Rush Limbaugh Program - April 6, 2007, Friday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 6, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:26

April 6, 2007, Friday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thanks, Johnny Donovan, and it is sure nice to be here at the East Coast campus of the EIB Network, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
	I am Paul W. Smith, often coming to you from Detroit, Michigan, still the automotive capital of the world, the great state of Michigan, city of Detroit.
	I've been broadcasting my morning show the past few days from the 2007 New York Auto Show, and then this morning at our sister station and old radio alma mater for me, WABC in New York, which is in fact where Johnny Donovan still is working.
	You have entered, of course, the Limbaugh Institute of Conservative Studies, where there is never a final exam, but we are tested every day.
	And I am, like you, a fellow student of the Institute today elevated to teaching assistants, supported by Mike Maimone, our broadcast engineer, and of course, H.R. Kit Carson, chief of staff, and helping out to Cookie Gleason, producer, who has it easy on a day like this when there's a guest host because, well, she handles the sound bites that are exclusively Russia's.
	They have a vault here.
	And I bet in that vault, that's where the extra cigars are, too, because I don't see any around here at all.
	But yeah, I know, I know.
	I don't have time to do it.
	I can't, I'm not going to blow up John as we're going into the news and even go back into the, these were hostages.
	He would like to say that they got their guys back through diplomacy, and it took us 444 days to get the embassy employees unarmed, hostages, totally innocent people, not trespassing on sovereign U.S. soil, remember?
	So he was being very sensitive about the fact that even his own people are saying, well, what happened with these soldiers anyway?
	They didn't fire a shot to not get captured.
	Whatever.
	We'll see how that all works out.
	But we don't have time to do that.
	We have a special guest that I always enjoy speaking with, and it'll be very interested to see what his future plans are.
	But I'm not even going to ask him about it because he told me that he would tell me first if he's going to run for president of the United States.
	Newt Gingrich, you remember that, don't you?
	Paulo did not tell you first.
	I said he'd come back on your show.
	Wait a minute.
	I could have sworn you said, Paul, you'll be the first to know if I officially run for president.
	Now, look, I've seen you say that to Alan Combs also.
	I told him that I would tell him that.
	All right.
	Well, Alan feels the same way.
	Alan feels the same way.
	Everybody will know about the same moment because, as you know, when these things get announced, they are everywhere simultaneously.
	Generally speaking, they're everywhere about five minutes before you actually say it.
	And sometimes two days before on Drudge.
	You never can tell.
	Yeah, you never can tell.
	All right, so I'll just keep that's a little insider secret, but what a great place to go.
	Drudgereport.com.
	Make sure you get the right one because there are pretenders to the throne out there.
	Mr. Speaker, how are you?
	I'm doing well.
	It's a fascinating time.
	By the way, I noticed back in your home neighborhood that they're having a real struggle and that there's some 34 Detroit school buildings that may be closed.
	Well, no, they need to be closed, and maybe, maybe, frankly, 50 should be closed because we've lost thousands and thousands of students over the last 10 years, and we don't need as many buildings.
	Frankly, we don't need as many administrators.
	We don't need as many teachers.
	But it's not been easy.
	In fact, we had our own version of the grapes of wrath as someone threw grapes at the folks having their meeting this week when they made the announcement.
	I'm thinking, if 34 schools closed, get your grapes.
	The good Lord only knows what would have happened if they had closed the right number of schools, like 50.
	And what our listeners, you know, the reason I wanted to raise this is this is a good example of how much change we need in government in America because the Detroit school system was picked by the Gates Foundation as the least effective major school system in the country.
	It's very expensive, a very highly paid system, but only 21% of entering freshmen graduate on time.
	And it's a very real challenge for the country.
	You're breaking my heart here.
	Yes, we know it is a problem, and it is getting fixed.
	And it is never fast enough, that's for sure.
	We've got our hands full, Newt.
	We certainly do.
	But we're making inroads slowly but surely.
	Be that as it may.
	I wanted a quick question because I saw that you're going to be squaring off on a climate change debate with Senator John Kerry this next week, and I want to talk a bit about that.
	But first, you've been working very hard to help medicine with medical records and computerization electronically, et cetera, et cetera.
	What's the latest on that?
	You've been talking about that for a while.
	Well, we've made some very real progress.
	And let me say, by the way, in a very positive way, the Southeast Michigan Health Council's Avera Health Alliance is a very vibrant organization that's doing very good work developing new approaches and new efforts in there in your part of the country.
	And the Henry Ford Health System has taken very major steps towards using information technology.
	And that's one of the good news stories.
	Well, they're world class at the Henry Ford Health System.
	That's absolutely right.
	And by the way, draw a fair number of people from Canada who need better health care than they're going to get in a government-run bureaucracy.
	So it's very interesting to talk to people about the effect of having a world-class health system and how much it's worth.
	I see a number of changes moving in the right direction, slower than we'd like.
	It's still very, very frustrating.
	And I wish that the federal government would take much more direct action.
	But there's a new opportunity, for example, Allscripts has developed an online electronic prescribing system that will allow doctors for free to prescribe medication electronically.
	And 96% of the pharmacies in the country have signed up for it.
	So that's an example of the kind of progress that's being made.
	There are very significant steps being taken towards electronic health records by many of the major insurance companies and the Blue Cross systems across the country are taking major steps.
	And my sense is that we are steadily increasing the number of people who have electronic health records, but we have a long way to go further than we should, frankly.
	And I wish that the federal government were taking a more leadership role in trying to get this done because if we ever get hit with a major biological attack or a pandemic or a nuclear attack, we'll discover all of a sudden that paper records are very, very dangerous and that they do not allow us to respond fast enough to a real health crisis.
	Now, on a side note, and speaking of prescriptions, did you happen to catch ABC's Brian Ross the other day?
	I saw it in the news and online, and I think it was on 2020.
	I didn't see the 2020 piece.
	But the mistakes that are made in the pharmaceutical industry, and that it is oftentimes pharmaceutical assistants, could be very well, could be high school kids who are actually filling the prescription that's supposed to be checked by a full-fledged pharmacist, but they're under so much pressure to move so quickly that there are many times that they're giving people the wrong pills, the wrong medicine.
	Well, that's right.
	And part of that problem, this is why.
	That's a human error problem, unless you can computerize that whole system.
	Well, the Institute of Medicine reported several years ago that up to 8,000 Americans a year die from medication error.
	And we believe that very.
	8,000.
	8,000.
	For people putting the wrong pills in the wrong bottle.
	Or because you couldn't read the doctor's prescription because the handwriting wasn't readable.
	8,000 deaths.
	That's astounding.
	And that's an example why we founded the Center for Health Transformation, because it was clear that unless you went through very significant, very continuing effort on this stuff, you were never going to get progress.
	All right.
	Let's get to some positive things here.
	Let's see.
	How did this thing come about where you are going to be going up against the guy who's been called the environmental champion by the League of Conservation Voters, Senator Kerry, who, along with his wife, Teresa, wrote that book, This Moment on Earth, which addresses climate change, preserving the environment, and showing that he can write a book just like Al Gore can?
	Well, I think, first of all, that Senator Kerry thought that having a debate with me would be a good way to get publicity, and I guess he was right.
	He was getting a fair amount of publicity.
	What will be interesting to watch?
	I used to teach environmental studies, and I have been very active over the years in trying to develop a conservative, market-oriented, science-and technology-based approach to the future.
	I mean, when I look out at things, for example, like the Kyoto Treaty, it was wrong on every single framework.
	And whether you believe in global warming or you don't believe in global warming, the Kyoto Treaty is for America a bad treaty.
	First of all, it doesn't solve the problem because it does nothing for India and China, and they're going to be the countries that are the two biggest additions to carbon in the next 35 or 40 years.
	Second, it is a classic European ambush for America in that the treaty is rigged so that it doesn't help the United States.
	For example, we could not use, we couldn't count carbon sequestration in our trees where we have huge thousands and thousands of square miles of trees.
	So the Europeans simply wrote the treaty to make sure that anything that was good for America didn't count, and anything that was good for Europe did count.
	And so I want to start with, it'll be interesting to see, I'm not prejudging where Senator Kerry is, but let's take your hometown biggest industry, which is autos.
	I very much want us to move towards a hydrogen economy.
	I want us to move towards cars that use alternative fuels and that are dramatically more conservation-based, which probably also includes cars that use a lot of composite materials, such as Boeing is now building into the 787 Dreamliner, much lighter materials, much better gas mileage.
	And yet, the fact is, as you well know, because you cover it so closely, the American auto industry today doesn't have the capital and doesn't have the finances to make the scale of investment that that kind of change would take.
	So I would like to see the federal government engage in a program of incentives and tax credits to make it possible for the science and technology of the next decade to dramatically move us to cars that don't rely very much on gasoline, whether because they are dramatically more capable of getting mileage or whether because they use ethanol and biodiesel and other kind of fuels or because we get the really big breakthrough, which would be to a hydrogen economy.
	And so my approach is a entrepreneurial science and technology-based approach where I think that the people on the left tend to have, first of all, a pain approach.
	They'd like to have a 50-cent a gallon gas tax.
	They'd like to have a carbon tax.
	They'd like to have government controls.
	I am not for turning America over to bureaucrats as long as the bureaucrat paints themselves green.
	Former House Speaker, possible presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, with us.
	You're welcome to join in.
	We have him for a few minutes longer here on the Rush Limbaugh Program, 1-800-282-2882, 1-800-282-2882.
	I'm Paul W. Smith, In for Rush.
	Well, the former Speaker of the House, possible presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, understands the situation here.
	I want to talk with him about a book he's working on called, much like his contract with America, he's got a contract with the Earth, which is based on a 10-point contract calling for a bipartisan approach to solving climate issues.
	We want to give some time to that.
	But he also understands, because we've told him, there are a number of people who would like to speak with him, and this is a unique opportunity.
	So, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your juggling your schedule around to spend even a little bit more time with us.
	We appreciate that very much.
	We don't take it for granted.
	Let's go to our callers here at 1-800-282-2882, 1-800-282-2882.
	And Jim in St. Louis, Missouri is on with Newt Gingrich.
	Hello, how are you?
	Good.
	How are you?
	Fine.
	I'm calling from the home of Sam Fox, which we're very happy to be associated with.
	But I wanted to ask you a quick question.
	Are you familiar with the Logan Act, and how would that apply to what Nancy Pelosi just pulled off?
	Well, I'm very familiar with the Logan Act.
	I used it in the 1980s to discuss various Democrats who were proactively helping the communist dictatorship in Nicaragua and made the point very clearly that the Logan Act, for our listeners, was passed in the 1790s by the generation that wrote the Constitution, and it made it illegal for any American to negotiate without the approval of the executive branch of the government.
	And the Constitution is very clear about this.
	I am quite certain that she violated the Logan Act when she was in Damascus by her own words, because she said she carried a message from the Israeli prime minister to the Syrian dictator, which, by the way, the Israelis have now repudiated and said she didn't understand the message, which is why you don't want members of Congress randomly getting involved and pretending that they're Secretary of State.
	You need to have one foreign policy with one president at a time.
	The Congress, you know, if Speaker Pelosi wants to come home and debate on the House floor, that's her prerogative.
	And if she wants to go visit on a truly fact-finding mission, that's her prerogative.
	But pretending to carry diplomatic messages is, I think, illegal.
	It has never been prosecuted in modern times.
	But I do think it is a profound mistake for the Congress to start getting in this kind of business.
	Do you think they would ever attempt to have a special investigator look at it?
	Well, I don't think they have the nerve to do that, but I'll tell you flatly, if you read the press coverage and you read her own statements, it's clear that she was behaving in a diplomatic manner which was absolutely wrong under our Constitution and which is very dangerous for the United States.
	Well put, Mr. Speaker, and a good question.
	Jim, thanks for your call.
	Jody is in Minneapolis, and on the Rush Limbaugh Show, I'm Paul W. Smith, our guest, former Speaker, Newt Gingrich.
	Pleasure to speak to you, Mr. Gingrich.
	It's a true honor.
	Well, it's good to be with you.
	I'm actually a young resident physician in Minneapolis, and I applaud all of your health care ideas.
	No potential candidate makes me more excited than your ideas.
	My question is with regard to the advent of the electronic medical record.
	And I'm not sure if you're aware of it or not, but the VA medical system in the United States has probably the most sophisticated, advanced electronic medical record in the United States, yet every hospital still insists on kind of going their own way with a different system.
	Do you see some role for, as much as I fear government intervention in health care, I would like to see some perhaps forced integration of electronic medical records across all institutions?
	Do you see a role for that in the future?
	Well, I think that it's a very clear requirement that we have electronic medical records.
	As I was talking with Paul W. Smith a little while ago, the Institute of Medicine reports that there are up to 8,000 people a year killed by medication error.
	They also report that there are between 44,000 and 98,000 Americans a year who die in hospitals from various medical errors.
	And in that kind of a setting, it seems to me that having some kind of program to get to electronic medical records is at the heart of quality and at the heart of safety.
	And the easiest thing the federal government could do is simply say that in order to be a Medicare or Medicaid provider or in order to be a provider for the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan, that you're going to have to have an interoperable, compatible electronic medical record as part of your practice.
	And by the way, if it's designed right, it actually saves money.
	It doesn't cost money.
	I met with the North Fulton Family Medical Clinic in Alpharetta, Georgia.
	They think they save $33 per visit by having electronic medical records.
	They don't have to transcribe their notes.
	They don't have to go look for paper.
	Everything is available right then.
	It's really fascinating to look at that kind of approach, and I think that the government should be accelerating that.
	Appreciate the call, Dr. Jody, very much.
	The Newt Gingrich fix or cure for a sick health care system in our country, the delivery problems we have, the insurance and cost problems that companies have by taking on this responsibility.
	Any thoughts on that?
	Well, I think that you are seeing, frankly, insurance companies and hospitals both work to extend electronic medical records.
	And I think that they all understand that the faster we have this kind of system, the less expensive it's going to be and the fewer people are going to die accidentally.
	Well, it's going to be interesting to follow because that is being said as one of the ways that we can't be competitive, speaking of the automotive industry and speaking of the automotive capital still of the world, Detroit, that the other countries don't have to do that.
	Other companies are supported by their countries in their health care.
	Well, the difference is in other countries, people pay more taxes for health care and they pay less in the private sector for insurance.
	In the U.S., we historically paid more for insurance in the private sector and didn't pay, and our tax burden is much lower than it is in many other countries.
	And by the way, in most of those countries, their growth rate is much slower than ours.
	If you look around the world, in virtually every industrial country in the world, they create fewer jobs than we do.
	They have a slower productivity increase than we do.
	And over the last 10 years, the gap has actually started to widen out, and the U.S. has begun to pull ahead.
	I mean, there's no industrial country that is competitive with us today.
	And despite the fact that they might have a national bureaucracy running their health service, that means they have a much higher tax burden, and that offsets the advantage they get in that front.
	We'll continue with Newt Gingrich here on the Rush Limbaugh program.
	I'm Paul W. Smith.
	Thanks, Johnny, very much.
	As we continue, the former House Speaker, possible presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, was to be with us two segments, but because he understands you'd like to speak directly with him, and I want to ask him about his new contract, much broader than his contract with America.
	The new contract is a contract with Earth.
	But I'd be remiss if, while I have you here, Newt, I didn't ask you a quick question about this.
	First, now the Democrats want to investigate the president's recess appointment of Sam Fox as ambassador to Belgium.
	Now, I'll give you my opinion.
	If they do anything, if they handle this in any way like they handled and blew the firing of the prosecutors for saying anything, all they should have said was, we did it because we wanted to.
	Next question.
	They wouldn't have gotten in all this trouble.
	I hope they aren't going to make the same mistake when he constitutionally has the right to do what he has just done with Sam Fox.
	Well, that's, you know, exact you you put your finger exactly on one of the most puzzling things about the administration right now.
	They're not going to make the Democrats happy.
	They're not going to appease the Democrats.
	They're not going to earn their friendship.
	The Democrats are on a search and destroy expedition.
	And if they can't destroy Bush on one thing, they're going to pivot and try to destroy him on something else.
	And I have never seen any problem more mishandled than the U.S. attorneys.
	They serve at the pleasure of the president.
	It is his prerogative under the Constitution to dismiss them whenever he wants.
	There was zero reason to explain anything except to say, in my judgment, we needed new people, period.
	End of story, I'm the president, you're not.
	If you don't like that, then you should run for president.
	Instead, they're now in this mess where they even had one of the Justice Department people say she would take the Fifth Amendment before she was even asked anything.
	I mean, you know, it's like they're voluntarily going out there and creating targets.
	The new book that you're working on, I think, is going to be available November of this year.
	You know, we're very excited.
	Terry Maple, who is a full professor of Georgia Tech and Primate Psychology and now the head of the West Palm Beach Zoo and is the man who was an entrepreneur really turned around and reinvented the zoo Atlanta.
	Terry and I have written a book called Contract with the Earth.
	Johns Hopkins University Press will bring it out this fall.
	And we did it because we wanted to directly draw the contrast with the kind of Al Gore left-wing approach to the environment.
	We believe there is every reason to be optimistic that science and technology and entrepreneurship and market incentives can lead to enormous breakthroughs.
	We point out that it is the dictatorships with massive bureaucracies that have the worst records on the planet for the environment, that it is free countries with free markets that have the best record on the planet for the environment.
	And we believe if we incentivize science and if we focus people on the right kinds of inventions, that we could have a remarkable 25-year explosion of new, better, greener technologies that will be better for everybody.
	By the way, you know that General Motors was working very hard on a hydrogen economy, if you will, and applications until they ran into the brick wall they ran into.
	It's still on their mind.
	They still have a lot of technology that can work toward doing that.
	That's right.
	And that's the sort of thing where if we had a tax credit for them to be able to work on this so that they had the money to do it, we'd be making dramatic progress right now.
	I mean, people in Washington who want to capriciously increase the CAFE standard into a whole series of bureaucratic controls aren't looking at how financially weak the American auto industry is.
	If we want to make sure that we bankrupt Ford and General Motors, all we've got to do is keep piling more and more government on top of it at a time when they frankly need the kind of financial incentives that would enable them to make the transition.
	I also think we ought to have incentives for them to tool up so that, for example, if they were prepared to start experimenting with the kind of composite materials that Boeing is now using, which are dramatically lighter than our current cars and actually stronger than our current cars, they would need a fair amount of resources to make that transition.
	But the effect in terms of our national security and the effect in terms of our environment of getting to a car that could go 500 or 1,000 miles on a gallon of gasoline by combining hybrid engines that you can plug in at night plus going to ethanol and DeSoy diesel, you can begin to think about really dramatic changes.
	And for any of our listeners who think that this is too bold and too dramatic, I find it fascinating.
	You'd be driving down the road listening to satellite radio with a cell phone and a BlackBerry, but think that we're talking about too much technology.
	Well, no one's ever given, in fact, the auto industry their due for all the high technology that's in a car.
	We take it for granted, by the way.
	You look at the number of small computers that are now in a modern car.
	It is astonishing how much information technology there is in a car today.
	And by the way, because you've mentioned it a couple of times, I'll underscore the fact that when you talk about those composite materials that Boeing is working with, we have Alan Malally now in Detroit running forward.
	He was at Boeing for 30-plus years.
	And so that same technology, that intelligence, follows Alan Malally.
	So we're not far off from the areas we need to be.
	You have also said that we will find in a contract with the Earth, the book that you were writing with Terry Maple that will be out this fall, is talking about focusing on the energy policy in four areas.
	You've mentioned incentives for conservation, more renewable resources, a new energy system, and environmentally sound development of fossil fuels.
	Sure.
	A couple of big examples.
	We are on the edge of a new generation of very safe, very clean nuclear power.
	We have had long experience in the Navy, for example, of running nuclear reactors that work, that are inexpensive, and that are very, very safe.
	I have to just say, because I almost said it by finishing up on the four points, I was stunned, Newt Gingrich, to find, as I sat there at a broadcast location in Paris a couple years ago, to find that in France, 70% of their electricity needs are handled by nuclear power plants.
	Look, I was embarrassed.
	Both in France and in Japan, you can build a new, modern, safe nuclear power plant in about five years.
	In the U.S., between litigation and regulation, it is now so expensive that we haven't built a new nuclear power plant in over 20 years.
	And then people run around and say they want to have less carbon in the atmosphere, except they don't want to do any of the things that would lead to less carbon.
	The other big breakthrough, frankly, is to develop a much cleaner coal technology where we can sequester the carbon because coal is the largest single source of energy in the United States, and coal provides about 40% of all of our electric production right now and is likely to for a fairly long period to come.
	But there are a variety of things.
	Denmark has made enormous progress, in part by using wind power.
	There was one study that South Dakota alone has enough wind that it could literally provide about half the electricity in the U.S. if we had the right power lines and power grid in place.
	And there's a lot of creative possibilities.
	So I think my goal this coming Tuesday is to draw in talking with Senator Heinz, I mean, Senator Kerry, then Teresa Heinz Kerry.
	I was thinking about Teresa, his wife.
	Right.
	They wrote the book together.
	They wrote it together.
	And my goal is with both of them to be able to say, why don't we try some market-oriented, science-and technology-oriented steps and not assume that it has to be a government regulation, government bureaucracy, government-mandated approach.
	And I think it'll be an interesting dialogue.
	I don't know yet that some of the talk about it has been sort of comparing it to WrestleMania.
	I don't think it's going to be like that at all.
	Senator Kerry and I have a long relationship.
	He's a smart guy.
	Neither one of you are going to try to shave the other one's head when it's all over either.
	It seems unlikely, and I think we'll probably perform at a different level than Donald Trump and Rosie.
	Okay.
	Well, and Vince McMahon, Donald Trump and Vince McMahon.
	But honestly, you could take Kerry, couldn't you?
	That's not a question of taking him.
	No, no, I was a joke.
	Don't do that.
	I'm sorry.
	I was led into that.
	Sorry about that.
	Yeah, Tuesday at New York University's Russell Senate Office.
	It's the New York University's hosting along with Brookings at the Russell Senate office building.
	Yeah, is it going to be televised, though?
	Because, Newt, if it isn't televised, we'll only see the cuts in the institutional media, or as Rush might call it, the drive-by media.
	We'll only see the cuts where he lays one on you as opposed to the ones that you lay on him.
	Well, look, look, American Solutions will webcast it, I think, later on in the day in its entirety.
	And we don't know yet whether C-SPAN and others will cover it.
	But my hope is to say to people, don't assume automatically that you have to be a left-wing green and in favor of higher taxes, bigger government, and more pain, or you have to be anti-environment.
	There is a conservative approach, a market approach, and a science and technology approach that can give us a better environment with a better economy.
	We'll look forward to contract with the Earth coming up.
	And do you have time for one other question?
	This poor guy's been waiting.
	Well, I don't know if it's a guy or not.
	Lee, in my neck of the woods in Livonia, Michigan.
	Lee, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
	I'm Paul W. Smith, and this is Newt Gingrich.
	Speaker Gingrich, it's an extreme pleasure to talk to you.
	And my question is: with these electronical medical records, you indicated going to reduce the number of mistakes and death.
	And one of the major impacts I've always heard was litigation in the area of health care adding to its cost.
	And do you foresee these medical records reducing the amount of litigation as it relates to that?
	Yes, my personal belief is that it's very likely that we will see a breakthrough where having an electronic health record lowers dramatically the amount of litigation because it provides such clear evidence that the doctor followed the right things and was doing the right things.
	And that's certainly one of the major arguments for handling it in that manner.
	Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the book, Contract with the Earth, and I look forward to your announcement if you do decide to become a presidential candidate.
	And I know you'll be calling me first.
	Listen, sometime between now and then, I am confident I'll be back on your show from Detroit, okay?
	Thank you, Newt.
	Thanks.
	Appreciate it.
	Very good.
	Former House Speaker, possible presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, here on the Rush Limbaugh program.
	I am Paul W. Smith.
	Rush said he's always wanted to take Good Friday off.
	There was just one complication.
	And he gave a lot of thought to this.
	He said, you know, the problem is Good Friday always lands on a Friday.
	But he decided after how many years?
	How many years?
	He had to be like 18 just doing here, doing this.
	He decided to take Good Friday off.
	He's fine.
	He's healthy.
	He's healthy, wealthy, and wise, as they say.
	And he'll be back here in this chair Monday.
	And I, for one, will appreciate that.
	Look, I love filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
	You got to know, for a guy who does what I do, this is it.
	This is truly a golden microphone.
	But I like listening to Rush.
	And so I like it when he's back, and he'll be back Monday.
	Just a personal note that affects all of us, and that is, I read a little bit about Bill O'Reilly, and I've got to tell you, I agree with Bill O'Reilly on this point.
	He said that perhaps one of President Bush's best hires, and most unlikely, I'll say, was Tony Snow, White House press secretary.
	Because Tony Snow, writing, in fact, based at one point at the Detroit News and then doing his syndicated column, and sitting in on this program at one time as the regular fill-in host, Tony Snow wouldn't pull any punches.
	If he disagreed with the president, he disagreed with the president, and he said so.
	And he had written some things that would be considered very critical of the administration.
	And one of the smartest things President George Bush did, has done, is hiring Tony Snow.
	And there was a question as to whether a guy like that with strong opinions as a columnist, as a talk show host, television host, all those things, could possibly be a good White House press secretary.
	And frankly, the answer is no.
	He couldn't be a good White House press secretary.
	He's been a great White House press secretary.
	And I just spoke to him yesterday, and he wanted to send along his regards to you.
	And he so appreciates all of the cards, all of the best wishes, and yes, all of the prayers that all of us have been sending his way.
	And he hopes you will continue to do that because he too believes it helps.
	If you don't know the history, you know that a couple of years ago, he found that he had cancer of the colon, got that dealt with.
	Some cancer has come back, cancer lesions at his liver and spreading elsewhere.
	He had some surgery, got back out of the hospital.
	What did he tell me?
	I think I can't remember the exact day last week, but I've spoken to him now a couple of times, and I'm here to tell you that he is strong.
	He has the right attitude, which you must have when facing cancer.
	And as he has said and said in one of his press conferences, in fact, speaking of the Edwards situation and the family, it's the fear that you have with cancer.
	And anybody who's been touched by it or has family members who have been or are, the fear is huge.
	He's facing that.
	He's working hard.
	He's feeling strong.
	He's out and about.
	And I have a feeling one day soon he will join Rush on this program.
	I hope that he will.
	I think that he will.
	And he will tell you that in his own words.
	Meanwhile, continue the thoughts, continue the prayers.
	And I'm happy to say that Traybon at the White House has told me that if you email, and it's whitehouse.gov, whitehouse.gov, if you go there, you can leave a message for Tony Snow.
	Your best wishes.
	Let them know you're thinking of him.
	Let them know you're praying for him if you are.
	And Traybon at the White House says they will be sure to get that to Tony.
	And I can tell you from speaking with Tony, he really appreciates that.
	And I just wanted to pass that along because he's a part of this wonderful family that we know of as the Limbaugh Institute, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the Limbaugh Institute of Conservative Studies, because he too was a fellow student, elevated to teaching assistant oh, so many years ago.
	He had to leave.
	He took that job at the White House.
	We continue on the Rush Limbaugh program.
	I'm Paul W. Smith.
	You know, we spoke earlier with Newt Gingrich.
	Tuesday, he's going to have that debate with John Kerry.
	John Kerry in the news, coming to the strong defense of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
	Anybody surprised?
	No.
	She made mistakes.
	I mean, period, plain and simple.
	And people are going to say, and the Democrats will effectively say, well, wait a minute, what about Congressman Darrell Issa?
	What about others?
	Darrell Issa, a Republican, who went and had conversations in Syria.
	He happens to be Lebanese and goes back there a lot.
	But what he didn't do was he didn't try to introduce new diplomatic initiatives.
	didn't try to claim, as it turns out erroneously, that he was carrying messages of peace from Israel and any number of other things that she should not be doing, should not be saying.
	That's left up to Dr. Condoleezza Rice, for example, or maybe even the President of the United States.
	So it's going to be an interesting several days.
	Actually, it's going to be an interesting several months, too many as far as I'm concerned, with this whole running for president two years in advance.
	But there's one place to be, and it's right here on your favorite radio station, listening to Rush and the other great programming that we have here for you day in and day out, seven days a week, 24 hours a day, to stay on top of what's happening.
	Thanks, Mike Mimone, our broadcast engineer, and of course, HR, Kit Carson, Chief of Staff.
	Thank you for joining me.
	You have a great Easter.
	We'll see you next time here on the Rush Limbaugh program on this, the EIB network, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
	It is the only place you'll find this kind of broadcasting on this, your favorite station.

▲