All Episodes
Previous Next
June 13, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:26
June 13, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program are right, and they are right because a consensus of the American people have decided that my views are right.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh program.
The largest media audience in America today, Katie Couric Drools, salivates over the size of this audience.
By virtue of consensus, the American people have proclaimed me right.
Yeah, Rather is going after Moonvus.
Well, Rather's just unloading all this frustration that he's had ever since they broomed him out of there.
The thing about Moonvus is smart to promote all this.
I mean, this is just, Rather versus, what's her name, Couric, is Rosie versus Elizabeth Hasselbeck all over again.
You know, it's just going to create curiosity.
And, you know, you get the word out there that the CBS got a newscast that's dumbed down and tarted up.
You're going to have people, oh, I want to see what dumbed down, tarted up looks like.
So they may get some additional tune-in factor on that.
Greetings, Rush Limbaugh, 800-282-2882 is the number, if you want to be on the program today.
I have to correct another thing.
I was under the impression that Dingy Harry made his undocumented Americans remark yesterday.
It was yesterday that I predicted the way the terminology and the language is going on this, that Dingy Harry, or that somebody would say illegal Americans.
And then somebody had told me last night.
He said it on the Florida Senate today, undocumented Americans.
It turns out that it was on June the 4th, nine days ago, that Dingy Harry said it.
And I had not heard him say it.
But here's the sound bite.
And this is, you know, Dingy Harry's gone back and forth.
This long before he pulled the bill, this is when he was all for the immigration bill.
This week, we're going to complete that legislation, and we'll hopefully bring to final passage a comprehensive bill that will strengthen our border security and bring 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows.
There it is.
That's from June 4th.
I had not heard him say it.
Well, it's twice I've been wrong in an hour.
It's going to, it's, you know, Brian, you're a little smart alley in there at me, but you got a point.
I have been wrong.
He said, but see, you missed the point.
My facts and fact presentation is not audited.
It's my opinions that are audited.
And it's opinions when you're right about opinions.
That's what counts.
I mean, there are too many opportunities to make factual mistakes of people like you telling me things that are wrong that I don't check out and repeat.
And then I have to correct it and take the heat for it.
So this will not affect my accuracy rating at all because these errors were not errors of opinion.
Yeah, listen to this.
Listen to this letter from a subscriber to my website.
Hey, Rush.
It's from Glenn Dodd.
Rush, I was engaged with a youth last night in conversation.
Of course, he's brainwashed from years of public school education.
But anyway, I asked him about YouTube and if he ever visits there.
And he said, no, it's run by Republicans.
And then he asked me if I knew who paid you, who signs your paychecks, as if he had some huge revelation.
He was about to drop on me.
I said, I think it's EIB that pays Rush's paychecks.
And the kid said, nope, he's on Bush's payroll.
That's the story.
He told me that you're on Bush's payroll.
He seemed to really believe that you're paid by George W. Bush.
Unbelievable.
Just thought you might get a kick out of that.
Glenn Dodd doesn't say where he lives.
Just one correction for you, Glenn.
Next time the question comes up, your answer is, I don't get paychecks.
I get wire deposits.
And I signed them.
So that's the answer to that.
Federal deficit sharply lower.
Now, we all know why the federal deficit is sharply lower, but I love the way the Associated Press and the reporter Martin Krutzinger reports this.
The federal deficit is running sharply lower through the first eight months of this budget year as growth in revenue continues to outpace the growth in spending.
The Treasury Department said that the deficit through May totaled $148.5 billion, which is down 34.6% from the same period a year ago.
Now, this is where it gets interesting.
That improvement came even though the deficit in May increased to $67.7 billion, up 57.8% over May a year ago.
However, analysts attributed this big increase in revenues to the Treasury to the fact that the IRS was more efficient in processing tax returns this year, meaning more revenue was collected in April with fewer tax collections left to be counted in May.
I'm sure this guy is dead serious.
I'm sure this guy actually believes that that's why there are more revenues in April.
Does he not know that revenue is due in April, April 15th?
Not just that, but the first quarter estimated tax filers have to pay on April 15th, as well as their previous year's return.
So you give the credit to an analyst at the IRS for increasing tax collections rather than the tax cuts.
They just can't bring themselves to do it.
I don't believe, in this guy's case, I'll bet you he never even considered tax cuts as having or being a factor in revenue outpacing the growth in spending.
As the baby boomers begin to ease into their 60s, most expect to delay retirement longer than their parents or grandparents.
This is another AP story which the AP says, that's good because many can't afford to stop working anytime soon.
This is a news story from the AP where they then opine that it's good that the baby boomer is going to keep working because they can't afford to stop working anytime soon.
Two new reports portray aging boomers as better educated with higher incomes and longer life expectancies than the generations that precede them.
How can that be?
We're destroying the planet.
They also have fewer children.
They are less likely to be married, leaving them with fewer options if they need help in their old age.
That one child they had will be very valuable, said William Fry, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.
Fry is releasing a report that says higher rates of divorce and separation could result in greater financial hardship for aging baby boomers.
You know, I have my own theory about this.
I'm sure that there's an economic element to people continuing to work.
Social Security not enough for them because they have affluent lifestyles and they want to continue them.
And if you're able to healthfully still work, they're living a long time.
And I was talking to Bob Novak yesterday for the interview, upcoming issue of the Limball Letter.
And he's 76.
And I've followed Novak's career for 20 or 30 years, and he's always seemed to me tireless.
I mean, on television, CNN, and Fox, he's always there.
He's never, as I asked him, I said, do you ever take time off?
He said, I never take time off from my column.
He said, me and my wife, we have a house on the shore in Delaware.
I go there some, but I don't ever take time off from my column because I can do that from anywhere.
He said, but I don't even think about retiring.
I think, because he said he loves what he does, but I think if you retire, especially in the midst of loving what you do, you're just going to die.
That's his view.
I think that's at least some of a factor in baby boomers wanting to continue to work.
I don't deny the economic element is there, but the fact that people, those that do like what they do and are able to generate a nice income with it, and they're still healthy, why retire?
You get tired of playing golf after two weeks.
You get tired of being home every day all day for after two weeks.
So I think that's a factor as well.
Quick timeout.
We'll get back with more of your phone calls and other exciting stuff here in the stack right after this.
Don't go away.
We talked about the contra-attempts going on between Dan Blather, former anchor, CBS Evening News, and Les Moonvest, the CEO of CBS Incorporated.
You've got to hear some of these soundbites.
3, 4, 6, and 7 is, I think is what I want.
Yeah, yeah.
Let's start with number 3.
He was on Fox yesterday afternoon with David Asmond filling in for Neil Cavuto.
And Asmond says, now they say Moonvest calls your dumbed-down, tarted-up comments sexist.
Look, this isn't about Katie Couric.
It's nothing to do with her gender.
Anybody who reads what I wrote and what I said knows that that's true.
But I think Les Moonvest was dealing with that tarted up comment.
Do you regret having said that?
No.
I was asked my opinion.
I didn't bring it up.
I was asked my opinion, and I said what I genuinely feel, but it does not have to do with gender.
What he's trying to do is change the subject.
What is this excuse?
I didn't bring it up.
He's been hoping for the opportunity to say that for who knows how long.
So then Asmond said, well, what Moonvest says is that if CBS doesn't get a younger audience, quote, evening news will die, and that's why Katie Couric was put in place.
Well, it's his shop, and it's his business, and he made the decision.
David, he admitted it today.
He acknowledged today.
He said that in retrospect, it was a mistake to load up the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric with features.
He said it was a mistake.
That's why I said it doesn't have to do with Katie.
It doesn't have to do with gender.
It has to do with the corporate leadership.
And the corporate leadership has these pressures to deliver for stockholders.
It's all part of the system.
And Les Moonves knows about entertainment, but he doesn't know about news.
He said at one point he needed to have naked news.
He said at one point.
He was joking.
No.
Well, was he?
You tell me.
But he said it.
And he also said that if he had his way, blow up all of CBS news.
And in a way, he did that.
Blow up CBS.
The naked news.
You know, I always thought that Rather would implode someday.
I thought it would be on CBS.
But he imploded on Fox.
Actually, he knows that if he wants to get his comments out there, he goes on Fox.
I mean, he wants his comments to be heard.
So here, here's the next bite.
Yeah, this is the last bite, number six.
Asmond says, how would your evening news look different than what we have today?
If you were at CBS, how would you do it?
I would run hard with hard news.
I would see the newscast as a public service.
With the international situation being what it is, did you need to emphasize foreign news, emphasize important news, emphasize quality news?
I will tell you this.
If you put Oprah in front of me and Entertainment Tonight behind me, I'll win for you any market in the country.
Well, anybody would in that circumstance.
If you get Oprah Winfrey's lead-in and trash Hollywood talk, anybody can win in that circumstance.
Oh, this is too funny.
Here's Karen in Springfield, Oregon.
Hi, Karen.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Good morning, sir.
Hi.
I was going to be really snide, but I'm not going to be, okay.
Oh, darn it.
Oh, I know.
We were hoping you were going to be snide.
I love snide callers.
No, no, you don't because you rag on us then.
The only reason why I called was to tell you that.
I don't rag on callers.
Now, wait a second.
What show did you think you called?
I know what.
Now, see, you got us all titillated here.
What were you going to say?
Just don't say it snidely.
Mexicans are, in fact, Americans.
You mean the way they're being treated?
No.
Geographically and physically, geophysically, they are, in fact, Americans.
Canadians are Americans.
Well, now.
States is America.
North America, Central America, South America, Norte America.
Come on, you can't.
You can't.
That's it exactly.
But you have to be careful when you say stuff like that because then people think, oh, no, they're not Americans.
Yes, sir, they are Americans.
They're not Americans.
Mexicans are not Americans.
Yes, they are.
They are not.
They are not.
Okay.
What are they?
They're Mexicans.
They're born in Mexico.
Okay.
Canada, the United States.
They're Canadian.
Mexico.
How far do you want me to go before I stop naming Americans?
Go to France.
True, true.
No, just say, yes, sir.
You know, you're wrong.
They are, in fact, Americans.
They're Mexicans by nationality.
What's the point?
But geographically, they are in fact Americans.
Look, I'm intrigued.
I'm about to get snied here.
What is the point?
The point is you're wrong.
About what?
saying that they're not Americans you know you throw out you're defending Harry Reid is Is that what you're doing?
You're defending Harry Reid when he said undocumented Americans?
Undocumented.
I'm sorry to yell at you.
No, he's wrong.
He's wrong because, in fact, they are Americans.
Good.
They're undocumented American.
Okay.
No, true.
Is that or is that not true?
Just say yes or no.
No, it's.
I'll say no.
This is absurd.
This whole call is surreal.
See, I knew it.
I knew it.
See, just because I'm right and you're wrong, you're going to say.
You can pull that on me because we are not married.
And in this case, you are wrong, and you are so wrong, but it's funny.
You're very cute.
You don't think that's part of this?
Nobody would buy this.
Nobody would buy your argument.
Nobody be persuaded by it.
Nobody would understand it.
Well, you know, you may as well have called here and tried to sell me a left-handed baseball bat.
That's how absurd this is.
That's probably what some of our great hitters are hitting with is a left-hand baseball bat.
Left-handed baseball bet.
No, no, really.
Well, what's left-handed about a left-handed baseball bat?
Geographically.
Geographically.
No, if you think Mexicans are Americans, then you think there are left-handed baseball bets.
I want to know what is left-handed about a baseball bat that's left-handed.
Same people that use left-handed cigars, probably.
Oh, I'll tell you, it's the handles on the opposite end.
No.
All right, Karen, this has been an experience.
No, it's been, it should be illuminating and educational.
Well, it has been, but not in the ways that you think.
I'm sorry for you if you don't think that.
Oh, please don't pity me.
Don't pity me.
It has been a pleasure, sort of.
Thank you.
It has been an experience for me.
Wait, Karen, are you still there?
Damn it, I wanted to ask her if she's a Hillary supporter.
You know, based on the polling data we had earlier in the program, Wayne in Kansas City, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Well, hello there.
How are you doing?
Fine, sir.
Hey, Darrell Head from back regular KMBZ days doing those one-minute updates early in the mornings.
Yes, I remember those.
Thank you for reminding me.
Oh, those are great.
I had to figure out who this weird guy was saying this stuff, and it was hilarious so far off the wall, but it made sense.
That was crazy.
The guy just before me?
Before you?
No, I mean, you were.
You were just hilarious with your comments, your one-minute comments.
That's what I meant.
Back on KMBZ in Kansas City.
Correct.
Yes, yes.
Yeah.
Anyway, there was a guy a while back, and you were talking about Kansas City and the fact that nobody goes to Kansas City, Kansas.
And I guess you haven't been there in a while because that is actually now the hot spot of the area.
I haven't been there in a while, but you know, it's just a joke that Kansas City, Missouri.
I mean, I actually lived in Overland Park.
I know.
The western part of Kansas City, Kansas, though, is booming now.
They've got the Speedway out there.
They've got Nebraska Furniture Mart, the world's largest furniture mark.
That's booming?
A racetrack and a furniture mart?
Well, hang on.
The racetrack started it, and there actually is a lot of activity all the time out there at the racetrack.
But they've got Cabela's, which is, I think that's their largest sports apparel market out there.
They've got a shopping area out there.
I had no idea, but you still have to drive through most of Kansas City, Kansas to get there if it's on the western side of Kansas City, Kansas.
That's a fascinating definition of booming.
I'm glad you called out there, Wayne.
We'll be back and continue here in mere moments.
Hey, Johnny, got to redo that and put in their national treasure as well.
Welcome back, folks.
Rush Limboy, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Well, look at this.
Lewis is the economy is roaring.
Strong momentum carries the U.S. economy retail sales up significantly.
Consumers brushed off rising gasoline prices and slumping home sales to storm the malls in May, pushing retail sales up by the largest amount in 16 months.
The May strength was widespread with auto dealers.
I knew it.
General Motors began advertising on this program during this period.
Department stores, especially clothing stores and hardware stores, enjoying an especially good month.
And I love this next sentence.
The strong showing for retail sales caught analysts by surprise.
They'd been forecasting a more moderate rebound of 0.7%.
So they were only wrong by half.
Every month we get these economic stories, and every month the experts have been taken by surprise.
You would think responsible drive-bys would stop consulting these experts who were always wrong.
But no, they love the imprimatur of negativity.
I thought we couldn't afford anything due to gas prices, so this whole thing shocks me.
In today's installment of We're All Gonna Die and You Better Be Scared to Death About It, an aging weather satellite, crucial to accurate predictions on the intensity and path of hurricanes, can fail at any moment.
Plans to launch a replace would have been pushed back seven years to 2016.
In a letter obtained by the Associated Press, NOAA, the chief of NOAA, said the failure of the quick scat satellite could bring more uncertainty to forecasts and widen the areas that are placed under hurricane watches and warnings if the satellite faltered.
And it could do so at any moment.
Experts estimate that the accuracy of two-day forecasts would suffer by 10%.
Three-day forecasts would suffer by 16%, which could translate into miles of coastline and the difference between a city being evacuated or not.
We could go blind.
I mean, it would be significantly hazardous, said Wayne Salade, emergency manager in Charlotte County, Florida, which was hit hard by Hurricane Charlie in 2004.
So the hurricane, we could fail at any moment.
We could fail at any moment.
And we're going to die because we won't know exactly where the hurricanes are going.
Here is Matt in Suffolk, Virginia.
Glad you waited, sir.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Yes, I wanted to hear your comment on a thought that I had regarding whether or not if Hillary does get the nomination and say Barack Obama is not selected as her running mate, she's going to have to answer to the fact that she did not select, and this is in the black community, the black vote viewing it through the Democrat race prism.
She'll have to answer as to why she did not select Barack Obama.
I think his ticket's written.
Well, it depends.
If Barack Obama stays in the race and gives her a tight race, and that race has divided the party, and she doesn't pick him, then deep doo-doo.
But if he's out of the race early, like if he slips in September, October, and is not in the final mix all the way to the end of when the process is concluded, there'd be no reason to put him on there unless she makes a calculation that it'll help out.
But your scenario is true if it goes down to the wire between those two and is really close, and then she doesn't choose him as the VEEP.
There'd be some people that might say that, well, I thought Clintons were the first black president and co-president and racism.
But the thing you have to understand is the Democrat Party and the drive-by media, they're not going to ever accuse those people of doing anything out of racial reasons.
There is no racism in the Democrat Party.
They're not bigoted.
They're not prejudiced or any of that.
So it'd be tough to make it stick.
If you look at it from the national media standpoint, but I'm looking at it more from the black vote, the black perception.
Well, he's not getting a majority of the black vote right now, is he?
He may be getting it now.
I think Hillary is, that's what, yeah, I think he is.
That's one of her areas of concern.
I'm not familiar on that breakdown of the most recent polling data.
But let's say, you know, let's consider your point valid.
You still have to say, are they going to abandon a group of people that votes 90% for the Democrat candidate for president every year?
Are they going to abandon that party and vote for Republicans just because Barack Obama wasn't chosen as the VEP?
That's anybody's guess.
Or possibly not vote at all, that whole chestnut of I won't vote.
Frankly, I don't think the Democrats care about black perception.
I think they've been taking black voters for granted for so many years that they just assume they're going to be there because of what I just said.
They know that black Americans are never, ever going to vote for Republicans, no matter what.
So I don't think Democrats even worried about the black perception.
All it would take, you have to understand something, all it would take is for Mrs. Clinton to have a little powwow with the Reverend Jackson, the Reverend Sharpton, and tell them, look, you guys have prominent roles, maybe not in my administration, but you're going to be factors here.
I don't want you to take this personally.
This is not about race.
And they'll throw Obama overboard and let him come back and try to win it on his own in four or eight years, depending on what happens to her in her own presidential race.
But, you know, they're going to far more value their position at the table of power in the Democrat Party or with a Clinton administration than they will want to align themselves with a guy that did not win the Democrat primary.
I mean, for the most part, Sharpton's already thrown Barack overboard.
We've documented that on this program.
So nice thought, but I don't think that your theory is going to transpire.
This is Elaine in Alverson, Pennsylvania.
I'm glad you called and waited.
Welcome to the show.
Hi, Raj, first-time caller.
Thank you.
I have two things I'd like to talk to you about briefly.
Yes, ma'am.
One is Bush's legacy, and the other is Hillary's planned redistribution of tax.
Redistribution of wealth.
Well, yes.
Via increased taxes.
Okay, which one do you want to start with?
Well, we'll start with Hillary.
I just want to know why would people still vote for her knowing that she has promised to raise our taxes?
Because she's saying she's only going to raise taxes on the rich.
She's only going to take the profits of big oil.
The Democrats have played the class envy card for years and years and years, and it doesn't hurt them.
Well, that's arguable.
It hurts.
I think it does in presidential elections, frankly.
But she's got problems in the presidential side, as we've documented in polling data here.
But I do think Walter Mondo talked about raising taxes.
He went down to defeat.
Edwards is talking about raising taxes.
They all are at this stage to get the nomination.
But you know that those who are very rich, they have a loophole, and that is the offshore accounts that they maintain.
We don't talk about the offshore accounts.
Okay, I hear you.
There is no loophole.
Believe me, there aren't any loopholes for the rich.
But see, you have to, let me try to explain this to you.
When the Democrats talk about raising taxes on the rich, they're talking about people who earn income by having a job, and they get paid for it, and their wages are $200,000, $300,000 a year.
The people you are talking about are the wealthy who do not earn income in the form of having a job.
Their income comes from capital gains, the growth of their investment portfolios, and there's not a wealth tax in this country until you die.
There is a wealth tax when you die, but that's on everybody.
But there is an income tax, and the purpose of the income tax is to prevent people from accumulating true wealth.
You just, with the level of taxation in this country, accumulating true wealth is a really, really difficult thing to do if you're going to work for somebody else.
So raising taxes on the rich is actually a misnomer because the way the Democrat voter interprets that is raise taxes on multi-millionaires and billionaires and make them pay their fair share.
And their tax rate, capital gains doesn't change, it's 15%.
Some of them are invested in tax-free municipal bonds.
You can have an investment portfolio of $25 million in tax-free munis.
And you can, if you elect to, at current prices for these tax-free municipal bonds, he'll throw off tax-free $2 billion a year for you to live on.
Really?
And it's not taxed.
The vast majority at one time of Ross Perot's big billion portfolio was tax-free munis.
You buy these bonds, and there are all kinds of people who have that kind of wealth.
Well, all kinds of people that do have that kind of wealth invest.
Some of them are very conservative.
A conservative investment is in tax-free municipal bonds because there's no growth there.
You're just generating an income stream for yourself.
You go to the equity markets, buy stocks and so forth.
You're putting your money at greater risk depending on the stocks that you buy.
You can buy high risk and you can buy low risk, be very conservative with it and be patient.
But there's any number of ways that the truly wealthy will not pay income taxes.
And it's income taxes that Democrats are talking about raising.
And that's on the vast majority of the American people.
This term rich is just bandied about to psychologically affect the middle class and make them think that all these truly wealthy people are going to get soaked, and they never do.
Well, I appreciate that explanation because I wasn't thinking of it on earned income.
So that you've explained that.
Yeah, even if they raise the capital gains rate, it's still going to be less than what the income tax rate is.
That's true, too.
All right.
What was the other question?
Bush's legacy.
Yeah, how can President Bush, his legacy might be as the president who brought about our demise as a superpower with this immigration bill?
If it happens, it'd take a while for that to occur.
But he clearly wants this to be his legacy.
He wants this to be his domestic legacy.
He wants the attempt to normalize the radicals of jihad in the Middle East to be his foreign policy legacy.
You know, it's tough to tell what presidential legacies are going to be.
You really can't trust the immediate writers of history.
They're just today's journalists.
And today, those journalists are predisposed to despising Bush.
So he's not going to have a decent legacy until people who are not yet born yet consult history and measure what Bush did versus things happening 50 years from now, 30 years from now, especially in the foreign policy area.
In that area, he has a chance, depending on this all, he has a chance to go down in a truly great place.
There have been very few presidents who have attempted to seriously move American policy in the foreign policy area.
Clinton never did.
Clinton was a status quo.
Clinton was just take things that come, don't do hard things and rely on high approval numbers to be the legacy.
You can see he doesn't have one other than Monica and impeachment.
And his whole existence since then has been to try to rewrite a new legacy and the drive-by media is helping him.
His true legacy won't be written until after these current bunch of sycophants in journalism today that write these legacies are long gone.
People that are not born today who have no personal stake in Clinton's success will take a stab at it and it'll be more accurate.
May never know because we're not going to be around long enough to know what the genuine legacies of these guys are.
We're going to have to assign them legacies within our own context here.
The fact that we were alive at the same time they were.
And sometimes the things they do as presidents take a long time to come to fruition.
They don't happen overnight, both domestically and internationally.
I'm a little long here.
I've got to take quick time out.
We'll be back.
Much more straight ahead.
Well, here we are.
We're going to violate one of the cardinal rules of this program.
You never, ever take a caller twice in one day.
Never take the same caller twice one day.
Try not to ever take the same caller ever again.
But certainly not in the same day.
We're going to, since I can do it because it's my show, we're going to make an exception to this rule.
We've got Karen from Springfield, Oregon back, who I wanted to ask one more question, but she had hung up.
But you only are doing this because I am like the most excellent caller.
Right.
Thank you.
Okay, so the question, this is a woman who said Mexicans are Americans, and Canadians are Americans, and Costa Ricans are Americans, Brazilians are Americans.
And so I wanted to ask you, based on your thinking and your logic on this, are you by any chance supporting Hillary Clinton?
No.
I'm wrong then on that title.
Now, see, this will affect the opinion on it because my opinion was that you would write in there the crop of women that were supporting Hillary.
No, there's also a lot of men that also support her, but not as many as you think.
Too many bad memories there.
She only had this likability factor.
She's got a likability problem.
There's no question about it.
Well, listen, I'm sitting here holding my left-handed bat as I'm sure you're holding your big cigar with your left hand, right?
No, I never do a cigar.
Well, not doing a show.
A cigar is in my right hand.
Actually, no, I'm not going.
At this point, no, I'm not going to.
Well, who are you?
Boy, if I had to vote for a Republican, it would probably be Ron Paul, right?
Well, I was.
Okay, the opinion audit will not be affected by this answer because you've fulfilled the reason that I offered the opinion.
That's interesting.
But, you know, I like Barack Obama, but it's way too early, isn't it?
Not for the passionate.
Well, for the thoughtful.
Well, and that's what I'm saying.
You know, that's definitely you.
You think, and the things you come up with sometimes, but you think.
All right, I want to move on.
Karen, I have to go.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Thanks again.
We got Mike in St. Cloud, Florida, who agrees with Karen.
Thank you, Mr. Snoogley.
Mike, welcome to the program.
Rush, I've been trying to call you for 20 years.
I finally get through.
I tell you what, there's one thing that I've got to say, though.
My first call, I've got to disagree with you on something because the lady's right.
Spanish people from Mexico are Americans.
They're Mexican-Americans.
They're just not U.S. citizens.
And the thing about it is that we keep pushing it and pushing it and pushing it.
We're going to drive that block of people away from our conservative thinking because the majority of those people are conservative.
They are not.
Not the ones we're talking about.
The ones that get to the point.
But you're talking about a fraction of them, Brush.
No, they come in.
No, they vote Democrats.
The majority of those, because I was born and raised in Texas.
And most of the majority of those people that came over and raised their children and are now American citizens are conservative.
History doesn't bear this out.
Simpson Mazzoli, 86.
You track political affiliation with those who became citizens and voted and registered.
It doesn't track.
You've got to look at it all the way back.
But anyway, wait a second.
We got 20 seconds.
We got 20 seconds.
Besides all that, is it worth breaking the law and allowing the law to be broken and bringing in under educated in order to get voters for your party?
No, I'm not saying that either, Rush.
I'm just saying that we're picking on the wrong people.
No, we're not picking on anybody.
We're not picking on anybody.
This is not what this is about.
We're trying to preserve the future of the country as we inherited it from our own parents.
Back in just a second.
As always, my friends, it was a blast.
It was a gas.
So we'll do it all over again.
Eagerly look forward to it.
We'll start prepping it even now, my friends.
▲
Export Selection