All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 10, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:12
October 10, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back.
Great to have you with us, ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limbaugh, America's real anchorman on the case, the bulwark, fearless and unrelenting, behind a golden EIB microphone here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
If you want to join us, the email address rush at EIBnet.com.
We had a call in the last hour.
Hey, wait a minute, global warming, whatever.
Maybe it's not man-made, but isn't Greenland melting?
I mean, how do you explain that?
And I said that our official climatologist here, Dr. Roy Spencer, had explained it to me, but it was a long time ago.
It's buried in this giant global warming stack over, so he re-sent the note to me.
Here's what he says.
I've run into people who actually think that ice breaking off of glaciers is a sign of global warming.
Nancy Pelosi appears to be one of them.
I have to explain to them that as long as snow continues to fall on glaciers like Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets, those glaciers will slowly continue to flow slowly toward the sea and chunks break off, falling into the ocean.
It's very dramatic, but it's completely natural.
Now, numerous factors here.
You know, snow adds added weight.
A lot of snow on your roof is a problem, as you well know, whether the world is warming or not.
In fact, the colder it is and the snow doesn't melt, the bigger danger you face if you've got a pile of snow on top of your roof, as you well know.
It's the same circumstance here.
It's a totally natural thing.
And I was dead on right.
It provides people a photo that you can take out of content.
Oh, look at part of that glacier falling off and breaking off and flowing into the sea.
Oh, no, it's melting.
No, it's not that at all.
It's just the opposite, in fact.
It's so much damn snow that it's causing weight.
And then, of course, the flows had a little warmer water.
Any number of things can happen here, but it's not a sign that Greenland is melting, ladies and gentlemen.
This is one of the oddest stories.
Australian doctors used an intravenous feed of vodka to keep an Italian tourist alive after he consumed large quantities of a poisonous substance.
This guy was doing his impersonation of a condor.
You know, the California condor that was in danger, one of the thing would eat antifreeze.
It looked good to them on the street when it dripped from people's cars, and it contains a poison, ethylene glycol.
Doctors speculate that this 24-year-old guy was trying to hurt himself, maybe commit suicide by drinking some ethylene glycol.
So they administered pure alcohol, which is the conventional antidote to this, but they exhausted the hospital supply.
Desperate to continue the treatment, the doctors at Mackie Base Hospital in Queensland hooked up an IV feed of vodka.
Let me get this straight.
The hospital has plenty of vodka, but it runs out of pure alcohol, and they're not going to run out of vodka.
The patient was drip-fed about three standard drinks an hour for three days in the intensive care unit.
Fortunately for him, he was in a medically induced coma for a good portion of that.
By the time he woke up, I think his hangover would have well and truly gone.
The hospital's administrators were also very understanding when we explained our reasons for buying a case of vodka because they ran out of pure alcohol.
You know, there's a big, big, big homeless controversy brewing.
San Francisco C.W. Nevius writing about it, it might be Nevius, I'm not sure how he pronounces it, in the San Francisco Chronicle yesterday.
Enough is enough.
San Francisco says of homeless, residents of a famously liberal city appear to be changing views.
The liberal left coast city conservatives love to make fun of could be undergoing a transformation when it comes to homeless people.
Although the city would still be a poor choice for a pep rally for the war in Iraq, indications are that residents have had it with aggressive panhandlers, street squatters, and drug users.
Maybe there's been an epiphany, says David Latterman, the president of Fall Line Analytics, a local market research firm.
People have realized they can hate George Bush, but still not want people crapping in their doorway.
Would somebody explain that to me?
This is pure liberal speak.
This is one of the greatest examples of liberal speak and liberal thought that I have ever encountered.
People have realized they can hate George Bush, but still not want people crapping in their doorway.
This from a market research firm.
I guess their tolerance for homelessness up till now has been based on the fact that they had to tolerate the homelessness if they were going to hate Bush to show how good people they are.
Anyway, it's falling apart the support for the homeless.
They've had it out there.
And this is a great illustration of how liberalism doesn't work.
They've been dealing with the homeless by encouraging homeless people, by encouraging the behavior, by not controlling them, by letting them harass merchants and stores and restaurants and so forth, then giving them an official place to stay right across from City Park or City Hall, thinking that if we're just kind to these people, they'll understand our kindness.
No, it just encourages more and more of the same kind of behavior.
Now they finally had their fill of it, but they're conflicted because they hate Bush.
And their hatred of Bush made them a little bit reluctant to deal with the homeless problem for whatever asinine, stupid reason.
But now they finally realize that they can still hate Bush and get mad at the homeless as well.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
Fred Thompson showed up for the first time in a Republican debate last night.
His appearance was a matter of debate itself among members of the drive-by media.
But remember the old adage here, folks.
Success, 80% of success is showing up on time.
So Thompson showed up.
He was on time.
So it was a success.
His people also did something else.
They set really low expectations.
There was no pre-pub on Thompson showing up and taking control of the hall and wiping it up with everybody else.
They put up pretty low expectations, and it wasn't hard for Fred Thompson to meet the low expectations and even surpass him a little bit.
Let's start with Bob Schieffer on the early show on CBS today talking with Harry Smith, who said, here's this guy.
He's been on television and movies and everything else.
He appears, what do you think of the way the guy looked last night?
Kind of hunched over?
But if an actor's going to become president of the United States, somebody, somebody, call Wardrobe.
He needs to get a suit that fits, number one, I think.
And, you know, I hesitate to make too much of the cosmetics of this, but there is something to be said for looking presidential.
You always remember back that nobody ever saw a bad picture of Ronald Reagan.
Ronald Reagan looked like a president.
Yesterday, I don't think that Fred Thompson looked that way.
In the beginning, he looked uncomfortable.
He looked somewhat nervous.
What's his face?
The Brett Girl, does he look like a president or a model?
Does Obama look like a president?
Does Hillary look like a president?
Now, I can understand people saying, wait a second, this guy has so much experience with Hollywood and acting and making up properly and presenting yourself the best you can be.
And if he didn't do that, maybe that was strategic.
Didn't want to come off slick.
Who knows?
I have no clue.
But I also marvel here at Bob Schieffer.
I don't remember all this praise for Ronald Reagan looking presidential back during Reagan's presidency.
What I remember from people like Schieffer's making fun of him.
He was a dunce.
He hated the homeless.
He would sneak into the park across from the White House at night.
He would steal their cans of pork and beans, go back to the White House, open them up, eat the pork and beans, and as he swallowed, he'd rub his belly and go, God, I'm glad I'm eating these and the homeless aren't.
I'm glad there's.
That's the picture they tried to paint of Reagan.
Never tried to paint him as presidential.
He painted him as an accident.
An accident, an accident waiting to happen.
Now, all of a sudden, he looks presidential so they can rip into Fred Thompson.
Here's Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America today, Diane Sawyer.
Senator Fred Thompson, what about the debate debut?
He didn't shine by any means.
He was not the star of the show yesterday.
He was surprisingly nervous at the start, but he did find his footing and he didn't make any major mistakes.
And he did survive Diane, what could have been a crippling blow.
Senator Thompson has confused the Soviet Union and Russia already on the campaign trail.
Had he not gotten that gotcha question right, he would have been in deep, deep trouble.
The gotcha question was from Christopher Matthews, and it was, Can you name the Prime Minister of Canada?
And Thompson did.
So here's Stephanopoulos talking about what might have been, but that's irrelevant because Thompson knew who he was.
But that could have been a fatal flaw.
No such thing as a fatal flaw in a debate that happens at 4 o'clock in the afternoon on a cable channel, folks.
Fred Thompson could have forgotten who his name yesterday, and it wouldn't matter because nobody saw it.
It was at 4 o'clock in the afternoon on a cable channel.
Can we get real?
Here's Howard Feynman.
We always love listening to Howard Feynman's comments.
He was on Hardball, Chris Matthews, last night.
Matthews said, Fred Thompson looked like he's enjoying this.
He listed all the elements in our society we're enjoying.
Is he?
At the beginning, he looked like he needed a very large digestive pill of some kind.
There's tone deaf, and then there's being oblivious here.
Most of the other Republican candidates conceded tactically in one way or another that the economy needs help in one place or another.
Thompson was talking about how robust the economy was.
And he was saying, throughout our history, even in good economic times, you're going to have pockets of places in the country that are not doing well.
And he cited Michigan because the debate was in Dearborn.
Well, Michigan isn't doing well.
It isn't doing well for specific reasons that have nothing to do with the U.S. economy.
It has to do with the local economy, tax increases, overspending by the governor there and the legislature.
It's textbook.
You know, Michigan is a great example of what the whole country will be if liberals get unfettered, unchecked access to all aspects of government.
By the way, Chrysler workers went out on strike today.
I saw a picture of this on television at the top of the R.
I counted 10 people on the picket line from an overhead camera, maybe on a helicopter or some such thing.
It's just not the good old days when the unions went on strike.
Last time the auto workers went on strike, General Motors, it lasted two days.
We'll see how long the Chrysler guys stay out.
They walked off the job this morning.
Quick timeout, folks.
Back after this.
All right, sticking with the audio soundbites.
Now, last night during the debate, the Republican candidates did something quite natural.
They attacked Hillary Clinton.
They were critical of Hillary Clinton's flip-flopping and her policies and a number of things.
Why?
Because she is the likely Democrat nominee.
This did not sit well with the drive-by media.
We have a montage here of the drive-bys defending Hillary from these vicious attacks at the GOP debate.
I kept thinking that Hillary Clinton was there last night.
The other candidate who got the most attention last night was not in the room.
Opened the debate with an attack on Hillary.
Going after Hillary Clinton.
Every answer sort of becomes an attack on Hillary Clinton.
Bash Hillary.
Attack Hillary for changing her positions.
Hillary Clinton.
She's the one we can easily demonize.
Yes, yes, yes.
Now, of course, when George W. Bush is routinely savaged during Democrat debates, I don't ever recall the drive-by media getting on their case for attacking somebody who's not even going to be on the ballot.
But here they got to defend Hillary.
This is, it's interesting, folks, because it's the same old don't attack the girl.
There's more to this than that, obviously.
I mean, these people are going to treat Hillary like she's a queen.
They all want her attention.
They all want to be invited to the White House's state dinners, the orgies, and the parties that Bill's going to throw.
They want to have all these things.
So they want to stay on her good side.
So they got to come to her defense as though she can't defend herself.
And they've bought into this whole notion that Hillary is a victim.
And we're not going to sit here and let our candidate be besmirched by these Republican meanies.
Blah, Rudy Giuliani last night was one of those who was discussing Hillary, and he does the most consistent job in these debates of going after her.
Chris Matthews said polls also show that voters look now, at least to the Democrats, to handle the economy.
How are you going to win back their confidence?
The possibilities for America in this global economy are endless if we don't put a lid on ourselves.
We want to give people freedom.
I'll give you an example.
Hillary, the other day, remember the Hillary Bond program?
She's going to give $5,000 to every child born in America with her picture on it?
I think, right?
I challenged her on it.
I challenged her.
She has backed off that.
She has a new one today.
This one is she's going to give out $1,000 to everybody to set up a 401k.
The problem is this one costs $5 billion more than the last one.
He also said something last night in the debate about health care and this economy.
And one of the things I love, and I don't care who does it, is people that tell the truth about this country and how great it is, how unique it is, how wonderful it is, how great the opportunities are in this country, how strong and vibrant our economy is.
I love people that have the guts to do this, swimming against the current that seems to have everybody in conventional wisdom wanting to say the economy is on the precipice of disaster.
They say it every year.
They say it every day if they're on the Democrat side.
And Rudy said, you know, I bet this healthcare business, what we need to do is fix our health care system, make it the best in the world, and sell it to the rest of the world.
And a couple other things in our economy.
We need to perfect, get them right.
Better than they are.
They're better now than they have been.
By the way, somebody had a great joke last night about the biggest problem if we go Hillary's socialized medicine route.
What are Canadians going to do for quality health care?
Because there'll be no difference in our health care and theirs, and they'll stop coming here for quality health care.
And Canadians are going to get sick and sick and sicker and sicker and die earlier because they're going to have nowhere good to go for health care.
But I'm telling you, folks, I appreciate anybody who's willing to be optimistic and positive about this country.
It's so magnetic.
It is so redeeming.
It's motivational, it's inspirational, and it has the added benefit of being true.
Let's go back to Fred Thompson.
Maria Barcharomo, the money honey from CNBC, said the economy is America's greatest strength.
In a recent poll with the Wall Street Journal and NBC News, two-thirds of the American people said that we're either in a recession or headed toward one.
Do you agree with that?
I think there is no reason to believe that we're headed for a recession.
We're enjoying 22 quarters of successive economic growth that started 2001 and then further in 2003 with the tax cuts that we put in place.
We're enjoying low inflation.
We're enjoying low unemployment.
The stock market seems to be doing pretty well.
I see no reason to believe we're headed for an economic downturn.
There are pockets in the economy, certainly that are having difficulty.
I think there's certainly those in Michigan that are having difficulty.
I think you always find that in a vibrant, dynamic economy.
I think that not enough has been done to tell what some call the greatest story never told.
And that is that we are enjoying a period of growth right now.
And we should acknowledge what got us there and continue those same policies on into the future.
Fred Thompson on the economy.
By the way, his remark about Michigan-led, might have been Romney.
I'm not sure who it was.
To say, just ignoring Michigan here.
Forget his line.
It was a somewhat funny line.
But his point was that, you know, even I remember back in the days when the oil price plummeted to 10 bucks a barrel back in the 80s, and it devastated the domestic oil market.
They had to cap and close some wells here.
They could not, at 10 bucks a barrel, afford to stay in operation.
They capped them forever.
And now look at the price of oil.
Well, consumers were just doing great.
The economy was just humming right along, but the domestic oil market took a hit at those prices.
That is what he meant.
Also, Maria Barcharomo asked an economic question to Giuliani.
She said, is London going to replace New York as the financial capital of the world?
And Giuliani says, what, pardon me?
She said, is London going to replace New York as the financial capital of the world?
If so, what are you going to do to change that?
And Rudy said, no, how, no way.
It's not going to happen.
It's not going to happen.
And there was applause in the room.
She said, well, we're seeing an increased number of Giuliani.
I said, come on.
No.
We're seeing increased amounts of businesses go to London.
Julian, let's stop this stuff with our head down.
London going to replace New York?
Give me a break.
Of course, London's not going to replace New York.
Well, the number of IPOs is higher in London in 07 than in New York.
Is the U.K. going to replace the U.S., the United States of America?
This is the strongest economy on earth, the last best hope of humanity.
We've been like that.
If this generation can't keep it that way, shame on us.
This country is a leader of the world.
When Congressman Tan Crato talks about the immigration problem, how about look at it this way?
Why do millions of people want to come to this country?
What country are they trying to get into?
I don't care if they bash us all over the world.
What country do they most want to come to?
What country do they most want to copy?
What are China and India trying to do?
China and India are trying to develop themselves to be like us, which is we got a heck of a lot that we can sell to them, but we just put on our entrepreneurial hats and act like confident Americans.
This was Rudy talking to Maria Barcharomo.
Back in a second.
And having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have at the same time.
Folks, I want to, before we go back to the phones here, I want to talk a little bit about this S-CHIP business and the Frost family, because the Baltimore Sun today has a story, Frost family draws ire of conservatives.
And what they're basically writing in this piece is listing all the conservatives, including me, who are attacking this family and making it unfortunate.
This is just a nice little family and so forth and so on.
And these mean conservatives are out there saying all these rotten things.
They quote me, Michelle Malkin, Mark Stein, so forth.
Way this all happened was the Frosts joined the debate through family acquaintance Vinnie DeMarco, the president of the Maryland Citizens Health Initiative.
DeMarco introduced them to the pro-SHIP organization Families USA, which put them in touch with Nancy Pelosi's office.
And voila, they were made stars, Graham Frost and his sister, in the dress responding to President Bush's Saturday radio address and so forth.
The Frost declined to show the Baltimore Sun their 2006 income tax returns.
The State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene would not confirm their enrollment in the program.
But John Fulcomer, the Deputy Secretary for Healthcare Financing, said yesterday that applicants must prove their income levels through social security numbers or tax returns to be accepted for coverage.
But he said a family's assets are not considered in determining eligibility.
The Frost children depend on financial aid to attend private school, the Frost say.
In addition, Gemma Frost receives money from the city for special education made necessary by her injuries.
Halsey and Bonnie Frost said they still have no health insurance.
Bonnie Frost said she priced coverage recently $1,200 a month.
Well, these people can clearly afford it.
They just choose not to.
But you know, this is not the point.
What everybody is missing about this is what I think is the nuts and bolts of the whole program.
This is the state children's health insurance program, and it's 10 years old, and it's up for renewal.
The Democrats are trying to increase the program so that it covers babies up to the age of 25, families of four up to the income level of $83,000, and any number of other things.
It's beyond the poor.
The poor have nothing to do with this program as the Democrats want it.
The president has not suggested it be cut.
The president wants to increase the funding by, what is it, $4 billion annually, but keep the coverage at poor children.
Now, the dirty little secret is this.
The Democrats put lies into the Frost kids' head.
They send them out there on television or radio to make these statements.
And one of the things that the kid said was, I just want children in my circumstance to be able to get the health care I got.
Well, guess what?
They got their health care under the previous iteration of the program.
They don't need an increase in the program for them to qualify, strangely, because the state of Maryland can qualify whoever they want.
So this is the whole thing is bogus.
We don't need the massive Democrat expansion in order to get this Frost family covered.
They were covered under this program as it currently exists, and yet they were trotted out to make it look like they would not have been able to recover from their auto accident because of George Bush.
It's another flat-out smear and lie and misrepresentation by Democrats who cannot dare tell the truth about anything.
And the truth in this case is their intention for this program as one of many stealth programs to get us stealthfully down to the road of socialized medicine with a government running the whole thing.
This poor family has been propped up, and this is typical for the Democrats.
It's getting to the point when you hear the Democrats start talking about for the children, think of yourself because they want to look at all of us as children, as incapable and incompetent as children are to make decisions ourselves.
So they start wanting everything for the children.
They're talking about every damn one of us.
And the way they use these people is just shocking.
Not shocking.
It's just disgusting to me.
And many of the people they end up using are frauds in the first place.
There was a case, and I had it in the stack yesterday.
Some mother back in the mid-90s, Hillary used this woman to promote health insurance, everybody, and so forth and so on.
The mother had a baby, and the baby was continually sick, digestive problems, and the doctors couldn't figure it out.
No matter what they tried, she didn't get better.
And it took $2 million of health care over a number of months and years.
And they still could not figure any of this out.
Well, they later found out that the mother had been force-feeding the kid certain kinds of health foods or whatever that had screwed the little kid all up and then had defrauded some government agency of $60,000.
And these are the people that the Democrats trot up.
There was another case.
Michelle Mulkin writes about this today in the New York Post.
I forget this woman's name, but the Democrats had her walking the highway picking up thrown away beer bottles, plastic bottles, and cans to redeem at the grocery store for a nickel apiece so that she could be able to finally afford food and medicine.
And they made a big deal.
They dragged her up to Washington.
Her wealthy son exposed the fraud of all this.
She was totally capable of affording what she wanted to afford.
The Democrats is find these people and they create them.
And they've done the same thing with the Frosts.
You people at the Drive-By Media, who wrote this piece?
Baltimore Son, Matthew Hay Brown.
Matthew, I know you're a good reporter.
I know you're trying to be a good reporter.
Do a story tomorrow on the fact that the program as it exists would have provided the did provide the Frost exactly what they got.
They did not need the Democrats' expansion of this and to be propped out there on national radio and television.
And to suggest they wouldn't get what they got if Bush gets his way is just wrong.
It is plain wrong.
You are a journalist, Mr. Hay Brown.
You are supposed to get to the truth of things.
Instead, you focus on the personalities here, how rotten and mean conservatives are.
Well, the truth about this family is the truth about this family.
And they're being used.
And they had a bunch of lies pumped in the kid's head, put him on radio, give him a script and so forth.
12-year-old kid for crying out loud.
I'm just not going to sit here and believe a 12-year-old kid came up with all this thought and belief and philosophy on his own.
Somebody had to pump him fill of it in his head or put it on the script for him to read or what have you.
Just a pawn.
A 12-year-old kid being used to advance a distortion and a lie.
It really is central to this.
The Democrats, they will do anything they can to get you and me to pay ever much more for another expansion of the federal government that they then are going to control.
But to put this family out there and to make the country, try to make the country believe that without this new expansion the Democrats want, this poor family would have been left out.
This poor family got exactly what they needed from the program as it exists.
And that's what's not being reported about this.
And that's journalistic malpractice.
Paul in Jacksonville, Florida, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Rush, where is the peace?
What peace has Al Gore achieved to qualify him for this Nobel Peace Prize?
Well, you know, it is interesting.
There's a post at National Review Online today by Ian Murray.
And he addresses this point.
He says, while Al Gore is the favorite to win the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday, a British courts found that his film is both partisan and contains no fewer than 11 material inaccuracies that need to be drawn to students' attention if it's going to be shown in the scrolls there.
As for the impending Nobel Award, am I the only one who finds it depressing that while past laureates like Mother Teresa Albert Schweitzer spent decades working with the poor in terrible conditions, Gore wins for making a movie?
Moreover, a movie of himself giving a lecture?
Moreover, a movie whose upshot is that the poor in Calcutta and West Africa should be denied access to the energy that can lift them out of poverty.
So that's a great...
What's he done?
But the Nobel Peace Prize in recent years hasn't been about peace anyway.
It's been about liberal activism.
How do you explain Jimmy Carter getting a Nobel Peace Prize?
Jimmy Carter is single-handedly responsible for the nation of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran, being the state sponsor of worldwide territory.
Jimmy Carter gets a Nobel Peace Prize.
How do you explain Yasser Arafat getting the Nobel Peace Prize?
Gore's going to get it because of the movie.
He's going to get it because global warming is a liberal hoax.
He's going to get it because he's criticized Bush.
He's going to get it because he lost unfairly to Bush in 2000 in their minds.
It has nothing to do with peace.
The Nobel Peace Prize has anything to do with it.
I should be the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.
I have done more for liberty, individual freedom, and the promotion of that, which is what leads to peace, than anybody in this year's roster of candidates.
I should be the recipient.
I'm not campaigning for it.
I say this only to illustrate how it's just, it's been devalued, this whole Nobel Peace Prize here.
Back in just a second.
Here we are back, Rush Limbaugh, with half my brain tied behind my back.
Just to make it fair, once again, ladies and gentlemen, I have pioneered a service in the process of pioneering this service.
I have brought the cost of the service down for all.
The headline here in this AP story says that all popularity of personal chefs rises.
As lives get increasingly busier with careers, kids, commutes, and other chaos, of course, my life has none of that kind of chaos.
Well, career kids and commutes know.
A growing number of people are turning to personal chefs to make sure that there's a hot meal on the table at the end of a long day.
Hiring a professional to cook for you isn't a whole lot different than hiring somebody to clean your house or walk the dog.
And it's not just for the wealthy, said John Moore, executive director of the United States Personal Chef Association.
They actually have a group.
It's not lifestyles of the rich and famous.
People don't have personal chefs because they've got tons of money.
They have them because it solves a problem, puts dinner on the table.
How many people have personal chefs but are not buying their own health insurance, though?
One, it's a legitimate question.
How many are paying for a personal chef but not buying health insurance?
This will lead, you know, if this keeps up, it's not going to be fair, folks, that a lot of people have personal chefs, but people, other people don't.
So this will lead, a Democrats will propose a program called S-Chef, which will put a personal chef in every person's house.
And they will do this because it's just, it's not fair that there are people who do not have chefs.
Well, that's right.
See, it's a great idea, too, because the S-Chef program that the Democrats will not come up with as a government-mandated program, the S-Chef chefs will have to be under federal guidelines as to what they can prepare and what they can't prepare.
And so the government can solve its panic and fear over our nation's obesity problem by making sure the S-Chef only can fix certain so-called healthy meals.
Thanks, Roy.
And once again, I pioneered the personal chef a long time ago.
And when people like me, it's like buying the first big screen TV.
Pay the full boat price and they come out.
It allows the production to continue and the prices fall so they become affordable for more and more people.
Yes, Mr. Snerdley, what's the question?
No, it won't work.
Mr. Snerdley's idea is this could solve the whole school lunch program, the whole hunger program, just get a chef in every house, the S-Chef program, and the S-Chef fix meals day long-breakfast, lunch, dinner, snack, so that the schools don't have to worry about it.
That'll never happen.
The government is not going to take away the power it has to attract people to those indoctrination centers called schools, and the power that attracts them is food.
You don't think those kids are going to class, do you?
Or fork?
They're going for the food.
Breakfast in the morning?
Whether you can afford it or not?
Hell, that started back when I was in junior high.
I knew it was all over then.
Didn't have a prayer then.
Hartford, Connecticut, this is Ferris.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Dittos, that's a great one.
Hey, every day we give thanks for your talents and those of Mr. Bo Snerdley, but I'd like to just shout out to EA Conklin of the Onion Country of Orange County, New York, for turning me on to you.
I appreciate that.
I would be embarrassed to tell you how many years ago that was, but it was a long time ago when the earth was green.
I am calling about the breaking news story from the United States Supreme Court.
And it ties into what you were saying probably a minute ago about having personal chefs.
It seems that a college brother of mine has just been granted by the Supreme Court to have the city of New York reimburse him for the cost of his son's private education in a 4-4 ruling, which is no ruling, as you may know.
Right.
Supreme said that former president of Viacom, Thomas E. Freston.
You went to college with Freston?
I went to college with Freston.
I worked for Freston in the cafeteria.
He was the head waiter.
His nickname, I will withhold.
All right.
Well, for those who don't know, Freston was one of the creators, founders of MTV.
That's who we're talking about here.
That was his child.
That was his child.
That's exactly right.
Not the child getting federal or city benefits, the child.
So your point is what?
How can such a wealthy individual be reimbursed for sending his disabled child to a city school?
Well, my point is this.
I stood up and cheered and thought of Tom when I heard of that and want to call him and congratulate him.
And when I spoke to another Freston about it, it was a retired school teacher from New York who was quite frustrated that a wealthy man would receive justice in this case.
And I'm hoping that you will line up with me on this and agree that Freston deserves the same judicial treatment that a poor man like me would get.
And furthermore, I wanted to point out that he You lost your train of thought, didn't you?
Well, I may have.
It's what happens to amateurs at times, and we specialists and highly trained professionals can spot it the moment it happens.
Well, get me back on the track.
Well, I feel for you.
Well, I've got a actually, your train of thought departures occurred at a good time because I've got to go.
I've got a hard break coming here.
I can't miss.
But I will comment on this at the top of the hour in the monologue because it is an interesting premise.
I want to give people the details of this as well, because the initial reaction people are going to have is, how can this be?
This is just not right.
But Ferris here has a good point.
We'll be back in just a second.
What the hell is this?
I never heard this in the bumper tune rotation.
You bring stuff from home again today?
Okay.
You did bring it from home then.
▲
Export Selection