All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 23, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:14
February 23, 2007, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Have you people heard about this island the Iranians plan on building that is going to be man-free?
No men on this island, so women can go out there and Muslim women can do what they want to do without any men around.
The question is, how are the light bulbs going to get changed in a lawns mode or any of that sort of stuff?
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's open line Friday.
HR just said, who's going to take out the trash?
H-R-H-R, you must.
There is no trash when women live amongst women.
Open Line Friday, welcome back.
Nice to have you, El Rushbo, firmly ensconced in the prestigious Attila the Hun chair here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Open Line Friday means that when we go to the phones, I don't have to care about what you want to talk about.
That's my present to you.
Monday through Thursday, this is a benevolent dictatorship.
Only I have the right to speak.
I grant that right to others on occasion.
But you have to call about things that we're talking about, things that I have deemed of interest to me.
On Friday, that's not the case.
So you can ask about Anna Nicole.
You can ask about Brittany.
You can ask questions about anything.
You can make comments.
You can call and whine and moan.
Offer praise for whoever or whatever.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882.
The email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
ABC News had an exclusive last night about this judge, Larry Seidlin, who has been running the Anna Nicole Smith Circus.
His wife is named Belinda, and she says that people are running around now saying that he should have his own television show.
Grab audio soundbite number 20, if you would, Ed.
This is just a sample here.
And this doesn't do the entire week justice in terms of the behavior of this judge.
But here's a little 40-second soundbite of the judge blubbering, breaking down into tears yesterday, announcing his big decision.
Richard Milstein, Esquire, as a guardian alighting for Daniel Lynn Hope Marshall Stern, is awarded custody of the remains of Anna Nicole Smith.
The Browley County Medical Examiner is ordered to release those remains to Milstein in accordance with Milstein's directives.
You'll read it, but I want her buried.
I want her buried with our son.
This guy's a probate judge, and he's out there telling the audience he doesn't like death.
He doesn't like funerals.
He doesn't like medical examiners.
He doesn't like coroners.
He's a probate judge, which is what he deals in.
He deals with the disposition of estates after people have passed on.
Anyway, that's just a sample.
His wife's out there saying, everybody's just calling them get to us and saying Larry needs his own television show.
And who knows?
He may well get it.
You remember this legislator out in California, Sally Lieber, who proposed the ban on spanking.
She abandoned this campaign.
It was a heavily ridiculed campaign to make spanking a crime.
She acknowledged that the idea would get whacked even in California's wacko legislature.
So instead, San Francisco Area Assemblywoman Sally Lieber introduced a more narrow bill that she said would help DAs more easily prosecute parents who cross the line from punishment into physical abuse.
She's seeking to classify a laundry list of physical acts against your children, including hitting with a belt, a switch, or a stick, or unjustifiable and grounds for prosecution, or as unjustifiable and grounds for prosecution.
Also, there'd be probation or a parental timeout, plus a class on nonviolent parroting.
Spanking a child on a butt, even to the point of injury, will remain legal in California, she said.
Clearly, I take exception with the part of the law, but the votes are simply not there to change it, she said, facing a bank of TV lights, cameras, and the largest media spotlight the soft-spoken Democrat has ever encountered.
Okay.
Washington Post going gaga today.
Well, actually, in a way, going gaga, but not all the way.
I printed this story out on my computer.
Seven pages?
Seven pages when you print this story out.
You know where the headline is?
For Clinton, new wealth in speeches.
Seven pages to tell us how rich Bill Clinton is.
Story says that in six years, Bill Clinton has raked in nearly $40 million in speech fees.
Former President Bill Clinton, who came to the White House with modest means and left deeply in debt, has collected nearly $40 million in speaking fees over the past six years.
This, according to interviews and financial disclosure statements filed by his wife, Senator Hillary Rodham.
Last year, one of his most lucrative since he left the presidency, Clinton earned $9 million to $10 million on the lecture circuit.
He averaged almost a speech a day, 352 of them for the year.
Only about 20% were for personal income.
The others were given no fee or for donations to the William J. Clinton Foundation and his massage parlor in Little Rock.
His paid speeches included $150,000 appearances before landlord groups, biotech firms, and food distributors.
And this is the key, as well as speeches in England, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia that together netted him more than $1.6 million.
Clinton said, yeah, I never had a nickel of my name other than what Hillary earned until I got out of the White House.
And now I'm a millionaire.
I'm richer than you are.
And I'm never going to stop reminding you of it.
I get a tax cut every year, no matter what Hillary's needs are, what my needs are.
Now, according to these financial disclosure forms, Clinton's net worth here is estimated to be between $10 million to $50 million.
The thing that's striking about this to me, and I don't care, but I'm not, you know, doesn't bother me.
I just can't forget.
You remember when Ronaldus Magnus left office, he went to Japan, made a couple speeches, and came home with $2 million.
He was excoriated.
Reagan was scorched by the drive-by media.
And why?
Because it was unseemly.
He was selling the presidency.
This was beneath the dignity of the office.
And now it's a source of great pride that William Jefferson Clinton is out there raking in $40 million.
He's got so much money.
I mean, Republicans, I'm their favorite guy.
I keep getting their tax cuts, and I don't need it.
Give the money back then.
People, phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rocket roller.
So much of this stuff comes from foreign sources.
Foreign clients have included the Saudi Arabia Dabag Investment Firm.
They paid $600,000 for two speeches.
China's Jing Ji Real Estate Development Group, run by a local Communist Party official, paid $200,000 for a speech.
The Mito City Political Research Group, a Japanese political studies center, paid Clinton $400,000 for a 200 or 2002 speech about politics.
He's all over Dubai.
And so's Gore.
These people are raking in all these speech fees from foreign sources.
And again, I don't decry and condemn anybody working hard and earning a living for it.
And if he's in demand and people are willing to pay this, fine and dandy.
But the interesting thing is that he's only, this $40 million, according to this story, is only from two to, what is it, two to five percent of the speeches?
Or 10% of the speeches.
The others are not paid.
Well, the money's going somewhere, and it's probably going to the library and massage parlor.
And of course, that money we're not told about.
We don't know who the donors to the Clinton Library and Massage Parlor are.
But the story talks about how the Clintons now have enough independent wealth that perhaps she could even fund some of her presidential campaign with her own money, permitting her to forego federal matching funds and the limits thereon.
Blah, I mean, everybody's happy.
And I just can't forget how poor old Ronald Reagan just got creamed for doing two speeches in Japan.
We'll take a break and be back after this.
Your phone calls and other things coming right up.
Open line Friday, and I make an honest effort to take more calls on Friday than during the week.
And so we go back to the phones now.
This is Blaine in LaGrand, Oregon.
Hi, Blaine.
Nice to have you with us.
Hey, Rush, hey, thanks a lot for all that you do, and especially the podcast that you provide us so that we can listen to all three hours of your programming and listen to it at our leisure rather than have to.
By the way, I need to interrupt you for a minute on this.
Sure.
If you'll permit me, it will not take away from your precious call time.
But you mentioning the podcast reminds me, I haven't talked about the podcast much, but the podcast is a service to subscribers at rushlimbaugh.com, and the podcast is of the program.
And it gets fed either to your computer directly or put up on iTunes.
And you'll have it by 30 minutes after the program normally.
Sometimes it's an hour, but you'll have it there.
Now, people ask me, why do we don't hear the theme song?
We don't hear any satire.
We don't hear any of the music.
Why is that?
And it's a licensing issue, ladies and gentlemen.
Blaine, I'm glad you brought this up because I've been meaning to answer this question for the longest time, and it keeps slipping my mind.
The way that we're able to play music on the radio program is that our member stations, our affiliate stations, all pay licensing fees to BMI, ASCAP, the licensing agencies.
But there is no license set up yet for us to legally replay that in other forms.
It's in the process of being worked out.
But even we could probably put some of the parodies that don't have music in them.
But anything that has music that is either one of our parodies off of a real song or an update theme, even the bump music we can't put on because we don't have the licensing permission to do that.
And it's something we're constantly trying to rectify.
It's just going to take time because all of this is new territory.
And when we first started this, people said, well, other hosts put their music on there.
Well, they may be doing it, but they may not know it, but they're violating regulations and the law.
And they're so small, nobody knows it.
The BMI and ASCAP's not picking them up.
But I can't get away with that, folks.
So that's the answer.
Blaine, thank you for allowing me to interrupt your call to make that point now.
Launch.
It's all yours.
Well, Rush, I kind of wanted to reiterate what you're talking about on the podcast.
It's really important for guys like me so we can listen to like all three hours and at a time that is convenient for us.
And, you know, it's just hard to get a hold of us.
What do you mean, guys like you?
When you might have to go on a patrol or something like that.
Well, that's what I mean.
What do guys like you?
Your military go on patrol?
Roger that.
I'm stationed in Baghdad.
I volunteered to go to Iraq, and now I'm an advisor to the Iraqi National Police.
Right now I'm on leave with my five kids and my incredible wife.
And so I thought I'd give you a call and talk about what I'm seeing back here on the media.
And it seems like a lack of leadership, but we'll stick to the media today.
How about that?
Go right ahead.
Hey, listen, I talked to some foreign correspondents when I'm down in Iraq, and I launched into them a couple times.
What network were you talking to?
Remember the networks they worked with?
Yeah, it was some CBS folks is what I talked to, and got them a little bit ticked off.
But I just wanted to share that with you that some things I talked to them about was, I really resent the coverage that they're doing.
It focuses on casualties and number of attacks, and that's okay.
They can report that.
That did happen.
But it's not the whole story.
And it's basically a scoreboard for the enemy.
And I understand that every death is a tragedy.
And that was one of my good friends in 2004.
And I named my second son after him.
But the number of casualties do not justify the news coverage.
We're talking, you know, we lose tens of thousands to car accidents every year.
You were talking about 7,000 for poor penmanship of doctors.
Yes.
We got close to a million a year for abortion.
And we're talking about 800 a year in Iraq.
And not all of those, not all of those are combat deaths.
Correct.
Correct.
Let me ask you a question about this because every time we get a call from a member of the military who is home on leave or is back for good after serving, we hear the same story and the frustration in your voice.
You come back, you watch a local media, and you see a whole different presentation than what you saw on the ground in Iraq.
I love your phrase, scoreboard for the enemy.
Drive-by media in America, scoreboard for the enemy.
That's brilliant phraseology.
Well, they don't even report what we've done.
You know what I'm saying?
It's only telling one half of the score.
Well, it's not fair to talk about the enemy who are dead because, of course, they're minorities and victims.
Yeah, that's right.
By the way, I read something today.
I want to ask you about this.
I don't know that you will know this.
Okay.
Mark Stein, who's a brilliant writer from Australia and publishes in many different areas here in the United States, has a column today in which he says that he was invited to the White House with a number of other columnists some time ago, not long ago, to meet with the president.
And the president told these guys, these members of the media, that 80%, 80% of the casualties in Iraq are taking place within 50 kilometers of Baghdad.
I wouldn't know.
You know, I haven't, Rush, I don't get a whole lot of time to read that stuff, but, you know, I don't know where he's getting the data from.
Baghdad's a rough place.
It's a rough neighborhood.
But it's not all bad.
And it's.
Well, that would include Baghdad.
But the point is that if 80% of the garbage is happening within 50 miles of Baghdad, including Baghdad, that would lead us to conclude the vast majority of the country has been tamed.
Well, Roger, most of the land mass, right.
But you've got to look at where your population centers are in Iraq.
And Baghdad definitely is the largest population center.
It's like the second most populous city in the Arab world behind Cairo.
And so there's an awful lot of people there, and there's quite a bit of violence.
But at least in my sector, what I can talk about, my sector of Baghdad, about eight square kilometers, it's not that bad.
And we just don't get that many attacks and everything.
And there's a lot of good things that are happening.
And for instance, I got this.
I work with the Iraqi National Police, and he's a non-sectarian guy.
And he, you know, they're normally seen as Shia, and he is Shia, but he works with the Sunni, and he's got in trouble with his hire for doing that.
But he's got a good relationship with the population and coalition forces.
All right, let me just ask you this, because time is dwindling, and you're well spoken and you're informed, and you're going back.
How do you feel when you hear about John Murthy's plan to slow bleed, deny you reinforcements, deny you armor and equipment to keep doing your job?
How do you feel when the Democrats want to pull you out of there because they own defeat because they think we've already lost this?
Rush, I'm a soldier, and by definition, I can't be a political animal.
But I'll tell you this: the administration has decided that Iraq is in our national security interest.
We need to decide as a people if Iraq is in our national security interest or not.
If it is, we need to support the administration and achieve a free and stable Iraq.
Not poo-poo it and decide we want to face defeat and pull out and leave our friends high and dry.
I mean, what happened to you?
I have to stop you because of time, but I appreciate your well-spokenness on this and your answers on this.
It's great to hear from you.
Thanks so much.
That's right.
A man, a living legend, a way of life influencing countless millions for 18 and a half years here on the EIB network, confounding, angering, and driving insane countless millions of others.
800-282-2882 news that I doubt will surprise too many people.
It will surprise some.
It is from the Australian today.
The survival techniques of West African chimpanzees have revealed that the first human weapons may have been developed by women.
The use of spears and axes to hunt and kill is commonly thought to have been pioneered among humanity's ancestors by males.
But research has indicated weapons may have been a female invention that compensated for their lesser size and strength.
Anthropologists' observations of chimpanzees in Senegal have revealed they gnaw the ends of sticks to create rudimentary spears, which they then use to hunt bush babies.
Now, bush babies are a small primate.
Bush babies not capitalized.
The findings are the first evidence of the systematic use of weapons in a species other than humans.
And they are intriguing because all but one of the chimps using the spears were females.
This gender imbalance has led scientists to theorize that female chimps pioneered hunting with weapons as the only way in which they could compete with the physically stronger males to add animal protein to their diets.
While males can hunt with their bare hands, females need weapons to help them.
Really?
Females have to come up with creative ways at getting at a problem, whereas males have brawn, said Jill Prutz, who is a researcher at Iowa State University.
The finding supports a hypothesis that women played an integral part in the development of weapons for hunting and other kinds of tools.
The observation that individuals hunting with tools include females and immature chimps suggests that we should rethink traditional explanations for the evolution of such behavior in our own lineage.
You know, folks, I have this.
I got this lifestyle stack every day.
It's getting bigger and bigger and bigger.
There is more, more of this kind of stuff, and it's all coming from science.
And of course, the magic word is science.
So whenever we see this stuff, scientists say this, scientists say that, nobody disputes it.
Joe Lieberman, you know, this, I said yesterday that Mitch McConnell is the most powerful man in the Senate.
Oh, by the way, this is big news, and I forgot to mention this.
Tom Vilsack, the governor of Iowa, has announced that he is dropping out of the Democratic presidential sweepstakes for this year.
I had forgotten he got in when I saw the story of that first one.
When did he get in?
So, Vilsack's gone.
They wanted to make sure we keep you informed at cutting edge of the latest political news.
So I said yesterday that Mitch McConnell, the most powerful man in the Senate, the Republican leader, been telling you this ever since the election.
The Senate is where liberalism, Democrat Party legislation can be stopped.
Republicans in the House are powerless.
But now there's a new contender for the most powerful man in the Senate, and that is Joe Lieberman.
Because Lieberman told the Politico.com website yesterday that while he has no immediate plans to switch parties, it is something on the table.
And the reason for it is Democrat opposition to funding the war in Iraq.
Lieberman, now operating as an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, has been among the strongest supporters of the war and President Bush's plan for the surge.
Lieberman said, I have no desire to change parties.
If that ever happens, it's because I feel the majority of Democrats have gone in a direction I don't feel comfortable with.
In fact, even worse than that, Lieberman has stopped attending the weekly lunches of the Senate Democrats because he finds it totally uncomfortable to talk about Iraq with them.
He just doesn't want to be around them talking about Iraq.
So Dingy Harry has offered to have the Iraq discussions at another occasion so that Lieberman can attend the Wednesday lunches or the weekly lunches.
I don't know when they're held with the Senate Democrats.
Now, why does this make Lieberman the most powerful man in the Senate, or at least the second most powerful?
Because he's put it out there.
He could switch parties.
And if he does, with Tim Johnson, who, by the way, has been flown back to South Dakota for rehabilitation, he's left the hospital in Washington, but he's nowhere near returning to active duty in the Senate, and so his vote doesn't happen.
But even with that, if Lieberman were to become a Republican, guess who runs the Senate?
The Republicans would have the majority in the Senate.
plus the vice president's vote on legislation.
And that would throw everything that Pelosi and these people have just totally out of whack.
It would just gum up the work that the Democrats, all these committee chairmanships, they'd be out there demanding a co-sharing agreement and equal membership on each committee like they did when Jim Jeffords switched parties and made the Democrats 50-50.
And Trent Lott went along with this, of course.
He's going to be able to get what he wants within reason from both parties.
And he's more closely aligned with the Republicans on the issue that matters most to the Democrats in the Senate anyway.
And that is Iraq.
I don't know that he would ever do it, but just saying he might has got the Senate Democrats, they've got to be nervous as hell.
And they can't offend him.
And they can't do something that's going to cause him to switch.
They're going to be walking on eggshells over this.
Good move.
Good political move by Senator Lieberman.
Steven Schenectady, New York, you're next on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hey, how you doing, Brush?
Hey.
I'd like to hear more about Sam Brownback, Senator Sam Brownbach.
Right now, it seems like he's the only person I could possibly vote for.
And I just don't hear enough about him.
Well, I'm confused.
If you don't know enough about him, how do you know enough to vote for him?
Well, I know that he stands for all the important things that I care about, particularly being pro-life.
And I'm from New York, and definitely you need to quarantine, politically quarantine New York and maybe even the Northeast from the presidential process.
We don't have anything good to offer you.
It is.
You know what?
That reminds me of Barry Goldwater.
It said pretty much the same thing.
And Lyndon Johnson ran a commercial of a saw, sawing the eastern seaboard of the United States off floating out in the Atlantic Ocean.
I think it was right.
It isn't going to hit.
Look, as to Senator Brownback, and about all of these candidates, because I get emails, and I get haven't taken too many calls.
Yours is one of the first.
How come you haven't told us which one of these people you like?
Folks, let me answer this for you as cogently, coherently, and briefly as I can.
A, it's too soon.
B, I don't know.
C, it's 10 months before the first primary.
I wrote a chapter in my book.
My success is not determined by who wins elections.
Now, you people have been with me since the get-go understand I don't get involved this early in primaries.
We get down to two people in the primary circumstance, if there are two viable candidates left, and I have a preference at that point I will say so.
But this far out, I'm not going to tie myself to a candidate.
I'm not under the illusion I can cause a candidate to win or make a candidate win, and I certainly am not going to tie myself to somebody who may end up doing something stupid down the road and lose.
What's that going to do for me?
Well, I don't know.
Snurdley says I can make them lose.
Maybe.
But I don't look at it that way.
I don't, I just, this is way too soon.
It's to me, it's a little, I don't tie myself to somebody in the primary, as I say, until we get down to the last two.
And if like when Bush McKay in 2000, I mean, obviously made a choice there.
But that was, those were the two viable candidates.
We've got a field of what?
Six and maybe seven here.
And lurking out there is Newt Gingrich, who's thinking about getting into this in the fall if circumstances meet whatever his criteria are.
I just, I don't, as far as your question about Senator Brownbeck, I have another theory about this, folks.
It's not my job to tell you about these people.
It's not my job to promote them.
And it's not my job to sit here and go through a lawyer.
How boring would this be?
All right, today, ladies and gentlemen, I have the position list for Senator Blowhorn and Senator Blowhorn on abortion thing.
You would be bored out of your mind, and you wouldn't remember half of what I told you anyway.
I don't look at this as my job to educate you who these people.
Their job, they're the candidates.
They're the ones going out and getting votes.
It's their job to get noticed.
I'm sorry to say, so if you don't know much about Sam Brownbeck, then Sam Brownback's got some work to do.
I don't.
I mean, I can read about Sam Brownbeck.
He's done some things that I like.
I don't like the fact that he defected on aspects of the Iraq War and the surge.
Joining Democrats in this, I was a little perplexed about that.
But yeah, he's a little weak on immigration for my tastes.
So anyway, it's 10 months before the first primary starts.
I can't tell you right now who I hope gets a nomination.
In fact, you know, my last time I made news on this is when I said none of these people rev me up.
This is about three months ago.
None of them rev me up.
Oh, the drive-bys loved taking that soundbite and broadcasting it all over their networks.
And I said, none of them rev me up.
And why should I say someone does if they don't?
Now, I'm not saying that what's happening now is unimportant because this is the time where candidates, you know, the polling data comes out, candidates make themselves known.
Fundraising competitions are underway and so forth.
I'm not saying it's not important now what's happening.
This is the political market at work is telling you that of the people that are out there, right, I do not have, there's a preference.
I don't.
How else can I say that?
What else do you want me to say, Snerdley?
Because he's giving me this look like he doesn't believe what I'm saying.
I know what you're thinking.
You know that I know people I don't want to get there, right?
Yeah, okay.
You know, there are those people, but I have made no secret of that.
But at the same time, let's say that there is a Republican candidate A, that there is no way right now I'm going to come out and extol the virtues on the basis that he's a conservative, because if he's not, he's not, and I'm not going to say he is.
And I'm not going to sit here and take a candidate who's 70% conservative and say, okay, that's conservative when there's 30% out there that isn't.
Now, if that candidate who is 60 or 70% conservative happens to get the nomination and is up against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, well, that's a different story.
At that point, you make an informed choice.
So if I come out here today and say there is no way candidate X I'm ever going to support, I may end up having to down the line.
So I'm not going to sit out in the name of purity.
I am not going to say, you know, Republicans need to learn a lesson.
We need to lose again.
I am not.
Never have been one of those.
There's no such thing as sitting out in the names of purity.
You know, only a bunch of idealists, moderates, people that don't understand the realities of politics do that.
Anyway, we'll be back.
I'm a little long in this segment.
Sit tight.
Coming right back.
And back to the phones to Monroe, Michigan and Lori.
Lori, were you, were you, did you call us earlier and we didn't get to you and you got back through today?
Is that how this happened to you?
Yeah, yeah.
I called you on Wednesday.
And first I have to say, Meghan Ditto's Rush.
That's so exciting to say that.
And I used to think you were this huge windbag until my neighbor influenced me to listen to you.
And I was converted September 2004 to hardcore conservativism.
Well, thank you.
Welcome home.
I have to ask, though, why did you think I was a windbag?
Well, I must admit, I was a liberal.
I listened to what everybody else told me about you.
I listened to Dan Rather.
I listened to all those idiots out there.
And I don't listen anymore.
I do not watch TV for my news.
You and Sean Hannity are my news.
Frank Beckman from WJAR, Paul W. Smith, that's my news.
Well, I rejoice over these kind of stories because people always say, you know, Rush, you need a branch out.
All you're doing is preaching to the choir.
And I always say, no, Oh, no, no, no, no.
I was a hardcore liberal.
In fact, my husband used to call me a closet liberal.
Were you a feminazi?
Oh, I don't think I went that far, but I was hard for women's issues and things.
And I'm a registered nurse, so I have the social doctrine there, too.
Yeah.
You know what my guess is?
My guess is you think or thought you were a hardcore liberal, but you probably weren't as liberal as you thought you were once you got educated on what conservatism really is.
Of course, that must be it because I've been listening to the Limbaugh Institute and I've been educated.
Well, we're happy to have you here as a great success story.
There's another notch in the belt here.
There's one thing I do want to talk about: that Iraq soldier who called, and you were talking about 7,000 deaths by poorly written orders from doctors and things.
Well, I do want to let you know that estimate is like, I just got done taking a course on it.
44,000 to 80,000 Americans die in hospitals as a result of medical errors each year.
That's higher.
Now, okay, that statistic that I have was 7,000 people die from improperly filled prescriptions because the pharmacist can't read.
Well, that's probably it.
But the total in hospital, 44,000 to as much as 98,000 Americans die in hospitals each year as a result of medical errors.
And I just got done taking a test on that.
So that's another bit of information for you.
That sounds high, but I'll accept it since you're a nurse.
Well, it's definitely, you can even look it up on, you can definitely look it up.
It's definitely proven.
You can look anything up.
All right, time is dwindling here.
Okay, okay.
What I'm calling for is that that one individual is talking about one coupon.
He wants a coupon for the gas companies.
Why don't I can get one from the pizzeria?
How come not from the oil companies?
Well, BP Gas Company, the credit card, does give rebates.
We get 5% on all BP location gas, 2% rebate on traveling and dining, 1% on eligible purchases.
And once you earn your purchases, you can receive a BP gift card or receive a check.
There's no limit on the amount of rebates.
I heard this.
I heard this from people.
People have a Shell Oil credit card.
Everybody does it.
If you use the Shell credit card, you get 5% off on the purchase.
They do offer discounts.
We saved $275 last year.
But, but, and I love the oil companies.
Don't misunderstand the question.
What's the interest rate on the unpaid balance?
Well, we pay it off.
I don't even look at that.
Well, okay.
But I got to tell you something else, too.
My husband and I consciously boycott Sitco because of that little dictator, Hugo Chavez.
Why don't these individuals who despise the oil company profits boycott walk everywhere?
Then they can help the outsiders.
Because Hugo Chavez is providing heating oil for poor old Bostonians thanks to Bill Delahunt.
He's a socialist dictator.
Liberals love him.
Back in just a second.
One big, exciting, unpredictable broadcast hour remains today on Open Line Friday.
A brief timeout here for private matters, and then we'll be back and continue in just a moment.
Here go the bars for your ditto cameras.
▲
Export Selection