All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 6, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:27
November 6, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, we're going to get into the Hillary stack.
I want to do it.
I want to get over it, get it over with, because I don't want to go back into a blue funk.
I'm convinced.
Spending as much time as I did last Friday on Hillary is one of the reasons I went into the weekend with a blue funk.
I got out of the blue funk last night for a host of reasons, not the least of which was the Steelers mauling the Baltimore Ravens.
Payback.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome, L. Rushball, the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-sensing, all-caring, all-everything.
Maha Rush Nishi.
800-282-2882 is the phone number if you want to be on the program.
Our buddies at Fox and Friends, Brian Kilmead, Steve Doocy, and Gretchen Carlson are the only ones to have exploited and exposed a Newsweek story.
The illegal immigrant driver's license controversy is one thing for Mrs. Clinton, but perhaps an even larger stumbling point during last week's debate involved communications between her husband regarding the health care.
Senator Clinton's defense is, you know, Russia, so are you going to release those documents?
What your husband and you did.
And of course, the first lady, former first lady, said, well, that's not my decision to make.
However, Newsweek uncovered some documents revealed that in 1994, President Clinton named his wife, along with his advisor, Bruce Lindsay, in charge of the former president's papers.
Senator Clinton's spokesman said, we don't control their process.
We're not holding anything up.
Senator Clinton also claimed that all of the records, as far as I know, about what we did with health care, those are already available.
However, Newsweek also reports that most records relating to the healthcare task force have not been released.
All the networks and CNN have thus far ignored the story.
But Fox and Friends discussed the story yesterday.
We have the transcript here I could read to you, but I don't need to do that.
Can I say something about this?
Why does anybody, when Mrs. Clinton says, well, have you ever noticed how often she says, I don't know about that.
I don't remember.
Here's a woman who is maniacally in control of everything in her life.
And yet at the most inappropriate times for her.
I have nothing to do with that.
She was on the commission.
President named her along with Bruce Lindsay in charge of the documents.
But here's the truth.
We know about health care.
We know, for example, we know all we need to know about it.
She had as part of her original health care plan a program called Kids First.
It was the forerunner of the S-CHIP program.
And she admits, or admitted back then, that the purpose of S-CHIP, Kids First, her version of it, was to get started on the whole socialized single-payer method of health care in this country.
But that's beside the point even.
It's not the healthcare documents we want.
We know about that.
We know it was a debacle.
We know about the bamboozled bus trip that we blew up and destroyed.
They started in Seattle.
By the time they got to Texas, the whole thing had been rendered a joke.
That was one of the most fun events on this program.
And she's doing it again at the Middle Class Express here in Iowa.
But we want the papers of the things that she said to her husband and he back to her outside of health care.
That's what everybody's interested in that's talking about these documents.
You know, she wants to be president.
She claims that she has lots of experience because she was co-president with her husband for eight years.
Well, there are numerous pages of documents detailing conversations that they had with each other.
And they have both said over the years that they talk to each other quite a bit about a lot of things, policy and otherwise.
And yet, she's touting herself as having all this experience that she won't detail what any of that experience is.
And these papers are not due to be released until 2009, some of them 2012 for the others.
Screw the healthcare documents.
We know about that.
We want the other stuff.
Now, moving on to the license business.
You know, this is just classic.
In fact, let's see.
In fact, I'm going to change the soundbite order here, Mike.
Let's start with number.
I guess we'll start with 14 because I've already covered what's in number 13.
Well, now, wait a minute.
I better.
That's still in a letter.
I thought we had Clinton saying what he says in this story, but I'm not sure that we do.
So we'll keep an order at number five on the soundbite.
Sorry to do this in front of you, folks.
It's real live broadcasting with no writers.
How about the writer's strike, by the way?
Late-night TV shows zapped.
Didn't produce.
Not going to be dark all week.
What else?
Reruns for some of the prime time shows in the November sweeps.
Former President Clinton on Monday compared Republican criticism, his wife's position on driver's license for illegal immigrants to the ads that helped sink John Kerry's White House hopes in 2004.
Tim Russert's question and the Republican reaction is the equivalent of Mrs. Clinton being swift boated.
Clinton said he was talking to the American Postal Workers Union at a convention.
And he said, I had the feeling at the end of that debate that we're about to get into cutesy land again.
But I got to tell you something.
It's fine for Hillary and all the other Democrats to discuss Governor Spencer's plan, but not in 30 seconds.
It just, you can't do this in soundbites.
It's just too complicated for soundbites.
You can't explain this in soundbites.
So here is Mrs. Clinton's husband running to the rescue once again to try to bail her out.
There's nothing to explain in a soundbite or not.
She flip-flopped on the answer, and she ended up blowing it big time by saying we should have passed the amnesty bill.
Illegal driver's licenses for aliens, 77% of the public oppose it.
I have it here in the stack, ladies and gentlemen.
And it's just, you know, this is one of these issues.
Immigration, here's a story in the, what is this, Chicago Sun-Times by Steve Huntley.
Three events of the past week give Democrats a reason to worry.
First, Hillary Clinton had a bad night in a debate.
Defensive, cold, harsh-sounding, mouthed position papers gave muddling, confusing, contradictory answers to questions.
In effect, trying to take both sides of an issue.
This cold, calculating, triangulating image is the reason she has high negatives.
So don't let, can we talk about immigration?
It's a huge, huge reason Democrats ought to be worrying.
The second guy, second reason Steve Huntley gives is Barack Obama laid out his foreign policy views toward Iran in an interview with the New York Times and said he'd have an open relationship with him.
This is not cool.
And the third reason, last week's report on war casualty showed that the news from Iraq is turning positive.
Iraq's going well.
Obama is an appeaser to Iran.
And Hillary's biggest vulnerability from the debate was her attitude and her character.
Three events of past week give Democrats reason to worry.
Well, let's add two more.
Their position on climate change is a deadly one once people find out what it's going to cost them.
And Mrs. Clinton's made it clear where Democrats are on illegal immigration.
And that, when you've got 77% of the people in the country opposing illegal immigration and driver's licenses for illegals, you can flip-flop all day long and you're not going to get your tail out of the hot wax.
And Clinton can come along and say, hey, you know, it's too complicated.
You can't put this in a soundbite.
You can't sound about that answer.
People knew us enough to understand this like we do.
But that isn't going to sell with anybody.
Tell people they're stupid.
That's really a way to win them over.
It's too complicated for you to understand.
I would love to explain it to you.
But that's, boy, it's not complicated at all, but they're trying to make it complicated because they're trying to get themselves out of the excrement.
You know, this is this is, I think these people are just starting to realize here that there is a problem that this woman has when she is forced to answer substantive questions to which slogans and pandering will not work.
Then in Cedar Rapids, you know, they're all out in Iowa getting ready for the Hawkeye Caucy.
The battle against global warming means big economic opportunities as well as challenges for the U.S., said Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday, touting her energy proposals as she campaigned in Iowa.
For this generation, climate change is our space race, she said, speaking in a cavernous factory with giant wind turbines in the background.
And get this: global warming, she said, hits particularly at the poor.
One in four low-income families have already missed a mortgage or rent payment because of rising energy costs.
Global warming.
She has just linked the mortgage credit crisis to global warming, ladies and gentlemen.
Does she think we are this stupid?
Yes.
And then here's a headline.
This is from the Chicago Sun-Times.
Obama turns up heat as he targets Hillary.
With her lead so strong, he decides he has to get tougher.
This guy is so milquetoast, he couldn't turn up the heat on a teapot, folks.
We found that at the debate the other night.
The guy couldn't turn up the heat, you know, on an outdoor campfire if somebody showed him the gauge.
Hi, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, talent on loan from God, Washington Post.
Sorry, Washington Times today, Rasmussen report.
Voters oppose driver's licenses for illegal aliens by a nearly five to one margin.
And immigration politics, or as immigration politics, explode into the presidential race.
By the way, can I you remember when we were debating the amnesty bill way back when in the summer?
And the proponents are worried, we've got to get this done fast.
We've got to get this done fast.
We can't let normal politics get in the way of this.
We've got to get this done fast to solve the problem.
Because they wanted to keep it out of any reelection campaign.
And you remember me saying back then, this is the kind of issue that needs to be in the presidential debate, in the presidential campaign.
We need our future president candidates to be telling us what they think about this.
And voila, it has happened.
And it happened, ladies and gentlemen.
May I remind you, without any ego whatsoever, I forced this question.
Now, we can't prove that.
But the day before the debate, I am railing about how it is that Mrs. Clinton gets passed on not having to answer what she thinks about the illegals getting driver's licenses in New York.
And a reporter writes this story.
Yes, it's radioactive for her.
You know, so I'm reading it.
I'm shouting at the paper.
Ask her.
You are a reporter.
And lo and behold, the next night of the debate, it came up and all hell has broken loose since.
And the Democrats and the media express shock and dismay that illegal immigration is such a stridently strong issue out there.
And you've got people like E.J. Deion Jr., the Washington Post say, yeah, it sounds like everybody cares about it, but it isn't.
It's a really small bunch of people, but they are very, very loud.
Tell me, E.J., with the still monopolistic or near-monopolistic control over the left-wing drive-by media, how is it that these voices you consider to be so small a number manage to be heard in such great number by our elected officials in Washington?
See, this is how libs lie to themselves.
Illegal immigration to the inside the Beltway bunch, the Washington, New York, Boston corridor, the axis of the Northeastern elites.
Why, they firmly believe, why, we've got to have these people in here.
It's a great American tradition, immigration, blah, blah, blah.
We can't be racist.
We can't be nativists and so forth.
And so they think their view is the dominant view or should be.
And so anybody outside the Beltway who doesn't subscribe, eh, they're just a bunch of, you know, rednecks when they're real loud.
Small numbers of people, but they really.
How could their voices be so heard when you have done so much in the drive-bys to squelch them?
77% of the adults surveyed opposed making drivers' licenses available to illegal aliens.
Just 16% support the idea.
It doesn't matter if you ask them, well, should it be because of security?
We got to have, like, here in the Politico, a little story by Roger Simon, legal or not, immigrants must drive.
You probably can make a good argument for giving driver's license to illegal immigrants, and you can probably make a good argument against it.
But you can't make both arguments at the same time, and you can't explain either in 30 seconds.
Whoa!
We just had Bill Clinton say, hey, Limbo, you know, this is not a soundbite issue, and you can't explain this in soundbits.
You know, it's not a soundbite, is itself a soundbite?
So Roger Simon has picked up that theme.
You can't explain either in 30 seconds.
And you go to page two of his story, and you get this.
Bruce Morrison, immigration expert.
It is a very difficult problem with no simple answer.
So when it comes to solving the problem, we take to our respective corners and call each other names.
This is politics in the 21st century.
It's just too complicated to explain to me.
Well, they got to drive.
Why do they have to drive?
I'll tell you why they have to drive so Democrats can register them to vote.
That's it.
It is what it's all about.
Anyway, you probably think I've lost my place.
The point is, we got this issue out, and it is now part of the presidential race where it should be.
And it's going to be quite telling to see how the Democrat candidates go on this because it's out there.
It's just waiting for them to trip over time and time again.
Paul, Lake in the Hills, Illinois, you're next.
Welcome to the program, sir.
It's an honor rush to speak with you.
Thank you, Very.
I wanted to go back to that Alaskan girl that they put up to talk with the stuff.
And I was wondering exactly what thousand-year-old traditions that they were referring to, and if it included things like snowmobiles, electricity, telephones, bush pilots, igloos.
I mean, what is it that they're trying to preserve with the way that they're living nowadays?
Well, let's go back and listen to the bite.
Let's listen to Soundbite again.
I love listening to the Soundbite.
I love listening to Democrats make little girls cry.
I love making liberals instill them with propaganda, scares them to death, and makes them cry.
So here is Charlene Lockwood, who, by the way, is 18.
She admits that she knew nothing about global warming when she was 16.
She hasn't seen any of the destruction of these great traditions.
She's been told about it, which makes it clear that she's been propagandized or brainwashed.
But here's what she said.
Just through my lifetime, I've seen so many changes in our community that it just hurts to not be able to have our, it's really scary to lose our tradition, our culture.
And we've been living here for thousands of years.
And it's not just that we're losing our food.
It's losing our homes.
And because we are spiritually connected and emotionally and physically connected to our homes.
And there are so many, so many communities that are in trouble.
You know, the more I listen to this, I don't know about you, Paul, but the more I listen to this, the more well, it's just outrageous.
We've been living here for thousands of years.
It's not just that we're losing our food.
Well, at the beginning, she actually claims that she has seen some of this, so I'm not sure how that can be possible.
So I would actually coin a phrase here, call it phony traditionalists, and maybe that'll spur another letter by Mr. Reed.
I don't know, but it just seems silly to me that they try to go on this traditionalist background and everything is changing when it has already changed for the good, I might add, based upon technology today.
Exactly, exactly right.
Do they really want to go back to the way they used to live 200 years ago?
A thousand years ago.
Well, let's not limit ourselves.
That's not what this is about.
And your questions are very thorough and illustrative in making that point.
This is not about, of course, nobody wants to go back to the way it was 200 years ago.
If we did that, we'd be dealing with horse manures in the streets.
We wouldn't have air conditioning.
We would not have indoor plumbing.
Nobody wants to go back to that.
Those are not grand and great traditions from the past that will unite us spiritually and as members of the community.
It's all bogus.
This is just emotional, emotional heart string tugging.
It's all it is.
It is.
In fact, I'll tell you what, folks, I'm going to go out on a limb here, something I'm familiar with doing and I do regularly on this program.
I think that it is sexist.
I think that it is profoundly sexist of Congressman Maki and the rest of the members of that committee to bring up a poor girl, a young girl who's been obviously propagandized and she's crying her heart out.
Would they ever bring a man up there to do that?
Would they ever bring a boy up there to start crying?
No, but let's go get the girl.
We can count on her to start bawling.
By the way, another prediction that I made, ladies and gentlemen, is beginning to come to fruition.
This happens frequently for me, especially when I make predictions about liberals because I know them better than they know themselves because they are not even honest with themselves.
I know them and I'm honest about them.
They live, you know, little cocoons to shield themselves from not only the rest of the world but themselves.
One of the predictions I made was that the worst thing that could happen to the left is if the surge worked, if Iraq started turning around, I said, you are going to see utter panic on the left because they have so politically or had so politically invested in defeat.
And have you sensed the panic as these casualty numbers have continually dropped?
And numerous leaders in various provinces in Iraq are saying, Al-Qaeda's basically gone from here.
The surge is working.
Investors Business Daily today is even touting David Petraeus as the ideal Republican presidential candidate.
He's the guy that could win the nomination and he can bring the country together, blah, That is just a sign of the success that we're having.
And the left is in, as I predicted, utter panic about it, not just dropping the issue from the campaign and trying to move on to other things.
Did you hear what David Obie said?
This is in the Hill newspaper.
If violence is decreasing in Iraq, it may be because insurgents are running out of people to kill.
Obie said yesterday.
There are fewer targets of opportunity.
Made this in a speech at the National Press Club.
He was watching or responding to a question about reports that security is improving in Iraq and that President Bush's surge strategery is working.
He stressed that military success has not led to political reconciliation.
The issue has never been military, Obi said.
The issue has always been political improvement.
No, it's not been.
You keep shifting what's important.
When all of our soldiers, quote-unquote, were dying, it was the political mission that was bad and it was botched and it wasn't working.
We got to get out.
Now it started working and the panic sets in.
We're just running out of people to kill.
David Obie.
Terrorists running out of people to kill cannot bring themselves to admit because they and they can't allow anybody else to understand that what's happening in Iraq is a huge turnaround.
Tim in Johnson City, Tennessee.
Welcome.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
Thanks, Rush.
It's an honor to be on your show.
Thank you, sir.
I wanted to comment on something you were talking about yesterday on the show about not basing your worth on the opinions of others.
Yes.
Listen, I listen to you all the time and agree with virtually everything you have to say, but this one really got me excited because I'm a youth minister in Northeast Tennessee and just maybe a couple of months ago directed a weekend for teens based on this very idea.
And we took an idea based off of Robert McGee's book, The Search for Significance, something he calls the performance trap.
And what he says is that most people in the world base their self-worth on the opinions of others plus their own performance.
And just like you were saying yesterday, this is such a bogus way of thinking and justifying your self-worth because, first of all, you can't always please everyone.
There's going to be people in the world that don't like you no matter how good of a job you're doing.
And then on top of that, sometimes you just can't perform.
Sometimes you're going to get beaten.
You're not always going to be the best.
And there's always going to be someone that is.
Not you, Rush.
That may be true for some.
Yeah, obviously not you.
But for most people, for us mere mortals, there's always going to be someone that is better than us.
And so here's the idea that we were trying to get across to the young people.
And that is base your self-worth on what God thinks of you.
Base your self-worth on if you're doing the right thing.
We gave them, you know, the scripture says, for what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul?
Some people are so interested on gaining the whole world and being the most popular and the best when those things aren't what really matters at all.
We told them that a good life is not based on the absence of problems, but a good life is how you deal with those problems that you're faced with.
Well, that's a mouthful.
You know, one of the most important things you said, I have a different way of expressing.
The desire for acceptance from others is a natural human characteristic.
And we're all raised that way.
We want feedback from our parents.
Good boy, Rusty.
We want to hear all of this.
We want to hear how we're good.
And we want people.
We're raised to make people love us and like us.
We're raised to not offend people so that we don't embarrass the family or whatever.
We're all raised this way.
And it leads to a dependency on this kind of thing.
And some people are able to escape it on their own, and other people aren't, and they become ruled and governed by it.
You set a life lived doing the right thing.
See, you're immediately in a problem right there, especially because you're a youth minister, because the liberals in this audience hearing you say that.
What right do you have to lay claim to what's right?
Who are you to tell us what the right thing to do is?
You know, we have a whole political movement in this country that's based on getting rid of all judgments on all behavior and replacing judgment with tolerance and understanding.
However, there will be no tolerance of ministers.
There will be no tolerance for the Pope.
There will be no tolerance for conservatives.
But there will be tolerance for all the depravity and all the debauchery that a society engages in.
That will be defined as enlightenment.
But each of us has.
And you'll know this when I say it.
I don't care whether you are a hardened criminal or whether you are as clean and pure as the wind-driven snow.
We all have an inner voice that before we do something tells us don't do it or it's okay to do it.
Well, maybe some of us don't have the inner voice.
I contend that the vast majority of people do.
That when you're about to do something you know you shouldn't do, you know you shouldn't do it because there's an inner voice telling you you shouldn't do it.
But we do it anyway because we think it'll be fun, it's a risk, we get away with it, what have you.
If people would just listen to that inner voice, if we just listen to it, they might be disappointed on the fun factor now and then, but their life would be far more fulfilled and worthwhile.
We're all born with it, folks.
We are all born with the inner voice.
Don't do it or do it.
It's wrong.
It's right.
And that inner voice is the target of much of our depraved left in this country to eliminate that voice and to make people forget it by saying that's just guilt and you cannot be governed by guilt.
Love free, be free, do whatever you want to do, blah, So, but I do think this whole business of allowing people to affect how you feel about yourself is the biggest trap on the face of the earth.
Earl in Tulsa, I'm glad you waited, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Yes, Rush.
Go ahead and thank for taking my call.
Make a ditto.
Thank you, sir.
I've tried to call you before, but never got lucky enough to get through.
I just want to talk about this girl from Alaska.
Well, you keep calling her a girl, but she's 18 years old, and in all 50 states, she's old enough to get married without her parents' permission.
She's old enough to join the army, and in most states, she can dance in a strip club.
Why are we calling her a girl?
She's not a kid anymore.
We're splitting hairs here.
But if you want to put this poor, innocent young Eskimo who has been brainwashed and propagandized to the point of tears in a strip club.
I guess I was one of the luck.
I was the lucky one.
And when I was 18, all they wanted to do was send me to Vietnam.
I didn't have to worry about global warming.
Well, if you'd have gone, Congress would have had you back.
Oh, I went.
I went.
But that's an excellent, that is a great illustration of how things have changed.
Here's an 18-year-old woman.
Is that better?
That's woman, yes.
18-year-old woman brought up to Congress to cry on cue.
Right.
About vanishing thousand-year-old traditions of obtaining food and shelter.
She may have won a crying contest somewhere, and they say, we've got to have her.
Well, maybe, you know, I'm sure the Democrats research this stuff, and it's all done for the photogenic aspect and the ability of the interviewee to reach out emotionally beyond the TV screen into the hearts and minds of viewers.
But here we have an 18-year-old woman who's brought up to Congress to cry.
And when you were 18, they gave you no choice and sent you to Vietnam.
Yeah.
And you didn't have time to cry.
No, and we had too much fun to cry over there.
But I'm glad we can all see through the Democrats and people like her.
Well, she's really unclear.
It's not so much saying, you know, you tell me she's a woman at age 18 in terms of life experiences and education is very young.
She's a neophyte in these kinds of things.
She knows what she's been told.
It's outrageous, and it is just unbelievable what they are doing in using her.
Because in this situation, I think the reason we call her a girl here is because of her age in relationship to the subject matter about which she claims to be an expert and is testifying.
Beverly, in San Antonio, Texas, we go to you before the break.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, how are you?
Thank you for taking my call.
I just wanted to say, I remember back in the 70s when I was about 10 or so, that Newsweek and all the network media were talking about the coming ice age within the next 30 years.
So that would mean we're in the ice age.
We should be right now.
They were wrong back then.
Why are we all buying into this global warming now?
I don't know how many people are.
When I hear Al Gore go on the Today Show and demand that journalists stop covering the side that's opposed to this, I sense a little panic because if he were really confident that they were going to sell this and everybody in the world was going to buy it, he wouldn't care what the opposition said because it'd be so small.
But he's trying to squelch the opposition here.
I'm not sure how many people actually buy this.
I know a lot of kids do.
See, that's the danger.
You heard the woman before Congress and all these little kids that have been forced to go and watch the movie that El Gore made.
Yes, and I remember being terrified as a child just from seeing that on the cover of Newsweek and not really understanding it.
So I can understand when you were 10, you were reading Newsweek, or was it just in the dentist's office when you went and you saw the cover?
I saw the cover.
Yeah.
Well, media has been scaring people since the media was founded.
Yes.
And I have another question.
Are most of these people that are pushing this movement down our throat, are they like Darwinists?
Do you believe that they believe in that?
Because if they are, then if global warming happens, we will either adapt or die out.
I think that they obviously, you know, that's a pretty good question because obviously they are Darwinists.
All these clowns that believe in evolution.
They're scientists, quote unquote, going biblical, will cancel their grants.
So they have to be Darwinists.
And yet, at the same time, we're saying we're not going to be able to adapt.
Exactly.
We're not going to be able to adapt.
You can't have it both ways.
Well, If you've got a slavish, on-your-side media that exists to simply promulgate your agenda, then you can say whatever you want without fear anybody's going to ask you a question.
And Mrs. Clinton's a great example.
She finally got a question on an issue she was not prepared for, and we saw and are seeing the outcome.
Thanks very much, Beverly.
A brief having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have Rush Limbaugh redefining hip on the radio.
I say it, and you'll believe it.
And that's how it works.
800-282-2882, if you would like to be on the program.
Mo in Columbus, Ohio.
Great to have you, sir.
Hey, Russ.
How you doing, man?
Pretty good, cool.
Ah, God.
You're a unique guy, man.
I don't know if that's not a compliment.
It's not an insult.
But listen, I listened to your show for like the last two or three months, man, and I can't never get through.
I got through today.
You quick to show play sound bites of all the stuff that the Democrats said and done.
I'm not going to knock it.
Some of it was idiotic.
You failed.
Wait, wait, wait.
Hold on.
Hold on.
You failed.
You have not one time played anything about the Republicans.
Mo.
You guys talk about the warrant.
Hold on, hold on.
Hold on.
Let me finish.
I knew he was going to cut me off because that's what you could have said.
Mo, I can't understand you.
I want you to slow down.
I don't.
Okay.
I don't cut people off.
Okay.
Okay.
Well, listen to me.
If you've listened for three months, you should know that at least.
Okay, well, check it out, baby.
I know I talk fast or you might listen just a little slower than I talk, baby.
Check it out.
Check it out.
Whatever.
Slow down.
All right.
Well, listen to me.
You're quick to play sound bites on the Democrats and all the dumb stuff they say and done.
I'm not knocking that.
But you have not one time played anything on Condoleezza's court trial when she was brought up on charge for not letting the American people know about the 911 incident.
She was born six months, three months, and three weeks before it happened.
Hold on, Freddie, cut me off.
Now, the funny part is, you're quick to say that the Republicans didn't know about it.
Well, two weeks before they went down, Cheney bought insurance to the World Trade Center.
Now, him being in the circle that he was in, you think Bush didn't buy insurance on it?
You think Condoleezza didn't buy insurance on it?
You got all these people out here thinking that the Democrats are the bad ones.
Well, you guys are the ones who, I'm not saying you, but Bush and them are the ones who didn't let nobody know.
Now, if they had told some people, if they had told some people that, hey, there's a possibility that these players are going to be hijacked and landed in the buildings, do you think they would have flown?
Do you think they would have flown?
Now, they couldn't tell them because this is the reason why we got to go to war.
Now, I don't say nothing, John, but we're going to get insurance on it.
We're going to get some insurance on these buildings just in case they happen to go down.
So when you say that they didn't know about it, dude, they knew about it.
They knew about it six months before it happened.
When she was on trial, that guy that was, whoever was the prosecutor's talking to her, he read back the memo she had on her on her desk.
He asked her, what part is not important enough to learn American people?
Mo.
Answer that for me.
A question.
Question.
Question before I answer this.
Okay.
Did you?
I want to make sure I understood because you were rapid fire there.
You got a lot of passion.
I like that in you, Mo.
I love people.
Passionate callers.
They could be saying the stupidest things in the world.
But if they're doing it with passion, people will listen to it.
Now, did you say that Cheney bought insurance on the World Trade Centers two weeks before they went down?
Don't play like you don't know that.
You done seen that.
I don't know.
No, no, I'm trying to figure out.
I'm trying to.
What kind of insurance did he buy?
He bought insurance on the World Trade Center.
It's on the building.
He bought insurance on the buildings.
It's all over.
That was out.
Something happened.
Mo, I didn't know this could be done, but if you bought insurance.
Come on, dude.
You knew that, man.
You knew that.
Russ, come on.
You're too smart for that, Russ.
Now, my thing is, if he or Condelee didn't do it, man.
Condoleezza's never been in a court trial.
Don't think she didn't put no insurance on it.
I've done it all.
Would you answer the question?
I've got 45 seconds left for.
I got to take a break.
If you buy insurance on a building and it goes down, you get paid.
You get paid off what you put on insurance on it, dude.
That's the type of thing.
But how could it be on the car?
How could a private citizen buy insurance on buildings owned by the New York Port Authority, the New York City, and New York State?
Oh, you told me he didn't?
What?
I got to send it to you.
I got to send you the article that's been online forever.
What is it from?
Was it from a website on Mars?
A website from Mars?
Is that what you said?
Your article that you're going to send me that proves this.
Oh, come on, Russ.
Okay.
You know what?
My dude told me that you were called.
You might play dumb on something stuff, Russ.
You knew it like everybody else knew it, man.
We're out of time.
I'm trying, folks.
We'll get this.
It was hopeless.
Hit the.
Mike, I want you to go grab just a snippet, any snippet, like just a minute, minute and a half of Mo's call, because I think I know some things about this guy, and I want to point out a couple of other things, too.
Do that during the break, and we'll review it.
▲
Export Selection