All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 31, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:59
December 31, 2007, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Now look, I don't want the last couple of hours to dissuade you.
I happen to be a big fan of Earth First.
I'm I'm dead serious on this.
Earth first, my friends.
We can mine and log the other planets later.
Ah, ah, I am Jason Lewis doing my best to fill in for the big guy Rush Limbaugh.
He'll be back on Wednesday and give us his expert analysis on the Iowa Caucuses.
We've been talking about that the big day Thursday, and then on to New Hampshire and Michigan and South Carolina, Florida, and February 5th, super Tuesday.
So it's going to get uh it's going to get well rather interesting the next few weeks and months ahead, right here on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network, the contact line, as always 1800-282-2882.
That's 1800-282-2882, and Russia's new email, L Rushbow at EIB Nets.com.
Just to make certain that you don't think the festive spirit has gone out of academia.
Let me bring you the latest in political correctness from the University of Minnesota.
I am from the uh great North Star State, the stomping grounds here.
So here's what I have to put up with on a daily basis.
I I I have a friend, believe it or not, I do have friends in education.
And I mentioned earlier that if we don't get a handle, the biggest drivers of government spending.
Remember Mike Huckabee on Meet the Depressed yesterday said the reason I raise taxes in Arkansas so much is well was for the kids.
It was education.
Every single Democrat, the socialist hides behind children.
Every program that they want to fund, it's all about the kids.
S chips, education, health care.
They've got to have a crisis.
Global warming happens to be the mother of all crises.
If they if the government can control your energy consumption, you have nothing.
You have no control over your life whatsoever.
You got that second computer you want to hook up?
Forget about that.
That second car, forget about that.
It is absolute command and control, which is why liberals love the global warming mantra so much, and why it's so, so dis distressing to see a few rhinos, Republicans in name only go that direction.
But education is a problem too, as I mentioned.
It's the single biggest driver of governments at the state level.
And believe it or not, at the federal level, there's far too much involvement.
Ronald Reagan ran on two education platforms in 1980.
One, we're going to eliminate the payback to the teachers' union called the Department of Education that Jimmy Carter put in.
We're going to eliminate it.
And two, we're going to have true market choice when it comes to education via tuition tax credits.
There's no reason tinkering with a command and control, government run, government monopoly, government school education system in this country.
It can't be repaired.
You can talk in glowing terms about charters.
You can talk about this or that.
But the bottom line is if we don't instill choice in education, you are never, you you are never going to get the best bang for the buck.
And you're also never going to remove the palpable liberalism that is so much a part of your child's indoctrination.
Now I know you teachers out there, Jason, you don't understand.
There's a conservative teacher.
Of course there are conservative teachers.
I know a few of them.
Years ago I used to have one as a friend.
But the bottom line here is we know where the NEA stands.
We know where your state education association stands.
We know what's driving your property tax bills.
We know what's driving the state budget.
And the vast majority of people who get a government check for a living tend to be more in favor of guess what?
Bigger government.
Call sixty minutes, we got a news flash.
People who who get a check from government tend to like candidates who promote bigger government.
So why do Republican governors run around saying, I gotta get the teachers union on my side?
Well, give them more money, they'll be on your side.
And what do you get?
You get more indoctrination.
It is an unwinnable battle.
And the best way to do it is to make certain that parents, that the money in education follows the parents.
And the best way to do that is to through tuition tax credits at the best and deductions at the very least.
Vouchers bring in some other problems.
Vouchers might publicize for lack of a better word, uh, the private school system as it exists, and some people are opposed to that because of that.
A tuition tax credit couldn't do that because you're just getting your own money back.
But I digress.
The University of Minnesota.
Speaking of education, and did you know that the taxpayer spends five hundred and thirty-six billion dollars?
That's larger than the defense budget.
For those of you that think defense is driving the deficit.
Five hundred and thirty-six billion dollars in K through twelve education in the last year recorded that I have anyway, two thousand four-2005.
Five hundred and thirty-six billion.
My must be underfunded.
In higher ed, another oxymoron, taxpayers will spend an estimated three hundred and seventy-three billion for higher education in that same school year.
$373 billion going for student loans, going to, you know, for Sally May to ensure student loans, going to direct appropriations to colleges and universities where the social sciences are little more than incubators for leftist thought, not so much the hard sciences.
So I I had the validation of my skepticism supported and reinforced once again when I got this email from a friend who works at the university.
And they said, Jason, get a hold of get hold of this.
Here is a note from the administration concerning art, all the departments at the U, all of their office parties, and how they need to keep them inclusive.
Inclusive I love that buzzword.
Consider the and I'll just read it to you from the University of Minnesota driven to discover holiday office party tips.
It's like it's like a bad S and L skid, isn't it?
Holiday office party tips.
Consider the purpose of the party create an environment where everyone feels accepted.
Well what's more important than that at Christmas.
Plan a time that makes sense with your workplace schedule.
It may be better to plan activities for January or February.
Consider celebrating another holiday instead of Christmas such as Martin Luther King Jr.
Day.
It can be a chance to learn together.
Check to make certain your holiday party avoids conflicts with other events.
You can also use it to plan department cultural awareness activities.
Pick themes that everyone can appreciate such as the end of the fall semester or the beginning of winter.
This goes back to the kind of the the pagan celebration for winter solstice, doesn't it?
What are they going to do over at the U. Hey, what's the party for?
Beginning of winter.
Have another beer the uh be aware of unintended messages celebrations held in December tend to make people think of Christmas.
Wa I wish I would have thought of that.
Can you imagine that this is higher education that's best did you know that celebrations held in December have a propensity to make people actually think of Christmas and we can't have that if you're going to decorate the memo goes on to say if you want to decorate plan to do it in a way that is festive but also inclusive of other December holidays and avoid of course unintended insensitivity.
They will be coming to the state of Minnesota this spring to demand millions more, hundreds of millions more in bonding by the state because they're so short on money never fails, huh?
1 eight hundred two eight two eight eight two now we're been talking about the environment and global warming and that sort of thing and how I think education and the environment are the impediments to a smaller government, a freer society and human progress right now.
And I'm talking I'm not talking about a clean environment obviously we all want a clean environment obviously we all want an educated workforce.
I'm suggesting that the marketplace is the is the best answer to both of those situations.
The marketplace will give us a clean cleaner environment it always does it always has and it will certainly provide superior education.
The danger for freedom and for liberty is the environment and education are now provinces of government we're from the government and we're here to help you that sort of thing and that is a recipe for oppression.
And it's happening speaking of global warming a Canadian Greenpeace representative in 2005 when trying to explain the fact that the temperatures are are you know going up, down, you've got all these weather variations that some people use to question global warming this particular Greenpeace representative said look, quote, global warming can mean colder it can mean drier it can mean wetter what's this guy's name Humpty Dumpty?
Words mean anything I want them to mean?
And this is the classic gore like response to any criticism of the global warming religion.
Well we we've got drier weather we've got droughts global warming oh we've got storms that's global warming we've got Hotter, colder, global warming.
It is the mother of all crises.
And liberals love a crises because war is the health of the state, and war is a crisis.
So everything's a war on poverty, a war on pollution, a war on health care.
You start to get the drift after a while.
They convince you to give up things you would never give up.
Your property, your income, your mobility.
You can't have that third car.
You've got to get on a light rail train by a light rail station by a Soviet-style high-rise condo.
That's where you've got to live.
It's all in the name of containing urban sprawl.
See, we've got these crises.
It reminds me kind of of the smoking bans.
You know, that was it.
That started out as an environmental movement.
Environmental tobacco smoke.
And we were told by the EPA he was killing 3,000 people a year.
Until a federal judge in North Carolina looked at the methodology and said, Are you out of your mind?
He rebuked the EPA.
There has been no study, whether it's the World Health Organization or Harvard or that federal judge in North Carolina that suggests environmental tobacco smoke kills anywhere close to that many people, if any at all.
As soon as I see a death certificate, a coroner's report where the cause of death says ETS, then I'll believe this nonsense.
But even if you, even if you went out on a limb and said, Oh gosh, uh it's irritable, uh, it it aggravates my asthma, all of this, therefore I want these smoking bans.
And remember, uh, there are some people advocating a federal ban now on smoking on private property, and that's the key.
That's the bright line.
Private property.
We've got right now 30 states and hundreds of cities nationwide passing these indoor outdoor smoking bans on private property.
Now, when it comes to pollution, there can be no externality when you're talking about private property.
Most people think of of pollution in terms of externalities.
If I'm you know, polluting a dump or I'm polluting the river or I'm polluting the air, that is a a free dump.
It is called an externality in economist terms.
And therefore it's gotta be reined in because people will keep dumping because there's no cost to them.
But if I'm smoking in my bar, if I'm smoking in my bowling alley, if I've if I'm smoking in my restaurant, you can easily avoid that.
You can't avoid an externality by definition.
You can avoid that.
Don't come in my bar, don't go in my restaurant, and don't bowl at my place.
What on earth is the state and city government, let alone the federal government, doing telling me what I can serve on my menu, trans fats ban, what I can smoke, what I can do.
What are they gonna do?
Ban alcohol in bars next.
You know, if conservatives believe that private property is sacrosanct, and it is, it is the barrier against the state.
Once you lose private property, you lose the barrier against big government.
The Fourth Amendment says you can't illegally search me.
Unreasonable search.
Why?
Because it's my property.
Once the smoking ban, these nanny state Nazis, I'm sorry to be so vitriolic here, but I I I believe strongly this is a this is an outrage.
Once they they pierced the veil going from public property to private property, there should have been a mini revolution in this country.
Not over defending smoking, over the idea that why are you telling me what I can do in my home, and that's coming next.
Right now in Alaska, these poor guys in Anchorage have to go outside 30 below and smoke.
I wonder if that's good for their health.
1800-282-2882.
I'm Jason Lewis, In for Rush Limbo on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
Cruising right along on this New Year's Eve of 2007 reminder, Rush is back on Wednesday after uh having last week off.
My thanks once again to uh for the fill-in opportunity, always enjoyable to be here at the Excellence in Broadcasting Network in Leesburg, Virginia.
Benjamin, you're on with me, Jason Lewis, in for rush.
Hi.
Hi, Jason.
I would just like to say no candidate is perfect.
Um even Russell Reagan had his mistakes.
Right.
But we have to go best we've got.
I personally would support either Huckby or Romney, whichever one makes it to Virginia.
But I wouldn't if Giuliani or McCain, who are my last two choices, made it to the general elections, I would certainly vote for them, even though I disagree with them on so many issues because uh the they with even with all their mistakes are much better than any of the Democrats.
So let me get this right.
The Democrats are going to take us to a tyranny of socialism in uh you know in a in a week, or I shouldn't say a week, in a year.
Uh the Republican liberal will take us there in two years, so that's better.
This lesser of two evils is precisely what got the party in trouble.
This notion wait a minute.
Let me finish.
This this notion that, gosh, we can't demand purism.
Trust me, we're not in danger of having a purist conservative.
We are in much greater danger as a cause of movement of watering down our values and voting for anybody because they've got an R behind their name.
I'm a conservative first.
I'm not a Republican Party reptile that's going to just say, Oh, I'm going to check in my my intellect at at the gate and vote Republican.
That's what they would like to have you believe, and that's what they do when they stifle you and say, hey, be a good Republican.
It's it's time for a little hell raising in the GOP.
Um my problem with that, you take a look at Teddy Roosevelt.
He tried to run against Taft, and third party candidates puts the vote.
The Democrat gets it and uh the America is overall worse off than they would have been.
You take a look at Roth Perot, nineteen ninety two and nineteen ninety six, splits the vote.
Third party candidates don't win.
So you're saying, well, so the Republicans can be as liberal as they want as long as you can find someone who's going to be more liberal.
I would say that there are unless you can find a third party that actually has a good chance of winning.
Well, I'm not talking about a third party.
I'm talking about supporting a Republican who actually believes in the platform and has got the has got the credentials and most importantly the conviction to implement it.
It doesn't have to be a third party.
I don't want to I've been a Republican all my life.
Uh and I still am.
I'm I'm just saying that the reason the party gets in trouble is when winning takes precedence over principle, people start to dilute those principles and you alienate the conservative base without which the party will collapse.
In fact, I would I would argue to you that if you really want to see the Republican Party go the way of the Whigs, just keep going down this Republican and name only big government rhino stuff, and you're going to see you're then you're gonna see a conservative third party.
If the Republicans don't get back to their Reaganite roots, which as you say it wasn't perfect, but it was the closest thing in my lifetime.
If they don't get back to that, then the Republican Party is an endangered species.
And that's that go ahead, I'm sorry.
If Nicano Giuliani got the nomination, you would vote third party.
Well, I don't know.
I I'm I s look, I'm not gonna tell anybody how I'm going to vote, uh but I would I would say this.
I would have serious reservations.
But look, if you had uh here's what here's your your homework for the week the the New Year's Day.
You ready?
All right.
Go back and take a look at the quotes without without anybody letting you know who said them.
For instance, if you had somebody that said, I'm not gonna support this tax cut because it's a tax cut for the rich.
Or if you had somebody said we have a biblical duty to solve global warming.
You have someone that said that illegal immigrants are God's children and that the in we've got to do something about the environment, and we gotta get money out of politics.
That's for that's why I'm for a campaign finance reform.
And you put those quotes in the mouth of John Edwards, Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton Clinton, Benjamin from Leesburg, Virginia would be leading the charge to blast these people.
Now you're telling me you're supposed to check your principle at the door when those quotes come from a liberal Republican?
No, what I'm saying is that when the general election comes, I would look at all uh across the board stances and see these candidates are the only ones who have more than two percent of the poll.
No one else is going to win.
It's going to be one or the other, whichever one has the most important thing.
Well, how far are you willing to go?
How far are you willing?
Let's say you've got two candidates, one a liberal Republican.
Remember Mike Bloomberg was a Republican when he ran for mayor.
Uh you you've got a liberal Republican and you've got a Democrat.
As long as the Republican is better on one issue, you're gonna vote for the Republican.
He's liberal and all the other ones?
As long as the Republican is better on more uh on the more issues that are more important to me.
I'm not going to just go to the party.
I gotta go.
I g I gotta wrap it up.
I understand, but I think the danger is of diluting our principle, not demanding a purity of principle.
Trust me, we're way on the other side of that.
I'm Jason Lewis in for rush.
More coming right up, so don't go away.
L. Rushbow at EIBNet.com, the new email address for the big guy.
He's back on Wednesday.
I am Jason Lewis uh filling in for well it's just great to be here once again filling in for rush high atop the EIB Tower in midtown Manhattan for a day I can say I've got talent on loan from Rush.
Kevin in Las Vegas, Nevada, you're on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network with me, Jason Lewis.
Hi.
Hey Mr. Lewis, how are you doing this morning?
Could not be better, sir.
It's New Year's Eve and no sight of Ted Kennedy anywhere in Minnesota.
So it's a great forecast then, isn't it?
I just feel I just feel safer.
I don't know.
I understand that.
Well I was just telling your call screener.
I was listening the the previous hour and you're talking uh to a couple of callers about the environment and about uh about agriculture and now I am an agronomist.
graduated from Texas A&M University, and I find it humorous that they want to get rid of all of these pesticides and herbicides.
Just like I told your call screener, you could actually drink a gallon of Roundup, and you'd probably vomit, but you wouldn't die, because it is so specific to what it does.
Now it's also funny about all these organic products but what what is the first thing people do when they go camping and they get water from a stream.
Oh well that that's even horrible.
That's even more you better not drink it.
You boil it, you put in the pills, whatever they do to sanitize it.
Absolutely absolutely but go ahead I'm sorry.
Oh I'm I was just gonna say well I mean with the uh with the organic products um the reason why they are so expensive is number one since they aren't using any any herbicides or pesticides they get lower crop yield.
Uh another thing is they have to pick them before you know harvest any of the the the crop before it is actually ripe.
That way it ripens on the way to wherever they're buying it.
Right.
And when you do that, I mean the plant doesn't actually it the fruit or the vegetable does not actually retain or or acquire all the nutrients it needs.
That is why all these uh quote unquote Frankenstein you know the genetically engineered fruits and vegetables are better because you can pick them when they are ripe and they last longer.
That's why I laugh at everyone that says they're on an organic diet and is more nutritious.
Well with with all these organic products they might as well just pass out multivitamins with them because they're not getting all the nutrition that they need.
Thanks to the environmental lobby and the ignorance or I should say the the ad coming from the mainstream media we have a bias against chemicals.
We have a bias against the pharmaceutical industry against drugs.
Folks drugs for lack of a better description are a good thing.
Better living through chemicals I mean higher yields are good.
They solve hunger it really is quite amazing isn't it Kevin?
But this is the sort of back to nature mother earth religion that is taking a hold of the country and if someone in the in the political arena doesn't stand up pretty soon and lead the way to fight this stuff instead of going along we're gonna wake up one day not only with rotten apples but with our liberties gone.
That is absolutely correct and actually we'll have a bunch of weaklings also because we're not uh able to get what we need from our foods.
Now back to the casino right Kevin thanks for calling from Vegas I do appreciate it.
Have a great uh New Year's Eve out there in Atlanta, Georgia.
Jason, you're up next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hey Jason, how you doing?
I'm doing well, Jason.
I like your name.
Very yeah good good name to you uh to you too.
I I happen to be a pioneer by the way when it came to the name Jason.
I am fifty two years young.
When I was a kid nobody was named Jason.
I I'm just copying you then I'm trying uh to aspire to greatness.
Speaking of, you're doing a fantastic job.
Rush is a tough act to follow, but you're doing the best job as anybody could.
Thanks.
We're having fun.
Okay.
I got a quick true story about the correlation between government spending and the quality of education.
This is not my vote for government education.
It's just an example.
So my wife was born in North Dakota.
She came down here during high school.
the average student spend in North Dakota is about $75.
five hundred bucks per uh per kid um they happen to be around fourth in education in the country she comes down here to uh Atlanta finishes uh high school two years early because she's that much uh further ahead and and we're 49th or hanging on to 48th or 49th and uh our average spend is thirteen thousand five hundred per kid.
Right.
Um I live in downtown Atlanta my taxes keep going up and up and you're uh the guy who's in the call screening uh summed it up the best you know adding you know pumping in money to the system is not the it's no guarantee for success.
The two lies, the two lies that the teachers' unions uh want to perpetrate upon the American people are as follows.
You want better teachers, you've got to have more money in education.
You want better education, you've got to have more money.
The empirical data is simply, frankly, in many cases, the opposite of that.
And two, smaller class sizes will ergo illicit higher educational outputs.
Uh why is it we go to college and sit in those huge auditoriums with two hundred and fifty kids and pay more?
What why is it that Japan and other countries have much larger class sizes and do a better job?
So those are the myths, and the goal here is not to have more computers or better schools.
The goal is to have a better contract for the next time the teachers' union negotiates.
Yep.
I hate to be I hate to be so blunt, but that's it.
You know, you mentioned uh Georgia, the average spending in Georgia is ten thousand dollars per pupil.
In Utah at sixty five hundred dollars per pupil, according to the uh uh the Department of Education and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Now, as you just pointed out, the test scores are higher in many other states that have lower and now here's what they'll tell you, Jace.
They'll say, Yeah, but you can't you can't expect us to educate um some kids that don't have any guidance at home.
We you can't expect us to educate children that that come from broken families and the homework doesn't get done.
You know, and that's a fair point, but more money's not gonna solve that either, then, is it?
No, no, not not at all.
And yeah, I didn't know it was ten thousand for the state, but I know in downtown Atlanta, which is their own system is thirteen five.
Well, that's right, and they they make up the difference in the rural areas.
For instance, in Minneapolis and St. Paul, you've got uh the the per pupil spending or the average daily membership is what the the nomenclature is here.
The they they it's roughly about fifteen, sixteen thousand.
You go out in the rural areas where it is much, much less, you get a statewide average in Minnesota of about ten thousand three hundred dollars per pupil.
Now, when people find that out, the the the public schools are spending ten, eleven thousand, that would be a pretty good private school education.
And if the the public schools, and this is the beauty of tuition tax credits, one of the reasons I've been a big fan of them for years, if they are let's assume out of that eleven thousand, the fixed costs are two or three thousand.
So you've got variable costs of eight or nine thousand that they have to spend with each new student that comes into the system.
If that school system is relieved of educating that child, they are relieved of a six, seven, eight thousand dollar expense.
So how would a tuition tax credit, which would remove a child uh cost the schools money?
The tuition tax credit might be for, say, at max in in a utopian free market world, it might be five grand for for a year.
Okay, so the taxpayer uh gets back his five grand in property taxes and or state income taxes, but the school district is relieved of of an eight thousand dollar expense.
They came out ahead.
There simply is no argument against tuition tax credits and liberalizing small L the uh the educational system.
Jason, thanks for the call.
Let's squeeze in uh Chris in Cleveland before we go to the next break on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Jason, how are you?
Could not be better, Chris.
How about you?
And a happy new year to you.
You're gonna ask me where my Argonauts are.
See, I used to get that I used to get that when I was a kid because I was the only Jason in the you know the the mid six where are the hey Jace, how are the Argonauts?
Where are your golden fleece?
Exactly.
And I was the pioneer, then no Jason gets that anymore.
Right, right.
Yeah, you're not just to mention it.
There are very few Jasons that I actually know.
Well, I guess I moved.
Real quick, um I was talking to your screen caller, and I I really appreciate your show.
You're making my drive from Cleveland to Michigan all that better.
Um you're leaving Cleveland.
No, I'm sorry.
Never mind.
Exactly.
Well, then again, I'm going to Michigan, so are you from?
Where are you from?
I'm from Cleveland.
I see.
Okay.
Well, Cleveland has had a renaissance, hasn't it?
Uh it it's tough.
It's it's pretty rough over here.
Um very very few industrial uh parkways and stuff.
You mean all those new taxpayer supported stadiums haven't reinvigorated the downtown area with a Keynesian multiplier?
Why I we're told every time the taxpayers have to build a new stadium or an arena for very, very well off owners and players, we're told that that's gonna be an economic catalyst.
I'm I'm confused.
Not in Cleveland, and the funny thing is is that they've built this big, gigantic, beautiful um rock and roll hall of fame.
And I don't think I've seen one single solitary uh rock and roller actually show up, man.
One that's been one that's been living anyway, yeah.
That's so true.
It started with convention centers.
Remember, every city had to have a huge convention center.
And the argument always was well, if we build this, it will go through the economy and all of the jobs will be created.
And it was this old Keynesian multiplier nonsense, which the usual retort should have been, well, gosh, if building one stadium or one convention center is good, we ought to build ten.
That's really gonna get the economy going.
It's just taxpayers getting ripped off right and left.
But I digress.
Go ahead.
Exactly.
Real quick, I wanted to talk about this smoking thing.
Uh the smoking bans.
Yeah.
All the environmentalists talking about the smoking and it's bad for everybody and all this other jazz.
Uh I want to paint a picture real quick.
I work in the liquor industry, and I also am a smoker.
And yes, I do realize it is bad for me, and yes, I actually would uh uh wish that they would ban uh cigarettes because I can't stand the darn things, and it would it would it would almost force me into quitting.
Uh but I do enjoy it.
They've got to also tell you they've got to exercise, too.
Exactly.
Where does it stop?
That's the danger.
The point I I wanted to make, and I was talking to your screen caller, and it baffles my mind when they did stop the smoking ban or stop smoking in like the local bars and restaurants and so on and so forth.
It's okay for for um uh them to pass a law that says you cannot smoke in a bar.
But in the same breath, they will allow people to and mind you, I want to want to also uh set the tone that I work in the liquor industry.
They let them drink ad nauseum, right.
They will let them drive a car to a bar, drink, spend fifty, seventy, a hundred bucks, and and until they cannot move, let them get in the car and drive home.
That's my friend not just last night, um, on uh uh just an unfortunate accident.
I I heard it on the news this morning.
Uh I'm up against the clock.
I'm up against the clock.
I know what you're gonna say, a tragic drunk driving accident.
The point here is number one, that is already banned.
There's a plethora of laws against drunk driving, and some would say they're not working very well.
So that has been tried.
Adding more laws that don't work, smacks of prohibition.
Let me expand on this when we come back.
I gotta squeeze in a break right here in the Rush Limbaugh program.
Check out Rushlimbaugh.com for all the latest from the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, Rush, as I say, we'll be back on Wednesday.
I can hardly wait.
I am Jason Lewis.
Now, speaking of the smoking ban and the previous caller about drinking, drinking is next.
They're going to go after you know the You can't take away the rights of the tobacco companies, a legal product, without jeopardizing every everybody else's rights.
And once we decided to trample on the law and take away the constitutional and common law defenses of the tobacco companies in these in these court settlements.
You know who's pushing the smoking bans, friends?
It's the money that came from the court law or the uh tobacco lawsuits.
Whether it was a separate one in Minnesota or the nationwide settlement, the master settlement agreement nationwide.
That's going to groups now hellbent on enacting prohibition.
They've tried it in their homes in Montgomery County, Maryland.
They're doing it in parks in the upper Midwest, believe it or not, we're going to ban smoking in parks.
That could be deadly.
You know, I see a guy 150 yards out.
This is all about some sort of nanny state control.
There are people born who are busybodies.
Unfortunately, they tend to gravitate towards government.
My the whether I smoke in my home or in my privately owned bar is quite frankly none of anybody's business.
And here's why it's none of anybody's business.
You don't have to endure it.
Don't come in my home.
Don't come in my restaurant, don't come in my bar.
The marketplace will sort this out.
If people really want a place that has absolutely no smoking, that place will make more money than the bar that allows smoking.
And the marketplace will work.
Voila, without any government intervention.
That's not good enough for the nanny state liberals.
And India's getting out of control.
They're going to ban cell phones.
They ban glass bottles on beaches in Minnesota, or they wanted to.
They got to have a booster seat for your child if he's nine years old or under 80 pounds.
You got baby Huey in the back of your car as though parents wouldn't have any idea what to do with the child.
The benefit of the doubt always must go to the individual and the parents in those cases.
But when the previous caller said, well, you know, they're not doing anything about drinking.
Oh my goodness.
We we've got a a war on drinking.
Um we've the the mad campaigns, the not a drop campaign, which wants to bring it from point oh eight in many states down to point oh two.
You know, you have gargled mouthwash and get pulled over.
It's a great revenue raiser.
Why don't we focus on the real dangers when it comes to drunk driving?
Those guys blowing a 1 7 or a.20.
Instead, it's all about getting as many tickets out there as you can.
It's about control.
And once again, remember, the purpose of living in a free society is all about having the ability of freedom of action, the ability to do what you want to do without interference from somebody else.
Well, why should anybody interfere if I want to be foolish?
And I I I understand there's a point where he says if you're if you're apt to hurt somebody else, we're going to interfere, and that's where drunk driving comes in.
Nothing to do with smoking bans on private property.
Now I'm more than willing to live by smoking bans on public property.
I don't like them in many cases, but I'm willing to live by that because through a representative republic and a representative democracy, that's what the people want.
You cross the Rubicon when you start to tell people on private property, let alone a federal edict, what they can do.
And that is very dangerous stuff.
In Philadelphia, Bill, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hey, Jason, thanks for having me on.
Boy, after hearing all that, I feel like I'm walking into a trap.
But I want to tell you first, before I tell you about the topic, because it is a little bit different.
The topic I'm going to bring up, you don't hear anyone talking about.
And it's not that I'm against this uh industry, but it has to do with the gaming industry and the uh proliferation of casino gambling throughout our country.
And I always get tagged with that nanny state thing, and I say, hey, listen, in my state where I live here in Philadelphia, number one, we are the largest city now in the country that's going to host casinos.
Number two, our state is getting fifty-five percent of every dollar taken in.
So the nanny thing's over.
They're already in bed with this industry.
But what I'm saying.
Now therein you hit the problem.
The problem is that governments are using this in their lot started with lotteries, and now they're going into casinos for government revenue.
That's what I'm opposed to.
Well, see, Jason, uh you know what?
I I'm not I'm opposed to that too, but the main problem I have with this industry, and I've been doing this for involved with this for over twenty years now, uh, is the simple fact that this industry has no safeguards or provisions to protect the consumer who uses it.
All right, I gotta cut you off because I've got a break coming here, but I get the gist of the argument, and I I, as you pointed out, you did walk into a trap.
But we appreciate it.
Look, that's like saying it was the predatory lending that got the mortgage, the subprime mortgage market in trouble.
No, we're responsible adults.
There's a reason prohibition didn't work.
If there is a demand for this, you don't adopt a one-size fits-all ban.
Let people choose what they want to do and live by the consequences.
That will regulate the behavior.
I got a break.
You're on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
Well, it has been a uh wonderful opportunity once again to sit in for the big guy, Rush Limbaugh.
Remember his new email address, L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
You can always check out the website, Rushlimbaugh.com.
Now he's back uh he's back on Wednesday, and then Thursday, of course, he'll handicap the race in Iowa for you on Wednesday, Thursday, the big day, so you've got to be listening to uh excellence in broadcasting on Thursday, then Friday for the post analysis, gotta listen.
Well, you just gotta listen each and every day to the Rush Limbaugh program.
As always a pleasure.
I am Jason Lewis, hailing from the great state of Minnesota.
My thanks to Mike and Kit and the rest of the gang at uh Excellence in Broadcasting.
▲
Export Selection