All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 6, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
August 6, 2007, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Man, oh man, this is unbelievable, folks.
This is unbelievable.
Well, I use that word too much.
It's not unbelievable.
It's totally believable.
It's just I got to come up with new words.
I use mind-boggling too much.
I use amazed too much.
Amazing.
I have here my formerly nicotine-stained fingers.
How's the granola bar?
I have here my formerly nicotine-stained fingers, a story from the New York Times, November 3rd, 2000.
Almost seven years ago.
We just had a story from Ron Fournier.
If you're just joining us here, welfare recipient, Medicaid, recipient just getting up.
We just had a story from Ron Fournier in the Associated Press and the headline, well, the lead of the story is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton running for president on her husband's White House record.
It's a strategy that cuts both ways.
I have here.
It's unbelievable.
Adam McGurney, the New York Times, November 3rd, 2000, almost seven years ago, headline, Clinton now running on husband's record.
Moving into the final leg of her campaign for Senate, Hillary Rodham Clinton sprinted from Buffalo to Manhattan to Long Island today, trying to do in New York State what Al Gore has studiously avoided doing across the nation, run on the record of the Clinton administration.
Looking fatigued and swinging bottled water to fight a dry cough, Mrs. Clinton disparaged Rick Lazio at every opportunity.
They're recycling even this story.
This is a running on her husband's record.
She had a paper-thin resume in 2000.
She's still got a paper-thin resume.
Is there any doubt that the drive-bys...
No, there is no doubt that the drive-bys are just mouthpieces for the Democrat National Committee.
Here's...
Here's more proof positive.
This is that Reuters story.
It's from Saturday that I was telling you about.
Here's the headline.
Congress recesses amid Democrat achievements.
I mean, this is nothing short of a spoof.
You tell a big lie, someone, you tell it often enough, somebody will believe it.
The telling part of this story, I'm not going to read the whole thing to you.
The telling part of the story is not what it says about the Democrats.
It's what it says about Reuters.
After months of being flogged for accomplishing little, Democrats who control Congress head into a summer recess, having passed several high-profile bills, from raging the minimum wage to bolstering U.S. security to expanding children's health care.
Raising the minimum wage, yip, yip, bolstering U.S. security, bolstering the Democrats?
President Bush, by the way, has shown us how to raise kids.
You keep them in detention.
Congress is a bunch of spoiled brats.
He made them stay through Saturday.
For this, for this to be credited to the Democrats for increasing security is an insult to the intelligence of any citizen in this country who pays even scant attention to what's going on with this.
And that's why I say this is simply the drive-bys as mouthpieces for the Democrat National Committee, the Democrats in the House.
Much of the Democrats' progress was incremental and out of the spotlight of the fights with Bush.
While those battles were raging, Democrats were able to plow ahead with bills they say will fulfill campaign promises to improve national security and help the neediest.
Can't handle anymore, folks.
Can't deal with not with not with this story.
On to the audio sound bites.
Go to the Kuk Fringe blogger convention that took place in Chicago.
By the way, the congressional leadership bailed on this Ron Emmanuel, Dingy Harry, and who, Pelosi.
They were supposed to participate in a Meet the Leaders panel on Saturday morning at 8, and they bailed.
They didn't even showed up because they had to stay in Washington.
The House was in session, and they had important votes.
But it didn't stop the presidential candidates from showing up.
Democrat presidential candidates showed up.
Some of them did.
I don't know how many, but they don't go to the Democrat Leadership Council.
They're avoiding all these moderate centrist, well, so-called moderate centrist Democrat organizations.
No, no.
Just was asked a question.
I sometimes don't think people realize the full scope and breadth of my talent.
Here I am in the middle of a brilliant monologue setting things up.
And in IFB here, I get a question from Mr. Snirdley, who would only ask the question because he's confident enough to know that his interruption of me will not take me off track.
His question is: is it safe to say that Mrs. Clinton is running on her husband's coattails?
No.
It's not how I would characterize it.
She's running on his zipper.
I mean, if you're going to run on the Clinton administration record, you're running on his zipper.
All right.
To the Kook Blog Convention.
This is Hillary Clinton.
We have several soundbites here.
We are certainly better prepared and more focused on taking our arguments and making them effective and disseminating them widely and really putting together a network in the blogosphere in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure institutions that I helped to start and support, like Media Matters and Center for American Progress.
We're beginning to match what I had said for years was the advantage of the other side.
You know, when I made that comment about the vast right wave conspiracy, I wasn't kidding.
What did I hear there?
She admits to starting Media Matters.
Now, I've told you this.
It's a Clinton front organization.
David Brock is slavish to Mrs. Clinton, and he runs the George Soros has got some funding in there.
But she set it up.
And the Center for American Progress, excuse me, John Podesta runs at a think tank.
He's a former Clinton chief of staff.
Now, the Center for American Progress just happens to be this independent organization that issued this report saying talk radio is unfairly balanced, that we need the fairness doctrine.
And of course, we all know what Media Matters is.
I mean, it's just a bunch of bought and paid for Clinton hacks.
And of course, the drive-bys don't tell us that.
The drive-bys report what they did.
They're an independent watchdog agency.
So she admits it.
Also, last Friday, I didn't comment on this because I didn't want to embarrass Mr. Deion Jr. any more than he'd already embarrassed himself.
E.J. Deion Jr., the Washington Post, wrote a column in which he started by saying, you may have missed it, but Rush Limbaugh celebrated the 19th anniversary yesterday, went on to talk about, you know, the achievements and so forth, and then proclaimed that this Kook Fringe blogger site is now the Rush Limbaugh of the Left.
Now, how many Rush Limbaughs of the Left have they anointed?
If you look at video of this convention, one of the things you'll see is a bunch of people sitting there disguised as empty seats, even during the candidates forum.
And compare what the bloggers do to what they're just grasping and strong.
Are just so beside themselves that they have failed to make inroads against me and others in the conservative new media.
But of course, when E.J. Deion Jr. picks it up and says Kuk Fringe bloggers are the new Rush Limbaugh, then of course the rest of the drive-bys echo it.
Here's Howard Kurtz, CNN Reliable Sources.
I would suggest that liberals here are doing what Rush Lumba did for talk radio 15 or so years ago, which is trying to seize control and make a connection with their supporters.
I'm here to tell you, after 19 years and these people still don't get what I do and how it happened and what my purpose is here.
My admitted purpose, I have countless times said this.
They still don't get it.
They're not even trying to get it.
Seize control and make a connection with their supporters.
We are running a business here.
We didn't seize control over anything.
Well, we may have a lot of power.
I mean, a man running the country here, but we're running a business here for crying out loud.
But it's all based.
It's all based on the insatiable thirst that they have to acquire the kind of power that they think I started this program seeking.
One more sound bite here before the break.
This is at the Kuk Fringe Blogger Convention in Chicago.
And it's the Brett Girl.
Here's one of the things he said.
The Democratic Party, the party of the people, ought to say from this day forward, we will never take a dime from a Washington lobbyist.
We do not do business with these insiders.
We're going to give the power in this government back to the people.
Senator Obama and I have already done it.
I have to run, take a break, but I just saw the other day the biggest single group of contributors to the Brett Girls campaign is trial lawyers.
If that's not a lobbying group, folks, I don't know what is.
Okay, we got one more sound bite here from the Kuk Fringe blogger convention in Chicago over the weekend, and it's from Hillary.
One of the moderators of this panel was a New York Times reporter, Matt Baugh, BAI as his name.
And after the Brett girl said, hey, we're going to take any lobbyist money.
We ought to all refuse to take lobbyist money, even though he's taking money to the trial lawyers and so forth.
The New York Times writer said, it's actually the second time you've made this very definitive statement about lobbying.
Senator Clinton, would you make a similar statement, or why would you think it's not a persuasive...
I don't think, based on my 35 years of fighting for what I believe in, anybody seriously believes I'm going to be influenced by a lobbyist or a particular interest group.
Now, you know, I've been waiting for this.
This gives us a real sense of reality with my being here.
Senator Edwards has really a very straightforward question here, which is, will you continue to take money from lobbyists?
Yes, I will.
I will, because, you know, a lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans.
They actually do.
Yep, NRA is a lobbying group.
She's right about that.
She got booed up there by the Kuk Fringe bloggers.
Look at, there's no way Edwards is going to stop taking money from lobbyists.
This comes up, all these insiders trying to make themselves sound like outsiders.
Edwards, a reformer, blah, blah, blah.
They couldn't survive without lobby money.
Even the new ethics bill.
The House passed this brand new ethics bill supposed to be insured against having $200 lunches and dinners paid for by lobbyists.
Oh, but you can still do it.
You know how?
You can still do it if it's a fundraiser.
What the hell else is a lunch?
If you call your lunch with a lobbyist to fundraise, you can still take the money.
There's certain things in politics aren't going to change.
They just aren't.
And there's, you know, one thing here, she is not that dumb to take up this place.
She knows anybody in their right mind running for office cannot answer this question.
Yes, I'm going to eschew lobby money.
Because you can't.
It won't happen.
Jarita in Laurel, Delaware.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
I just wanted to call you and let you know that there's some dedicated Rush listeners down here in Delaware.
We aren't all liberals.
And I want to tell you, we started listening to you 9-11, a little bit after 9-11, because my grandson had to go to AI DuPont in Wilmington the morning of 9-11.
And that's when we began really listening to radio, and that's...
And you've been hooked ever since.
Yes.
Yes, sir.
Absolutely.
I consider you the source of this worldly truth for myself.
I discount anything I hear on television.
I watch it for a laugh.
It is good fun.
But I do enjoy hearing you.
And I just want you to know I'm dedicated because I've been holding on for two hours on my cell phone.
I know.
I understand that.
And we were just waiting for the right moment to put you in.
And I thought following Hillary Clinton would help you stand out all the more.
Ah, yes.
Well, I do hope I stand out from her.
I would want to, yes.
I am amazed and astounded at the things I've seen in this country in the last, say, 10, 15 years.
We all are.
We all are, Jarita.
We all are.
We're trying to do something about it here so that we don't have to see it as often.
I hope so.
And I do want to say that I'm ashamed of the things that I hear said about Mr. Bush.
He's the head executive.
He's our president.
And the things that are said to me are reprehensible.
They are.
But let me tell you something, Jarita.
The one thing that I have learned when you listen to people say the things about President Bush that they say, understand something.
They're telling us far more about themselves and who they are than they are telling us anything about President Bush.
Take that to the bank.
It's great to have you in the audience.
I'm thrilled that you're there.
Thanks much.
Joe in Grand Prairie, Texas.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.
Good afternoon, and mega SUV Dittos, Russia.
Thank you.
I heard a caller earlier call you and talk to you about Michael Irvin.
I want to totally disagree with him and agree with you.
I think I listened to that speech.
I came home, brought it up on my computer again from the local newspaper that had it on.
And I could not be more impressed with what that man had to say and the example that he set, I think, for his children, for the children that were in that audience.
And I'm 70 years old, and I know in 70 years, I've made a few mistakes in my life, and I've been forgiven for them.
I can't say they've been as serious as Michael Irvin's, but we all make mistakes.
And I truly, truly believe that that man has turned his life around.
God bless him.
And I hope he continues to.
And I hope his kids that we're listening take what he said from the heart.
No notes, no nothing, just speaking for 25 minutes, totally from the heart.
I couldn't believe it.
It was a fantastic event.
And there aren't many people that can do that.
I mean, and not stutter around and lose their train of thought.
I mean, anybody can go out and try to talk for 25 minutes without notes, but there aren't very many people who pull it off and be cogent, organized, so forth.
It was incredibly inspirational.
There's not enough of that.
I agree.
Running around, especially the daily dose of media pap that we get today.
It was welcome.
Well, I'm glad you had that reaction to it because like we all make mistakes, the severity of the mistakes we make differs from person to person to person.
There isn't a personal life that personal life doesn't make mistakes.
So the question is, after you make one or a series, what do you do?
You overcome it, you learn from it, and do you try not to repeat it?
Or do you let it get you down and you let it beat you down?
Say, I'm worthless.
I'm never going to recover from it.
I'm never going to get over it.
I'm never going to get past whatever I did here that's caused people to think this of me.
And that's what he was talking about.
Because he felt that way.
He thought he killed his chances for the whole thing.
He thought it was over.
I know.
And there he was in there, and he was just trying to tell people, get up.
Well, you know, the one other thing that really impressed me about that speech and about the reaction, his wife and his family has forgiven him and his mother.
And by golly, if they could forgive him, so can I.
Well, that's pretty big because they're the ones that were touched personally by it.
Exactly.
Very big of you out there, Joe.
Thanks a whole bunch.
I appreciate it.
We move on to St. Augustine, Florida.
This is Holly.
And welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi, Rush from Aga Florida Dittos.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Did you know that Rush is on my top 10 list of favorite male names?
You beat me to it.
You beat me to it.
Okay.
I'm just getting a little disturbed with Newt lately.
He was at a conservative conference last week and said we were waging a phony war and we weren't winning this war.
And I think that just gives the liberals more talking points.
Yeah, I saw that.
I was when I saw it, I said, my gosh, he's echoing John Edwards.
Edward's out there saying it's a bumper sticker war, and Newt says it's a phony war.
I'm at a loss to explain it.
I have the same reaction that you did.
Okay.
And of course, he's maybe running for president, so he's looking for his own talking points.
But that just gives you a lot of things.
One of the things I think, put it in context, I'm aware of some things that Newt's been saying for the past, I don't know, three months.
He's really been ripping the administration, incompetent, not focused, and this sort of thing.
And he thinks the primary focus ought to be domestic agenda and rebuilding country in a number of ways, morally and spiritually, that sort of thing.
But I still can't explain it.
I mean, other than to tell you that it fits with previous criticisms of the administration and how he thinks that they're incompetent and screwing things up.
But I don't know.
In the middle of the surge working, I just, as the liberals were saying, it wasn't useful.
Well, we got another study out there, folks.
Another big-time study out there that men who get angry at work are rewarded and women who get angry at work are not rewarded.
And the angry guys make more than the angry women.
It just makes women madder.
So it's a vicious cycle out there in the workplace.
Add other factors, and the anger multiplies, obviously.
There's just nothing that can be done about it.
By the way, the spin on, I forgot to add this, the spin on Newt's comment about the war being phony.
The spin is now that he said he was taking it out of context that he was referring to the way we're waging the war, not the war itself.
Which sadly is not much better.
In fact, let's grab soundbites 9 and 10, because this is why whatever somebody says, the war is phony or the strategy is phony or whatever it is, in the midst of what's happening now, it raises question marks.
I mean, if you wanted to say this, say it six months ago, saying it in the middle of reports that the surge is working, which is precisely new strategy.
It makes people wonder what Newt or anybody who would say something like that is looking at.
We'll go to Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace.
He talked to these two guys that wrote the op-ed a week ago today in the New York Times that, of course, Times readers have not even read, apparently, though they think it's worthy.
Ken Pollock, Brooking Institution.
What did you see over there that led you to believe the troop surge might actually work?
You see in a few places in Iraq some very dramatic changes.
The one that everyone knows about is Anbar Province, where the Sunni sheikhs have flipped on al-Qaeda and Iraq and the other Salafi groups and are now working with U.S. forces.
Mosul, Iraq's third largest city, which at one point in time had required tens of thousands of troops just to keep the place from flying apart, was now mostly being handled by Iraqi security forces with only a very small American presence up there.
And elsewhere in Baghdad and the southern belts, the northern belts, we also saw progress, important progress on the security front and even some progress with local economic and political developments.
Now, we got one more bite on this too, and this is from O'Hanlon.
He was also on the show.
He's a co-author, Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow Brookings Institution.
Chris Wallace, so what can you add to that?
Particularly this question that I asked Secretary Rice about, which is sectarian violence, this argument that this is trying to provide some kind of circuit breaker in terms of sectarian civil war.
We have suppressed the sectarian violence.
We are seeing much more progress against the al-Qaeda and Iraq, the other Salafist groups, some of the extreme Shia militias, and that part is going much better because Iraqis, along with the surge, Iraqis are getting sick of the violence from other Iraqis against them, and they're getting tired of these extremist movements.
That does not solve the sectarian problem.
That's going to have to be phase two of this.
But the first phase is looking fairly good on the military battleground, at least.
Right, it is.
And that's the strategy.
So the strategery alteration has been good.
Because the Democrats are out there.
It's a political situation.
The political situation is a political situation.
It's just the political situation.
Here's a montage.
Let's go to Soundbite 8.
Carl Levin, CNN's late edition, a montage of his remarks.
And by the way, we have repeated nothing in this montage.
The whole purpose of the surge was to give the Iraqi political leaders the breathing space to reach a political settlement.
The surge has not succeeded.
That is not political progress.
Cautious about any political progress.
Well, the political progress benchmarks political progress between the Iraqis, the failure of political progress, the chances of political progress.
How do you produce political progress, political progress?
There's not going to be political progress.
It's political progress, a political settlement, a political surge, work out a political reconciliation.
Let's go back to Soundbite 7, which takes us back to July 24th on this program and listen to what I predicted.
It cannot be reported that the surge is succeeding.
So what we'll be focused on instead, ladies and gentlemen, is how the political situation is falling apart and not making progress and so forth.
So wherever the good news is, it's like the drive-bys of the Democrat Party find a way to avoid it.
But this is the worst nightmare is for this news to start trickling out for the Democrat Party.
10-4, good buddy.
So I suggested that they focus on the process, the progress, lack of progress, political progress, and so forth, just to keep the negative drumbeat going.
And the purpose of that during the recess here is to separate recalcitant Republicans in the Senate from President Bush.
That's what the Democrats are going to be trying to do throughout the recess, getting ready for the Petraeus report.
They're going to try to get these, people like Hegel, they've already got.
And Olympia Snow.
They're going to try to get more Republicans to distance themselves from the president and vote next time they offer resolutions in September to get the troops out by a certain date.
President has a veto-proof house right now, so whatever the Senate does may be inconsequential.
But that's what the focus is, the political progress.
No political progress.
The whole purpose of the surge assurance is political progress.
It can't be said that it's succeeding.
Chris in Woodbridge, Virginia, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, good to see you.
Hey, I just wanted to clarify what I think Newt's talking about when he talks about a phony war.
I thought I just did that, but go ahead.
And I wanted to base it on things that he's written.
He has a newsletter and that sort of thing out there.
And the phony war is, it's spelled P-H-O-N-E-Y war.
And it's a period during World War II, like from 1939 to 1941.
Hitler had occupied Poland and they were making their intentions known.
And nobody, everybody thought they could avoid war with Hitler.
And then he attacked France and the phony war, according to Newt, was then over and the real war had begun.
And he had written this in response to Prime Minister Brown banning his ministers from using the word Muslim in connection to all of the terrorist attacks that are going on in Britain.
I think that's Newt's point.
I don't think everybody has the context of what phony war means.
It's actually a historical term.
Okay, well, that's fair.
But the spin that I'm getting is that the phony war meant the strategy, not the war itself being phony.
Yeah, I think, though, on strategy or strategy or whatever, that it's the fact that we're often ignoring the real culprit being radical Islam, that we don't want to talk about those sorts of things, that people are, they want to destroy Western civilization.
And I think that's where it becomes a phony war and that we don't really face up to who our enemies are on a worldwide stage, not necessarily the question of the state.
Wait, wait, wait, wait.
Okay, now you're talking about something different.
We don't have this bite, but I heard Giuliani say yesterday in the debate that he listened to the Democrats and not one of them in their last debate ever uttered the words Islamofascism or militant Islamist fanatics, not even talking about who the enemy is.
The Republicans are, and the president has done his share of it.
He may not use the term Islamofascists.
Right.
But we all know who the enemy is that we're fighting over there.
I think if you're talking about political correctness in this country, yeah, there's no question it's going on.
And it frankly makes me mad.
Yeah, it makes me mad too.
I simply wanted to give context.
I think that it's more a historical term from Newt's perspective.
And putting it in context, I think, helps us understand it just a little bit better.
Okay, but it's still, how can I say this?
Because you people know I like Newt.
And I have great respect for Newt's brain and his intelligence.
But to come out and use the word phony, you've got to know how that's going to play into the hands of people.
You've got John Edwards out there saying it's a bumper sticker war.
And in the midst of the surge, we're going to come out and use that word.
It's an invitation to be taken out of context.
If, in fact, your explanation is accurate.
Dave on his truck in Indiana, burning up fossil fuels and polluting the planet, changing the climate at a boy.
Welcome to the program.
Thank you, Rush.
Let me tell you, it's an honor to speak with you.
Thank you, sir.
You were talking earlier about the bridge collapse in Minneapolis and that a lot of people seem to think there's no money for the infrastructure.
I'd like to point out that every single big truck on the road today that's registered in any state pays $550 every single year and it's classified federal heavy highway use tax.
That's above and beyond what paying road taxes for their license plates.
Absolutely.
I'm telling you, the idea that our government doesn't have enough money is a scam.
It is a liberal hoax.
They got more money than they know what to do with.
They got so much they can't count it.
They can't keep track of where it all goes.
This call for raising taxes to fix one bridge that falls, and then it tells, well, there's 70,000 that could fall tomorrow.
You know what I also laugh at?
Folks, we are such, as a society, we are such a bunch of children and kids.
Okay, so the bridge in Minneapolis, the I-35 West Bridge, does what it does, collapses.
The next day and the next couple days, newspapers in local cities all over the country and television stations are examining local bridges.
Hell, they did it here.
And a story here.
Two of the bridges spanning the intercoastal waterway could be deficient.
Yes, they are.
We already know they are.
We live here.
They're going to replace them by 2010.
They're structurally okay, but they're going to wear out.
So everybody gets caught.
Is my bridge safe?
Oh, no, is my bridge going to fall tomorrow?
And the news, and drive-bys dutifully comply with this panic and fear by going out and talking to all these people.
And of course, what's the answer?
From coast to coast, city to city, little town to little town.
Well, our bridges are, we think they're safe, but we don't have all the money.
We need to either repair them or even investigate them.
We do need increased funding.
And so worldwide, nationwide, every little newspaper, local television state, local radio state, the message goes out, government is broke.
Government doesn't have money.
The bridge may fall.
You may die.
And we can't do anything about it.
Aside from this bridge, can somebody tell me when the last bridge collapse was?
There are actually quite a lot of them every year.
Little tiny bridges that sometimes people aren't on them.
Sometimes.
When's the last time you heard of this happening?
When's the last time a bridge like this collapsed?
And don't tell me, Katrina.
I mean, that was a man-made disaster.
George Bush ordered that, so you throw that off the seriously.
When does this happen?
And everybody panic by the figure, should I cross this bridge or not?
I read the paper today.
DOT said, it's really deficient.
Oh, my God.
No money to fill.
What am I going to do?
Because I've got to get over to blockbuster.
Everybody just don't just, I get so ticked off at the way the drive-by media takes a singular event like this, makes it sound like it's a national plague or epidemic.
And of course, the end result is, we need more money.
And boy, we need more money.
Get it from somebody else.
As I reference occasionally, ladies and gentlemen, people say, Rush, are you sure about this kid's business?
I mean, you're really, how much of this is just for show and how much of it is just none of it is for show.
I had this story last week.
I really, I've had this perpetual fear ever since I saw it when I was a kid myself with other families.
We had this story out of Italy where this 61-year-old guy had still not left home, and his mother finally kicked him out of the house because he wouldn't pay.
He wasn't getting a big enough allowance.
She's doing all this.
61 years old still at home.
So the fear is, I believe, bankruptcy, poverty for me.
That's the fear.
Nothing.
Destitution.
There's another reason.
I don't know if you've seen this or not.
This is Slate.com.
Rudy Giuliani's Johnny Giuliani's daughter supporting Barack Obama.
There's one vote that Rudy Giuliani definitely can't count on in his presidential bid, his own daughters.
According to the 17-year-old Caroline Giuliani's Facebook profile, she is supporting Barack Obama, designates her political views as liberal, and at least till this morning, proclaimed her membership in the Facebook group Barack Obama, 1 million strong for Barack.
According to her profile, she withdrew from the Obama group at 6 a.m. Monday after Slate sent her an inquiry about it.
You see, if, with a capital I and a capital F, if I ever became a candidate for anything, I would also not be burdened with this kind of thing.
A rebellious lunkhead kid running around causing me all kinds of problem.
What?
I put my name in the ring for what?
Oh, no, I'm sorry, I don't know what you guys are saying.
Let me move on.
Scott in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Scott?
Scott?
Hey, you.
Yeah.
Thanks, Rush.
It's a pleasure talking to you.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Yeah, well, when football season started, or starting, I thought discussion and get your feedback on the induction ceremony this past Saturday.
I was glued to it for three and a half hours on a Saturday night.
It was probably one of the better ones I've ever seen.
Of course, I'm a sucker for those kind of things, but just really the substance of the topics.
For example, your Missouri boy Roger Worley and then again, Bruce Matthews and their Christian conviction, Michael Irvin starting off his speech with a prayer, a white man from Mississippi from the 50s being wheeled out due to his dementia, and Alzheimer's by three of the best black running backs in the history of the NFL.
It was so much.
It was so much to absorb, and it was amazing.
And I just wanted to get your feedback on what you thought of it.
I assume you've seen all of them.
I've always loved these NFL Hall of Fame induction ceremonies because I always find them inspirational.
I love football, and I've played it.
And people who reach the pinnacle in the game understand exactly what's necessary to do it.
I don't think people who have never played this game have no clue.
There's no way you could.
You know, folks, I was in the Astrodome once.
I was down in Houston for a Russian Excellence tour, and the Fortune versus were down there playing the Houston Oilers during Montana's heyday.
And Lee Steinberg, the famous sports agent, came and sat next to me.
He just casually observed, Do you know nobody knows how tough these guys are looking at the game?
Do you realize the average human being could not get up after one of those collisions, after just one offensive play, especially a running player by the offensive line star?
People have no clue.
They have no clue.
These guys are going through summer camp right now.
Two days in high school is brutal.
It is boot camp.
And they do it every year.
The Army does it once.
Now, veterans, it's a little different as they get older.
But no, I think that the stories these guys all tell about, this is not baseball.
This is not any other sport.
They only play it once a week because you couldn't play it more often than that and survive.
And even you'll see what happens to some of these guys later in life.
who have played a number of years.
The inspiration that these guys know and share because it's taken that and they've all needed inspiration from others to get where they've gotten.
And I'm a big believer in inspiration and speaking positively and motivating people.
And you can't succeed in that game unless you are motivated and have the ability to inspire and motivate others.
We're going to have some global warming news tomorrow, but let me tease the headlines.
Abnormally cold temperatures in Texas this summer threaten the cotton crop.
And from the Sunday Herald in, where is this?
Scotland.
Firms guilty of making fake green claims.
That's all coming up tomorrow, as well as whatever is worth talking about that happens between now and then.
I will look forward to it.
▲
Export Selection