All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:16
October 3, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Hang on, this late arriving show prep here.
Okay.
I think we have to do a global warming update in this hour.
So grab Ball of Fire by Al Gore.
Yeah, we got a lot of stuff here.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
It's Rush Limbaugh.
This is the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
It's great to have you with us.
The telephone number is 800-282-2882.
If you would like to join us, the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
One of the things that continuing here for just a second on the left's attempts here to get both feet back on the ground in this smear that has bombed out.
Just to review.
This past Monday, Senator Reed goes on the floor of the Senate, reads a letter that he has written to the CEO of Clear Channel Communications, the syndication partner of this program, asking them to demand that I apologize and get spanked or whatever for being outrageously critical of soldiers who are serving in the military but disagree with the president's war policy because I call them phony soldiers.
Did no such thing.
Two words that they have now amplified into hundreds and thousands of words where they have interpreted my meaning, interpreted my thoughts.
They have accused me of falsifying transcripts.
They have accused me of all kinds of things.
Two words, phony soldiers, has led to a smear that has been going on basically here for a week because the original incident happened one week ago today.
So Senator Reed asks all the senators in the Senate sign his letter to the CEO of Clear Channel.
41 senators sign it.
Not all the Democrats even signed it.
He sent the letter to the CEO of Clear Channel Communications, who replied late yesterday afternoon, basically saying, Senator Reed, get over yourself.
Another defeat for Senator Reed could only get 41 senators on this.
The House resolution that was drafted Monday to condemn me has, according to news reports that I've seen, been moved to the back of the burner.
The Republicans, led by Jack Kingston, the House, have their own competing resolution praising me if the Democrats do bring this forward.
So what's happened here?
They're just trying to take attention away from the disaster that was their Petraeus ad, the Betraeus ad, moveon.org grant.
Backfired on them big time in every way possible.
It backfired on them.
They had to pay the difference in the rate cut they got from the New York Times.
New York Times had to admit that they finagled their rate cut for this group, making it sort of an in-kind contribution.
General Petraeus' approval rating shot up to 61% after the ad.
The Democrats in both the House and the Senate called him a liar to his face, essentially, before he even testified in his report.
The whole thing blew up.
So it was time to divert attention from that and try to regain the high ground on their supposed appreciation for the troops.
So here comes my use of the term phony soldiers when I was referring to genuine fraud, fake, phony soldiers.
And they misinterpret that on purpose and tell people I was talking about legitimate heroes who just happened to disagree.
That has fallen apart because it's patently absurd.
It's one of the biggest lies ever been told about what I said.
So now people are starting to examine the timeline.
How could he have been talking about Jesse Macbeth, they're asking, when he didn't mention Jesse Macbeth for two minutes after saying phony soldiers?
Well, the previous day, I did a morning update on Jesse Macbeth.
That was recorded on Monday afternoon.
These people now want to get caught up in what was in my mind.
I'll be glad to tell you what was in my mind, but you can't because you don't know.
When I had the caller on the air and he was talking about these kinds of frauds, I said, yeah, phony soldiers with Jesse Macbeth right in my mind because the morning update had just been recorded two days ago and it ran the previous day.
And we had learned about a lot more phony soldiers in the research of putting that thing together.
Then we learned about the ABC news program on Monday night where they did a story on Macbeth and phony soldiers and so forth.
It's all over the place.
Of course, I was thinking about multiple phony soldiers.
They tried to say he said Macbeth, but he said plural and soldiers.
So he's making it all up.
Then they went to the timeline, which I just discussed.
They were trying to say that the timeline doesn't fit Limbaugh's explanation.
This, when I say a Stalinist-like, this is exactly what I mean.
The timeline is not relevant here.
Timeline has nothing to do with this.
The content has everything to do with this.
How can I defend something they say I didn't say?
Or something I didn't say that they say I said.
I mean, the whole, everybody that's on their side is simply once again trying to divert from all this, and there's no need to divert from it because the central point here is, what did I say?
What was the content?
The timeline is not relevant unless they want to try to make me out to be the liar.
They are the liars.
They are the frauds, and they know it full well.
Senator Reed and all of the senators that signed the letter know it.
And all the House members that denounced me on the floor of the House simply accepted a blatant lie.
And now to cover their acceptance of the lie, they're trying to say, Limbaugh is still fudging on this timeline.
Timeline's irrelevant, even though the timeline holds up.
So it's the content here that's important.
I say two words, they amplify this to hundreds and thousands of words to say something I didn't say.
Then they get into my head for me and say what he thought.
And then this is what he meant.
And of course, the willing accomplices and the drive-bys that reported this duly accepted the premise without challenge, without question.
A couple of them did call us over time.
So you have a very interesting situation.
We've reached a new day when interpreters are allowed to determine the meaning of words spoken by others.
What happens with that is the loss of meaning.
If watchdog groups, whom nobody seems to care to verify their authenticity or who the hell they are or what their agendas are, Byron York has a piece.
I'm going to read the last paragraph of his piece.
I'm going to have to print it out.
Wait till you hear who some of the staff at Media Matters for America are and for whom they used to work.
We know Mrs. Clinton admitted to starting the organization.
We know it's a Clinton front group.
We know what its reason for existence is.
And it's, as far as she's concerned, probably doing a bang-up job.
But the timeline and all this that they keep focusing on is simply now once again to divert attention to the fact that they have blown the story of the content of what I said.
The blowback is starting to get to them.
And now even their drive-by accomplices are starting to get tired on cable news networks of having to report this.
Can't we, what was this, Limbaugh?
I mean, why is the Senate condemning a private citizen for?
Why can't the Senate and the House start working on getting us out of Iraq?
Well, I'll answer that.
They have been trying.
55 different resolutions have been offered.
They have failed.
Yet, supposedly overwhelming numbers of the American people want us out of a rock.
That number is true.
70%, 60%, whatever it is percent want us out.
How come they can't get it done?
And because they can't get it done, they have angered their lunatic fringe even more.
Lunatic fringe expected the process to begin in February after they were installed in charge in the House and Senate in January.
And they've tried and they've tried and they can't get it done and money keeps getting appropriated for the war effort.
Bush keeps skunking them and their fringe lunatic base is simply fit to be tied.
So guess what's time to do?
Distract from their failures.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi need to get the heat off them.
They know that the lunatic fringe despises me.
So get this false charge ginned up, this smear, and the lunatic fringe, who doesn't care about the truth anyway, jumps right on it and then not only forgets the failures of Reed and Pelosi, they get all excited and happy that Reed and Pelosi are finally taking it to Limbaugh.
He's been getting away with too much for too long.
But the whole thing's built on balsa wood.
The whole thing is built on just a deck of cards that are that are transparent.
It's a flat-out smear and lie as anything I've ever seen is.
This is the testing grounds for the 2008 presidential campaign playbook.
There will be other such hits like this on me and others from now through the election.
And if they win in 2008, these people at moveon.org and Media Matters for America, who have, in fact, many of them previously worked with Mrs. Clinton.
One of them is Sidney Blumenthal's son is at Media Matters for America.
And Sidney Blumenthal was, I think his name is Max.
And Sidney Blumenthal was Mrs. Clinton's henchman in the White House organizing all these investigations and hit pieces on Mrs. Clinton's enemies.
So what will happen if they win the White House in 2008 is that all these people that have previously been with them and are new to the force, learning how to investigate, learning how to trump up charges, will be given positions in government where they will then be able to conduct investigations on the part of the government, not just little groups out there.
Official investigations on part of the Clinton administration against whoever the Clinton administration decides needs to be investigated.
And I use the word investigate lightly.
I use the word smear would be more accurate.
Who was Mrs. Clinton once smeared when she's president?
This is a little cottage industry, a training exercise, if you will, for people who will eventually be appointed by her to positions of power in the federal government.
So that's what this is really all about.
It isn't about phony soldiers.
It's about a smear.
It's not about the timeline.
It's about the content and the techniques that these operatives use, hiding under the notion that they're nonpartisan.
They're simply trying to get the facts of things out.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
They are partisan hacks bought and paid for by Mrs. Clinton and through shell organizations such as George Soros has set up.
And that's who they are.
It's a Democrat Party operation.
And that's why there's total unity.
Whenever there's a smear in a lie, that's why they don't question it because it doesn't matter whether it's true or not.
The smear and the attempt to destroy and discredit people that might get in her way are what this has always been about.
And it will continue.
They'll refine their techniques.
They'll refine their tactics.
They will try to learn where they went wrong on this.
They will not learn the main lesson.
Don't try to tell somebody that what somebody said was a lie when it wasn't.
They'll continue that theme when the area is a little grayer, but they'll have to pick and choose their targets.
Well, people who do not have a microphone three hours a day to deal with it, such as Scooter Libby, for example.
Give you any number of examples of people who do not have access to their own microphone or internet page or whatever to deal with this stuff in a protracted and detailed way, will be future targets, as well as those of us who do have microphones because we are perceived to be in the way of the coronation of Hillary Clinton in January 2009.
We'll be right back and continue after this.
I just check the email here during the break.
And some people think, you know, Rush, are you sure you haven't been talking about this too long?
Is it maybe something that's going to be your head a little bit?
I mean, bring Hillary Clinton into this and to say that he's out there trying to destroy anybody who gets in her way.
And so, see, this is a problem when you say things to people like, they don't want to believe that that kind of thing is possible in our civics 101, to them, political system.
Yeah, I think it's totally possible.
And I can give you some evidence for this, ladies and gentlemen.
Mrs. Clinton helped found Media Matters for America to deal with the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Do you know any liberals who deal with the vast right-wing conspiracy by debating us?
Taking us on the arena of ideas.
No, it's all about smears and character assassination, destruction, and discreditation.
Always has been.
But what did Mrs. Clinton do long before she founded Media Matters?
Does anybody remember the term bimbo eruptions?
Mrs. Clinton managed bimbo eruptions.
We were told that Betsy Wright managed bimbo eruptions, but we've since had the Don Van Netta and a book, there were two Clinton books that came out.
One of those books made it plain that Mrs. Clinton managed the bimbo eruption war room.
Now, what were bimbo eruptions?
I mean, I realize some of you are new to the program and maybe new to caring about this, and you might not have been paying attention or old enough in 1993, 94, 92, the campaign, to be familiar with the term.
What were bimbo eruptions?
Bimbo eruptions were women with true and unfavorable stories about Mrs. Clinton's husband's unethical behavior.
There's Kathleen Willey.
There was Jennifer Flowers.
There was Juanita Broderick.
There were Paula Jones.
There were countless others that were Monica Lewinsky.
There were countless others that probably existed that we didn't hear about.
It was Mrs. Clinton's job during the campaign of 1992 to get hold of those women before they erupted and read them the Riot Act.
Let them know what would happen to them if they did.
Take care of them somehow to keep them quiet.
The bimbo eruptions were women with true and unfavorable stories about her husband's unethical behavior.
Hillary's job was to perform character assassination on those women who did come forward.
She helped portray them as phony mistresses or having phony allegations.
She portrayed them as stalkers.
In the case of Paula Jones, she was trailer park trash, to which the feminist movement readily signed on and said, yes, she's trailer park trash.
The purpose was to change the story by distracting everybody from what these truthful women had to say.
Well, what does Media Matters for America do?
Character assassinations on people to distort their true and damaging stories, to distract bimbo eruptions to now talk show eruptions.
This is Mrs. Clinton's timeline, and she's doing it with the usual character assassination, portray them as phony, liars, make up facts.
All of these things are part of the bimbo eruption philosophy.
This is how Mrs. Clinton has done business for a long time.
Now, she should have to answer for both of these as she aspires to become president, but she won't be asked about it.
But that, ladies and gentlemen, is the truth.
The bimbo eruptions were real.
Manage them was real.
Destroying those women, making sure they didn't come forward in the first place.
If they did, rake them over the coals, distract, destroy them.
Forget the truth, destroy them.
They stood in the Clinton's way.
Can't have that.
John Kyle from Arizona was on the Fox News channel today with the host John Scott.
Two soundbites here.
Scott's a senator.
You two among those defending Rush Limbaugh, right?
That's right, John.
It's been a mischaracterization of what he said from the very beginning.
Of course, intentionally so.
He didn't say that all the troops that disagree with the war or the president were phony troops.
He was referring to a specific soldier who it turns out was a phony soldier and who had been discussed in his program before the conversation that resulted in all the controversy.
It is a politically generated controversy by Democrats who want to change the subject from the Petraeus Betray Us ad, which they got a lot of criticism for because they'd been supported by moveon.org and didn't want to criticize the ad.
So John Scott, this is well, and that seemed like much more personal, much more direct slap of the general rather than this comment by Rush Limbaugh, which I guess, depending on how you read it, I mean, you leave off one sentence or one word of what he said, and all of a sudden it's not an issue at all.
Well, that's right.
And they had been discussing this one particular case, which was very unfortunate.
A young man who was very critical of the war and claimed to have fought in, I think he claimed to have fought in Iraq and so on.
And it turns out that he hadn't.
He served, I think, like six weeks and was never in combat, was never abroad, and had been dubbed the phony soldier.
And that's what the comment was about.
Neither Limbaugh nor anybody else would ever claim.
Just how silly this is, that any soldier that disagrees with the president's policy is a phony soldier.
That's just not true.
That's what they tried to make it out to be.
And again, in all of this, I must remind you again, in all of this, there still have been precious few details to come forward about what Jesse Macbeth did and what he was convicted of and what he alleged.
He said he saw U.S. troops hang innocent Iraqis, children, parents from the rafters of mosques.
It was all lies.
He was never there.
That's the phony soldier.
They're all over the place and nobody's talking about them.
Hi, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, talent on loan from God.
Now, one more thing to those of you who are worried, I'm not being criticized.
Rush, maybe you're going on too much with this.
Is some of this perhaps going over your head?
No, no, no, no, folks.
Mrs. Clinton signed Harry Reid's letter to the CEO of Clear Channel, who runs a syndication company of this program.
She signed it.
She signed a letter asking for the CEO of the company that syndicates this program to spank me, to make me apologize.
Of course, you've got to understand what we're dealing with here.
It ain't beanbagging and it's not Civics 101 that's going on right now.
I realize steady dose of this people, you're going to want to hear it.
We're not going to do a steady dose of it day in and day out.
But this is about more than me.
This is a much, much larger issue than me.
This is about a tactic, a series of tactics, what the country will look like if these people get into the White House and these kinds of things can happen from the government aimed at anybody, not just these little so-called special interest groups that aim at media figures that they have problems with.
But we are going to take a brief break.
It's time global warming update.
But this is a good one, and it makes another point that I've been making for many, many moons here.
Sing it Al Gore.
All right, on this program, over the course of recent past, one of the ways I've attempted to alert people to the real truth behind man-made global warming is that it is a hoax being presented as a religion.
The only difference between global warming and any other major religion is that its God is tangible.
Otherwise, it's the earth.
Otherwise, everything in every major religion is present.
You've got the Garden of Eden, i.e. the pristine planet.
You have taking the bite out of the apple, sin, disobeying.
And that is what?
Cutting down trees.
It is driving SUVs and so forth.
You've got destruction destroying the planet, which leads to what?
The apocalypse.
You have fear, which is a fundamental part of many religions, scaring you into behaving a certain way or else you are going to hell.
Global warming has fear.
You're going to destroy the planet.
Your kids and grandchildren have nothing.
You will burn in hell on the surface of the earth because of global warming.
It's got guilt.
As you know, many major religions get what they want with guilt.
They guilt people into behaving, do this, do that.
This is the same thing.
Guilt for driving SUVs.
Guilt for having your air condition home.
Guilt for having too large a carbon footprint.
Guilt for not buying carbon offsets.
All this.
And it has salvation.
Accepting the blame.
You are responsible for destroying the planet, but you can be absolved from this sin if you agree to higher taxes and roll back your lifestyle and let others in positions of government tell you what to do and when to do it and where you can live and can't live and how big your house can be, all these things.
That's how you absolve yourself of the sin.
You can also go around and buy little cars that won't make a bit of difference to the environment, but you will feel better and you will be absolved of your sin.
You can carry your own little bags at a grocery store rather than using paper bags or plastic bags.
You will not be making one bit of a difference.
The Earth's climate, but you will feel better because you will be told you are saving the planet and preventing the apocalypse.
You can be told to do any number of these things.
You can change your light bulbs at compact fluorescence.
You can use ethanol, which is causing rising prices and food shortages all over the world.
But you can feel better about that because you are somehow polluting less.
And then you can start criticizing people who don't believe this.
And you can become an evangel.
Every aspect, you can become a preacher.
You can become a priestess.
And you can condemn the sinners who are not paying attention.
Every aspect of every major religion is right in the middle of global warming.
Global warming is nothing more than a disguised liberal plot to advance, just like Mrs. Clinton's S-CHIP program for kids, is a Trojan horse to get us into universal health care on the guys that were only doing it for the children.
So global warming is simply a masked and camouflaged way to get liberals to where they want.
Power over every aspect of your life, as many aspects of your life as possible.
So with that as the setup, have a story that I'm holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained finger.
Cybercast News Service.
Headline, Religion must be destroyed.
Atheist Alliance declares science must ultimately destroy organized religion, according to some of the leading atheist writers and intellectuals who spoke at a recent atheist conference in Northern Virginia.
God is a myth.
Children must not be schooled in any faith, they said.
At the Crystal Clear Atheism Event sponsored by the Atheist Alliance International, while most attendees on Friday night were adamant that God is a myth, the convention attended by hundreds of people brought into focus a divide among atheists as to their identity as a movement and the nature of the enemy they faced.
In his speech, Dawkins, who is Dawkins, left his name out here anyway, some guy named Dawkins portrayed a black and white intellectual battle between atheism and religion.
He denounced the preposterous nonsense of religious customs and compared religion to racism.
He also gave no quarter to moderate or liberal believers, asserting that so-called moderate Christianity is simply an evasion.
Harris said he believed that science must ultimately destroy religion.
He also discussed spirituality and mysticism and called for a greater understanding of allegedly spiritual phenomena.
He also cautioned the audience against lumping all religions together.
He noted that radical Islam was far more threatening than any radical Christian sect, adding that Christians had a right to be outraged when the media treated the two religions similarly.
Now, what's this got to do with global warming?
If you get rid of organized religion, and they're not going to succeed, but this is who these people are.
If you get rid of organized religion, it sets the stage for unorganized religion, which is what global warming is.
I forget the brilliant man.
It might have been Chesterton.
G.K. Chesterton said, if you don't believe in God, you can be led to believe anything.
If you don't believe in God, you have no meaning in your life.
And you will thus search for meaning and you will find it anywhere.
And most people, even atheists, want religion of some kind in their life.
Hello, global warming.
As a substitute, apparently unrecognized and not even organized religion.
Yet it is.
So it will set the stage for more people, if the atheists were to ever get their way, of establishing global warming as an unofficial religion that does force people to behave in religious ways just to a false god, the earth, a tangible God.
By the way, there's another thing, another characteristic that all major religions require.
And the same thing can be said of man-made global warming.
And that characteristic that both require is faith.
Because when you get down to it, nobody can prove their religion's true.
That's why there is faith.
And that's why faithful people frighten those who have no faith.
Because faithful people realize there's something larger than themselves.
The global warming people essentially are atheists.
You cannot believe in the God of creation and believe man-made global warming.
You just can't.
You might run around and say, I don't want to destroy God's creation.
God's laughing at you.
You can't.
He could, but you can't.
You can't create it.
You can't destroy it.
You might be changing.
We adapt to it.
We have to adapt to it.
Every living thing has to adapt to nature in order to thrive.
Yeah.
Well, we build homes on the ocean.
Guess what?
Hurricanes are going to.
We adapt.
So we build deep foundations.
We've got to get shutters.
We do a number of concrete roofs.
We adapt.
They say we're destroying the planet when we do this.
They all require faith.
Faithful people know they're things larger than themselves.
The global warming religion crowd are nothing larger than themselves and what they say and what they think.
By the way, we had a story last week that the scientists, it was a major story, by the way, scientists after 10 years finally concluded that the chemical reaction they thought taking place in the stratosphere leading to the ozone hole was not happening.
That 60 to 70 percent of the ozone hole could not be attributed to the chemical reaction that they thought.
What do we do?
We got rid of Freon.
We got rid of the spray cans and so forth, aerosols.
We've wrecked the shuttle program by making every launch a death watch because we can't use Freon.
It was all for nothing.
So here's the second story to Global Warming Stack.
Ozone hole over Antarctica shrank by 30% this year compared with a record loss in 2006, said the European Space Agency today.
Ozone, a molecule of oxygen, forms a thin layer in the stratosphere, filtering out dangerous ultraviolet UVB sunlight.
It damages vegetation, can cause skin cancer and cataracts.
The protective layer has been badly damaged by man-made chlorine-based chemicals.
No, it hasn't.
Who wrote this?
This French news agency, a bunch of idiots.
It has not been damaged by those things.
We now know this.
It opens and closes, and we can't explain it.
It's the sun that makes ozone, folks.
We couldn't destroy it if we wanted to.
We'd have to put the sun out to destroy ozone.
So God invents the sun, creates the sun.
It's a big ball of fire.
It's a giant nuclear reaction going nuts out there.
Has to be something protective in our atmosphere.
There can't be life.
I think it happened by accident.
Ozone protects us from frying.
UVB, of course, so it gives them the opportunity to scare us all over.
We're all going to fry because we're destroying the ozone.
See how it works?
You committing sin, especially the big corporations who invented Freon.
The big corporations invented aerosol spray cans.
Yeah.
They're destroying the planet.
They want to kill everybody, including their customers.
And then you were told you can't use these things anymore because you are absolved of sin.
You go out preach against them, and you are part of the religion, and you don't even know it.
And I got to go.
We'll be back after this.
And back to the phones we go.
Lila in Grove Point Park.
It's nice to have you with us.
Welcome.
Hi, Rush.
I'm a charter subscriber to your letter, and I received the October issue this morning, and I've already read it through.
And I really think it is your best one yet.
And I loved the interview by Mr. Snerdley with you.
Yeah, I meant to mention this thing was out.
This has been distracted.
I got my official editor-in-chief copy last week.
She's talking about the 15th anniversary issue of the Limbaugh Letter, the most widely read political newsletter in the country.
And its expanded version since it's the 15th anniversary.
And what did you like about the interview Mr. Snerdley did with me?
Well, it was in depth.
I never realized that you really hurt from the junior, high, and high school rejections.
I mean, I could identify with that a little bit.
Everybody can.
And so it was just a lot of stuff in there that I had no idea about you.
And I've listened to you since 1988.
So it really was great.
And I wanted to let you know that I really loved it.
And this is one that I'll read more than once.
Well, I appreciate it.
That interview with me is so in-depth, you'll need to read it more than once to get all the stuff that's chalked in there.
That's right.
Well, I appreciate your saying that.
I'm glad you called to tell me that.
Thank you very much.
And keep up the good work.
I will do.
Snerdley interviewed me.
We got pictures of the interview taking place, by the way, at the EIB broadcast complex.
I figured it was the 15th anniversary issue at a limbo letter.
We make it about me since it's my newsletter.
And we did.
And there's an extensive interview with me in there that Mr. Snerdley conducted.
And I don't know how, but he got stuff out of me I've never said before anywhere about growing up and some other things.
And when we finished with us, oh, geez, send me this when you've edited it down.
We're not editing it.
We're going to add pages if we have to to put this in.
So before I had seen the finished product, I really didn't need to see it because I knew what I had said, since I'm the interview subject.
And I remembered what I said.
But Diana Schneider, the editrix of the newsletter, they were all going nuts.
Wow, this, this is, this.
I can't believe you said all this.
Well, blame Snerdley or praise Snerdley.
Snerdley put me to sleep in this interview, relaxed me so much.
We did this interview over two days.
And his first question was 10 minutes long.
Second question was five minutes long.
We had to do two days because his questions were statements of adulation, idolatry, praise, and so forth.
I'm kidding about the last.
But thanks again, Lila.
I appreciate your nice comments about it.
It is available now.
You should be getting yours if you are a prescriber.
You should be getting yours soon.
We've got to take a quick time out here, folks, and be back and continue right after this.
Let's go to Rock Ledge, Florida.
James, thanks for calling, sir.
You're next on the El Rushbo show.
Hey, Rush, wasn't about 10 years ago the Democrats were using the scare tactic that the elderly is going to have to eat dog food, and you joked that you were going to get your mother a brand new can opener.
And wasn't it Patthu Schroeder that got up and quoted you on the floor?
Yeah, I was making a speech at GoPak.
That would have been a little over 10 years ago, 1995.
Okay, I've been listening since 92.
All right.
Okay, so it was 12 years ago.
And you've got a great memory.
I spoke at GoPack on a Sunday.
And at the time, the budget might have been 95, the budget battle was going on.
The Democrats are out there saying that Republicans wanted to take mouth out of babies, food, food out of babies and school kids' mouths, and wanted to cut Social Security and all that.
So I opened it, GoPack, by saying, I want to thank you people for inviting me.
I'm happy to be on your team to starve old people.
I have just gone out.
My mother, I'm told, because of what you're going to do, is going to have to make the choice between medicine and dog food.
And I couldn't be happier.
I just went out.
I bought my mother a new can opener to be able to open the kennel ration.
And Patsy Schroeder, and they abrupted in laughter.
Patsy Schroeder went to the floor of the house.
This is what it has come to.
This is who they are.
And then she read the quote.
We've got that audio.
Maybe Cookie can find it for tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection