All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 20, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:04
August 20, 2007, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.
I just read a late arriving email here.
All right, greetings, folks, and welcome.
Great to be back with you after an exhausting weekend, I must say.
Not a whole lot.
Well, I got some rest, but it was at odd times of the day and night.
But nevertheless, here, raring and ready to go.
We've got broadcast excellence for three straight hours here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
A telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, is 800-282-2882.
The email address rush at EIBnet.com.
Mr. Snirdley, did you watch the Democrat debate yesterday more?
Well, you know, I didn't either.
I had to fly to Missouri on a family matter yesterday, and so I didn't, and I didn't bother watching it on TV.
But I'm fully briefed on it, and we got audio sound bites from it, and we will, again, share those with you, El Quico.
But there are other items in the news here of a little bit of lighthearted nature, some of them not so lighthearted, but this story is intriguing.
One out of five Norwegian criminals fail to show up to serve their sentence.
This is from the Eftenposten newspaper in Norway.
20% of criminals do not show up for their prison time, according to the Norwegian Correctional Services.
Prison authorities can do little but hope the criminals will eventually come knocking on the prison door.
Honest to gosh, that's what it says.
In fact, criminals sentenced to long prison terms are particularly prone to not showing up.
They're right.
This is classic.
I mean, the Netherlands, Norway, whatever it is, we're talking just Uberlift.
And they hope the criminals show up.
Do you know what the problem is, folks?
I go to page two of the story.
The dilemma facing prison authorities is that failure to show up at prison is not yet illegal.
Wait till the libs in this country figure that one out.
Failure to show up is not illegal.
A gauge of future economic activity inched up in July, indicating that economic growth may pick up slightly in coming months, despite turmoil in the housing market.
Interesting.
And by the way, you know, last week, and I've done this, I've issued this warning over several, several broadcast years of service to you and this country.
I've warned you of the danger of carrots.
Everybody who has eaten carrots has died within 50 years of doing so.
Everybody who's eaten carrots, well, 95% of people eating carrots have been involved in some kind of an accident within a year after eating carrots.
It's a big problem.
And look, from the Canwest News Service, consumers should not eat one brand of baby carrots sold recently at Costco stores because of contamination by the thing that causes fever, nausea, and vomiting.
It's Shigella.
This is from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
The Carrots are labeled Los Angeles Salad Company genuine sweet baby carrots, and they come from Mexico.
No, they're not from China.
No, no, no.
No, everybody thinks that poison carrots would be coming from China.
These are from Mexico.
But it doesn't matter where you buy these carrots or other carrots.
You're still in trouble.
This story is AP, and I love this story.
Family ties are the key to youth happiness.
So you're between the ages of 13 and 24.
What makes you happy?
Well, a worried, weary parent might imagine the answer to sound something like sex, drugs, and a little rock and roll, maybe some cash, maybe some car keys.
Turns out the real answer is quite different.
Spending time with family was the top answer to the open-ended question according to an extensive survey.
More than 100 questions asked of 1,280 people between 13 and 24.
This is a joint project between the AP and MTV on the nature of happiness among America's young people.
Nearly three-quarters of young people say that their relationship with their parents is what makes them happy.
Yeah, they're my foundation, said Christiana St. John, 17, a Haskrule student from Queens.
My mom tells me even if I do something stupid, she's still going to love me no matter what.
Just knowing that makes me feel very happy and blessed.
Other results, however, more disconcerting.
Of course, what AP story would not be complete without this next finding.
While most young people are happy overall with their way lives are going, there are racial differences.
The poll shows whites to be happier across economic categories than blacks and Hispanics.
I mean, even in a happiest poll, what makes you happiest, women, minorities, poor et al are the hardest hit.
Now, you might think money would be clearly tied to a general sense of happiness.
Almost no one said money when asked what makes them happy.
Now, let me sum this up.
All of the things that conservatives have been fighting liberals over for the last 50 years, strong family ties, controlled sex, religion, faith, parents, according to this poll, we're right.
And they, the liberals, are wrong.
And the old-fashioned things that we fought to save and they fought to destroy in the end are what make kids happy, secure, healthy individuals.
You know what I didn't find?
I read the whole story.
I didn't find one kid that said government makes me happy.
I didn't find one kid that said, yeah, my senator makes me happy.
I didn't find one kid, one answer here that said my congressman makes me happy.
And I didn't see anything in here about a village making kids happy.
Parents, yes.
Gods, yes.
God, yes.
Friends, yeah.
Sex did not show up that much in terms of providing happiness.
Now, this is going to be buried, but if it were not buried, this would turn liberal education theory and feminism, sociology, the Democratic Party platform, and MTV on their ears.
And they'll adjust this to these conservative fuddy-duddies who're right reality, and they'll start promoting religion, parents staying together for their kids, kids abstaining from.
Yeah, right.
I don't think we'll get that kind of promotion from them.
At any rate, I found that the whole thing just invigorating.
Because, you know, we got a sound bite from Hillary Clinton coming up here in which she says she's been fighting those people, meaning us, for 35 years.
And when I saw that, it got me to think, who has she been fighting and for what?
And I got to thinking, do we fight them?
And I think, yeah, we do, but there's a fine-line distinction.
For example, this program, this program is aimed at you, the people.
We conservatives engage in an intellectual pursuit.
We want you to be intellectually understanding of conservatism, be able to apply it, be able to learn it so well you can explain it and be persuasive.
In the process, when we are attacked by people like Mrs. Clinton, who admits doing it for 35 years, we will then jump to the defense of ourselves and others and point out things about them.
But the fine-line difference is that they are doing the exact opposite.
They are not trying to expand the minds of the opportunities of the people they want to vote for them.
They are trying to destroy their enemies.
And I say it's a fine line.
I wouldn't mind politically destroying the left, but we do it in much different ways.
So you have a story here about this, about childhood happiness or youthful happiness, and you find out that basic traditional values are what bring it about, especially in this day and age.
In fact, this poll actually doesn't surprise me, folks, given all of the pitfalls and the decay, the perversion, the destructive nature of pop culture and the way it's reported.
These were pretty heartening results, especially when you have the polling or the sponsoring agencies here, AP and MTV.
So in the midst, it's one of the reasons why I'm always optimistic.
I always think the future is bright.
In the midst of all this turmoil and angst and chaos and the perception that the younger generation is going to hell in the handbasket, which every adult generation always thinks, by the way, there are real signs of optimism out there when it comes, I mean, for kids to say what they said, for young people to say what they said here, it means they have a pretty solid foundation, a pretty solid understanding of what gives life its real meaning and, you know, real meaning in your life.
That's something that a lot of people never grow up to find, or they find it pretty late.
So I was encouraged by it.
We got a quick timeout.
We'll get started with the Democrat debate soundbites.
Your phone calls also coming up right after this.
Your guiding light, El Rushbo, Nobel Peace Prize nominee, national treasure, general all-round good guy at 800-282-2882.
I don't do this very much.
I'm going to make an exception.
I got the cutest email today from a woman named Maura La Piana.
She's a subscriber, Rush 24-7.
And her subject line was, I lost my husband to you.
I said, whoa, better read this and call the lawyers.
As I read it, turns out she'd married this guy for 17 years.
I think they've been married 17 years, and it's his birthday today.
She wanted me to wish him a happy birthday.
He used to be a big Democrat.
She introduced him to me.
Now that's all he'll do is listen to this program.
Which, Dino, it's a great decision, pal.
And your wife still loves you.
See, this is how this works.
So I just, I wanted to take a very seldom do we do birthdays on this movie.
Like we don't do over the back fence.
You lose your cat, call a local show.
Dog runs away, don't call us.
Also, half-hour news hour, the sketch last night is up at rushlimbaugh.com.
If you missed the airing of the episode last night, which, you know, they changed the air date and the times twice.
It was going to air Thursday night last week.
Then they moved it to Friday.
Then all the flooding and stuff happened to Hurricane News.
They moved it to its regular Sunday broadcast time.
It was 10 o'clock last night.
So it's up and running now at rushlimbaugh.com.
It gets a quick time movie format.
And it's about two minutes.
And it's hilarious.
All right.
International Herald Tribune, owned by the New York Times.
But this story has not appeared in the New York Times.
In fact, this story hasn't appeared.
We haven't found it anywhere.
Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, none of the major newspapers.
You remember, many, many moons ago, ladies and gentlemen, I told you the dirty little secret of the Democrat Party is if they win the White House, they are not pulling troops out of Iraq.
Headline International Herald Tribune, Clinton sees risks in rapid Iraq pullout.
Senator Hillary Clinton went out of her way Sunday to underscore the risks of a too rapid U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
indicated that a pullout might take up to 20 months, adding this is not going to be easy or safe.
She says we're going to have essentially troops in Iraq the first two years of her presidency.
Now, you might be thinking, why in the world would she say this now?
What in the worldwide does she still got to win the nomination?
This is not going to make the base happy, these kooks.
Well, number one, it hasn't shown up in the American media.
It is on Drudge, so it's out there, but it's in the International Herald Tribune.
The Boston Globe mentioned it without any details, didn't make a big deal out of it.
The dirty little secret here is that Hillary thinks she's got the nomination wrapped up.
She's already running the general election.
Nomination is hers.
Without one vote being cast, she's figured it out.
I also think not only just based on the things that she's saying, based on who she's talking about, I think she's concluded that Rudy is going to be the Republican nominee.
And I think she's already running against him.
I think she's just giving whistleblower time here to the opponents that she faces in the Democrat Party.
So she's out there now forgetting all about trying to woo the base because she's got it.
She's got the nomination.
This is in her mind.
All right.
To the audio soundbites.
I want to go back, play for you the very first question that George Stephanopoulos asked the Republican candidates two or three Sundays ago on their debate on his show on Sunday morning.
First question.
Our goal today is to get a real debate going among all of you, to find out where you stand on the issues, but also to figure out the real differences that separate you.
And in that spirit, here in Iowa, you've already been going at each other somewhat beneath the radar screen on the issue of abortion.
All right.
Now we have for you the Democrat debate was yesterday.
Here is a montage of all of the Stephanopoulos questions and candidate answers on abortion in yesterday's debate.
Keep in mind, none of these are repeated.
That's right, ladies and gentlemen.
There were no questions on abortion, and thus there were no answers.
For the second Democrat debate in a row, this was the case.
And of course, what would a Democrat debate be without the words Rush Limbaugh?
Here is, this was at Drake University in Iowa, by the way.
George Stephanopoulos said this to Senator Clinton.
Outgoing White House Counselor Carl Rowe opined on that this week.
He was on Rush Limbaugh.
Here's what he had to say.
There is no frontrunner who has entered the general who's entered the primary season with negatives as high as she has in the history of modern polling.
She's going into the general election with, depending on what poll you look at, in the high 40s on the negative side and just below that on the positive side.
And there's nobody who's ever won the presidency who started out in that kind of position.
So Stephanopoulos said, well, what is your response to this?
You know, I have been fighting against these people for longer than anybody else up here.
I've taken them on and we've beaten them.
The idea that you're going to escape the Republican attack machine and not have high negatives by the time they're through with you, I think, is just missing what's been going on in American politics for the last 20 years.
The reason why we're going to win is because we have a better vision for America.
We know how to bring about change.
And I know how to beat them.
So, yes, they're going to be driving up negatives and making all these comments.
Doesn't matter to me a bit.
Well, we went and I did a little research here, folks, and I found, you know, the Republican attack machine, quote-unquote, went after Al Gore pretty good in 2000.
And his negatives were not nearly as high as Mrs. Clinton's.
Then in 2004, the so-called Republican attack machine went out after John Kerry, who served in Vietnam.
And his negatives didn't score nearly as high as Mrs. Clinton's do.
By the way, the attack machine, as she calls it, is simply the truth squad.
All we do is get the truth of these people out there.
The thing about these Democrats, especially Mrs. Clinton, is when you call them on their facts and how they're wrong about things, they consider it an attack.
You know full well you wish there were an attack machine in the Republican Party, don't you?
I mean, have you not, have you guys, have you guys spent a lot of time watching Karl Rove?
He has been, he was on all three network shows yesterday.
He's just cleaning up after these people.
He was wiping the floor with these people.
I don't care if it's David Gregory.
I don't care who it is.
He's wiping the floor with all of them.
And you watch this and you say, gosh, where has this been?
Where has this kind of response to the Democrats been from the White House?
Well, I happen to know because they've told me.
Rove feels liberated now that he's resigning and will be out of the White House in a couple of weeks.
So even less than that.
So he's free to unload.
And then people say, well, why is he going after Hillary?
You know, it's the age-old thing.
If you focus your attack on Clinton or anybody, you elevate them.
You elevate their sense of importance.
And of course, you give Mrs. Clinton the chance to say, aha, they're really worried about me.
Why?
Blah, So people are speculating, why is Rove doing this?
In fact, here's AP, Deb Reichman.
Master GOP strategist Karl Rove won't let up in his attacks on Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton.
But the intriguing question is why?
Why?
That's the question.
How about what he's saying about her?
Are you not at all interested in that?
Why is he going after Hillary?
Do these people actually sit there and think we're just going to lay down and let Mrs. Clinton walk all over us?
Do they really think that's what it's such a fait accompli?
She is such the candidate of inevitability that why are they bothering to criticize?
Well, who would dare criticize Hillary?
So they're coming up with answers.
And one of the answers that they're coming up with is it's reverse psychology.
You know, keep in mind here, keep in context, how they think of Karl Rove.
He's the wizard of Oz, he's this master strategerist pulling marionette strings behind a curtain.
And so they're saying it's reverse psychology.
That they want the Republican apparatus, the attack machine, wants Hillary Clinton to be nominated because of her high negatives and because they think that she'd be the easiest of the Democrats to beat, of the top-tier Democrats to beat.
So they can't figure out why he's doing this.
How about to get the truth out about her?
How about something is just as simple as what it looks like.
If it's a duck, it's a duck.
Walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
We're not talking about Mrs. Clinton.
We're talking about what we are, in a sense, but what Rove is saying about her.
Gladly, ladies and gentlemen, making the complex understandable in a slight irrelevant error.
I just want to foreclose any nagging emails.
I said a moment ago that the half-hour news hour opening sketch was at rushlimbaugh.com in QuickTime format.
It's not.
It's Windows Media Player.
You still watch it, but I can watch it.
It doesn't matter, a hill of beans.
I sent it up to them in QuickTime, but QuickTime we don't use for streaming.
We found better luck with live streaming with other things.
So just, you know, I just, people, you see, I don't make too many mistakes.
Documented to be almost always right 98.7% of the time.
When I make a mistake, everybody harps on it.
Don't have the luxury like you people of learning from my mistakes and getting a pass.
When I make a mistake, bam.
Everybody zeroes in and wants to point it out.
Let's see.
Let me grab line two.
I want to go to, before we leave Mrs. Clinton here in the dust, we're not going to totally leave her, but got a question from Zimmerman, Minnesota from Ron.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.
Hello.
John Arvis.
Rush, an honor to speak with you.
Thank you, sir.
I apologize to you for our beacon.
You wait 17 years to hear from me.
I like that attitude.
I like that kind of confident bravado.
Thank you.
Hey, I heard Hillary say this yesterday, and I sent a chill up my spine.
Her disingenuous banter when she talks about she wants to work with both sides of the aisle, and she just got right up there and said, I've been fighting these people for all these years.
35 years.
Fighting these people 35 years, right?
It spoke volumes.
Well, I want to expand on this and tell you why she's doing this.
She's already concluded that she cannot be beaten in this primary.
And what she's doing, she's moving rapidly.
She is moving quickly to build up a solid and rational position, ostensibly reputation on national security, trying to distinguish herself from the others.
Hence this international tribune and Herald Tribune story.
We're going to be in Iraq for two years after she's president, she says.
Just can't get out of there.
The others are in a race to tell the base how fast they're going to get out and how they're going to do it and even what roads they're going to take out of there.
Wait till you hear the bite coming up.
It's hilarious.
So she's got the nomination wrapped up.
So she's campaigning now for the famous move back to the center business.
She knows that what kills Democrats in general elections is the position being taken by all of her opponents in this campaign and in the debate.
She's also going to run on health care.
She's going to do it all over again.
She knows that people want something for nothing.
She can convince them that that's what her health care plan is.
She'll say that she was lied to about the war, that it was fought incompetently, but that we can't pull out all at once.
We just can't do that.
She's going to try to put Republicans on defense because they'll be defending the Bush position, yada, And I guarantee you, she and her team right now are working on trying to neutralize the security issue.
The Democrat car, the hybrid with all these candidates in it, has gone off the cliff, as I keep telling you, on the subject of Iraq.
They've invested in defeat.
She's pulling back.
She has jumped out of that car and the parachute has opened and she's gliding gently down, well, as gently as she could glide in a parachute down to reality.
And it isn't going to help that some of our guys have been weak on security, certain aspects of it, such as the border.
That's where they are vulnerable.
So I think, as I said earlier, I think she's getting ready to run against Rudy.
I think that's what they think or who they think the nominee on our side is going to be.
And I think they want to.
So in the meantime, Rove is out there trying to alert everybody to just what her record is.
And by the way, her incompetence is the hidden message.
And the drive-by's just, they are just, nobody criticizes Hillary.
They don't know what to do with this.
This is unprecedented.
Well, you might say, oh, Michelle Obama and Mrs. Edwards are out there criticizing her.
But see, I finally figured this one out, too.
You can't hit the girl.
You just, you can't hit the girl.
For Edwards and Obama to go out there and criticize Hillary, she plays the victim better than anybody does, and she could make real hay out of that.
So they've got their wives out there ripping her.
But the drive-bys aren't taking that seriously because Hillary is the inevitable candidate.
So here comes Rove, and he unloads first on this program, then goes on to meet the press, then wherever else he went on Sunday and unloads with basically the same message.
And they're all out there saying that Carl Rove singled out Hillary Rodham Clinton for criticism, if I may be so bold.
He didn't single her out at all.
Each and every time he has been asked about it, including on this program.
And I'll admit something to you.
I hadn't intended to ask him about Hillary Clinton because I didn't think that I'd get an answer.
But we had the audio soundbite of the ad that she was running, accusing this White House of not seeing half or more of the population.
By the way, grab our commercial on that that we began debuting on Friday, Mike, because this I had the audio soundbite and had played it, and I asked Rove about it because the White House had responded to it.
So that's when he unloaded.
But he's asked about her each and every time.
Now, you might think it's a minor point, and you might say, well, he's smart enough to know he's going to be asked about it, so he's ready for it.
But he doesn't bring it up.
He is always asked about it.
We have put together a parody ad of Mrs. Clinton and this invisibility thing because the ad that she did run was just outrageous and wrong.
And that ad was a classic example of the Democrat attack machine.
So this is the way we explain it in reality to people.
Ha, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh.
Now, moments ago, I gave you insightful analysis on how Hillary is already in her mind, she got the nomination wrapped up.
Time now to run the general election.
Time now to move back to the center, try to get some credibility and rebuild the reputation on national security.
Meanwhile, the other guys still, they nowhere near winning a nomination, so they still have to appeal to the base.
And the question came up yesterday about getting out of Iraq.
And we have a little montage here of the candidates with their pretending to say that they can be the first and the fastest to get us out.
Listen to this.
When you begin to take the troops out, what are you going to do with the four or five thousand civilians that are left inside the green zone?
We would move them through roads in Kuwait.
We would move them through roads through Turkey.
Moving troops out cannot happen without careful planning.
We would have to take our troops out, plus the equipment, which we would not want to leave, plus what we do with the people in the green zone.
In a very orderly way, bring our troops out.
Orderly phased withdrawal.
Pull everybody out and turn to the Iranians who helped us defeat the Taliban.
That was Mike Gravelle.
He's always good for a laugh.
So Richardson's already, he's telling you, okay, here's the road we're going to take.
We're going to take roads out of there in Kuwait.
We're going to take roads in Turkey out of there.
But you hear the difference between Mrs. Clinton's answer and all of the others.
Now, Turkey would not let us use their roads to move in, if you recall this.
I don't know if they've changed their mind.
Maybe they'd let us use their roads to get out of there, but they may think once we got in there, we wouldn't stop.
We would stop.
And these people are just hopeless.
All right, now back one more soundbite.
Before we go to the break, we'll go back, grab number 11 here.
Stephanopoulos, this is basically a yes-no question.
We've seen all this turmoil in the markets over the last couple of weeks caused by the credit crunch and the crisis in the mortgage markets.
We saw on Friday the Federal Reserve lowered the discount rate for banks.
Should they lower rates for everybody else?
Yes or no?
Yes, I think it'll happen in September, but we also need more liquidity.
They ought to be allowing Fannie and Freddie Mac to put more liquidity in the market.
I agree with that, but we also need a home rescue fund for all the millions of Americans who are worried about losing their homes.
Well, I would say that there's no answer to that question.
Just follow the money of the people on this dais and you'll see a response.
All right.
Now, what's interesting to you about this?
Does something strike you about this question and the answers?
Does it ring your bell that nobody asked John Edwards about his $16 billion million dollar investment in Fortress Financial, which foreclosed on 34 or 38 New Orleanans, which is where he announced his campaign, where he had the poverty tour?
If Mitt Romney had invested $16 million in a company foreclosing on the homes of Katrina vixens, do you think he'd get asked about it?
Damn right he would.
Stephanopoulos didn't bring it up.
Neither did any of the candidates.
But we will.
Have you seen this story, folks, about artificial life will be created in three to ten years?
Some of the lines from the scientists in this story are amazing.
The AP writer on this is Seth Borenstein, and he informs us of dramatic scientific advances.
Experts, quote unquote, predict that we are three to ten years away from the creation of artificial life.
Although, quote, that first cell of synthetic life made from the basic chemicals and DNA may not seem like much to non-scientists.
It'll only be visible through a microscope.
It's going to be a big deal.
Everybody's going to know about it, said Mark Bedeau, whose company, PhotoLife, is working on it.
Creating photocells has the potential to shed new light on our place in the universe.
What arrogance.
He also said if we could remove one of the few fundamental mysteries about creation in the universe and our role.
Sorry, Mark, you might think you're going to do that, but that's one of the answers that we as humans will never get on this earth.
But it's even better than that.
All this is pretty heady, as are the predictions for these artificial life forms.
For example, these are cells.
We're going to be able to create artificial life, according to these experts, that will lock up greenhouse gases, that will eat up toxic waste.
We're going to create life forms that will fight all kinds of disease.
Now, Mark Bedeau acknowledges there are fears that artificial life forms may spin out of control, but he says, I get this.
When these things are created, they're going to be so weak.
It'll be a huge achievement if you keep them alive for an hour in the lab.
The idea of these new life forms getting out and taking over, never in our imagination could this happen.
Well, then, if you're only going to keep them an hour in the lab before they die, how are they going to eat up global warming?
And how many of them is it going to take if these things are microscopic?
You're going to have to have a whole bunch of them out there.
By the way, what is artificial life?
I thought that was a robot.
At any rate, I'll tell you what's amazing to me about this.
All of these resources devoted to creating cells in laboratories to cure what ails mankind.
While inside the human body, real life, supremely advanced by the standards these clowns are talking about, is routinely discarded.
It's called abortion without any regard for its God-given potential.
Narry a word from scientists about this.
So we think we're going to learn more about our place in the universe and creation in their laboratories as they create artificial light forms to eat up global warming and to cure disease.
These guys have any clue the natural disease curing systems in the human body.
They have the slightest idea what they are talking about.
This is an example of the arrogance and the vanity that I think we as human beings can exhibit all too frequently, particularly in areas like this.
Let's see, Bennington, Vermont next.
Brian, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Rush, a pleasure.
Yes, sir.
I was intrigued by your survey that you reported on the youth in the country and what they considered important in their lives.
Yeah, what makes them into happiness survey?
Exactly.
And I think it was Edmund Burke once said that tradition is a sum total of our knowledge as a people.
And which goes to the fact that family tradition is so important to us as a culture.
What I would like to see is I would like to see this survey expanded.
I would like to go to the black community.
Ask the youth in the black community, what is the most important thing in your life?
Well, they did.
What is it you would want more than anything else in the world that you don't have?
And I think it would be what they would answer would be a two-parent family.
Well, could be, but we don't know that.
It'd be dangerous here to speculate.
It makes sense that they would say that, given the status of single-parent families in the black community.
But this survey dealt with it.
Of course, with the AP involved, with the drive-by media involved, and of course, MTV, it had the obligatory, I don't care how much happiness there is out there, minorities ain't happy.
They just ain't as happy.
The blacks and the Hispanics, just not quite as happy.
Now, the way libs deal with this, folks, is to not figure out why the blacks and the minorities are not happy.
We've got to figure out why the white kids are too happy and do something about it.
It's not fair.
It just isn't.
Here again, we've got discrimination and what have you.
Happiness is now something that decides its relevance and its place based on race.
So the traditional liberal value, and they do love to have people equal.
Equality to them is misery spread around as equally as they can make it.
Hey, the first hour is in the can, soon to be on the road to the secret warehouse, housing artifacts for the eventual Rush Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.
We'll take a brief break here at the top of the hour.
▲
Export Selection