All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 12, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:16
November 12, 2007, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program, documented to be almost always right, 98.8% of the time.
I am well known radio raconteur, general all-round good guy and harmless, lovable little fuzzball.
The all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing, all-feeling Maha Rush Nishi.
We are here at 800-282-288-2, the email address rush at EIBNet.com.
Rank and file Democrats express dismay Friday over their party's latest anti-war strategy.
Some members reluctant to vote around Veterans Day to bring the troops home.
The House was on track to uh consider legislation this week that would give President Bush 50 bill for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but insist he begin withdrawing the troops.
The measure identifies a goal of ending combat by December 2008.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed off plans for a Friday vote after caucus members told her late Thursday they weren't sure they would support it.
Liberal Democrats said the proposal was too soft.
Conservative members told Pelosi they thought it went too far.
Majority leader Dingy Harry in the uh in the Senate said he didn't want to approve a spending measure for Iraq unless it forced a change in Bush's policies.
When asked whether that was possible, considering the thin majority Democrats hold, Dingy Harry said it was up to the White House and up to uh Republicans.
So there apparently on a rare occasion we will find adults in the Democrat Party regarding this stupid move last Friday to propose this coming up the Veterans Day weekend.
Uh but there's there's also something more going on than this.
Why do the Liberals keep bringing up and losing the S-Chip bill?
Why do they keep bringing up cutting defense spending and losing?
They they've all but admitted this.
They're gonna run on the following premise.
We Democrats were out here fighting for you, but the Republicans and Bush won't let us win.
So it's not our fault.
We're trying to do the right thing.
We j we just can't get Bush and the Republicans to agree and go along with us.
So they like losing all these things, especially the S-Chip bill, because it makes them think they're gonna be able to run a campaign next year on how Bush and the Republicans hate the children.
Last Thursday, Senator Joe Lieberman painted a dim picture of his party, saying Democrats have given up their moral authority on foreign policy because they're more concerned with opposing Republicans and doing what's right.
For many Democrats, the guiding conviction in foreign policy isn't pacifism or isolationism.
It's distrust and disdain of Republicans in general, President Bush in particular.
Lieberman said this at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies.
The uh the Bush administration's post-9-11 ideological conversion confronted Democrats with an awkward choice.
Should we welcome the President's foreign policy flip-flop or should Democrats match it with a flip-flop of our own?
I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president articulated for the war on terror as our own.
Because it was our own.
It was our legacy.
But that was not the choice most Democrats made.
Instead, they flip-flopped.
Lieberman said Democrats are not being guided by principle, but rather by partisanship.
Amen, bro.
Right on to money.
We've we've mentioned this on this program countless times.
Moving on to another issue that the Democrats are enmeshed in that's not good for them.
It's by Gloria Borger, U.S. News and World Report, the Democrats Immigration Dilemma.
For the past year or so, Republicans handed a Democrats a gift that kept on giving immigration reform.
The GOP was divided as the Democrats watched the squabbling from the sidelines.
Even more to the point, they were absolutely delighted at the prospect of picking up the support of Hispanic voters, outraged at the efforts of some Republicans to deport 12 million.
There was never nobody on our side was realistically talking about deporting anybody, Gloria.
Anyway, it was a free ride.
Democrats happy to take it until the wheels came off.
Hillary Clinton didn't mean to be the one to do it, but she was.
Her struggle with herself over how to handle the issue of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants and other the other week changed everything.
Not only was she caught without a clear idea of how to handle it, the entire Dais of Democrats shared the debate stage with her, seemed to be a tad undone by the question, and pleased that she had been called on first.
That way they could jump on her for taking both sides of an issue, but delay their own answers long enough to figure out how to straddle the matter.
And they are still doing it.
It's not hard to figure out why, Ms. Borger writes.
Immigration's a killer issue.
One that cuts so many ways, it's hard for a pol to figure out just how to pander.
Liberals are against building that fence to keep illegal immigrants out.
Conservatives are worried the fence won't be tall enough.
Here's the key reason, though.
Independent voters are unhappy that nothing's been done on the matter of illegal immigration.
Anyone who wants to be president needs to keep independent voters happy.
In fact, a recent survey by Democrat polster Stan Greenberg shows that the top issue underlying the discontent of independence is unprotected borders.
It's not just independence.
This crosses party lines.
Seventy-two percent of the American people are upset with current immigration policy and the lack of action to uh to deal with it.
In the Los Angeles Times.
Another story.
This meet about the same thing.
They mean the Democrats are really worried about this.
Some think the party can toughen its image on illegal immigration without straying from traditional positions.
What do you mean?
Stradle offense, come down on both sides, waffle, why?
Is that what Democrats think they can do on this issue?
Top Democrat officials and strategists are engaged in an internal debate over toughening the party's image on illegal immigration, with some worried that Democrats' relatively welcoming stance makes them vulnerable to GOP attacks in the 2008 elections.
Two stories.
Gloria Borger, LA Times on the precarious position the Democrats are in on illegal immigration, serves as yet another attempt by the drive-by media to warn the Democrats to get in gear on this.
By the way, folks, we did it on this program.
We injected this issue finally into the into the presidential campaign, illegal immigration, where it should have been all along.
When Tim Russert asked that question that I had railed about the same day as the debate, when he asked it later that night of Hillary Clinton, yeah, but yeah, but the answers were just embarrassing, and she is still off stride as a result of it.
From the Politico.com today, Hillary Clinton was asked this summer if she would describe herself as a liberal.
She shied away, saying the word, not using the word, has taken on a connotation that describes big government.
I prefer the word progressive, she said.
It has a real American meaning.
Then she expanded the term to modern progressives and finally clarified that she was a modern American progressive.
These are heady days for the Democrats, party favored by almost all measures in the coming presidential contest.
But while the Democrats are emboldened, they remain wary of the term liberal.
Republicans, by contrast, are as unpopular in the polls as they have been for at least 15 years, nonetheless, the label conservative remains in vogue.
This is a whole story about how liberals don't like the term liberal, and why not?
Because it's accurate.
It does mean big government.
The way they are today, it means socialists for crying out loud.
And they're all about protecting their real identities.
They're all about shielding who they really are.
They're all about making you think that there's somebody and people that they're not.
I mean, why go out and hire all these wordsmiths to help them phrase things like George Lackoff rhymes with.
Haven't heard much from this guy.
I don't even remember his name.
Brief time out here, folks.
We will be right back.
More of your phone calls are coming up right after the break.
Ah, welcome back.
I just got an email I checked out during the break.
Somebody said, Hey Rush, you were talking last week.
What if Huckabee wins Iowa?
I mean, how does that throw things over?
Could you support Huckabi?
I'd have a real problem with that because he is pro-exercise.
And I'm not.
Uh that'd be a toughie.
Bill Clinton, ladies and gentlemen, and Osama uh what a Barry agree that the Republican Party will make immigration an issue.
Well, yeah.
What are they?
Brainiacs for this?
This is Dan Balls' blog at the Washington Post.
I was talking about this earlier.
During two days of town hall meetings in Southeast Iowa before otherwise friendly audiences of Democrats, Obama was repeatedly challenged on immigration.
The sense of frustration and anger about illegal immigration was evident virtually every stop.
It seemed a harbinger of what could be the Democrats' most difficult challenge in 2008.
Well, you guys in the drive-by's, where have you been?
Where in the world have you been?
What did I bring to somebody?
Oh!
Oh!
Ran into a guy in a golf course recently.
Some Philadelphia.
Said, hey, what about Bloomberg Rush?
I said, What about him?
Great president, don't you think?
And I said, as a Republican?
Well, yeah.
I mean, he got two to three months he could still wait to get and decide if he wants to get in and go, and he could do it.
And I looked at this as a good friend of mine.
This is a problem with you people live on the East Coast.
You think that there's no other parts of the country.
Mike Michael Bloomberg could not get the Republican nomination for anything outside New York.
And maybe parts of Philadelphia.
Actually, I was felt a little uncomfortable because I got my voice raised a little bit.
You guys understand there's a whole country out there.
You're just like the media in the New York Boston Washington corridor.
And there's whatever happens there is all that matters.
And is all there is.
He chuckled and walked away.
And I was finished with the conversation.
But there's this balls again here.
Just now figuring out that immigration is going to be a problem for the Democrats.
Gloria Borger had one thing right when she talked about the fact that the Democrats weren't saying diddly squat about this during the original amnesty bill debate.
They were just watching what they thought was the Republicans caving and destroying themselves by being divided on the issue.
When in fact it's the Republicans that saved themselves.
The Democrats are the ones that allowed themselves to be split on this now and to just figure out what is going on.
Now, Balls' piece is only on a blog on the Washington Post, it's not in a newspaper.
But let me read you this paragraph.
Having listened to both Hillary Clinton and Obama answer tough questions on immigration from voters this week, it's clear there is almost no difference between the two of them on the overall topic.
Neither Hillary nor Obama can answer the question in 30 seconds or even two minutes.
The Democrat position takes time to explain, includes plenty of qualifiers to soften the message that they favor providing a path to legal status for the estimated 12 million illegals.
Now in the country, Hillary Clinton may have stumbled in the Philadelphia debate, but every Democrat running for president knows that tough questions will keep coming from the voters and the Republicans this year and next.
Can't answer the question in 30 seconds, can't answer it in 20 minutes, because they don't want to answer it, Dan.
It's real say don't want to answer it.
They don't want to tell people what they really think about this.
And what they think is, they want as many illegals in this country, and they want them having driver's licenses, and they want them being registered to vote, pure and simple.
And I just told you in ten seconds what both of their positions are.
Mrs. Clinton's and Obama's, doesn't matter.
The brick girl, any Democrat candidate running for president, that's the position.
As many illegals in the country as possible, get them driver's licenses and photo IDs.
Uh as for their driver's license so they can register to vote.
Done.
Now, if they really believe it, why don't they tell us this?
Because they know it's deadly.
By the way, have you heard the latest now?
Bill Clinton taking the blame for botching health care.
Not Hillary.
It happened last Thursday in Glenwood, Iowa.
Here is the former president.
She has taken the wrap for some of the problems we had with health care last time that were far more my fault than hers.
I mean, let's just face it.
We couldn't raise money.
This time, when you let the uh uh tax incentives for upper income people expire, they'll create a pool of money that wasn't there last time.
We told her she had to get to universal coverage, and there would be no new money.
She had to figure out how to do it.
She also was very vulnerable to the Senate filibuster last time.
Because they were on uh just say no to Bill Clinton.
Oh, the chivalry.
The chivalry from this man and the and the strange memory.
And of course, we had a tax cuts.
Uh, we when you let the tax cuts for upper income people expire, that'll create a pool of money that wasn't there last time.
Uh she's already gonna tax, she's taxed the rich out of existence on paper in explaining how she's gonna pay for everything that she's uh going to do.
Uh this has caused some concern too in the Clinton campaign.
Uh you know, Mrs. Clinton, uh, your husband's out there.
Mr. Edwards, your wife is out there.
Mr. Obama, your wife is out there.
Can't any of these candidates speak for themselves and when they happen to step in it, can't they get back out without a spouse coming along to help them?
Which uh that caused Hillary Clinton to defend her husband, Bill Clinton, for defending her on the campaign trail in Iowa.
Well, with her campaign having hit a rough patch lately based on a rocky performance at the Philadelphia debate, the Clinton camp sent Bill out to Iowa to try to rally support for her in the early voting state.
The uh former president took on the task with gusto in one speech.
He cited a survey by a Canadian pollster that said many people in France, Germany, Britain, Italy, and Canada preferred Hillary uh to be the next U.S. president.
Oh, really?
Uh today there's a story from Northstar Writers.com, Paul Ibrahim.
If America's image is so bad, why do pro-Americans like Sarkozy keep getting elected?
It was by watching America grow that men and women understood that freedom was possible.
What made America great was her ability to transform her own dream into hope for all mankind.
And that's not the words of Ronald Reagan, nor George W. Bush, Abraham Lincoln, or George Washington.
Those are the words of Nicholas Sarkozy, the uh current president of France.
Bill Clinton last week was the latest to jump on the bandwagon of top Democrats, suggesting an electing Hillary would be the only way for America to repair its image in the world.
But here's the great pull quote from this story.
This global trend of electing conservative pro-American governments is due to the kind of solid foreign policy and leadership that the world had missed during the Clinton years.
And except for those leaders whom Bill uh whom Bill Clinton aids in criticizing the United States, such as Canada's rejected Martin, leaders of the democracies today are friends who are reaching out to us in a manner we've not seen in a long time.
These are leaders with whom we are happy to work regardless of disagreements.
It is Bill Clinton and Al Gorbin traveling the world trying to gin up anti-American support among socialist audiences and socialist groups and leaders, which then gets fawning praise from the worldwide drive-by media.
But in truth, the reality is that Germany and France and a number of other Canada, Sweden, Portugal, Greece, Mexico just elected a conservative guy.
Uh these pe these countries are all electing pro-Americans.
And they keep getting elected.
So Clinton to say this Canadian pollster, many people, France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Canada, preferred Hillary Clinton to be the next U.S. president.
Don't think so.
Uh just more myth making, image making, than trying to define what a template and narrative will be in the drive-by media.
Last Thursday, uh Barack Obama on a campaign trail, and he's asked about Clinton, saying the health care fiasco was more his fault than Hillary's.
Uh, all I know is that uh part of the record she's running on is having worked on health care.
So it's kind of hard to gauge if one of her claims is to have experience in this issue.
Mr. Venn suggested somehow uh she didn't have anything to do with the fact that it didn't work.
You know, if you weren't saying that part of your basis for experience is the work you did on help care, then presumably uh when it didn't work, you know, that that's part of uh uh that's part of the experience as well.
Yeah, the the she worked on it, it didn't work.
That's part of the experience as well.
So here comes chivalrous bill riding in on uh black horse uh as the first black president to say uh you know uh healthcare that that was more my problem than hers.
I mean, she didn't have much to work with.
We didn't give her much to work with her.
We raised tax on people, but didn't create enough money, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
So this this doesn't help, uh, folks.
It just makes all these candidates look like they can't speak for themselves when the spouses go out there and try to clean up the mess.
Half my brain tied behind my back because that's all I need to keep it fair.
Rush Limboy and the EIB network.
This is Brian in Winston, Salem, North Carolina.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
How are you, sir?
Just fine, sir.
Thank you for asking.
Uh conservative right-wing Christian dittoes from North Carolina.
Oh, just the kind of people that Barack Obama says the Democrats don't like.
Yeah, and oh, by the way, uh, just a good old Southern saying, just keep laying the hardwood, the nurse ratchet, okay.
I really know no other way.
I just really know no other way.
I really appreciate that.
Let me take you back to the first hour, Rush, if I may.
And um my comment is the difference between screening an audience as the president of the United States, you know, security issues.
Are you talking about the planted questions?
Yes, I'm sorry, yeah.
That the Clinton campaign is denying happened, uh, but that Mrs. Clinton says she won't tolerate uh and she didn't know about.
Right.
And yeah, it it blows well, it doesn't blow my mind because we're talking about Clinton Inc., but that we would be talking about screening people to come in for the president of the United States, and then planting questions.
I mean, to me, that's a huge difference.
Well, you know, the whole the Bush plants questions.
He takes questions from the press at these press conferences, none of those questions are planted.
Um the the the idea that that Bush plants questions and so forth, or that every other candidate does it too, which is what the Clintons said, uh uh is just like, well, everybody lies about sex, too.
Nobody has any morals, nobody has any ethics.
We're not any different than anybody else.
Everybody does this stuff.
Well, well, Maha Rushy, I know you can give a good explanation to me and the listeners there.
Um what is the difference between screening what our president does and the obvious planting of the Clintons?
Well, uh I what I don't even know when you're talking about screening a personal appearance of the president makes somewhere where the public is going to be there.
Yeah.
It's a security procedure.
Yeah, that's what it makes sense to me.
Come on.
I could give you a better analogy using the way I run the EIB network's Rush Limbaugh program.
We screen calls.
We do it for a specific reason.
We try to find the best callers.
This is a radio program.
Callers are not highly trained professionals like I am.
They're not specialists in broadcasting.
And so we try to find people who either have passion or something unique to say, or who will make the host look good.
And that's done not by complimenting the host, but by inspiring the host.
Uh that's why I say I'm a benevolent dictator.
We do not grant everybody the right who gets through on the phones to speak because some of them will be so boring that the audience will leave.
And I can't have that.
Uh to bore the audience, that's that's probably the only genuine fear that I have in running this program.
So we screen to find the best.
And they can be critical, they can be off-the-wall wacko or what have you.
But but planting calls to make the host look good or whatever.
Never ever happens.
And sometimes, you know, it's embarrassing.
I have I have people, friends of mine want the phone number so they can call in to say things, and I will not do it.
I just will not do it.
It's artificial.
You know, I w the the uh talk show, the callers call you, and they get through or they don't get through.
Uh we don't call the callers.
And so there's a big difference.
Um the the Clinton campaign is not screening, they're planting.
They're actually putting people in the audience with a specific question that Mrs. Clinton, the candidate, knows is coming.
Pure and simple.
And the reason for that is security of the political kind, doesn't want to get questions like she was asked at the Philadelphia debate.
She wants to get questions where she can offer her meaning little meaningless little slandering or pandering slogans.
Uh and make people think that she's thoughtful and deep and connected and all that sort of stuff.
It's all a show.
It's uh it's it's all designed to protect her.
That's not what we do here.
That's the best way I could illustrate the difference.
Um T California is next.
This is Patty.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Hi.
Hi.
Um, thank you for taking my call.
I wanted to call you on Veterans Day, and thank you for your support of the troops, your positive outlook on our war effort over there.
Um I have two sons in the United States Army.
My older son is uh U.S. Army Airborne Ranger, and my younger son is an infantryman with uh fourth infantry division.
And well, those are both huge units.
Yes.
Yes, they are, sir.
Airborne Rangers and the Fourth ID.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
And I just so appreciate your your warmth and your love of our soldiers, and you support them, and I I can't tell you how much it means to me.
I just wanted to thank you, sir.
Well, thank you.
Uh I I hope you heard the call earlier where we were uh caller and I were discussing sacrifice, and and uh one of the things that I don't think should ever be uh left out of that discussion is the sacrifice of families make.
Military military families.
I did hear that call in the case.
Because while you're while while your your sons are over there, you've had to put up with uh four years of negative news about the mission, about the troops, yes, stories about their uh raping and murdering citizens and all this sort of stuff, and you always face the possibility every day of losing them.
Yes, that's that is true, sir, and it's it's very disheartening, and it's uh it's a fight every day to fight back the fear and to keep the faith and to just listen to the positive and to try to filter out the negative and that's that is absolutely correct.
That's true, sir.
Well, we uh we have all the admiration and love for you people in the world, uh you those of you in military families and uh you will always have it from the vast majority of the people in this country, Patty.
I want you to listen.
We've got a soundbite here from uh MSNBC Live.
Uh the anchor Tamron Hall talking with correspondent Tom Aspell.
Uh and Tamron Hall says, we hear that these pronouncements are dramatic improvements in the capital of Baghdad, but what do you see from your vantage point being there?
Before we play the bite, no, we just want to remind you, last Thursday.
New York Times story, insurgent group driven out of Baghdad.
It was Al Qaeda.
Only 13% of the country is left infested with Al-Qaeda.
Most of its mookie Al Saders boys.
And I saw just a moment ago that Petraeus is going to enter into discussions with uh with with uh Muki.
Al Qaeda has been kicked out of Baghdad.
The whole purpose of the surge.
And of course, the New York Times couldn't even identify the group, insurgent group driven out of Baghdad.
The whole objective has been realized.
This reporter, Tom Aspill, MSNBC Live grudgingly sort of confirms this.
American casualties are down.
Casualties among Iraqi security forces also down.
Here's a telling statistic.
At the beginning of the summer, there used to be about 187 explosions per month in central Baghdad, and that figure is now dropped to about 18 per month.
And then the number of indirect fire attacks, that is rocket and mortifier in and around Baghdad, that has dropped from nearly 400 a month down to about 20 a month.
Now that's a significant decrease.
So it certainly means that thanks to that surge of 30,000 American troops in and around Baghdad, beginning at the beginning of this year and going right through the summer, because of those troops, uh the Americans now saying that Baghdad is largely pacified.
There are still incidents going on in and around the Capitol.
But certainly, as the Prime Minister said on Sunday, uh it seems to have dropped off by about 70 or 80 percent, and that's a considerable improvement.
What does that mean?
It means Bush was right.
Oh, they can't bring themselves to say that.
It just means in fact did this guy say Al Qaeda.
Uh no, these attacks, these incidents, they are way down.
Nothing about Al Qaeda being driven out of Baghdad.
Nothing.
Just doesn't fit the narrative.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
As we predicted, ladies and gentlemen, last week, less than twenty-four hours after the last ballot was cast last Tuesday.
New Jersey Democrats sent a strong message to New Jersey voters, your vote doesn't count.
One day after the voters rejected plans for the state to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to support stem cell research grants.
Democrats returned to the State House intent on pushing through millions in bonding for stem cell research facilities, only after the Republicans objected to the Democrats decide to cancel a hearing that they had scheduled for last Thursday to approve that borrowing.
But despite the cancellation, Governor Corzine and Senate President Richard Cody, both avid supporters of stem cell results uh research said that the uh the state will move forward with its plans to build facilities throughout the state, ignoring the voters' mandate to cease borrowing.
The Republican leader in the assembly, Alex DeCroce, I hope I'm pronouncing that right.
It's hard enough to get people to go to the polls because many feel their vote doesn't count or make a difference.
Now they find out it doesn't.
In New Jersey.
I suspect New Jerseyans know this all along.
This is not the first time.
As I said last week, when the state Supreme Court can just throw out the Constitution and let uh the torch be replaced by the lout, so the Democrats have a candidate in their Senate race.
Well, what's this?
What what's the big deal of ignoring a referendum or ballot initiative?
Ray in Cumberland, Maryland.
Welcome to the EIB network, sir.
It's your turn.
Okay.
El Rushbo.
Yeah.
A happy veterans day from a right-wing Christian nutcase.
Yes, uh, just the kind of person Barack Obama says he doesn't like.
Exactly.
But Rush, after your show today, I think I'm gonna have to change my diet.
Yeah, what are you gonna do?
Um, gonna stay away from ear pods now, I guess.
Earbuds?
Yeah, the the ones for the iPhone.
I found and iPod too.
Uh CNN, uh big big report.
Uh Wow.
If you eat those things, uh uh you could get sick.
What I'd like to know is how do they get the rats to inhale them?
Uh well that's that's that's I don't know that they did.
I think what they did was inject the the phthalates in the uh earbuds and in the cord into the rats to see what would happen.
But I don't think the rats ate the buds.
Uh I don't know that any human being is eating the buds.
Look at folks, I know broadcasting.
And I'm just gonna take a wild guess here.
That story on CNN with the chief medical guy, who probably really appreciates his credibility.
Going out, doing a story how eating Your iPod, iPhone, earbuds, and the cord could make you sick, and that a warning should be on the boxes that the iPhone and the iPod come in.
And furthermore, don't breathe them in.
Now, I know at CNN they are whacked, but this would set a new standard.
Now, so I don't know if this is true, because I don't watch CNN enough to know.
But it could well be that Apple refuses to advertise there.
You just never know.
If they do advertise there, then of course my theorem is out the window.
So I'm just speculating, but I don't have time to watch CNN 24-7 to see if Apple's advertising.
What I think Steve Jobs and Apple ought to do in the face of this onslaught, this assault on their product, uh, by the drive-by media.
They ought to start making edible earbuds and wires, cords that the earbuds come on, so there wouldn't be any danger.
Make them chewable.
And by the way, can you imagine the sales that they would have of earbuds and cords because people would eat them, come in different flavors, different textures, maybe add them, make them ingredients to other foods.
And you can your apple tastes like a pear.
Uh or what have you.
Make your apple taste like a white truffle without it costing you 300 bucks a pound.
There's any number of possibilities for Apple to do here since somebody's discovered that if you eat, and actually, they haven't discovered it.
They're just speculating that the phthalates in there could make you sick.
Story is it's just it's just this it was ridiculous.
But it was there, and it was done seriously.
Now, maybe you know, we were speculating here amongst ourselves, maybe we haven't heard of anybody eating these things, and we can't figure out how to breathe them in.
But who knows?
A lot of nuts in this country could there might have been a couple people that ate them.
Swallowed them by accident.
Never know.
Santa Anna, California, this is Noel.
Noel, great to have you with us, sir.
Oh, hi, Rush.
Um hey, uh, I was uh just calling to say I know you plant questions.
Um you've been doing it for years, and you and you plant them in the Hillary campaign in Obama and Julie Giuliani and uh Romney.
Uh anytime you have a caller who calls and says, um, I'm a longtime listener.
You know they're a thinker.
Right.
And uh they just ask the hardball questions, not the softball questions, and uh I like those folks.
And uh so thanks for what you do.
Uh you do a great job.
Keep it up.
I appreciate it.
But I'm I'm I'm I'm a little bit confused.
I might have misheard you.
Did you did you say I plant questions?
Oh, you're the Johnny Appleseed of American political debate.
The Johnny Apple seed of America I love that.
I'm gonna steal that.
Hey, it's yours.
Uh Johnny Appleseed of American political division.
So you're saying because I inspire thought uh that that it that that plants questions in the minds of the audience, uh, who then, if they ever have contact with a candidate might ask these questions, and voila, a question gets planted.
Oh, uh, with the candidate fellow citizens, their neighbors, you bet.
Well, uh, you know, I I uh as you know, I don't often uh get introspective and think about the profound impact I've had on American politics, but you uh have you made me face that front frung square.
That's really nice of you to say.
I appreciate that.
Well, you're welcome.
All right, have a good day out there.
No, it's Santa Anna, California, the Johnny Appleseed of American politics.
Back.
Okay, just got an email from somebody, and you don't know if uh, you know, anybody can send you an email about anything.
You gotta be very, very careful of hoaxers in the email.
And I've spent a lot of time uh reflecting and contemplating on hoaxes.
But anyways, what the emailer said is that a lot of kids are putting the iPod and iPhone earbuds in the mouth so that they can feel the bass in their mouth.
Why couldn't you feel it in your ear?
Keep in mind the CNN story did it made it a point to say that nobody knows whether eating or inhaling iPod, iPhone, earbuds causes a single problem at all.
That's it, folks.
Another excursion into broadcast excellence, fun frolic frivolity, serious discussion in the can.
▲
Export Selection