All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 12, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
December 12, 2007, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Here's another thing.
You know, this is just, I'm sorry to say this stuff because I know it's going to offend some of you, but you know, I don't care about that because I don't think you ought to give me the power to offend you.
So if you get offended at your problem, this business about organic.
Not only is the term bogus because there's no such thing as inorganic.
I mean, you can't go in there and I want the inorganic strawberries.
They won't know what you're talking about.
But anything with carbon atoms is organic.
You can go out, and when you wake up on Christmas morning and you pull that lump of coal out of your stocking by the fireplace, it's organic.
It's organic.
And so that's the way it is.
By the way, we talked about oil yesterday and it being a crop.
Brazil's offshore oil bonanza may be even bigger.
Thomas Lifson, the American thinker, we have covered with great interest the discovery of a huge offshore oil field by the Brazilian oil company.
The Tupi oil field was reckoned to contain as much as 8 billion barrels of oil, an as-yet unknown fraction of which will be recoverable, but almost certainly a few billion barrels if past experience is any guide.
Now, as was hinted at the time, a neighboring offshore tract shows promise of being far larger in terms of its oil potential.
Recognizing this, the government of Brazil has postponed the auction of drilling rights in an area geologically similar to Tupi in order to gather and analyze further information on its potential.
Bloomberg is reporting that a geological formation beneath a two-mile layer of salt in Brazil's Santos offshore basin is larger than Tupi, and if oil-bearing, may contain significantly more oil than Tupe.
The fact is that the potential for deep oil in offshore Brazil is but one example of the as yet unexplored potential of other territories such as Anwar, federal lands in the American West, and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico, where oil development is stupidly and officially banned.
When oil production is banned, there's no incentive to conduct the expensive tests, which could give us better data on the development potential.
So the Tupe oil field, 8 billion barrels estimated, only the beginning.
And soon, ladies and gentlemen, we will be harvesting the crop.
Back to the audio soundbites.
The Oprah was on Good Morning America today with the co-hostette, Diane Sawyer.
And Diane Sawyer said, look, you've written a speech, which is unusual for you.
I had written a speech because I didn't trust myself just to stand up there and talk.
And this was too important of an issue, I thought, me to be up there rambling around.
Okay, this is the night before.
I was 3 a.m. still working on my speech.
Yes, I was.
And then I heard somebody say that his staff helped me write the speech, which insulted me since I was like doing my homework late at night, working on it myself.
I didn't appreciate that.
Oh.
Somebody accused the Oprah at night writing her own speech.
Welcome to politics, Oprah.
I mean, this is my point.
Once you get into it, you better know firsthand when you start what you're making yourself a target for.
Diane Sawyer then said, look, I've never experienced that kind of energy, meaning all those people out there.
Everybody's there because they're concerned about the country.
Denzel Washington chimes in with, what are they saying?
What are they most concerned about?
I think what they're concerned about is people don't want to have to continue to work so hard and still be poor.
They don't want to have to work so hard and still have to struggle so much.
And that is a basic concern of everybody.
You're spending more and more and more money and feeling like you're further behind.
And that's sort of the deepest sentiment.
Well, are we surprised that an audience of Democrats' primary concern would be how hard they have to work?
And then Mrs. Clinton's going to come along and raise everybody's taxes, which is going to force everybody to have to work even harder.
They're going to have less money, as Oprah says, here to spend and spend and spend.
Ignorance, the most expensive commodity.
I don't care whether it's organic or inorganic ignorance.
It is the most expensive commodity that we pay for in this country.
Then Diane Sawyer says, Have you heard from Don Clinton Leone?
Have you talked to them?
No, I haven't heard from the Clinton.
What do you say to Hillary?
I've always said this: that my being in support of Barack Obama is not my being against Hillary Clinton or anybody else.
It's just that for this moment in time, this is what I know I am supposed to be doing.
I feel compelled to do this.
So my vote for is not a vote against anybody.
It's just a vote for.
Nice spin.
Nice spin.
Of course, it's a vote against Hillary.
Hillary is the perceived winner already.
She's the perceived frontrunner.
She is the inevitable winner.
And here comes the Oprah.
Of course, I understand what she says.
She's voting for Obama, but it's got to mean she's against somebody else.
It just has to be.
All right.
It's trouble time in Clinton City.
From Manchester, New Hampshire, a new poll shows that while the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president holds a comfortable lead in New Hampshire, the Democrat race has tightened dramatically.
According to the latest WMUR CNN poll, Hillary Clinton's 20-point lead has vanished.
She now has 31% support.
Barack Obama in a statistical tie at 30%.
The Brett girl is third with 16%.
Bill Richardson has slipped slightly to 7%.
The poll was conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center over the weekend.
Oprah Winfrey held a rally for Obama on Sunday.
It might have given him a bounce.
On the Republican side, Mitt Romney leading with a 32% support.
Rudy and McCain both have 19.
And Huckabee has climbed slightly to 9% in New Hampshire.
Ron Paul is at 7%.
So Obama and Clinton are tied.
Romney remains strong.
Hillary Robin Clinton's backup plan, if she falters in Iowa, can be summed up in two words.
New Hampshire, Clinton's Democrat team is preparing television ads in New Hampshire, criticizing Barack Obama's health care plan and working to build what campaigns call a firewall.
If the Obama presidential campaign ignites in Iowa, Mrs. Clinton wants to be ready to cool him off in a state where her organization is strong and her support has proven durable, really.
We just heard that she statistically died.
Now, this is an AP story.
What is it about these attacks?
I thought the Clintons did attack people.
Remember the Bob Dole debate with Bill Clinton in 1996?
And Dole, Dole said something.
I forget what it was.
He launched into Clinton.
And Clinton standing there solemnly, holding the microphone.
No attack.
No attack ever fed a hungry child.
Remember that?
And the audience swooned.
Oh, he's so wonderful.
So I would say back to Mrs. Clinton, no attack ever fed a hungry child.
And that's what Obama ought to say.
I think Obama or get Oprah to say, if you don't want to say, get somebody, get your wife to say no attack ever fed a hungry child.
Or if no attack ever got anybody health care, because that's what she's going to be attacking you on.
No attack ever got anybody health care.
Now, this is the strangest headline of the day.
It is in the New York Daily News, Bill Clinton to aid Hillary's campaign.
What the hell has he been doing?
I'm going to give you a dirty little secret about this.
Let me give you the details of this story first.
Bubba to the rescue.
Alarmed by his wife's slide into polls and the disarray within her backbiting campaign, a beside himself Bill Clinton has leaped atop the barricades and is furiously plotting a cure.
She's in big trouble, and he knows it, a top Democrat operative and Hillary Clinton booster told the New York Daily News.
Sources familiar with the ex-president's thinking say he doesn't believe his wife's situation is desperate, but he's unhappy with her operation, once hailed as a juggernaut, and concerned that she could lose the Democrat nomination without major alterations in strategy and staffing.
Another Democrat with close connections to the Clinton campaign describes Bill Clinton as, quote, very engaged and very agitated.
He's yelling at Streef's chief strategist Mark Penn a lot.
Penn laughed off the idea that he's on the hot seat.
He said, that's funny.
I've been working with Bill Clinton through thick and thin for 10 years, exchanging views.
Sources close to the former president say that he and the candidate are talking constantly, but sharing very little of what they're discussing with subordinates.
Pouncing on a report.
Who do they think they're dealing with here?
She's shaking experience.
She should be able to work this stuff out without Der Slick.
She's so experienced, they're not going to tell us what they're talking about.
Pouncing on a report that revealed Obama staked out stridently liberal positions in a 96 candidate questionnaire.
Hillary's campaign argued his past record is easy ammo for the GOP.
Obama's spokesman Bill Burton fired back for a candidate who 50% of the country says they won't consider voting for.
Raising questions about electability is a curious strategy.
They are firing.
That is a nice one.
Now, here's the dirty little secret, folks.
And I want you Democrats to listen to this because whether you will admit it to yourselves or not after you hear me say it, you know it's true.
Bill Clinton to aid Hillary's campaign.
He has been working on Hillary's campaign.
I think he's one of the reasons it's in trouble.
All of this conventional wisdom that people are voting for her because they really want him.
This is just drive-by media pap, folks.
It is the drive-by media that's enamored with this couple.
A majority of the American people are not and never have been.
Bill Clinton has been working on this campaign and what's happened to it since he started.
It's imploding.
He hasn't helped.
He never helps.
He couldn't save Gray Davis.
The guy has a tracker.
He went out and he endorsed a Democrat candidate for governor of Hawaii and a Republican won, Linda Lingle, a female.
I have explained this many times before.
He is not a big vote-getter.
He never has been, not on the national scene.
He couldn't win majorities in his own presidential races.
And he wouldn't have been president the first time if it weren't for Ross Perot.
He couldn't save Gray Davis.
He and she, both Clintons, lost Congress in 1994.
This is always a complete myth that the Clintons are a juggernaut, that the country loves them, that country can't wait to have them back, and that Bill Clinton can ride in at the last moment and save the day.
When he rides in, he ends up hurting the people that he's trying to help.
I mean, look at, she's a loser.
She had to move to one of the bluest of blue states to win office of the United States Senate.
She knew she had no chance in Arkansas.
And that's a marginal state for Democrats.
They'd known her for years there.
So the idea that Bill or Hillary Clinton are these popular politicians who win huge elections has always been a myth.
It has always been a lie.
And when I saw this headline today, Bill Clinton to aid Hillary's campaign, what has he been doing?
He's been on this campaign.
He's been public and he's been making statements.
And some of them have been impolitic.
Some of them have been stupid.
Some of them he's continued his tradition for lying.
He has already been involved in this campaign, and you can see what happened to it from the moment he got involved.
I'll give you another example where Clinton went in to save the day and blew it for another candidate.
Does the name Kathleen Kennedy Townsend ring a bell, ladies and gentlemen?
She was running for governor of Maryland.
Said to be the runaway winner.
And of course, Clinton went in there.
She gets beat.
I'm telling you, this Clinton juggernaut thing, how much they're loved and all that.
Democrat Party, maybe, but not throughout the Democrat Party.
Look at the Obama and the Oprah show.
But they're not this national juggernaut, and he does move in there and does more harm when he starts trying to help people.
Sheila Jackson Lee, during a Clinton campaign appearance phone call, said this about Senator Obama.
All of a sudden, you are altering that position, which I think is something that has occurred with Senator Obama.
Then on some of the law issues that impact Arkansas and Texas, that is inconsistent.
So we don't have the whole call here, but they put her out on a conference called A Trash Obama for flip-flopping on previous liberal positions.
And what she's basically saying here is that Obama is too liberal.
So here, let's go to Ann Lewis.
As you know, one of Hillary's buds, MSNBC Live.
Andrea Mitchell is talking to Ann Lewis.
Part of her argument is that her experience of first lady gave her this special qualification to be president of the United States.
Do you really think that being first lady is the experience that people believe is the qualification to be, a qualification to be president and commander-in-chief?
What Hillary Clinton offers is someone who's had years of experience at making the change.
So it is an experience in a vacuum, and it isn't change in a vacuum because left to themselves, either words just a bumper sticker.
The question is, what do you have experience at doing?
The question is, how could you make that change occur?
And that's what she's offering.
What did I just hear?
We just heard Ann Lewis say that Hillary's experience is in bringing change.
Now she's responsible for the S-CHIP because she made peace in Northern Ireland.
She brings change.
She has it.
I thought the experience was that she flown with her husband to China and been around kids and stood up for them and fought for them for 35 years and all of that.
Mitchell says, you're emphasizing change.
That's because a lot of polling is telling us that people, contrary to the New York Times conclusions in their poll, people do want change this year more than experience.
By the way, that New York Times poll yesterday was sick.
That New York Times poll was talking about how everybody loves Hillary and Bill and all this sort of stuff and their experience.
Do you realize that was not a sample of registered voters?
It was not a sample of likely voters.
It was a sample of the American people.
Yes.
It's totally bogus in a campaign poll.
It was a total trumped-up drive-by poll.
And so, and now, this is actually a good question from Andrea Mitchell.
Wait a minute.
You're now emphasizing change instead of experience?
Because a lot of polling is telling people that they want change this year more than experience.
Is that a cause of concern in your campaign?
Hillary's experience is that of making change that makes a difference in people's lives.
So, as first lady, she worked very hard and was really responsible for the establishment of S-CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance, that has meant health insurance, access to health insurance for millions of children.
She worked with parties of Northern Ireland, asked the leaders of Northern Ireland who met with her last week.
She worked alongside Bill Clinton to create the structure for peace.
Over and over, I think, as you look at Hillary Clinton's record, it is whatever position she's held, she has worked to make change, and that's change that works for people's lives.
I hate to tell you this, folks, but S-CHIP, whether you like it or not, was a Republican Congress idea in 1997.
So, the experience thing ain't working because polls are telling people, ah, hell with experience, we want change.
And so, just right out of the box, and oh, okay, fine, we can do that.
Hillary's experience is in bringing change.
This is this, this is pathetic.
Mrs. Clinton, they can't do anything right.
They can't get anything right.
They can't do anything right whatsoever.
So, experience doesn't work.
Okay, fine.
People want change.
Oh, the Clintons.
I got a guy who can come up with an idea for that.
She's expert at the experience of bringing change.
There's another story.
This is in the New York Times today, feeling heat.
Clinton tries Iowa up close.
A couple things in this story.
It seems negative on Hillary if you read it, which is a shock for the New York Times.
I think what they might be doing here is managing expectations.
The story talks about how the Clintons have never done well in Iowa before.
They've never even really done Iowa.
But news flash, New York Times, neither has Obama.
So it's a little puffy.
She's not doing well, but that's okay.
The Clintons have never done well in Iowa.
It's a managing expectation.
Obama's not been there either.
I know.
I know.
Sit tight.
We've got an hour and a half left.
I'm going to get to it.
Back to the phones first.
Marty in Springfield, Virginia.
I'm glad you called, and welcome to the EIB Network.
Thanks, Rush.
Yeah, look, you're halfway more than halfway through this show, and you haven't talked about the most important news to a lot of us conservatives.
I mean, we need you to intervene in this squabble between Romney and Huckabee.
It's escalating, and I'm afraid it's going to tear up the Christian right coalition.
Are you talking about Huckabee attacking Miss Mormonism?
I thought, don't Mormons believe Jesus and the devil were brothers?
Yeah, I mean, come on.
You know, he's in the lead.
Why does he have to stoop to something like that?
I mean, it's it's why, why, why did he say in 2002, why did he go to George Bush and ask him to relax the Cuban embargo so that he could have a market for Arkansas rice?
And then he was told, well, you got markets over there in Taiwan and over in Asia.
Oh, oh, okay, fine.
Well, then forget the embargo.
Yeah.
Those markets existed.
A Cuban market for rice?
How am I supposed to intervene here?
I'm serious.
What would you like for me to do?
Well, I just tell them to stick to the issues.
I mean, if they're not going to stick to the issues, why don't you do it, you know, spell out what they're and I think you're doing a pretty good job, spell out what their position is.
But for heaven's sake, say something that, you know, this doesn't need to get ugly.
I mean, this is only going to come back and bite us in the middle.
It's not going to come back and bite us.
You mean if how is it going to come back and bite us?
You might be right.
I don't want to hear this negative crap.
And if they associate it with, I mean, what's going to beat Hillary is, yeah, the right stand on issues, but it's going to be a positive type of person who comes across as positive versus Hillary's negative.
Well, how do you think?
How do you think Mitt's dealing with this?
Let me qualify myself first.
I'm a Latter-day Saint.
I'm going to go with Mitt.
He wasn't my first choice.
But, you know, when Gingrich bugged out, I was upset about that.
And Alan got screwed by the media.
But, I mean, all things considered, whether I was LDS or not, I'm going with Romney, but I'd vote for Huckabee.
But, I mean, for crying out loud, you know, this thing about, I think Romney doesn't need to be too negative.
I think his ad that he just came out with is pretty straightforward.
you know, here's the similarities, here's the...
Yeah, but it's not negative at all.
I don't think...
I don't really think it was.
The media says it's negative, but I don't think it was.
But I wish he wouldn't hammer Huckabee so much.
I mean, I want him to clearly delineate the issue.
Well, but Huckabee is starting to go over the line here.
It's a campaign, and I don't care what people say.
These negative ads, they work.
They just do.
Now, let's talk about Huckabee for a second here in this Lucifer and Jesus comment.
Aren't Jesus and the Devil Brothers in Mormons believe?
What I think Huckabee is, you know, Iowa's one thing, but he's got to take that beyond Iowa.
And right now he's at 9% in New Hampshire.
He's got a 10-point lead in Iowa, and he wants to build on that.
And the audience he's shooting for is the evangelical crowd in Iowa.
Latest numbers I saw, 48, 49% of the evangelical crowd is for Romney.
I saw another poll the other day that said, might have been yesterday, that 17% of evangelicals said they would never vote for a Mormon.
So I think what Huckabee's trying to do is really build that lead, not just win Iowa, but have a smoking win to give him some momentum to go elsewhere.
Because the evangelical crowd in New Hampshire is not as big a crowd.
It's not, if he could get them all, he wouldn't move up.
Romney is way ahead there.
So I think he's just trying to capitalize on the strength that he's deriving in Iowa from the evangelicals.
It is an unfortunate comment.
And Romney came back and said, yeah, these religious comments are over the top.
It was what his speech was about last week, which I thought was, as I said many times, it was a fantastic, inspirational, and uplifting speech.
And it wasn't so much about religion as it was about religion's ties to the founding of this country.
and very, very important.
I think Huckabee is showing us who he is, and he thinks this is what it takes to win.
And he's a, you know, I don't know if he's current, but he's a Baptist minister, and his religion is very serious to him, too.
And he's using it for all it's worth for him, and I think I understand why.
I don't think I could stop it either.
Well, I don't know.
I think you could.
I mean, I think you control America, and that's good.
And then I think at the very least, you ought to be able to control the Republican nominees.
I mean, they're all beholden to you.
They wouldn't have been in power anyway.
Yeah, you know what?
You may have a point now that I think about it in that regard.
You might.
People don't believe this, but my staff would believe me when I say I walk around here with such humility.
You would not believe it.
They're all laughing because they know it's true.
Okay, so you may have a good point here.
Remember, remember this, in the sense, what you're asking for is somebody to stand up and say, would you guys stop acting like kids and start talking about the issues that are going to get us elected president?
Taxes, immigration, the future of the country, and so forth.
Stop all this crap.
That's the kind of thing you want me to say.
You got it.
We don't need a referee rush.
All right, I just said it.
They're going to start a debate here in 20 minutes in Iowa.
We'll see.
The Des Moines Register is doing this, Iowa, and doing this debate.
And they're putting out the news that this could be seismic.
How can a debate at 1 o'clock Central Time be seismic?
How can anything that happens at 1 or 2 o'clock be seismic?
I think you're also suggesting maybe that I call them personally.
I call Huckabee personally and McCain and all these guys say, cut this crap.
You guys, this is serious.
What we're facing here is serious, the future of the country.
And you all know you're far more qualified than anybody on the Democrat side to lead this country.
Don't destroy our chances by making yourselves out to be people you really aren't.
Exactly.
Boy, if you could do that, that'd be great.
But at least, you know, if Roe's giving advice to Obama and what's his name, Matt Chris Matthews giving advice, you can give advice to both of them as they just stick to the issues because seriously, it's getting to the point now with Huckabee's.
Well, now, wait a second.
Romney is sticking to the issues.
He is.
I mean, even that so-called attack ad against Huckabee was about issues.
I agree.
I agree.
But, you know, I think he needs to say things in a positive way.
But, you know, people are going to, in the general election, if Huckabee's going to start, you know, sure, it's fine to target the fear on the part of even bigotry on the part of some evangelicals to get elected, but that's going to come back and bite you if in the general election the people who are undecided say, yeah, that just justifies the left's portrayal of the Christian right as being a bunch of bigots.
Well, I mean, I'm going to vote for Huckabee if he gets the nomination.
But, you know, for crying out loud, you know, he's only going to shoot himself in the foot and put us at a disadvantage if he has to stoop to some things to get nominated.
Well, you are putting me in a really, really unfortunate position here because during primaries, you know, I do not take a position on specific candidates.
So I know you're not asking me to do that.
You're asking me to get in there and referee this and get these guys to grow up.
You got it.
And stop it.
All right, I'll do it.
Staff all shouting on the IFP.
Thank you.
I've got to hold my fire here.
I've got a, you know, Huckabee, he just, he got the endorsement of the Minuteman guy.
Do you realize what Huckabee's immigration positions have been in the past?
That nomination Endorsement stunned everybody.
I couldn't figure it out.
I thought I was performing a service by staying out of this because I don't take sides against or for candidates during primaries.
But believe me, this is not this thing he said about Romney and Jesus and Lucifer.
This is not the first time that statements have been made from the Huckabee campaign that you go, what?
So, yeah, I know I'm not refereeing this.
See, this is the risk.
I'm running a huge risk here.
But look, you're not.
Actually, I'm not because I can withstand it.
I am running the country.
That's right.
You know it, and I know it.
All right, look, you know, Marty, I appreciate this.
You have beaten me upside the head in a very productive way, and I appreciate it.
Thanks, Rush.
All right.
A brief time out here, ladies and gentlemen, and we'll be right back.
I'm going to tell you something about this.
One more thing here before we move on to Romney and Huckabee and Huckabee saying, Well, doesn't Romney believe that Jesus and the devil were brothers?
What this does, I happen to think that Romney, look, you can figure this out to me.
Romney has to have been waiting for something to happen.
He's probably surprised it's taken this long.
He knows what a target his religion is.
So I gave a speech last week.
He's been waiting for this.
It puts him on the high ground, I think.
I think the way he came back and said, look, this is over the time.
What do you say?
It's going too far.
Attacking somebody's religion is going too far.
And I'll tell you something.
I mentioned this the other day.
There's a history of Democrats attacking the religion of conservatives, Christianity, and evangelicals and the people who practice them.
And this time, it's a Christian attacking a Mormon and so forth.
But it gives Romney the high ground temporarily.
You just know he had to be waiting for this.
He just had to be.
And these things tend to work themselves out.
But it doesn't mean I'm not going to intercede.
I don't want you to misunderstand.
I'm not looking for outs.
Don't panic.
Sandy in Naples, Florida.
I'm glad you waited.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
Merry Christmas.
Same to you.
I want to say I am a three-issue voter: taxes, taxes, and taxes.
All right.
Right on, right now, right on.
And I think that you should be talking more about that because I believe that whoever gets the nomination and who is for lowering taxes will therefore have the integrity to take care of the immigration situation,
the war in Iraq, and everything else that people are NAMBAMBYing about.
Here we are, smack dab in the middle of another wonderful, fabulous, fantastic show.
And I got two calls in a row telling me I'm not doing it right.
No, honey, you totally do it right.
But I want because you are the man.
And we need you because the drive-side.
I understand.
Look, you're right.
I was just trying to be funny.
I do not have a thin skin, as you know.
Well, it wasn't funny.
This is a very serious thing.
I know.
And you know what?
I was thinking earlier today.
I don't know.
How long have you been listening to the program out there, Sandy?
Oh, probably 20 years.
All right, then you probably will remember, but even if you don't, even if you don't, this will make my point, you probably remember a number of monologues of mine back in the early 90s during the Clinton campaign and his eventual presidency on the concept that your money is yours.
It is not the government's first.
It is yours.
You remember that?
Oh, absolutely.
All right.
Well, it's been a long time since I did that treatise.
That's true.
Same thing baseline.
That's why I'm bringing it up.
Well, I know.
And I'm agreeing with you.
I'm saying it may be time to go through that whole conceptual philosophical presentation again, because there are new people listening to the program today and people who are young then and have matured and gotten older who may have missed it the first time around.
But people think it's such a simple concept.
Of course it's our money.
Well, that's not the way the Democrats look at it.
Not the way some Republicans look at it.
Could I interject something here?
Of course.
Thank you so much.
You're such a gentleman.
I mean, I would love for you to challenge every American that listens to you to itemize monthly the taxes they pay from their paycheck to the groceries.
Been there.
Been there, done that.
That was part of the it's your money.
Walking them through the pay stub.
Just because you never see the money doesn't mean it wasn't paid to you.
But they need to be reminded of it.
That's what I'm saying.
I'm agreeing with you.
I mean, even we took our dogs to get grooms and were taxed on that.
Well, the taxes don't end.
So you want to cut taxes on dog groomers?
Yes.
Okay, good.
That's a good starting point.
Want to cut taxes on everything.
The cable, the telephone, the cell phone, the local, the state.
I mean, you name it, the groceries.
You can't go buy a lemon without paying taxes on it.
Well, look, here's another reason.
You know, this is something that I have at the top of one of my stacks today.
Hillary Clinton argued yesterday for keeping the inheritance tax in place, saying it is a key to ensuring the United States remains a meritocracy.
The estate tax has been historically a part of our fundamental belief that we should have a meritocracy, that we don't want a system where we expect people to make it on their own to be overtime dominated by inherited wealth.
It's none of her business.
Well, then she needs to go run for president of Russia.
Exactly.
Exactly.
She wants to take ExxonMobil's profits.
She wants to take all kinds of profits.
She wants to run healthcare.
You're exactly right.
I'm agreeing with you.
Gee, I've never had this much trouble agreeing with anybody in my life.
But I'm agreeing with you.
This whole business of the estate, meritocracy, the estate tax is designed to be redistributive.
It's not anything to do with meritocracy.
She's coming out against inherited wealth.
It's none of her business.
It's none of her business how you spend your money, but she wants to make it your business.
And all liberals do.
But what bothers me more than anything about this, Sandy, is the fact that the concept of money being people's, the people who earn it, can so easily be distorted because the liberals can convince people, well, I should pay higher taxes.
We have so many people suffering and so forth.
And the inefficiency of what government does with people's money.
And further, there are a couple of things to add to this whole theory, too, which I have recently done, which is that, you know, Democrats are running out there saying, we need increased taxes.
We've lost too much tax revenue with the tax cuts for the rich.
B.S. We got more revenue pouring into Washington than they ever dreamed.
Capital gains at 15%.
Tax cuts has caused an economic boom.
The fact of the matter is tax increases, as far as Democrats are concerned, have nothing to do with raising money for Washington.
It is all about control.
Because the more you are taxed, the less of your money you have and the less freedom to engage economically in this country you have.
It's a hideous thing.
It's a good suggestion.
I'm agreeing with you.
We are continuing to scratch away at the surface here of show prep and other items on the agenda today.
We'll be monitoring the first hour of the Republican debate.
It's going to be tough because I will be reading on closed captioning, but it's just about to get underway.
So sit tight, folks.
▲
Export Selection