesting this?
His reason for suggesting it is that basically America is not going to back down against bullets or bombs.
But if asked to leave would in the case would would honor ballots.
I I would think that would be in the American uh principle.
Well, after all, we're not there fighting to fight the Iraqis per se.
We're there to presumably escort them into a democratic regime.
But if they don't want to be escorted, should we be there?
If they don't want to be escorted.
Uh well, I think at this point the question has been answered, as far as uh the United States is concerned.
The voters went to the polls last Tuesday.
They elected the Democrats.
I believe that Iraq uh was one of the top three, maybe maybe number one and two of the top five issues was Iraq.
And so the American people have spoken to now go ask the Iraqis what they want.
Um is it's a little late for that.
It's a little after the fact.
Uh uh the you know, whether they want us there or not.
I've not I've not heard any stories they want us out.
I've I've heard just the exact opposite, in fact.
But uh who knows what you can believe.
We're stuff coming out of the uh out of the drive by uh media.
But it it seems it seems to me we're getting ready to pull out of the Iraq Study Group.
I mean, see you know you have it's not just the Democrats.
You've got the Iraq study group.
You've got Lee Hamilton and James Baker and whoever else, Bob Gates and and everybody right now is fashioning the exit.
Uh no b nobody any longer's talking about winning.
I mean, uh the ar the Iraq study group's objective is not to come up with a ways to to to win.
Uh their objective is to find a way to get out of there, uh uh peace with honor or what have you.
That does appear to be what's going on on that side of things.
Yeah, it well, and so I don't I don't I don't think at this point uh the Iraqis have a voice in what we're gonna do.
Uh and as far as the Democrats are concerned, they never have.
So I wouldn't expect the Democrats to respect what they say or uh or I mean hell, John Kerry's out there calling our troops terrorists and and uh we're trying to we're you know the Democrats are coming up with the Al Qaeda Bill of Rights to make sure that any of these terrorists that are captured uh uh can't be convicted of anything.
Uh uh I saying that Saddam uh had the country in much better shape uh than it is today.
Uh when Saddam was mass murdering uh people, three hundred thousand, all these mass graves that have been found.
Uh there was no concern from the human rights activists of the left and the Democratic Party.
So why all of a sudden today they would be concerned with what the Iraqis want?
Uh I think is uh moot question.
But I appreciate the call out there, Ralph.
Thanks.
Terry in uh Fairhope, Alabama.
Welcome to the program.
Well, thank you so much, Rush.
It's a pleasure and an honor to speak with you.
I've been listening to you for years, and you're just the best.
I'm going to allow my wife Iris of thirty-four years to kiss the hand that holds this phone.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Uh I've grown trees in my front yard and I I've hunted in in clear cut so I can speak of this, okay?
It might be capitalism.
Uh one of the alternatives that that you didn't think of, and the New York Times might not have mentioned, that that's causing these farmers to renew their crops uh to grow trees.
You mean you mean uh like the like Hammerhill P the paper companies, uh the Yeah, I've heard that there was a rumor some years ago that for every tree they cut down they plant fifty because they need more.
I mean they they need trees to make the New York Times.
And it's some fast growth technology and and the pine trees that's that's helping that too.
Uh, Yeah, but but see, nah, but you can't fool me because I have read these stories and I know what the environmentalists have said.
They don't count these replanted trees as true forestation because of what you just said.
They're not natural.
But if you have hormone technology to speed the growth of these trees, and they're gonna get cut down again anyway, and so they don't count.
It's still stripping the land bare by a bunch of evil capitalists.
But have you grown trees personally?
Uh no.
So I'm really not qualified to comment on them.
Okay, thank you.
That that's that that what you said's true, but I don't know how you don't count what's that.
If you hit it with your car, it'll slow your car down significantly, but it's not there.
Is that what the c uh what the environmentalists say?
Essentially, yes.
If it's planted by a uh a major uh corporation, it wasn't there.
You could back your car into a into a tree on a foggy night and dent the uh hood, but it really didn't happen if that was a tree planted by uh paper mill people.
I wonder I wonder if they know that or if they're stockholders.
Well, it it's you know, this is it's really it's really not that that complicated.
What you have to know is that uh uh big corporations are evil and are destroying their plant.
That's I don't even believe the story.
As as as you know.
I mean, you can cite all this evidence, you think capitalism is responsible for the all this uh new forestation.
Remember where this is happening is China and India.
You telling me that I got some form of capitalism in India, but but and maybe some in China, but not in the outlying regions, uh outside of the uh major cities.
I just when I see good economic news in the drive-by media, my antenna go up.
My r it just it can't be true.
They don't ever report good news, so there's a trick here somewhere.
I thought that uh change of subject a little bit, but I thought in the outlying regions in China there was significant capitalism like small farms and the like.
They might be part of the ones that are contributing, and they might in environmentalists might like it because it doesn't it clean the air a little bit of the calf latus?
Well uh yeah, but but it also destroys the trees.
I mean it cleans the air, but then the pollution destroys the trees.
You have to understand.
Uh you're making a valiant effort here, uh, and I applaud you for it, but there is no good economic or or environmental news.
There just none.
Uh you can you can sit out there and wishful think all you want, but there's no good environmental news.
I'll have to listen to you more to recheck my economics, because I thought buy low and sell high was good, but apparently it's not.
Well, see, that's another problem.
Buy low and sell high equals profit.
Oh.
And that's sin.
Can't you you've got a long way to go.
But I'm you're you're you're off to it, you're off to a good start.
You're the best.
I've listened to you for years, and you're still the best.
Terry, thank you very much for the priest day, Ross.
Appreciate it.
You bet.
Uh I apologize, ladies and gentlemen.
I have never grown a tree, and yet I chose to comment on it.
My bad.
Don't boom boom boom-boom.
I have been thinking about a problem that we all know exists.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen.
How do we get the media, the drive-by media, to report successes?
Not just presidential successes, but um uh successes of the country that are owing to Republican leadership.
How do we do this?
Uh there is an opportunity now.
And I want you to follow me on this.
Some of you will find this screwy.
Uh I assure you it's not.
For these next two years, the media cannot do the standard thing that they do when the Republicans are in power across the board, and that is really paint news as horrible.
The economy stinks, Rumsfeld stinks, rice stinks, uh, unemployment numbers are the whatever.
They're not good.
Nothing's good.
They do when when Republicans are running the Congress and uh had Bush in the White House, everything was rough.
They can't do that now.
And we see evidence of it all over.
Core inflation drops by record amount.
Walmart profit up, upbeat on holiday.
Uh all of this news that we've had lately, uh, Afghanistan, they're happier than they've ever been over there.
The new, you've seen it.
You've seen the trends.
The drive by media simply cannot paint a wholly negative picture the next two years because there are Democrats running the House of Representatives, or will be, and Democrats running the U.S. Senate, plus they have to promote Hillary in 08.
So in order to do that, I mean they can't promote Hillary by by ripping the country to shreds.
It's going to be a problem for them.
It really will.
So I think one of the ways that we could illustrate what what their objective is, at least on this program, is to credit Hillary herself for all of these successes.
And we can go back in time and give her credit for things that have happened.
For example, uh, this is all based on this.
How does this president ever, with this biased media, ever get credit for any of his accomplishments?
He doesn't, does he?
He hasn't gotten credit for one accomplishment.
So here's what we say.
Well, George W. Bush became president the same year that Hillary Rodham became a senator.
And look at all of the wonderful things that have happened since Mrs. Clinton became a senator.
And so, so so many things have happened, and she hasn't gotten hardly any credit for it at all because the media's been busy trying to destroy Bush by painting all the news as bad.
So, in order to break through with the drive-bys, we have to do it this way.
Hillary Clinton's decision to liberate Afghanistan and Hillary's decision to liberate Iraq brought freedom to some 50 million Muslims.
This is how we can report the story and get it covered by the drive-by media if Hillary is credited for all of these successes.
There hasn't been one terrorist attack on U.S. soil since Hillary Clinton was elected to the Senate.
Hillary Clinton's decision to cut taxes brought an economic recovery and a boom, and then prosperity to a nation that had been crippled by a dot-com crash, a recession, and a costly attack on our homeland.
Hillary Clinton bravely attempted to reform Social Security.
She had the courage to challenge the third rail of politics.
And even though she didn't succeed, history will vindicate her wisdom.
Hillary Clinton reduced the cost of prescription drugs to seniors, got no credit whatsoever, in fact was ripped to shreds for trying this.
Hillary Clinton was labeled the dumbest politician in our history, but she smooth proved herself to be smarter than those with the smart label.
Hillary Clinton came to Washington and immediately set out on changing the tone.
I mean, if we if we the list is limitless here because there's all kinds of good news that's happened.
If we just credit Hillary Clinton for it, we can perhaps illustrate in a in a in a because sometimes you have to go through the back door with people to get them to understand things because they're bent over forward looking at something.
And when I say I mean you have to come up from behind.
When you go up and tell people, yeah, you know, Bush did hi Bush, I hate Bush.
Do you know how great things in this country have been since Hillary Clinton was Yeah, we know look at how the economy's going.
The objective is not to get them to praise Hillary.
The objective is to get people to understand that there are really good things that have happened.
More on this at a later date.
We must break away now, ladies and gentlemen, another EIB obscene profit timeout.
Stay with us.
Well, that ends, brings to a screeching halt, another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence in mere minutes.
I will reopen this line and begin an interview with Michael Baron for the upcoming issue, the post election issue of the Limbaugh Letter.
Look forward to be back in here, uh be back here tomorrow.
And uh revved up, making sense about whatever is happening out there as you have come to know love and expect to see you then.
▲
Export Selection