All Episodes
Previous Next
March 5, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:47
March 5, 2007, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
You're tuned to Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, the nation's leading radio talk show, most listened to throughout the country.
The Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, the largest free education institution in America.
Remember the college, the institute offers no degrees.
There are no graduates because the learning never stops.
Time to get to the global warming stack.
Paul Shanklin as Al Gore warbles.
Rush Limboy, the EIB network.
All right, got a pretty pretty healthy global warming stack here.
Interesting things off the top.
In news from the UK, a new documentary that will air soon on the BBC, the Great Global Warming Swindle, says that accepted theories about man causing global warming are lies.
The Great Global Warming Swindle, backed by imminent scientists is set to rock.
The accepted consensus that climate change is being driven by humans.
Remember, there cannot be science if there is consensus.
I will say this till I become blue in the face.
Science is not up for a vote.
The program to be screened on Channel 4 this Thursday, the BBC Channel 4 will see a series of respected scientists attack the propaganda that they claim is killing the world's poor.
Even the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore is shown, claiming that African countries should be encouraged to burn more CO2.
Nobody in the documentary defends the greenhouse effect theory as it claims that climate change is natural, has been occurring for years, and ice falling from glaciers is just the spring breakup and as normal as leaves falling in autumn.
A source at Channel 4 said it's essentially a polemic.
We are expecting it to cause trouble, but this is the controversial programming that Channel 4 is renowned for.
Controversial director Martin Durkin said, you can see the problems with the science of global warming.
People just don't want to believe you.
It's taken ten years to get this commissioned.
I think it will go down on history as the first chapter in a new era of a relationship between scientists and society.
Legitimate scientists, people with qualifications are the bad guys.
It's a big story that's going to cause controversy.
Now note the way this is written.
It's essentially a polemic.
We are expecting it to cause trouble.
This is controversial programming that Channel 4 is renowned for.
Controversial director, Martin Durkin.
What's controversial about this?
There are plenty of people that agree with these people.
I am one.
How could it be controversial to me?
It is only controversial because the left has established the norms on this.
Remember what Al Gore said last week when he got back from the epidemic awards.
He made a speech to 50 people somewhere on Tuesday, and he said that balance in the media reporting global warming is bias.
Because there is no disagreement, and there shouldn't be any disagreement.
Al Gore basically said that anybody, any scientist, any news organization that portrays uh an alternative theory to man-made global warming is not balance.
That it is biased.
They are trying to shut up people who don't believe what they say, but it isn't working because more and more people are coming out and expressing exactly what this is.
Nothing more than propaganda.
Here's another report on the same uh uh program, and this is uh this is from the BBC's site.
The first one was not from the BBC site.
This is from the BBC site Channel 4.
In a polemical and thought-provoking documentary, filmmaker Martin Durkin argues that the theory of man-made global warming is a powerful political force, that other explanations for climate change are not being aired properly.
The film brings together the arguments of leading scientists with prevailing consensus that a greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide uh uh uh born by human activity is the cause of rising global temperatures.
Instead, the documentary highlights recent research that the uh uh effects of solar radiation on the atmosphere may be a better explanation for the uh changing of the climate from ice ages to warm interglacial periods and back.
The film argues that the Earth's climate is always changing.
And that these warmings and coolings took place long before the burning of fossil fuels, that the present single-minded focus on reducing carbon emissions will have little impact on climate society.
And it is a very scientific presentation, what I understand.
Uh the ice core record goes to the very heart of the problem we have, said Tim Ball, a climatologist and professor emeritus of geography at the University of Winnipeg in the documentary.
They said if CO2 increases in the atmosphere is a greenhouse gas, then the temperature will go up.
In fact, the experts in the film argue that increased CO2 levels are actually a result of temperature rises, not their cause, and that this alternate view is rarely heard.
So the fundamental assumption, the most fundamental assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans, is shown to be wrong.
I've often heard it said that there's a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system, said John Christie, professor of director of the Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama.
Well, I'm one scientist, and there are many that simply think that is not true.
In a story from Canada, Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists, and among Canada's or France's most celebrated scientists, was among the first to sound the alarm about the dangers of global warming.
By burning fossil fuels, man increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which, for example, has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century, said Dr. Allegre twenty years ago.
Fifteen years ago, Dr. Allegre was among the 1,500 prominent scientists who signed the world scientist warning to humanity.
Highly publicized letters stressing that global warming's potential risks are very great and demanding a new caring ethic that recognizes the globe's fragility.
In order to stave off spirals of environmental decline, poverty and unrest, leading to social economic and environmental collapse.
However, Claude Allegre has now changed his mind.
He now sees global warming is overhyped, and an environmental concern of second rank.
His break with what he now sees as environmental can't on climate change came in September in an article entitled The Snows of Kilimanjaro, the French weekly that it was published in.
His article cited evidence that Antarctica is gaining ice, and that Kilimanjaro's retreating snow caps, among other global warming concerns, come from natural causes.
The cause of this climate change is unknown, he says matter-of factly.
There's no basis for saying, as most do, that the science is settled.
No basis what it cannot possibly be settled if there are scientists in great numbers who disagree with all of this.
There's no way it can be settled.
So big names are starting to defect from the uh from the accepted theories.
Jerry Schmidt, writing at the American Thinker blog, the American Thinker.com, points out in a little short article here, the hypocrisy and the curiosity of the left.
They trust global warming models, but when it comes to the economic models of Milton Friedman and many others, which show that lower taxes produce growth and prosperity, they discount them.
They throw them out, even though there is evidence in the United States since the 1980s that such is the actually since the 60s, when John Kennedy first cut taxes.
And he writes that this dichotomy only underscores the conviction that modern liberalism is a quasi-religious set of beliefs that cannot be perturbed by facts or evidence.
It is a religion.
Remember, we talked to uh Roy Spencer last week.
Prominent uh scientist, climatologist, a number of other things.
University of Alabama, Huntsville, used to be with NASA, and he was saying, you know, what what nobody can factor, what nobody can model, and what nobody is really spending enough attention in analyzing is the precipitation around the world and the effects that that has on uh on climate change.
Lo and behold, live science.com, with constant weather forecasts on TV and the Internet, and all the precise storm totals that are reported, you might think that scientists had a firm grasp of how much rain and snow falls around the planet.
You'd be wrong.
It's amazing how much we don't know about global patterns of rain and snow, said Walt Peterson, atmospheric scientist with the National Space Science and Technology Center, University of Alabama, Huntsville.
Meteorologists don't know how much snow falls each day.
They don't know where it lands.
They also don't know how much rain comes down, nor how much is heavy downpours versus light drizzles.
There these are just a few of the outstanding questions.
So little is known.
The models are wrong.
They cannot possibly measure the deep complexity of the climate on this planet, and yet global warming is a settled science.
It is not settled, and it's not science.
It is a religion.
It is liberal religion, and as such, we are not permitted to question it, but people are.
They're falling out of the ranks.
And by the way, another uh another little story here.
This is from the San Francisco Chronicle.
China is about to pass the United States as the world's top generator of greenhouse gases.
It'll happen soon.
In 2008, the United States will be number two in greenhouse emissions.
And this story, rather than taking this and taking to its logical conclusion, this story concludes that the U.S. is responsible for today's crisis of global warming, China responsible for tomorrow's.
Does anybody anywhere see any effort being made to get the Chinese to clean up?
Chinese were exempted from Kyoto, the liberal Bible, or one of the books of their Bible.
This is all a bunch of hocus pocus and worse.
My friends, brief time out.
We'll be back and continue after this on the EIB network.
Your phone calls are next.
Okay, back to the phones we go.
People have been patiently waiting to appear on this program.
I totally understand that.
Some people have been waiting for two and a half hours here, folks.
Uh John in Ocala, Florida, you're up first.
Great to have you with us.
Rush, it's an honor to speak with you.
Thank you, sir, very much.
And I want to take you back to your comments earlier about the events in Selma.
Yeah.
I think it's outrageous and even hilarious when the white liberal politicians go down there into the southern churches.
Some of the funniest stuff I ever heard on your show is Al Gore doing that.
Yes.
But I I I want uh do you think that uh maybe Obama has a more legitimate position there?
And I want to relate it to you this way.
You've got a baseball background.
And would you be critical of a black ball player speaking at an event that was celebrating the life of uh Jackie Robinson?
Uh huh.
What?
Uh you got to first tell me what I did with Obama that would that would equate to attacking a black ball player uh paying homage to Jackie Robinson.
No, what I think is that you were putting Obama's presence there at Selma in in the same light as Mrs. Bill Clinton's appearance there.
And I think he has a more legitimate uh position there by the fact that he is black and he's making a success of his life, and he is celebrating the events that happened in Selma.
Well, but but what uh when did I the only thing I picked on him for is because he too reverted to black speak when he doesn't speak that way normally.
All right, well, I didn't say he shouldn't go.
All I look at.
And in fact, you know, he I said he drew the largest crowd.
And his crowd was uh uh uh more receptive and so Mrs. Bill Clinton to go down there, bring her husband to have any credibility because she doesn't on her own.
Uh you know, the I don't know what I did.
I mean uh the uh you know Obama all I also pointed out that it's the LA Times and others who've been saying he's not black enough.
Um and he went down there to prove that he is and so forth.
Well, how is this an attack?
You know, that the the whole notion uh that that I don't know.
I I just I I wish we could get past all this finally.
This this stuff staying rooted in the past, being staying there, staying rooted in the past is not doing any of these people any good.
And it's it's just shameless pandering on the part of both these people to go down there with an express purpose of seeking votes.
I understand how it works, but uh the the contrary to what everybody thinks, this is not honoring these people.
Do you really think Dr. Martin Luther King, when he said I had a dream, dreamed what happened in Selma yesterday.
Well, I I don't think the way Mrs. Bill Clinton approached it uh honored him at all, but I think the things that Obama was saying made a lot of sense.
And and yes, I do some of them did, and which I pointed out, and I played him back to back with Bill Cosby, who said the same things.
And I agree with both of them there.
Yes, I do too.
Absolutely.
But you'll note you didn't hear it anywhere else.
The drive-by media didn't play those sound bites from Barack Obama.
Well, of course not.
Only here on the EIB network have you heard them.
Unless you were.
Well, that's why we listen to you, Rush.
I appreciate that, uh, John.
Thanks.
Uh thanks very much.
Uh speaking of paying homage to Jackie Robinson.
Tiger Woods was asked by uh William Clinton, William Jefferson Clinton, who was president at the time to show up at Shea Stadium for an event that was to honor Jackie Robinson, and uh Tiger Woods said, No, I'm uh I'm not going.
There were a host of reasons why.
I mean, Tiger Woods does not want to get involved in anything political, uh, but he also doesn't want to be used.
Uh and and uh uh I well I don't know Tiger, so I can't I can't I can't say any more about I could only speculate and conjecture uh as as to why he didn't uh want to participate.
But Clinton was stunned.
Clinton was shocked, a little surprised that such an opportunity would be uh passed up.
I'm not at all.
I I um you know, these that thing was as much about Bill Clinton as it was about Jackie Robinson.
This is the thing that you know everybody is missing.
These people are taking the occasion of these anniversaries and making it about them, but it wasn't.
I don't know.
It just it just rubs me wrong.
This whole this whole thing just rubs me wrong.
Political pandering shameless.
Grab the Hillary bite.
What what bite is that?
Eight?
I've forgotten the number.
Listen to the first part of this.
You tell me if Dr. King, when he said I have a dream, had this in mind.
This is the site of my concepts.
No, I'm no, no, I'm sorry.
We'll have to we don't have enough time.
I don't have the transcript turned up, was looking for a Hillary bite, and I don't remember which one it is because there's so darn many of them today.
Uh I think it's uh it's six.
It's six.
But we don't have time to get well, I'll we'll do it in the next half hour uh after we get back from the uh from the break then.
But really, folks, uh I you when you when you take a look at the pandering that happened in Obama, he goes down there and says, I'm uh I was conceived here.
This is uh this is a conception here or whatever, and uh, even though I've never been to Selma before, I mean that's not how he speaks.
It's it's it's insulting.
Other people say, no, this is what you have to do to relate.
No, you you know, you don't you don't you don't have to always be like the Romans when you go to Rome, and a lot of people would not want to be like the Romans when you go to Rome.
I know, I know.
Thank you.
Thank you, and welcome back.
Well, we got to see um looking at the meet the press sound roster.
We'll get to that Mertha.
Even though Mirtha bores me, it's still it's it's still important.
At any rate, here's the Hillary bite, and just you just tell me, and by the way, grab the Obama bite that you played by mistake up there.
Or I'm sorry, that I called for by mistake.
My fault.
Uh grab the Obama, but just folks, this this is Hillary Clinton Selma yesterday.
Just ask yourself if this is what Dr. King meant when he said he had a dream.
Let us say with one voice.
The words of James Cleveland's great freedom hymn.
Ugh.
I don't feel no ways tired.
I come too far from where I started from.
Nobody told me that the road would be easy.
I don't believe he brought me this far to leave me.
And we know if we finish this march, what awaits us?
St. Paul told us.
All right.
In the letter to the Galatians.
That's enough.
Oh, here's Obama.
This is the side of my concepts.
I am the fruits of your labor.
I am the offspring of the movement.
So when people ask me whether I've been to Selma before, I'll tell them I'm coming home.
So he's apparently he's been to Selma before.
Because he's coming home.
He was conceived there, site of his conception.
So he's placing himself firmly in the civil rights slavery, so forth legacy, even though he has literally no ties to it.
None.
ZILT.
Zero nada.
This is not a service.
This is not compassion.
This is this is just unfortunate, shameless pandering.
And BS.
By the way, the European Union, unlikely to meet the goal of a maximum two degrees Celsius rise in temperatures, which it views as a threshold for dangerous climate change, according to a leading UN official on Friday.
Clearly seems very, very difficult to limit it to below two degrees.
You see how it's crazy.
We had a story on Friday that the UN is going to issue an edict.
An edict that there can only be a certain amount of temperature rise.
And the EU can't even meet what the Kyoto Protocols call for.
The EU.
And they complain at us and gripe about us.
Say we are to blame.
It's our fault.
Let's see.
What did I do with it here?
Ooh, don't tell me I put it aside.
I intended to use it.
Oh, the tornadoes.
Everybody sing the tornadoes last week had to do with global warming.
Just the exact opposite.
The extremely cold United States was probably a contributing factor to the tornadoes.
Tornadoes in the United States form on a front of dry cold air descending from the north meets warm, moist air coming from the south.
Sometimes a body of the cold air slides over the top of the warm air, trapping it underneath, and then all hell breaks loose.
The tornado tornadoes happen.
They've happened long before CO2 emissions.
From the Toronto Sun, a story by Lori Goldstein, a column, actually.
More inconvenient truths.
Planting trees won't save us.
Ethanol isn't cool, and rebuilding a city below sea level is insane.
She says the more you research global warming, the more you realize we're being told things that don't add up.
Here's some examples.
When flying around the world by buying carbon offsets.
One popular way of doing this is by planting trees.
Let's do the math.
And for those of you that uh went to the public school system, we'll help here.
It takes fifteen trees.
Get this now.
Listen to me on this.
It takes fifteen trees.
Forty to fifty years to absorb five tons of carbon.
Forty to fifty.
Planting trees ain't the answer.
A return flight from Toronto to Vancouver injects 5.4 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere per passenger.
Carbon dioxide takes 50 to 200 years to dissipate naturally.
Therefore, to absorb most of the carbon dioxide caused by one passenger, taking one domestic round trip flight across Canada in 2007 requires planting 15 trees today that won't complete the job until between 2047 and 2057, assuming that none of them are destroyed by fire, disease, or insects.
If they are, they'll release their carbon back into the atmosphere.
As Guy Downsey and Patrick Mazer write in stormy weather, 101 solutions to global climate change.
If we imagine that tree planting can be the solution of the world's climate problems, we may be making a massive miscalculation.
And flying is just about the worst way to emit greenhouse gases.
Taking one long flight can easily exceed a year's worth of car emissions.
Plus, it injects the gas into the atmosphere at high altitude, heightening the effect.
The only way to be carbon neutral when flying is to get off the plane before it takes off.
And the story goes on to talk of this in the Toronto Sun uh on February the or March the 4th, sorry.
We heard about Schwarzenegger registering his private jet with Terra Pass.
And uh he's gonna reduce and eliminate his carbon footprint because they're gonna go out there and plant trees.
Do you understand, ladies and gentlemen?
Totally bogus all this is.
Forty to fifty years to absorb the carbon put in the air by one passenger taking a Canadian coast to coast flight.
Now you could you could then use that statistic.
You could say, my gosh, we're not doing as much damage as we thought.
If that much carbon's put in all these trees, it takes that many years to get that carbon in when there's no way that we're gonna there's nothing we can do.
We're not gonna stop flying, and you know that Al Gore's not.
And these green celebrities are not going to stop flying.
This column also talks about uh ethanol and so forth.
We're told ethanol added to gasoline reduces greenhouse gases.
Most ethanol in the U.S., the world's biggest emitter comes from corn.
Takes about 74 units of greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuel energy to produce 100 units of ethanol energy.
You also lose the carbon dioxide absorption value of the corn, the plant.
You got to take the corn out of the ground, you get rid of the stalks, the green part of the corn, there goes your carbon absorption.
While uh ethanol added to gasoline produces a net of 30% less carbon dioxide emissions compared to plain gasoline, the pl uh to plant enough corn to make this significant for global warming would, as Robert Henson writes in The Rough Guide to Climate Change, require 15, covering 15% of the world's agricultural land, that's a country the size of India, with nothing but corn, solely for the ethanol.
That would cause starvation.
There's also a war between proponents of adaptation and mitigation in addressing global warming.
Anyway, you run these numbers and you find out that all this is impossible anyway.
And if it's impossible to take that much carbon out of the sky because can't plant enough trees, it takes them 40 to 50 years, then you have to ask, just how much damage is it really doing?
If all these jet engines and jet flights were going to cause global warming, we'd be boiling right now.
They've been flying around up there since the 40s, 30s, 40s, 50s, we'd be dead.
Anyway, I know there's other stuff up for this stuff is just folks have become a cause celeb with me.
I single-handedly amount of mission to blow this whole thing out of the water.
Because it's it's it's just another giant lib hoax.
And at the end of it, if it works, you're gonna be paying higher taxes, and your kids are gonna be paying higher taxes, and you're gonna have all kinds of big government with regulations telling you what you can and can't drive, can't and can't eat where you can and can't live.
Added to the Hillary health care restrictions, it's not gonna be fun to be an American if this stuff ever comes to pass.
Here's Bill in Cincinnati.
Uh uh, thank you for your patience, sir.
Welcome to the show.
Hey, Rush, make a retard, firefighter ditto's.
Thank you.
Hey, I was I was seriously hurt on the job, and uh your your three hours provide me more pain relief than my morphine pump will ever do.
Well, I appreciate that.
Thank you for saying that, sir.
Uh, I I'm serious.
I mean, you you really this best three hours of my day.
But um what I called about, Rush, was um I got a problem with the uh politicians like Chuck Schumer that are up in arms over the conditions at Walter Reed over the last couple of years, and um Schumer sends a letter to Robert Gates to investigate everything that's going on, but my feeling is if he had gone there over the years to visit all the patients rather than the occasional photo op, he would have known that there was a lot of problems long ago.
You know, uh Bill, this is an excellent point.
I've been watching this hearing a little bit today.
Congress went on the road to have a committee, had a hearing at Walter Reed.
Now, last November I was at Walter Reed.
Now I this is this this is not in the big scheme of things indicative of anything.
I was I spent an hour uh in uh in in one of the uh rehab amputee rehab centers.
And I talked to 25 people in there, and I and I asked them, do you and and uh I had an entourage with me, and then and uh you know there was uh there were some uniforms there, but I said, Do you have everything you need here?
Oh, yeah.
And they were happy.
These guys it blew me away.
I've told the story uh countless times.
These these people were uh uh bullion, and it was it was sobering.
These are people missing one or both legs and arm, uh going through rehabilitation, and they were they were incredibly upbeat.
They were young, as you would expect.
Uh and in fact, I I went in there five minutes after John Kerry left.
And I asked one of the soldiers that carry say anything.
No, he just comes in here for his photo up every now and then.
And the soldier said to me, I wish he would have said something, because I would have said, Senator, I'm too dumb to understand you.
I uh I went to Iraq, got stuck there.
Uh about about this this Walter Reed.
I don't I don't misunderstand, I don't expect them to start unloading on me about whatever lack of great care they're getting or circumstances, but they did somebody in the place did.
And here's here's the thing about this Walter Reed thing that offends my sensibilities.
I'm watching this hearing today, and in fact, grab uh, let's say, grab Soundbite 18.
Because this is we got Schumer bill reacting to this and talking about it.
Here we have these pontificating congressmen, once again acting as mere spectators.
They failed their own base closure responsibilities and oversight.
You know, the Walter Reed's being shut down.
The base closure committee shutting it down, and and then and the wherever is whatever's contained there's got to move, I think, over to Bethesda.
Uh so Congress didn't have the guts to deal with it.
They had a the blue ribbon panel, and now they what what what about congressional oversight here?
Uh these guys act like they're the things are going on in the country and they don't know anything about it.
And they're yet they're sitting up there pointing fingers of blame at everybody else, as though they're the giant fixers.
These people are our congressmen.
They write the laws in this, they have committees after committee after committee can do oversight on virtually anything that they want.
Uh, you know, what what what the hell good are they?
And their staff, their supposed oversight responsibilities, they can't deal with this stuff before it appears in the Washington Post.
Hearing after hearing after hearing, they get all kinds of reports from the General Accounting Office and the inspector generals, the various research services, they conduct investigations and hearings, they act like they're surprised over all this.
Some of these some of these committee chairmen have been in Congress for 20, 30, or 40 years.
And here's another thing.
I want to know this.
How many of Congressmen, I don't know that the answer is any, but I I have to believe some congressmen have heard from their constituents.
If the circumstances of Walter Reed are as bad as they as they are reported to be, I have to think that some military families have sent letters to their congressmen complaining about the conditions.
Don't know it, but it strikes me, people write their Congressmen all the time for a whole bunch of reasons.
Why would they not about this?
And yet these guys run around and act like they're totally shocked and stunned.
They can't believe what happened.
Here's what Schumer said about it yesterday on uh on ABC.
Uh he wants an investigation.
He wants another blue ribbon panel on this.
Stephanopoulos said it'll be a bipartisan effort.
Well, I hope it's a bipartisan effort, and it should be.
I'm worried about if it's this bad at the outpatient facilities at Walter Reed.
How is it in the rest of the country?
Because Walter Reed is our crown jewel, so I'm actually sending the second I'm sending the Secretary of Defense a letter today asking that there be an independent commission, an independent group, maybe headed by someone like Colin Powell to look at all of these facilities where the soldiers who were on their way to some other destination.
So Bill, uh it's this, it's this spectator pontification.
Pontification.
Like these guys don't know anything that's going on.
They've got no say.
So now they're going to have a blue ribbon pair.
A bunch of outsiders come in and look at it.
That can just gutless is what it is.
Okay, let's see.
We got a story.
So what's the date here?
Come on.
Okay, March 4th is.
Okay, yesterday.
Yesterday the uh the C AP runs a story.
Iran no plans to meet with U.S. and Iraq.
Iran will not necessarily have direct talks with the U.S. if it attends an upcoming good neighbor conference about Iraq security crisis, an Iranian official said Sunday.
Then um AP today, Iran's foreign minister indicated Monday his country would take part in the International Good Neighbor Conference in Iraq on Saturday, which would be the first public U.S. Iranian encounter in nearly three.
Hammet made up their minds out there.
Here's uh here's Michelle in Northport, Florida.
Glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi, Rush.
This is Michelle, and I'm talking about health care.
And we watched my husband Skip and I watched you last watched them last night.
And Hillary does not know a thing about health care.
Uh-uh.
Mrs. Bill Clinton.
Mrs. Bill Clinton.
Bless her little heart.
She doesn't know much about husbands either, I don't think.
But anyway, she has no sense of humor.
She doesn't I she you look at her eyes and you know she's lying.
She's not going to help the older people in Florida, of which my husband's a Vietnam vet.
And he was mugged in New York.
He can't get health care.
So we rely on the VA.
And there are a lot of people out in Florida that are old that if they listen, they will not vote for her.
They should go to Hillary Stop Her Now.com and listen to the um those boat people.
Oh, I can't think so.
Well, you know, I I think that we'll have to wait and see.
Um not even sure she's gonna get nomination.
Obama could get it.
We'll have I got somebody else on this healthcare business too.
Let me get them in.
I've got one minute, one minute.
I want to get to uh Jackie in Anchorage, Alaska.
Hello.
Hey, greetings from the home of the ID a rod.
Hi, thank you.
Thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
Listen, I'm right in the middle.
I'm not on the right or the left, and I I like the answer that you gave to Derek this morning about hating, but Rush, it's time for both sides to be accountable.
Someone's gonna have to start taking the high road.
You know, these are just political monkeys flinging the mud back and forth.
What are we talking about toxic?
What are we talking about?
Give me a subject.
I'm talking about uh uh Ann Colter's remarks.
I just think that you let her off the hook too easily.
I realize she's somewhat of a parody buddy and and sort of on your team, but I just really think there was no excuse for her making the judgment to say what she did.
Uh well, there isn't I'm I wasn't making an excuse for I was trying to explain to you whilst why so many people she has tremendous amount of supporters for this, and I was trying to explain to you why.
Conservatism is about ideas.
Uh it's it's not about it's it's it's it's well now I've got five seconds.
I can't I can't respond to you uh quickly.
I I was uh not defending nor was I attacking.
I was trying to explain to you why certain people are reacting to it the way they are, which has a lot of other people surprised.
Anyway, uh I gotta I really gotta go.
All right, folks, be patient.
We'll be back in twenty one hours.
▲
Export Selection