All Episodes
Previous Next
June 13, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
June 13, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, welcome back, folks.
Nice to have you with us.
As always, Rush Limbaugh behind this, the Golden EIB microphone.
We are here at the prestigious and distinguished Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I, of course, occupy the prestigious Aptilla the Hun chair, endowed by me as a senior fellow.
It's the largest free education institution in the world.
There are no graduates.
There are no degrees because the learning never stops.
And I'm going to get to your phone calls much.
It hit me.
I didn't get a phone call in last hour.
Apologize for that.
But we'll get to your call soon here after the monologue segment that opens the program.
And I've got a couple of immigration things, but I want to mention one thing that's brewing out there.
You know, it was Jeff Sessions from Alabama.
No, no, sorry.
Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isaacson from Georgia, both Republicans.
Chambliss, who, by the way, was on the original wave of Republicans supporting Ted Kennedy and others on the bill, the immigration bill, sorted it a 180 yesterday, put out a press release saying that they talked to their constituents in Georgia, said the real concern is border security.
And they urge the president to put up an emergency supplemental and get something done on the border.
And a lot of people are telling the president this now.
And we have to be very careful here, folks, because I want just put out the possibility here that that might happen.
There might actually be a bill, because they want this.
Your elected officials, the White House wants this bill, and they want amnesty.
All you have to do is look at this bill to understand that.
There's really no effort to stem the flow.
And particularly the Democrat Party, the purpose of this is to have a never-ending flow of low-skilled, uneducated, poor people pouring into the country for the express purpose of providing cheap labor and potential new union members.
And the second thing is all these new voters who are going to become controllable and totally dependent, the Democrats running out of victims.
So the idea that they're going to fix the amnesty portion of this is something I don't think is going to happen, but they may, somebody may come up with an idea here.
Okay, we can stem some of the tide out there.
We can alleviate some of the anger.
We can buy some time here if we just come up with a supplemental bill that says we're going to build a fence or really enhance border security somehow.
That might happen.
I'm not going to predict it for certain here, but I won't be surprised if it does.
Come up with some bill, an emergency supplemental spending total claiming to enhance security, thinking that this will buy you off.
And then follow it pretty closely with probably a new rewritten bill, but it will still be an amnesty bill.
And so the point is to be very careful here and continue to pay attention because it's obvious this is something they all want.
And they're busy now trying to figure out how they can get it done in the face of all this opposition.
Now, some of you people doubt me.
After 19 years, I literally don't understand why.
Don't doubt me on these things.
But some of you still doubt me, checking the email.
Rush, you keep saying that Democrats want poor stupid people as new voters, as new residents.
I don't even care if they're citizens, just want them here as residents.
That just seems a little accusatory to me.
All right.
Yesterday, let's go back.
We had Kim Gandy, the president of the NAGs, writing a story.
Essentially, it was about how I'm not making this up.
I hope you were here yesterday to listen to this.
Kim Gandhi wrote a piece about all the spousal abuse that goes on among legal and illegal immigrants.
And it was a piece about how the women, female immigrants, get beat up constantly.
They can't go work.
Their husbands threaten to throw them out of the house.
All kinds of crazy things.
And of course, I and others like me are responsible for this, for creating this air of negativity about immigrants, legal and illegal.
It was absurd and it was funny, but it was quite telling.
And of course, the conclusion I came to was that these are the kind of people she wanted in the country.
It was beyond description.
There's a new addition to this today from another feminist.
I don't know if her NAG membership is current, but her name is Barbara Ehrenreich.
She's a writer.
She did that book about taking minimum wage jobs a few years ago.
She went out there, took some minimum wage jobs, wrote about them, how horrible, how it's impossible to live on them, how it's just destructive, and all of this.
She posted something online yesterday at then.com.
Rush Limbaugh has been expecting liberals to start whining about the $5,000 fine undocumented immigrants.
Oh, that reminds me.
I know these people.
Do I know?
I said yesterday it wouldn't be long before some Democrat will be calling them undocumented Americans.
Dingy Harry actually did it during this program yesterday on the floor of the Senate.
He actually referred to them as undocumented Americans.
I said that this phrase would be illegal Americans.
But I said this is where it's headed.
He did.
Undocumented Americans is what Dingy Harry says talking about the immigration bill, obviously.
So here's Barbara Aaron Reich.
Rush Limbaugh has been expecting liberals to start whining about the $5,000 fine undocumented immigrants will have to pay to gain citizenship under the new immigration bill.
Well, I did say that, but I went further.
I said there will not be a fine because most of these people are not going to try to become citizens and they won't have to, therefore, pay a fine.
And they won't have to go to the end of the line.
And they won't have to go back home to their home countries and come back because the minute the bill is signed, they're legal.
They don't have to leave.
It's only if they try to become citizens have to pay the fine.
And that isn't going to happen.
Most of them are not going to pursue citizenship because it's not why they're here in the first place.
The second thing that will happen is the whining will begin.
5,000 is too punitive.
Why we're taking food out of the mouths of babies?
Why that we've got to lower that or maybe waive it or make the employer pay it or some such thing.
So she's acknowledging I got that right.
Then she continues, most liberals have been too busy chortling about the immigration-induced split in the GOP to make their own case against the bill.
So let a mighty whine rise over the land.
Undocumented workers should not be fined.
They should get a hefty bonus.
All right, they committed a crime, the international equivalent of breaking an entry, but breaking an entry is usually a prelude to a much worse crime like robbery or rape.
What have the immigrants been doing once they get into the U.S.?
Taking up time on the elliptical trainers in our health clubs, getting ahead of us on the wait lists for elite private nursery schools?
No, Barbara, they have been winding their way into our health care system.
They've been finding their way into all areas of our social safety net, referred to on this program as the hammock.
And they are a net expense.
So the breaking and entering does, in a way, lead to a much worse crime.
But the problem is it's not viewed as a crime by the Democrats because they want the redistribution of wealth.
They love the fact that there'll be a net cost and a net cost increase, things like Social Security and health care, food stamps and all that, because that's how their power is enriched and entrenched.
Now, but here's a liberal woman who's concerned about the poor.
She wants them to get a bonus.
Not a fine.
In case you don't know what immigrants do in this country, the Latinos have a word for it, trabajo.
They've been mowing the lawns, cleaning the offices, hammering the nails, picking the tomatoes, not to mention all that dishwashing, diaper changing, meat packing, and poultry plucking.
The punitive rage directed at illegal immigrants grows out of a larger blindness to the manual labor that makes our lives possible.
Listen to this now.
The touching belief in the class occupied by Rush Limbaugh that offices clean themselves at night and salad greens spring straight from the soil onto one's plate.
Native-born workers share in this invisibility, but it's far worse in the case of immigrant workers who are often, for all practical purposes, nameless.
So she's writing here that because of the class I occupy, I have no clue how these menial jobs get done.
Ms. Aaron Reich, I pay to get them done.
I employ a lot of people.
I pay them to do the work, and they are paid well.
The idea here that there's a class of people that doesn't have any clue how all this stuff gets done.
The critics of us, our critics, have no understanding.
This is not anti-Hispanic.
It's not about the nature of these people other than the fact that we wish we'd increase our immigration of educated and highly skilled people.
But most of the people on my side of this are concerned about the future of the country demographically, electorally, culturally, institutions and traditions that made the country great.
If there were evidence that these people were wanting to assimilate and become part of that, it'd be a different story.
But the evidence is to the contrary.
She then continues with this.
The only question is how much we owe our undocumented immigrant workers.
First, those who do not remain to enjoy the benefits of old age in America will have to be reimbursed for their contributions to Medicare and Social Security.
I'm not making it up.
Not making it up.
These poor illegals who don't stay here to enjoy the benefits of old age in America, they're going to have to be reimbursed when they go home because they're not going to get their Social Security and Medicare benefits.
They're not going to stay here long enough.
No, it's not a parody.
Undocumented immigrants annually pay an estimated $7 billion more than they take out into Social Security, $1.5 billion more into Medicare, a study by the National Academy of Scientists.
Well, I've got my own study, Ms. Aaron Reich, and it's Bob Rector at the Heritage Foundation.
I trust this guy.
He's a scholar.
He's an expert on these kinds of things, transfer payments, balances, net costs on the poor, not just in this country, but around the world.
But her whole point of this column is, we owe these people so much more than what we're paying them now.
They need a bonus for coming in here.
They're doing things we won't do.
They're not staying long enough to collect the benefits that they're owed because they're paying into.
She never heard of Prop 187.
So anyway, the opinions on all this cross the spectrum.
A little long here, but as I promised, I'll come back and grab some phone calls.
The EIB network, you get it's 800-282-2882.
Still here, ladies and gentlemen, considering the comments made by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Gramnesty saying his job is to go to Washington, go to the Senate to work with Ted Kennedy, to work with Democrats to get hard things done.
So if Lindsey Gramnesty's job is to work with Democrats and Chuck Schumer's job is to work with Democrats, because I know that Schumer and Kennedy don't think that their job is to work hard with Republicans.
So if you got Schumer working with the Democrats and Lindsey Gramnesty working with Democrats, who's working with us?
Me, exactly.
And I'm unelected.
Here's Andrew, Evansville, Indiana.
You're up first today.
I appreciate your patience.
Thank you.
Thank you, Rush.
You said something earlier that confused me.
Hillary Clinton's main group of people she appeals to are women with needs.
I thought that was Bill's main group.
Well, no.
Bill works with women who need desire, who have desires.
See, that's the difference: needs and desires.
Oh.
See, but look at you're trying to crack a joke.
I've always said, leave this to the professionals.
Don't try this at home.
I make it look easy.
It was a nice stab.
And I'm going to use your call because you were so graciously patient to transition to explaining this again.
There's a Washington Post poll that suggests Barack Obama is really scoring well with highly educated women, and Mrs. Clinton is not.
She's scoring well with low-educated and poor women.
And the dichotomy for me is, or the dichotomy, the thing that strikes me is that she's the smartest woman in the world.
How come is that she's not appealing to women who are from her same strata?
Now, the way the Washington Post talks about this is women with needs, poor women, and women with desires who are affluent women.
And the women with desires, you're right, are flocking to Bill Clinton and to Barack Obama for different reasons.
But if you add this together, folks, it's not hard to figure out where the Democrat Party is headed and what they want the population of this country to consist of on a majority basis.
They are pursuing uneducated voters.
Obama in the story recognizes that's a weakness.
Hillary's not concerned with not having the upper educated women.
She's happy to have who she's got.
Barack Obama is concerned, well, I can find my way down there.
I can get them.
We're working hard to get the poor, uneducated women.
We'll get them to our campaign.
They want them, is the point.
And that's why they're willing to look the other way at the types of people that illegal immigrants are pouring across the border.
They want them.
They're controllable, are more easily controllable, and they're dependent.
They're trying to change their bosses from us to a different group of people who are going to have far more need and dependence for them.
This is Pete in Norwalk, Connecticut.
Pete, you're next.
Great to have you with us.
Thanks, Rush.
How are you?
Good, sir.
Good to talk with you.
I just want to make reference to, I think at the top of your show, you played a soundbite from that lady in Florida chastising you about not showing sufficient respect for the junior senator from New York.
I would like to point out to her, she may recall, that in her 2000 run for the Senate, Mrs. Clinton was so obsessed with distancing herself from President Pecadelo that all her campaign propaganda, including her post, that said only Hillary, said nothing else.
It said Hillary, Hillary, Hillary.
So all you're doing, Rush, is acquiescing to the wishes of the smartest woman in the world.
Well, Look, the woman was from Amelia Island, Florida, and she was upset that we're not showing proper respect to Mrs. Clinton.
And she said she occasionally flips on my show and said, I just don't respect her at all.
We call her what she wants to be called.
One day it's Hillary.
The next day it's Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The next day it's Hillary Clinton.
But your point is she calls herself Hillary in her campaign.
Look at how many times do you see the drive-by media Bush not President Bush when talking about him?
It's not unique, and for people to complain about the way Mrs. Clinton's being disrespected is foolish.
I submit to you that since Nixon and Reagan, there hasn't been a Republican as berated, attacked, demeaned, impugned, and lied about as George W. Bush.
No respect whatsoever has been offered.
Of course, these women are not concerned about that.
But she's obviously a Hillary supporter, and that explains her point of view.
Lawrence Berg, North Carolina.
And Mark, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
It's an honor to speak with you.
Thank you, sir.
I just find it ironic that when we have these street demonstrations in favor of amnesty, we have 10,000 people show up with Mexican flags.
That's characterized as a great grassroots movement.
But when hundreds of thousands of phone calls and faxes flood Washington, that's a right-wing, bigoted conspiracy.
Yeah, you're referring to Senator Feinstein's comments?
I'm referring to everybody's comments.
Senator Feinstein on Sunday said she has never received more racist, hate-filled phone calls and emails in her 15 years in the Senate from opponents of the immigration bill.
And you understand, none of this, what you observed is easily understood.
These people that you see in the tens of thousands waving Mexican flags, why, they fit the prism.
When Democrats looked at the prism, everybody liked that's a victim.
They're just trying to come out of the shadows.
All they want is a shot at a decent life.
We ought to be honored they've chosen our country, blah, blah, blah.
On the other side, when Feinstein goes out and tries to characterize the opponents of this as racists and bigots and people filled with rage, I'm telling you that's just to give cover for the next time the bill comes up because they know the same number of phone calls are going to come in, maybe more, and they know we're going to be passionate.
And so the Feinstein comment is to allow other senators to say, well, yeah, we're getting a lot of phone calls.
Of course we are, but you ought to hear them.
A bunch of racists and nativists and bigots.
Not a majority of the country.
Small group of people calling 25 or 30 times each.
Oh, we don't have to listen to these people.
We know that the majority of the people are with us.
And that's all her comment is about.
It's setting it up for the next time to be able to disregard all of you who plan on calling and continue to email as jump change, wackos fanatics not worth listening to.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Welcome back.
El Rushbo, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Now documented to be almost always right.
98.7, gone up one-tenth of 1%.
98.7% of the time, according to the latest opinion audit from the Sullivan Group in Sacramento, California.
All right.
I want to play these Al Gore soundbites again from yesterday.
I know we put them up at rushlinbaugh.com, and Drudge had them up for a while yesterday.
They're all over YouTube.
But this is just, it's mind-boggling.
It's September 29th, 1992.
Al Gore at the Center for National Policy.
Now, he's the vice presidential nominee at this point.
This is in the middle of the campaign.
The Gulf Wall is in the past.
We won the Gulf Wall, but they're trying to attack Bush, and it was the worst economy in the last 50 years.
Bush is incompetent, should have taken Saddam Hussein out, stopped halfway there.
These guys were trying to overcome the image of liberal Democrats as soft on usage of military and this kind of thing.
But the point of this is, you know, Al Gore's out there talking about how Bush lied.
He's joining the Democrat chorus.
Bush lied.
There were no weapons of mass destruction.
He fudged the intelligence.
The whole thing was made up as an excuse to go into Iraq for whatever conspiratorial reason to get oil or to have some opportunity to go into Iran later or to cover up for the fact that we aren't going to get bin Laden, blah, You've heard it all.
And on the basis of that and Al Gore's exhaustive work on global warming, he, of course, has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, as have I.
And we and my sponsors are seriously considering sending these three bites to the Nobel Committee.
We don't trust that they know how to use YouTube to see these, because this ought to disqualify and discredit Gore anytime in the future on whatever he says.
Here's the first of three bites.
It's nine and a half minutes long.
We just called the three that make the case here from this speech of September 29th of 1992.
Bush deserves heavy blame for intentionally concealing from the American people the clear nature of Saddam Hussein and his regime and for convincing himself that friendly relations with such a monster would be possible and for persisting in this effort far, far beyond the point of folly.
Throughout this period, Saddam's atrocities continued.
In March of 1988, Saddam used poison gas on the Kurdish town of Halabja, brutally murdering some 5,000 innocent men, women, and children.
And none of us can ever forget the pictures of their bodies, of parents trying to shield their infants, even in death, that were in our news media and around the world.
The Iran-Iraq war then ended in August of 1988, and Iraq had not prevailed, but neither had it been defeated.
As a result, you would think that the administration would give our policies a second look to see if they should be altered.
But the Reagan-Bush administration never hesitated, even when the news became much, much worse.
Keep listening, folks.
It just gets better with each bite.
In January 1989, President George Bush was sworn in.
Based on plentiful evidence, he had reason to know that his ongoing policy regarding Iraq was already malfunctioning badly.
Just last week, we learned of a memorandum written in March of that year, just two months after his inauguration to Secretary of State James Baker, as Baker prepared to meet with a senior Iraqi official, in which the author of the memorandum noted that Iraq continued to cooperate with terrorists, that it was meddling in Lebanon, that it was working hard at chemical and biological weapons and new missiles.
These are exact quotes from the memorandum to the administration.
And most significant of all, in the same month, September of 1989, the CIA reported to Secretary of State Baker and other top Bush administration officials that Iraq was clandestinely procuring nuclear weapons technology.
The tape, 1992, CIA credible.
CIA told Bush he's working on nukes.
They have wanted to effectively impeach Dick Cheney over this.
They say there was never any ties to Saddam and terrorism.
Al-Qaeda was everywhere, folks.
Even in the United States, Al-Qaeda was in Minnesota.
It was in Florida.
Never in Iraq.
This is just mind-blowing to me.
Here's the rest of this bite.
Through a global network of front companies.
Did all of this make any impression at all on President Bush?
Did his judgment on foreign policy come into play when he was told that this nation with a record of terrorism continuing was making a sustained concerted effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical, and biological?
Well, evidently not.
Well, apparently it didn't make much impression on you guys either because you dropped it like a hot potato the moment you were inaugurated because you didn't have the guts to deal with hard issues.
This is irresponsible.
These people ought to be disqualified.
Al Gore ought to never be on television talking about this again.
The media ought to be embarrassed to have him on talking about this.
They ought to be embarrassed, and every Democrat ought to be embarrassed listening to this.
1992, 15 years ago, Al Gore trying to warn this country over the danger we faced from Iraq and the fact that George Bush 41 was doing nothing about it.
Of course, these guys are inaugurated.
They serve eight years.
They don't do anything about it either.
Except when impeachment came up, Clinton did give a speech in 1998 that's almost verbatim what George W. Bush has said about this since 2002.
But the drive-bys who all know this want to forget it, want to pretend it didn't happen, because the action line is Bush sucks.
Bush irresponsible.
Bush lied.
Anything that doesn't move that action line forward to drive-by media is going to be ignored, just like this will be ignored.
He will not be asked about this by anybody.
If he dares show up on a cable news show, he will never, ever be asked about this.
Here's the third bite.
The text of NSD 26 blindly ignores the evidence already at the administration's disposal of Iraqi behavior in the past regarding human rights, terrorism, the use of chemical weapons, the pursuit of advanced weapons of mass destruction.
Instead, it makes an heroic assumption of good behavior in the future on the basis of an interesting theory, namely that Iraq would suddenly and completely change its ways out of a fear of economic and political sanctions.
Stop the tape.
I can't let this go.
These are the ones that are advocating sanctions now against Iran.
These are the ones that advocate the global test.
Bring the UN in and let's talk to our allies and make sure we get permission from them and let's do sanctions.
We must do some never military strikes.
Looks at what he's calling for now.
He's poo-pooing sanctions.
They don't work.
Bush is stupid for thinking they will against such an evil guy.
Well, it leaps from the page that George Bush, both as vice president and president, had done his utmost to make sure that no such sanctions would ever apply to Saddam Hussein.
The question is unavoidable.
Why should Saddam Hussein be at all concerned about a threat of action in the future from George Bush, the same man who had resolutely blocked any such action in the past?
Stop taking yeah, and he probably wasn't afraid because you guys in your eight years didn't do diddly squat but kill a janitor in a missile strike on a Saturday night into an empty building.
And all of a sudden, we elect a guy who is going to do something about this that the UN didn't do.
And now what do you guys do in the Democrat Party?
Try to discredit him in the process, discredit yourself, and you end up actually seeking to secure the defeat of the United States in this and the U.S. military, all for your own personal political gain in your party.
Here's the rest of the bite.
To the contrary, Saddam had every reason to assume that Bush would look the other way no matter what he did.
He had already launched poison gas attacks repeatedly, and Bush looked the other way.
He had already conducted extensive terrorism activities, and Bush had looked the other way.
He was already deeply involved in the effort to acquire nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and Bush knew it, but he looked the other way.
This is beyond description.
Anyway, I wanted you to hear that again.
We played it the first hour yesterday, and you may not have seen it on various websites out there, including mine.
So I wanted you to hear it if you didn't catch it yesterday.
Quick timeout.
Back to your phone calls right after this.
Serving humanity simply by showing up.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, to Cliff in New York City.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Thank you for waiting.
Hi, Rush.
I am black.
I'm an immigrant.
And I am conservative.
I agree with your position entirely on this immigration bill.
But there's also, to me, a racial component to this thing because I personally know of several people, legal immigrants, who committed crimes.
Some of them were white-collar crimes.
And they were deported, their green card status rescinded, sent back to their own country.
So I'm trying to figure out how is it that they are allowing so many immigrants here who have criminal records.
It seems to me the fact that they're...
It's not allow, it's want.
Look at.
That may sound harsh, but I'm going to tell you why I say that.
A senator proposed, who was the proposed, it was it Kyle?
Was it somebody proposed an amendment to deport those who were here with criminal backgrounds, and the Senate defeated it?
It was a Kyle Amendment.
They defeated it.
But there already is a law, and based on that law, they have deported several black people that I know, all black.
Well, look, I happen to agree with you on this.
I think for Feinstein to run around and talk about how there's racists, there are racists and bigots and nativists and restrictionists and all this in the anti-amnesty crowd.
The fact is that there is a clear racial preference on the part of this immigration bill for Mexicans, for his family.
Absolutely.
There's no question about it.
Well, thanks, Brush.
That's my point.
Well, Matt, you made it well, and I, as a good host, amplified it, thereby cementing it in the minds of the audience.
Appreciate it, Rush.
You bet.
Who's next?
That was Cliff.
I'm sorry, Chris in Kansas City, Missouri.
You don't have to put Missouri up there sternly.
Kansas City, Kansas is a myth.
You just put Kansas City up.
Well, there is, but nobody goes there.
Chris in Kansas City, Missouri.
Hello.
Spoken like a former resident.
That's exactly right.
Hey, it's a great honor being on the show.
I just wanted to, you know, something that I was thinking about when you brought up the wage issue.
And it just seems to me that there's a labor surplus because of the immigration, the illegal immigration.
Well, see, they say there's not.
And what they're saying is that we've got jobs being unfilled.
We've got certain things.
That's just not true.
I mean, to say that Americans won't do a certain job, it's true at a certain wage they won't do that job, but if you raise that wage, they will.
And if you don't have a labor surplus, what's going to happen is that the wages for those jobs will go up, which is what the Democrats say that they want anyway.
And I just want to say one other thing is that Al Gore is a big watermelon.
You know, red communist on the outside or in the inside and green on, you know, green environmental, red on the outside, yes, yes.
Yeah, that's I once had a guy in the timber industry tell me that's what he thought the environmental movement was, a bunch of watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside.
Al Gore's the biggest watermelon head I've ever seen.
I can't believe anybody takes that guy seriously.
Oh, hey, I mean, he's the Fred Thompson of the Democrat presidential field.
I mean, they're just everybody just waiting.
And by the way, did you hear what Clinton said?
Clinton was asked if he thought Al Gore would get in.
And Clinton said, oh, yeah, I think he's going to get in.
I think you'll see Gorgon.
You shouldn't mention Fred Thompson and Al Gore.
There we go.
Again, Deedlebutton.
I'm sorry, folks.
People get passionate on this program.
I totally understand.
No, Clinton said he's got his own money.
He's got a lot of money, a lot of his own money.
And if somebody stumbles out there, somebody slips, then I think he'll get in.
Now, who is going to slip?
Who's most, and somebody will.
I mean, you know somebody will.
So he thinks Gore's going to get in.
So of the top-tier Democrats, you've got Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary Clinton.
You have Barack Obama and you have the Brett girl.
Who else is that?
Is that pretty much the top tier?
Or is there a fourth that I'm forgetting?
But you shouldn't even mention Al Gore and Fred Thompson in the same sentence.
Well, I'm talking about in the sense that there's Democrats unhappy with their field and Republicans are unhappy with theirs.
And Thompson, I mean, he's in a Bloomberg, was it?
Rasmus Apollo.
He's tied with Giuliani, six points behind.
That's within the statistical margin of error in, I think, a Bloomberg poll.
And Gore, he doesn't poll all that well yet, but he's the great watermelon hope.
But of Clinton, Obama, and a Brett girl, which of those well, you know, Hillary's not going to slip.
So Obama or Edwards, who's going to slip?
Edwards, of course.
Edwards, of course.
Okay.
Bill Clinton's theory is that that's when Gore gets in, is when one of these people slips.
Gore's got so much to lose by trying to run again.
Well, you can't factor the question of ego out of anybody who runs for president.
In fact, you've got to have a strong ego.
You've got to think country can't get by without you.
I think Gore could pick up the anti-Hillary vote, both the smart and the dumb anti-Hillary vote.
I think there's a pining away, especially the anti-war crowd.
Of course, once these soundbites of his get out there, any number of possibilities exist.
Quick, well, look, Chris, thanks for the call.
Susan in Knoxville, Tennessee, you're next in the EIB network.
Hello.
Mega Ditto's right.
Thank you.
I wanted to compliment you on your photo spread in the August edition of Cigar Fish and Auto.
Thank you.
I just got my copy of that a couple days ago, and I went through there.
They're not bad.
They're not bad.
You're looking good.
I appreciate that.
You're looking great.
And also, I turned to the back, and there you are again.
Is that, yeah, that's the cigar dinner, Black Tie Cigar Dinner with Schwarzenegger, Rudy, Marvin Shanken, and Michael Milkins in that picture, too, I think.
You hang with a high-class crowd.
Well, I accept the invitations.
Well, I can certainly understand that.
That's a fundraiser for prostate cancer, so it's well worth it.
The pictures that she's referring to in Cigar Fishing Auto is, I don't know, about a month ago.
Marvin Shankin has this feature in his magazine.
He calls himself the shot maker.
He's got this feature, golfing with Marvin or some such thing, and he sets it up with as many pros as he can.
He set up with Greg Norman.
He was in play with Greg Norman, and they needed to find a pro play with me.
And the two of us, my pro and myself, would oppose Shankin and Norman.
And we got Raymond Floyd, and we played at Raymond Floyd's new club and course down here called Ol Palm.
And I was shooting lights out on the front nine.
Shanken and I were both given 18 strokes against the pros.
And I shot a 41.
It could have easily been a 39 if I'd have just, and I was singing along putts, but it was a 41.
It kind of fell apart in the back 47, so I shot an 88.
Marvin shot a 98.
The shots were not being made that day that he was taking, but it was an absolute blast.
We all had dinner at my house the night before, got up and had lunch afterwards.
And that's the photo spread she's referring to in the most recent issue of Cigar Aficion.
I'm glad you referenced that because I'd forgotten it, Susan.
Quick time out here.
We'll be back and continue in just a moment.
Ladies and gentlemen, I erred in the last 20 minutes, and whenever I err, I find out about it, I correct it immediately.
We mistakenly said that the amendment to Deeport Criminal Illegal Immigrants was a Kyle amendment, was not.
That amendment was offered by Texas Senator John Cornyn, and it was defeated.
So, two of the three hours of broadcast excellence now in the can on the way over to the warehouse housing limbaugh museum artifacts.
▲
Export Selection