Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 247 podcast.
Yeah, I know.
I know, but we're going to deal with it later.
The show is starting.
I some days.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
And broadcast excellence, three straight hours.
Looking forward to talk to you, talking to you always do.
Telephone numbers 800-282-288-2, and the email address is Rush at EIBNet.com.
Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, we learned that uh the Oprah will be campaigning for Barack Obama.
I openly speculated, I wonder how long it'll be before the Oprah gets a call from Don Clinton Leone.
Hi.
This is Oprah.
And I'm out campaigning for Barack Obama.
So leave a message, and I'll call you back.
Oprah, this is Bill.
And you know, I I wouldn't ask you to change your mind about Barack.
Ever.
And we really don't need Iowa to win anyhow.
Stop lowering expectations.
And just tell that witch to get out of politics that are the only books she'll be reading our books on tape.
Thanks, Oprah.
I knew I could count on you.
By the way, also this morning on uh on Joe Scarborough's show on MSNBC, Mark Penn, who is uh Hillary Clinton's pollster appeared.
You know, the Zogby poll came out yesterday, and it showed that Hillary gets beat by every Republican candidate, from Huckabee to Rudy to Romney to McCain, she gets beaten nationally by every one of them.
Now, this is a poll that the Clintons don't like.
So Mark Penn went on to discuss this today.
And Scarborough said, hey, look, now we we've got polls coming out.
The Zogby poll that you saw, everybody's talking about this morning that shows that she's losing to all these Republican contenders.
Even Huckabee's beating her by five points.
What's uh what's going on here?
That was Zogby's first interactive online poll ever.
The Gallup poll that came out also yesterday showed Senator Clinton five points ahead of Giuliani and double digits ahead of some of the other possible Republican nominees, and showed that if Barack Obama were the nominee, it would be dead even.
That's a real poll that's got fifty years of history.
This is the first time Zogby has done something online.
It's a meaningless poll, and really frankly, shouldn't even be on your show.
Yes, Joe, you shouldn't even be talking about this poll, Joel.
I am Mark Penn, and I'm from Clinton, Inc., and you shouldn't be mentioning this poll.
Um by the way, the margin of error in this poll from what I've seen, the Zogby poll is just plus or minus one percent.
His sample was ten thousand voters, as opposed to the usual 400 to 800 you get with Gallup, ABC Washington Post, CBS New York Times.
Scarborough says, So the Zogby poll is is meaningless to you.
It's an online poll.
It's his first ever.
Its methodology is completely untested and unproven.
You could look at any of the real polls in including some of his his real polls, that this is totally out of sync.
It makes absolutely no sense.
The uh message there is Joe uh only mention the positive Hillary polls.
Please.
Uh Clinton Inc.
trying to control the media out there.
Uh this was the Gore Media approach uh uh too back in uh 2000.
You know, don't get any bad news out there.
And at any rate, we got a lot of Hillary news coming up today, a lot of campaign news.
Uh some things about Iowa and New Hampshire you may not know in terms of just who can vote there and how often in the primaries.
But first, I've got to tell you a little story.
Over the weekend, I had all the family in uh for Thanksgiving.
And I was uh working at the same time.
I mean, I'm getting the computer and I'm checking to see what's happening.
I saw this story about a cruise ship that sank in Antarctica in the Antarctic Ocean after hitting an iceberg.
And the details of this were just you know, some people out on a cruise in the Antarctic, and they hit an iceberg, and they were all rescued and so forth.
But um made a note of that, and I'd run across this story uh that I shared with you yesterday that humans looking at the uh universe or shortening its life and all that.
So I went out, I met the family outside on the patio, and uh they said, Well, anything interesting in the news.
And I said, Yeah, there's this cruise ship in Antarctica.
A cruise ship, a pleasure cruise ship in Antarctica.
And the thing sank.
And I said, What do you bet?
This is a bunch of environmentalist wackos on a global warming tour, and they run into an iceberg trying to find evidence of global warming in the Antarctic.
And we all got a big laugh about it.
Of course, I was I was just speculating.
But do I know these people or do I know these people?
Even when I make jokes about them, I am right.
From the Canadian Free Press or the Canada Free Press today, you'd never read this.
In the mainstream media, the owner of the sunken ship, the MS Explorer, leaving this huge carbon footprint, the bottom of the Antarctic Ocean Friday is an acolyte of Teensy Weency carbon footprint crusader Al Gore.
GAP Adventure CEO and explorer owner Bruce Poontip and Gore have similar ideals, filling their schedules with speaking engagements on environmental change to educate global audiences.
And that's straight from their website.
In fact, as recently as last April, both Poon Tip and Gore gave presentations at the Green Living Show in Toronto.
Boone or Poon Tip, it's Poontip, sorry about that.
So I expressed my admiration for Al Gore's commitment and leadership, which spans more than twenty years.
I also invited him aboard our legendary polar expedition ship, the MS Explorer, to visit the Arctic.
Well, the legendary Polar Expedition ship had at least five faults at its last inspection.
Maritime record show the MV.
Anyway, it was a bunch of eco-warriors.
I was exactly right.
There were 154 passengers, and a lot of them were eco-warriors, and they were out there doing a doing a global warming cruise.
The Antarctica ice caps expanded.
But how about this?
Here are a bunch of eco-warriors on a global warming cruise in Antarctica.
But what what kind of an idiot would take a cruise to the Antarctic Ocean?
A pleasure cruise.
But these are eco-warriors, and they're out there and they're looking for evidence of global warming, and they get sunk by an iceberg Titanic II.
I mean, this it just doesn't get any better than this.
These eco-warriors, by the way, did you realize how much money is in this?
Here's this.
What's this guy's name?
You've got to be very careful pronouncing this name too.
It's two days in a row.
Bruce Poontip is out there selling tickets on his faulty ship to a bunch of idiot liberals paying who knows how much to go look at and find evidence of global warming.
The money in these in the environmentalist wacko business and these and these eco-warriors is uh is just funny.
And of course, how much how much you know what what what what powers these kind of ships, fuel oil and diesel, how much of that stuff is now on the Antarctic Ocean floor?
What kind of carbon footprint did the sinking of the eco-warrior ship create?
Uh as Thomas Lifson of the American thinker asks today, will we see any polar bears or birds soaked in oil or diesel from the MV Explorer?
Uh good thing Gore was not aboard.
Uh by the way, in all the weekend coverage of this, not one aspect of what I've just told you was mentioned.
They just portrayed it as a cruise ship.
Now, you know, I'm one of these guys, folks.
I can read the stitches on the fastball.
And there's just something that doesn't make sense.
On Thanksgiving weekend, a bunch of people on a pleasure cruise in the Antarctic.
We're not talking the Caribbean and Pina Coladas here.
You can't stand outside on this.
It's cold as a witch's upper torso in the Antarctic Ocean.
This is not where you go on a pleasure cruise.
But we got this, and there were pictures of the thing sinking amidst uh ice in the uh in the ocean.
And it was just, oh, so sad.
But it was a very story that ended very, very well because all passengers were rescued uh on this cruise, but not one aspect of who owned the ship, that he's a friend of Gore's, that it was an eco-warrior tour uh was ever mentioned in the drive-by media.
Lots to do, so sit tight, though.
We'll be right back.
What did we talk about yesterday, folks?
We talked about how the drive-by media can take any news story and turn it into a disaster.
Such as the news today that the uh I think the average home price has fallen four and a half percent in the last measuring period, right?
And so this is supposed to be a cause for panic.
Oh no, subprime lending market going down the tubes, home prices falling, Abu Dhabi infusing cash into Citigroup.
Oh no, oh, whoa is us.
Wait a second.
How about for people who aren't able to afford houses and now might be able to because the price is down four and a half percent.
These fluctuations happen constantly.
Uh and yet what's great about it is it seems that the American consumer is not playing this time.
Seems like they're not playing along with all of the uh all the doom and gloom.
Here's another great example.
This is a story from the AP.
Too little milk, not enough sunshine and exercise.
It's an anti-bone trifecta, and for some kids, shockingly, it's leading to rickets.
The soft bone scourge of the 19th century.
See, now they're so excited to take life in this country back to the 19th century, we got rickets back out there.
But cases of full-blown rickets are just the red flag.
Bone specialists say possibly millions of seemingly healthy children aren't building as much strong bones as they should.
A gap that may leave them more vulnerable to bone cracking osteoporosis later in life than their grandparents are.
This potentially is a time bomb, says Dr. Laura Tossi, bone health chief at the Children's National Medical Center in Washington.
Now, when I read this story, I said to myself, what this is this is a flat-out joke.
Of course there's too little milk.
There's not enough sunshine and exercise, because cows, we have been told for how many years cause global warming.
And we've got to get rid of cows.
Exercise makes us exhale carbon dioxide.
Skin, sun gives us skin cancer.
So we're telling the kids it's immoral to drink milk because cows and methane cause global warming.
Exercise is not really all that necessary because it ex you put more carbon dioxide out there than you otherwise would.
And the sun causes cancer.
Now, after telling us to avoid all of these dangers.
Now they're saying avoiding all these dangers is creating the possibility of rickets in kids.
Uh you know, I I I constantly say to you that I'm I'm amazed, and I should say that I'm long past the point of being amazed, but I'm really not.
Uh, because I I think there has to be something going on.
The media today, the old media, drive by media, whatever, is simply so formulaic.
Uh it is it is not the result of any intellectual pursuit anymore.
It is and it's detectable.
Uh it's it's uh easily noticeable, and therefore the credibility that they offer and have is is shrinking.
And I think that they have to be in denial.
I'm gonna be talking about this later on as the program unfolds.
So I found a story.
Uh somebody says uh some some some research people claim that the real secret to healthy relationships is deniability.
When you see your mate engaging in things that you don't really approve of, just ignore it.
Because to talk about it creates tension, and that that that that poses all kinds of problems in relationships.
So just, you know, we're talking about little things here.
Just ignore them.
Just deny it.
Just live in denial.
Denial is healthy.
And I think I'm going to extrapolate this, ladies and gentlemen, what I think is that this is a partial explanation for the way liberals live today and the drive-by media operates.
How in the world can thinking people spend ten years telling us the sun is killing us, cows are causing global warming, which is gonna kill us, and exercise you expel too much carbon dioxide, and then after pummeling pummeling us with this, then come back and tell us that our kids are getting rickets because they're not getting enough calcium and exercise and sunlight.
Uh they can do it because they have no memory of what they've done on the it's just the template is doom and gloom and scare the hell out of people.
Now, this next door, this this has to be a parody.
It just has to be.
But it I doubt that it is.
It is from today, and it's from the UK guardian.
Mahmood, Ahmadini Zad, has offered himself as an observer in next year's presidential elections here in the United States.
The proposal came in a speech to volunteers with the Bazij, a pro-regime militia.
He said he was prompted by a belief that Americans would vote against the current administration in a truly free poll.
Now, this is what Achmedinizan actually thinks Bush is still on the ballot.
However, the terms of Ahmadini Zad's offer appear to betray some confusion about the potential candidates.
He said, if the White House officials allow us to be present as an observer in their presidential election, we will see whether people in their country are going to vote for them again or not.
Mahmud Ahmadinizad, this Jimmy Carter Idis.
I read this today, and I didn't know what to make of this.
Bird brain flew, what is what is what has overcome this guy?
And then the news from Abu Dhabi.
Citigroup, the biggest U.S. bank by assets, will receive a seven and a half billion dollar cash infusion from Abu Dhabi to replenish capital after record mortgage losses wiped out almost half its market value.
Citigroup shares rose 3.7% early today, following acting chief executive officer Wynne Bischoff's statement late yesterday that funds from Abu Dhabi Investment Authority will help strengthen our capital base.
Abu Dhabi's part of the United Arab Emirates.
Abu Dhabi, of course, right down the road from Dubai.
Now Dubai and the United Arab Abu Dhabi buying up this chip company.
What's it?
I'm having a metal ball.
What's the name of it?
Buying up his chip company makes uh computer chips, silicon chips.
Uh now they're they're buying up hotels left and right, and now they've uh they've got a cash infusion of seven and a half billion dollars to save Citigroup.
But damn it, we are not gonna let them anywhere near our ports.
But here's your laptop.
And here and then your mortgage is now your mortgage is now being funded and backed by the United Arab Emirates.
Abu Dhabi.
Rush, this isn't funny.
This is a major security breach.
Well, I'll tell you, it depends uh if if uh if Abu Dhabi is going to get any management power in Citigroup, then I mean you might you might have some concern.
But we have we have all kinds of foreign investment in this country, and and uh some of it involves just investment with no management, some does.
That that kind of stuff uh is is monitored.
Why am I so gleeful about it?
Well, well, I'm not gleeful at Citibank needs seven and a half billion.
I'm I'm not gleeful about that.
I'm not gleeful that the mortgage mess has happened, but it's we're in the middle of a market correction, but I'm gleeful because I just remembered the panic over the Dubai ports deal.
And I sat here and I tried to tell my country to be reasonable.
I tried to say to the American people, do not do not react to this the way that you are.
This is just a knee-jerk reaction here that is unwarranted.
Find out who these people are and what they're doing and what the purpose of find out how many ports they own around the world that they already run that our ships go in and out of.
Uh, plus it was a free market deal.
Uh and plus there was something else behind it too.
There was a there was a an arrangement between the Bush administration and uh and Dubai for some security control in the war on terror.
Anyway, it got blown in.
I remember and I was watching uh Chuck Schumer today.
He was on CNBC talking about all this subprime mortgage business and uh Dubai or the Abu Dhabi deal.
Uh, and he was uh sounding so reasonable about this about foreign investment and how he's all for it, and uh, we've Got to have this happen in order for the United States to continue to grow and be the financial capital of the world, which is what, by the way, the Emirates are trying to do.
Uh Abu Dhabi and uh Dubai are trying to become the financial capital of the world.
And I remember it was Schumer during the Dubai Ports deal.
It was Schumer leading the charge of the Democrats in the Senate to oppose the deal.
You people have forgotten this.
This was embarrassing as it could be to me.
You had Republicans and Democrats in both the House and the Senate racing to the microphones to denounce the do by port sale and stop it.
The Republicans ended up getting into the microphones first and took credit for it.
The American people didn't want the deal.
It was sort of like the immigration deal.
They got what they wanted in that case.
And I remember Dingy Harry going to the microphone saying, Well, the Republicans didn't stop this.
Chuck Schumer led the way.
So Schumer stopped the Newby Ports dealers on CNBC today, waxing eloquent about all this foreign investment, such as Abu Dhabi and Citigroup.
And we are back.
Rush Limboy, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have to your phone calls here, the audio sound bites in in just a second.
I want to explore the subprime issue for for just a second.
There is an upside to it, but it's it's a typical upside that I notice, and that is an opportunity for people in this country to learn something.
And I would not advocate this kind of mess as a teaching moment, but it has happened, and so it is a teaching moment.
It lets you see how Congress fixes problems, or more precisely, makes them worse.
Okay, so we've got the subprime issue.
And we don't know how bad it is.
It's a mess, folks.
And no one, no observer, no insider can tell how messy it is.
Barney Frank et al.
have put together the latest mischief, known as the mortgage reform and anti-predatory lending act of 2007.
Now to call what happened here predatory lending is absurd because the lenders are taking it in the shorts here.
And who was it that made them extend these kind of loans in the first place?
Once again, you have Barney Frank leading Congress, acting like a bunch of innocent bystanders and bystanders and spectators, as though they had no clue this was going on when they ordered lending institutions to be more inclusive of people who actually couldn't afford them.
It was fairness, and it was equality, and it was to be anti discriminatory in all of these things.
The predators, if there were any, were in Congress.
And they prey on every business in this country that they plus in the put in their in their target sites.
Uh and that's the real predator.
And now all of having helped create the mess, here comes Barney Frank with a solution.
Now, this is the teachable moment.
Lenders, the predators, are writing off billions in bad debts.
That's billions with a capital B. You got heads falling, financial stocks are taking hits.
And what is your Democrat-led Congress do?
What do they want to do?
They want to turn the tort lawyers on them with charges of predatory lending.
That's the mortgage reform and anti-predatory lending act of 2007.
These people are already, as you know, in the banks and the investment houses, the subprime market.
People are getting canned.
These companies are writing off billions and billions in dollars in losses.
They're downsizing in a lot of ways.
And so here comes Barney Frank with a with it.
This is just throwing a bone to one of the biggest Democrat contend uh contingencies and constituencies out there, the trial lawyers, the tort lawyers.
He wants to turn lawyers on the subprime market with charges of predatory lending, lawsuits, class action suits, seven-figure, eight-figure lawsuits.
He wants to enable the people who were not suitable to receive a loan in the first place to be able to sue the lenders for taking advantage of them and causing them to lose their homes and so forth.
They're literally trying to wreck the economy.
And in the process, you know what's going to happen here?
They're going to turn off the whole prospect of lending to those with the lowest credit ratings.
Because when you start, when you turn the tort lawyers onto these people who are already really getting beat up.
Now they may deserve to.
Who knows?
I'm not making a moral judgment here.
I'm talking economics.
I still say that most of this or quite a bit of it could be laid at the feet of Congress for demanding that these unqualified borrowers be made qualified simply by the stroke of a pen in order to extend fairness and equality and opportunity and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
I mean, markets are markets.
If you can't afford to pay something back, you shouldn't get the loan.
Congress comes along and tells people, no, you've got to lend it to people who can't pay you back.
You gotta do it.
And then when you can't foreclose on them either, but if you start foreclosing on them when they can't pay you, but we're gonna really come after you.
So now the so-called predators, if Barney Frank and Congress get their way going to have the the the John Edwards plaintiff's bar turned against them after they've already been losing their jobs and already taken the hit for a bad decision in the first place.
Now please note and what one other point here, and this is key.
This is when you know these unintended consequences, like the the liberals never study the dynamics of any of their actions.
They continue to look at things in a static way, as though actions do not have reactions, and actions do not have consequences.
So if after this this mess that is the subprime mortgage market, if the people involved in that business are now going to be subjected to class action suits of seven figures and eight figures, what is their natural reaction going to be?
They're gonna tighten up on loans more than they have ever tightened up before if you have even a hair's worth of of uh being unqualified.
If you just have one tiny little thing, like you put down the wrong middle initial on your application, you finished.
They're gonna see to it that that it's gonna be tougher and tougher and tougher to get a loan.
Now, another thing is a teachable moment.
Congress did not anticipate this.
Congress did not realize it was happening.
Congress did not prevent it.
They caused it, in fact.
Now they want to politicize it.
The Democrats want to politicize it for election advantage, because what they hope to do with all this is to send this message to the beleaguered middle class that uh, well, we're not gonna let these evil Wall Street people screw you.
We're gonna let you get back at them.
And this is gonna keep campaign contributions flowing from the trial lawyers, which is a huge uh huge bunch.
And this this is your Congress at work, folks.
What they're doing to banking, they want to do to your health care, and they want to do to big oil.
It's gonna get to the point you have a headache, you're gonna call Barney Frank.
Dr. Frank, I uh I have a I have a headache.
Remember the watchword for doctors first do no harm.
The one thing Congress can do to fix this mess is try not to fix it, to stay totally out of it.
The markets work.
Let the market handle this.
Look at what Citigroup has to give away in order to get the cash from uh Abu Dhabi.
Eleven percent interest in the firm.
Well, that that's a good measure of how bad this is.
To give up eleven percent interest in the firm for seven and a half billion dollars.
We're talking Citigroup.
And they're gonna give up eleven percent interest in order to uh uh get the cash.
Uh that's that's that's that's just uh a good indication of how uh bad the mess is, but markets work, Congress doesn't in the market.
When Congress starts meddling in the market, then you've got big, big problems, and that is where we're headed if this ever becomes law.
Jason in New Brunville, Texas, you're first as we go to the phones today.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, how are you, sir?
Just fine, sir.
Thank you.
My question to you is I was thinking about what you said earlier about how the consumers aren't playing along this time.
Yeah.
And I sense a real generational turning point out there where you hear all this stuff about the subprime mess, and yet you hear about plasma TVs flying off the shelves at Walmart, and the two can't be it didn't seem like they can both exist at the same time.
So I wanted to ask you, do you think we're heading toward the real turning point, generationally speaking in the next election?
Because I think that's what caused your um what'd you call it, your blue depression a couple weeks ago?
Blue funk.
Blue funk, yeah, I mean, well, that's just because I had to talk about the Clinton sedam much.
I don't think that's what it was.
Well, was it?
I I think it was when um was it Colonel Tibbetts when he passed away, the pilot of the Anola Gay.
Oh, yeah.
I think you were thinking about you know, that generation is really leaving us, that World War II generation.
I know your dad was part of that generation.
Right.
But when they leave, they're leaving the baby boomers over four trillion dollars in insurance policies and stuff like that, and it's really changed the middle class economy in this country, and a lot of these young gen wires that are coming up.
It it occurred to me the other day, you've got you know, young what do you call them, uh, rush babies and college right now?
Exactly right, rush babies.
These rush babies in college, you said some of them don't remember the Clinton administration, and you're right.
And some of them don't remember Rita X and caller abortions and Dan Bay Royal.
So I was just curious what your thoughts were on I mean, in ninety six, yeah, I wish Dole had beat Clinton, but it didn't feel like it was a big pivotal election.
And this one feels that way.
Well, see, I have I have previously mentioned this, and I think that you're on to something if you came up with this on your own, because I think we do have in this next election, 2008, the last dying gasp of the sixties baby boomers, both left and right, to try to grab hold of the country and uh and and and make the country's uh uh future in their image.
And it's particularly dangerous here is the sixties anti-war left, which is Hillary, which is Bill, which is everybody on their side.
Um this is their last chance.
This is their last chance to take this grand vision they had in the sixties and turn this country into some you know socialist utopia that they envision, with themselves in total control and total power of it.
Uh and the question is uh whether a lot of young people come out and vote.
Well, can I ask you something about that, Rush?
Well, of course.
What uh what and what I think what I wor why I worry about this is if you think about uh when we talk about generation wide, that is about seventy million young people born after 1980 and before 2000.
And when you think about that gener about half of them now are a voting age.
Where they've spent the last three to seven years has been in college and in high school and rush, the people you just described, that left wing national public radio, white wine sipping, antiquing on the weekend kind of wisty person who doesn't want to get into red state micropolitan economies, they want something safe, they go into public education.
And it may be that the next election has been decided until these young people kind of get their first kid, their first mortgage, and they and they grow up.
Um this isn't like Gen X, where they were growing up at 33 and 34.
I I haven't met a Gen Wire in over three years who isn't pursuing some other kind of side business on their own.
So maybe uh the public school teachers didn't get to them after all.
Well, it's interesting you mentioned that.
Because I'm holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers.
A story from the American sinker today by uh Charles J. Sykes.
The headline, a quiet defeat for political correctness.
I'll give you details of this because I gotta go to a break here, and I want you to keep listening out there, Jason.
But the the bottom line here is that liberals are not getting everything they're trying for on college campaign.
Uh, you can chalk it up to rush babies, you can talk it up to generational change.
Uh uh any number of things would probably be applicable and accurate here.
Some interesting data in this piece, you're on to something.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Our last caller, Jason, made an excellent point.
Well, actually reminded me that I uh made a great point and I had forgotten.
I and I really I can't remember the specific thing we were talking about, but it was somebody on the phone, and they were going on and on about the the Clintons, and it was a young person.
I said that they don't remember the nineties.
They don't they they're not infatuated with Clintons.
They were not old enough to have been brainwashed by the drive-by media, the Democrat Party's total love affair with the Clintons.
Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton to these young kids.
Um they're just uh you know, more old folgies running around.
You know, there's nothing magical about them to the younger set.
Uh and that is uh it's it's an excellent point.
Now here's Charles Sykes's piece, the American thinker today.
Liberals not getting everything they're trying for on college campi.
Maybe this is how political correctness ends, not with a bang, but with a whimper across the country.
Universities that had abandoned in a loco parentis in the nineteen sixties because it was too oppressive and intrusive have replaced it within local big brother programs of political and cultural re education.
And the point of the story is that a lot of students say, screw you.
We're not interested in your cultural re education and your political re education, because they're arriving on campus with principles and ideas already formed.
Wonder where that might have happened at home while their parents had this program on.
Last fall, for instance, the University of Wisconsin unveiled an ambitious diversity campaign designed to root out inappropriate speech and behaviors on campus.
The Think Respect Campaign was not as controversial as the University of Delaware's re-education program that required students to confess their racial guilt and demanded that they demonstrate correct attitudes towards sexuality and environmentalism.
But the University of Wisconsin's program was just as creepy.
Posters appeared around a campus that included suggestions how students could put up a no hate sign in your room, become a big brother or sister, and confront inappropriate jokes.
This is what the university wanted students.
They're giving them guidelines on how to do this.
By the way, a little quick question here, Mr. Snerdley.
Do you know how many feminists it takes to change a light bulb?
That's not funny, is the answer to the question.
Uh when not confronting such inappropriate humor, students were also encouraged to inform on one another.
In other words, if they heard inappropriate speech, hate speech or what have you, they were supposed to go tattletale.
At the center of think respect was a bias reporting mechanism that encouraged students to report oppressive and racist attitudes and behavior.
Students could download a form to make their allegations, which would then be investigated by the administration.
The university's website encouraged a liberal use of the system.
They wanted everybody running around policing and monitoring everybody else and then reporting to them on who was saying inappropriate politically incorrect things.
Students can report anything from a hate crime to graffiti to verbal harassment, it said.
When this reporting system was unveiled, University of Wisconsin law professor Ann Althouse said, students can report anything.
And remember Chancellor Wiley's statement, we will not tolerate bias, racism, disrespect, or hate?
Will not tolerate disrespect.
You know, I want students to feel good about campus life, but isn't part of campus life, having rowdy debates and vigorous arguments.
This program should make students worry that anything other than bland pleasantries is going to get them in trouble with the administration.
And the point here is that even at one of the most political righteous campuses in the nation, it turned out the students did not want to rat one another out to the diversity police.
As the student newspaper, the Badger Herald reported last week, the campaign now is relegated to its spot in the vast bank of inactive organizations occupying the student organization's office web space, and the bias reporting mechanism fills a similar role on the dean of students' website.
Uh anyway, the it's it's uh it's it's you know, everybody says, when are we going to turn this around on campus?
When are we going to get rid of the liberal bias on campus?
And I've always cautioned.
These things don't happen overnight.
It's not like you have a cold and then all of a sudden one day you feel 50% better, noticeably better.
This is the kind of thing that sneaks up on you and it'll happen over time, which is why it's always so important for those of us who are in guidance positions here to never give up, even though you don't see signs that your influence is working, either as parents, other family members as members of the community with your circle of friends.
And so there's a there's there is the caller's right, Jason's right, there's a whole new generation of kids coming up.
And as I have always, they they're not at some point they're not gonna take the garbage that they are inheriting.
They're not going to take the lifestyles, they're not gonna take the permissiveness, whatever it is.
They're gonna want to form their own principles, form their own culture, and to hill with the Clintons, and to hell with whoever else uh is demanding fealty.
So there's progress.
It's reason to feel good about this kind of stuff.
Rush babies will change this country and turn it around.
Back after this.
We're only just getting started.
Uh I got another story for you coming out of the break, top of the hour.
Global warming debate is not one-sided on college camp eye either.
A lot of college students are saying this is dumb.