All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 22, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:42
January 22, 2008, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Did you notice how upset Mrs. Clinton got when Barack Obama had the temerity to remind America that she was once a corporate lawyer sitting on the Walmart board?
Lucky for him, there were no ashtrays nearby on the stage.
I mean, of all things to get testy about, okay, so I was on the Walmart board.
That really ticked her off.
So she has to come back and say, well, yeah, well, while you're out there celebrating Reagan's ideas, I was fighting those ideas when you were practicing law representing your contributor, Redzco, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.
Interestingly, after that, Wolf Blitzer would not let Obama respond.
They had to stick to the format and go to Ed.
They had to give Edwards some time.
And then Edwards said, hey, hey, hey, you know, there are three people in this debate.
And Blitzer eventually went back to Obama.
He got the answer to the question.
Greetings, welcome back.
Rushland Boy, 800-282-2882, the phone number, email address, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
Okay, so Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Clinton gets all upset about this Walmart board business, and Barry comes, she comes back with this sleaze ball contributor as a slum lord.
And everybody watching the debate, at least people like us watching the debates, Barry, Barry, Charlie Tree, Riottis, Lippo Group, Lincoln Bedroom, Coffees, Charlie Tree with $250,000 in money orders to the Clinton Legal Defense Fund.
Barry, where are you?
Now, there's a reason.
There may be two reasons why Obama did not reply or retort.
And I think that, or this is Norman Shu still in jail, trying to commit suicide on a train, Colorado, heading to New York.
Now, my theory is that the reason Barry did not retort with any of this is that once you go there, you open yourself up for the return volley.
And if you figure that in the case of people elected to the U.S. Senate, you have to figure that most of these people have something in their fundraising histois they would rather people not know.
And I guarantee you that Obama's probably one of those and doesn't, and I'm sure the Clinton Oppo research team at Clinton Inc. knows all of it.
And so if Barry goes there, Hillary could come back and say, how dare you insult me in my home?
We have been totally vetted on this.
We had an independent counsel investigating us for years, a newspaper investigating us for years, and nobody ever found a thing.
Now, how about when you, Obama, did X and Y and Z?
Now, see, you would think, we've been in this primary for how long?
You would think that one of these guys opposing Mrs. Clinton would use some of this because they're all out there talking about cleaning up the mess that's Washington.
Why don't they?
The other theory, I'll run it by you and you see what you think.
The other theory is that the DNC has told all of these people on the Democrat roster, you are not going to say anything about anybody else that's going to destroy them in the general.
And so that there's a sort of a behind-the-scenes handshake of the table.
And they got pretty close to it last night, and the fur really started flying.
Now, this is just a theory that the DNC has told these people, go out and say what you want about each other, but do not go anywhere that could ruin our nominees' chances, whoever it is in the general by getting this stuff out there.
That kind of argued, I could argue against that theory by saying who cares what happens in the Democrat print.
The Republicans and their nominee could fire back at Hillary with this stuff, and no DNC is going to tell them to shut up about it unless the entire political class has a handshake under the table that they will not ever accuse any opponent in any party of shady fundraising because a lot of it already is shady.
And McCain has given us the framework for this.
That's right, Limboy.
You got it.
It's a good thing most people don't have your memory.
We're all corrupt.
We were great, decent people.
We got here.
Money corrupted us, Limboy.
Corrupted us.
And I got it out.
I took the money out of politics.
So, you know, I'm telling you this fundraising business is one area where none of them want to go.
And so you might say that the Clintons have insurance on this because nobody else is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow on the matter, on the subject.
Let us continue with audio soundbites from the slug fest last night.
We left off with Mrs. Clinton saying to Obama, yeah, those Dragan ideas were bad for America, and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor Redzco and his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.
And then Edwards got in there.
Wolf Blitzer said, Senator Edwards has been remarkably patient during this exchange, and I want him.
I don't know if you want to get involved in this, Senator Edwards.
What I want to say first is, are there three people in this debate?
Not two.
I also want to know on behalf of voters here in South Carolina, this kind of squabbling, how many children is this going to get health care?
How many people are going to get an education from this?
How many kids are going to be able to go to college because of this?
Does this sound vaguely familiar, ladies and gentlemen?
Remember 1996, the now famous debate between Bill Clinton and Bob Dole.
And Dole, I guess this might have been the second or third debate, one of these debates in the round.
And somebody told Dole, you know, you're not scored.
You got to take gloves off in this debate.
So Dole took them off and went after Clinton on some of these matters that we've been discussing, fundraising and stuff.
And Clinton, they were all standing around and handheld microphones, and Clinton put his micro close to his mouth.
And he said, no attack ever fed a hungry chow.
The place melted.
The place just went besonkers.
No attack ever fed a hungry child.
So here's the Brett girl recycling Bill Clinton from about 11 and a half years ago.
Wolf Blitzer said, Senator Clinton, your proposal, this is freezing interest rates.
This is the subprime crisis.
Your proposal calls for a five-year moratorium on interest rates, a 90-day moratorium on foreclosure, five-year keeping those interest rates the same.
Alan Greensman suggests we simply have to let this housing crisis exhaust itself.
Trying to prevent the housing markets from going down merely prolongs the agony.
Does your plan, as he would seem to be suggesting, prolong the agony?
What I hear as I go in and out of people's homes and talk to so many who have already lost their homes, they're in foreclosure.
They see these interest rates that are about to go up and they know they can't pay them, is that we take action now.
My moratorium for 90 days is a workout.
It's not a bailout.
I want people to be able to see whether they can stay in their homes paying a rate that is affordable for them.
And the interest rate freeze is, I think, merited because look at what's happening.
If you're a big bank that helped get us into this mess, you go borrow money from Abu Dhabi or somewhere.
If you're a homeowner who has been at the bottom of this incredible scheme that was established, you're left holding the bag and you don't have the house anymore.
Oh, this is incredible.
This scheme?
Mrs. Clinton, this incredible scheme was hatched by Congress.
It was Congress who told lenders that you're going to go out and lend money to people that basically can't afford it.
But look, as I said yesterday, I agree.
Let's go freeze foreclosures.
Let's tell these predatory lenders they can't take your house for three months.
And during those three months, you figure out whether you can pay the rate.
No, in those three months, you skip town.
And then she says, we're going to freeze interest rates.
It's just not fair out there.
We're going to freeze interest rates.
We're just going to have a timeout.
Mrs. Clinton, if you're going to do this, would you freeze stock prices too?
Would you put a floor on stock prices?
And would you tell the markets, you tell those predatory brokers that they can't sell a stock below X price?
Now, I know what you're thinking.
Rush, that's silly.
That's absolutely how she can't do that.
How would you enforce it?
Exactly.
It would be silly.
So what's the difference in that and putting a 90-day freeze on interest rates or a 90-day freeze on foreclosures?
This is frightening, frightening stuff.
This, again, this debate last night, aside from the two duking it out here over these little ancillary things, this was the Democrat Party telling us how they plan on destroying the U.S. economy when they get in the White House.
As you listen to these audio soundbites from the Democrat debate last night, you need to ask yourself the question: why are the Democrats not asked more about their positions on social issues?
Abortion, same-sex marriage, school prayer.
If you listen to these same drive-by media people ask questions of Republicans, what's it about?
Abortion, abortion, abortion, homosexuality, the Bible, Bush.
Why don't the same questions get asked of them?
Well, we know the answers here, but I just thought I would raise it anyway.
They've never asked about abortion, never asked about same-sex marriage, and everybody asked about scrool prayer or any of this.
We go back to the audio soundbites here.
And in this one, Hillary and the Brit girl team up on Obama.
Obama says to Hillary, you know what we have to do is we have to have consistency in how we vote.
You can't say one thing during the campaign trail and then apologize afterward and say it was a mistake.
And that's repeatedly happened during the course of this campaign, and I think that tells you the kind of president that folks are going to be.
Well, you know, Senator Obama, it is very difficult having a straight-up debate with you because you never take responsibility for any vote, and that has been a pattern.
You in this, in the Illinois.
Now, wait a minute.
In the Illinois state legislature, just a minute, in the Illinois State Senate, Senator Obama voted 130 times present.
That's not yes, that's not no, that's maybe.
And on issue after issue that really were hard to explain or understand.
You know, voted present on keeping sex shops away from schools, voted present on limiting the rights of victims of sexual abuse, voted present time and time again.
It's just very difficult to get a straight answer, and that's what we are probing for.
Clinton Inc. is probing Obama for straight answers.
Here is Obama.
What happened on that particular provision was that after I had sponsored it and helped get it passed, it turned out that there was a legal provision in it that was problematic and needed to be fixed so that it wouldn't be struck down.
But when you comb my 4,000 votes in Illinois, choose one, try to present it in the worst possible light, that does have to be answered.
That does have to be answered.
What's also important is that people are not just willing to say anything to get elected.
I don't mind having policy debates with Senator Clinton or Senator Edwards.
But what I don't enjoy is spending the week or two weeks or the last month having to answer to these kinds of criticisms that are not factually accurate.
And the press has looked at them.
They are not accurate.
And you need to present them as accurate.
Well, you know, this all sounds well and good, but come on.
The grown-ups here, Barack, you know, Clinton's going to lie about you.
That's what they do.
And then they start acting telling me.
When do they ever tell the truth about anybody?
You're the first guy to have it happen to.
Frankly, I could have given a better answer about his 130 present votes than he did.
Because I've heard him say it before.
What I've heard him say before is that, well, in the Illinois State Senate, you vote present when there are things in the bill you don't like.
If there are enough present votes, you can send it back to committee and get it started.
You got to get it fixed and then bring it back.
Say you like it, but there's something in it that's really onerous.
You vote present.
Now, you can't vote present in the U.S. Senate, and they tried to make a big deal.
He didn't explain that very well last night.
The Breck girl, this is the team-up.
This is the Breck girl deciding to jump in on this against poor old Obama.
The question was: why would you over 100 times vote present?
John, I mean, every one of us, every one of us, you've criticized Hillary, you've criticized me for our votes.
We cast hundreds and hundreds of votes.
What you're criticizing her for, by the way, you've done to us, which is you picked this vote and that vote out of the hundreds that we've got.
And all I'm saying is, what's fair is fair.
You have every right to defend any vote.
You do.
And I respect your right to do that on any substantive issue.
It does not make sense to me.
And what if I had just not shown up to the vote?
What if I had just not shown up to vote on things that really matter to this country?
It would have been safe for me politically.
It would have been the careful and cautious thing to do.
But I have a responsibility to take a position.
And then he tried to explain again what the present vote means in Illinois, but he didn't.
He didn't quite get there, I don't think.
Now, this is Mrs. Clinton ripping Obama's lungs out on health care.
Blitzer said, I promised Senator Clinton she could respond as well.
You got 30 seconds.
If you don't start out trying to get universal health care, we know, and our members of Congress know, you'll never get there.
If a Democrat doesn't stand for universal health care that includes every single American, you can see the consequences of what that will mean.
I think it is imperative that we have plans, as both John and I do, that from the very beginning say, you know what, everybody's got to be covered.
Universal health care is such a core Democratic principle that I am willing to go to the mat for it.
I've been there before.
I will be there again.
I am not giving in.
I am not giving up.
And I'm not going to start out leaving 15 million Americans out of health care.
I am not running for president to put band-aids on our problems.
I want to get to universal health care for every single American.
Yes, and if I had been there, I would have said, have you seen how it's failing in the U.K.?
Have you seen how it's failing in Canada?
But of course, the moderators and questioners at the CNN are not even aware of that.
By the way, we just learned that Fred Thompson has dropped out of the presidential race.
His mother is very ill in Tennessee.
No word of whether he's going to endorse anybody or suggest that his support go to any particular candidate.
But Fred Thompson has just pulled out of the Republican primary campaign.
All right, Ron in Las Vegas, thank you for waiting and welcome to the program, sir.
Hello, Rush.
It's an honor to speak to you, Mega Dittos.
Thank you, sir.
And my question to you is: they've been talking about this tax rebate thing or the $145 billion.
Wouldn't the American people be better served to stimulate the economy by giving tax incentives to people that are buying houses?
That, you know, there's a lot of houses here in Las Vegas.
I think they say 25,000 that are in foreclosure.
Wouldn't it be better to give tax incentives to get people to buy those houses?
Well, we're not talking about that much money.
We're talking anywhere from $600 to $800.
Right, but instead of giving it to every single person, if you gave it to the people that were buying the houses and people that are investing in buying rental properties or whatever and get these houses off the market, wouldn't it help the American people and more of the homeowners here that maybe their equity has gone down because of all the houses that are on the market?
Okay.
You know, I'm running out of time here.
I need to answer this, Ron, when we come back from a commercial break.
Okay, before we get back to Ron in Las Vegas, Fred Thompson has resigned from the Republican presidential primary race.
He's pulled out.
We don't know who, if anybody, he's going to endorse.
I wouldn't want to hazard a guess, but I do know this.
Only last week, my brother David, a well-known attorney and syndicated columnist in this country, wrote a glowing column endorsing Fred Thompson.
Fred Thompson, within 10 days, pulled out of the race.
I have asked my brother to write a column endorsing Senator McCain, and following that, a column endorsing Governor Huckabee.
And now back to Ron in Las Vegas.
All right, Ron, you had a different theory here on the economic stimulus.
Explain this to me a little bit more.
You want tax credits only for people who are being foreclosed on it, or something like that, correct?
I just think that it would stimulate the economy more if You gave a tax break to people that were going in to buy houses that are being foreclosed on right now rather than sending $800 to each person.
I don't see where that's going to stimulate the economy.
All right.
But I need some numbers here.
Ron, people that are being foreclosed on, we're generally, you know, banks, I mean, it takes a couple months for this to happen of you not making a payment.
I mean, we're talking a lot more than $800 here.
And your proposal is to give a tax credit, not cash, tax credit to people who are unable to pay their loans, being foreclosed on.
No, no, no.
No, I'm saying.
On their closing costs, let's say they didn't have to pay hefty taxes.
Closing hefty taxes in the closed.
There's a lot of people waiting.
The closing costs have already been paid.
We're talking about people who have been foreclosed on or who are on the process of being foreclosed on.
Oh, you want people who are going to buy the foreclosed houses?
Right.
Right.
What I'm saying is people are waiting for the market to bought them out, and then they're going to probably start buying up these houses.
And so if you, instead of giving $800 to each person, if you were to be able to, you know, they were able to save a few thousand more on the purchase of a home to get it off the market instead of being in foreclosure.
Aha.
I see.
This, well, I see the difference.
I thought you were talking about people about to lose their houses, let them keep the house with some government action.
What you want to do is spur economic activity by having people buy the foreclosed houses and making it easier to do so.
Right.
Okay.
We do have a built-in incentive to home purchases, and that's the deduction of the mortgage interest that one pays.
I would also guess that homes that have been foreclosed on are pretty large.
There's pretty a large number of them.
I would think that those prices of those homes have come down incredibly, making those homes more affordable.
I think that's one of the greatest sources.
If there is any economic angst out there, I don't think it's oil.
I don't think it's gasoline.
I don't think it's any of these things that people talk about.
I think that it has to do with existing homeowners who are seeing the value of their home plummet, and they're worried how long it's going to take to get back because that's their sole source of equity.
And that's going to bother more than $3 gasoline.
And because if all the value of housing is coming down, except in certain pockets of the country, there are very few pockets that's coming down.
Those houses are already much cheaper.
These foreclosures are much cheaper to buy now than some of them you get in the courthouse steps at an auction.
But if we're going to do that, I don't know how much money we're talking about to do that.
And why do you think that there is economic stimulus in people buying houses that have been foreclosed?
Well, I know that they're talking about lower tax revenues here locally.
And I would say that they send around a thing showing how much your house is worth.
And so they're not able to tax us as much.
And so they're saying that we're going to have to cut back here in Nevada in certain areas.
And I think that has to do with everybody's house value has gone down because there's so many houses on the market.
Right, exactly right.
And so, I mean, anything to, I think that giving $800 to each person is a band-aid.
I think, you know, I think there's smarter things to do with that money, you know, even if it is just a drop in the bucket.
I'd rather see it to go to somebody that's trying to, you know, get the economy going.
Investors.
Hey, look, first-time home buyers, buyers, or whatever.
$800 may be a drop in a bucket to you, but it's not to women and minorities who are always hardest hit.
And it certainly is not a drop in a bucket to illegal immigrants.
And it's certainly, it's not a drop in a bucket to pets.
Pets have been rendered homeless here because of this.
We just had the story out of Naperville, Illinois.
I'm not making this up.
We got homeless pets now because of these foreclosures.
Now it's serious.
And I think, you know, your example here of local governments crying, oh no, the value waste houses are going to have property tax.
They're going, oh, sorry about it.
Make them cut the services.
You know, the idea that we've got to maintain a certain level of tax revenue so government never has to cut back, got to change.
There's so much wasted money in government, local, state, national, it's obscene.
People don't have the slightest idea how much money these governments are taking in and how much they're wasting and where it's going to.
But they are never asked to do with less.
Okay.
So you get, in a convoluted way, the value of your home goes down.
You worry about the equity loss, but your property tax goes down.
Of course, it's not going to happen instantly because it can take away off the assessment.
But still, your property tax is going to go down.
And now that's bad news.
I, as an American conservative, do not consider tax rates going down a bad news.
I don't, I'm sorry.
I don't.
I think, you know, the reason I said, Ron, that I felt like I was going to be sick is because when you come up with alternatives to the stimulus plan, and I understand your heart's big and your intentions are honorable, but when you accept the premise and then try to come up with a better idea, I feel that you have been lassoed, that you've been hooked into this notion that the government can fix this.
Markets fix themselves.
It's called corrections.
Bureaucracies never correct their mistakes.
They just add to them.
They just pile onto them.
And you can see government program after government program.
I don't care if it's state, local, or national.
And so the idea, well, instead of 800 bucks, I know what you're saying, but Rush, they're going to do it anyway.
I know, and it's a shame they're going to do it.
But if you start targeting it like that, the first thing you would hear, the Democrats would object to this on the basis that this is only going to benefit the speculators.
If you're going to go out there and come up with a government program to make foreclosed houses easier to buy for people who want to get into the home market, then the speculators are going to move in and they're going to start speculating on the future value of these homes.
And who are the evil speculators?
They're mostly Democrat slumlords, but they're going to be portrayed as Republicans.
Evil Republicans would be accused of benefiting most from that kind of tax credit when, in fact, Democrat slumlords would.
And so then we would have this issue.
We'd have Pelosi and Clinton at the debate saying, I can't believe President Bush, he wants the rich to get richer with this tax credit to allow people the American dream and get in these four.
The real beneficiaries of this are going to be these speculators who are going to drive the prices up.
Has President Bush no shame?
Don't the rich have enough money?
And then, of course, people go, well, there's no way I'll support that.
I want my 800 bucks.
Look, I got an idea.
Let's just deal with this all at once, okay?
We've got a subprime crisis.
We've got foreclosures.
We've got equity loss.
We've got all kinds of problems out there.
Let's right now resolve that as a people.
We are going to come up with a big enough stimulus that will retire everybody's bad debt on their homes.
We're not going to pay off the whole mortgage.
Whatever they're in arrears on, we'll pay it.
Get them back to square one.
They don't have to lose their house.
Then after that, we're going to come up with a stimulus package that is going to make sure we wipe out every bit of debt that every American has run up on his visa or MasterCard.
You can't run up debt on American Express.
You've got to pay it all off in 30 days, unless you take the easy payment plan, which is not offered to too many people.
But you, so in the case of these poor people that we've read about in Los Angeles making $100,000 a year and have to take public transportation to the job scooping ice cream at the local Scoopy Dip, $40,000 of credit card debt.
That's just un-American.
We can't have, well, wipe that out.
Wipe out everybody's credit card debt.
I mean, we have to do this, folks.
It's the only fair thing to do.
And then we'll pay off everybody's automobile loan.
And then for those of you with teenagers, we will pay all of your neighbors.
We will all gather together for the good of America to stimulate the economy.
We will make sure to pay all of your teenage kids overages on their minutes used for text messages and phone calls.
This is easy.
I could get elected tomorrow.
There's a new poll out there, ladies and gentlemen, from the Clinton News Network and opinion research.
Blacks and whites, optimistic and pretty much in agreement that progress has been made towards civil rights leader Martin Luther King's dream of equality in American society.
84% of whites think there's been a lot of progress, 78% of blacks.
Surveys, numbers also show that Americans are more ready for a black president than a female president.
Right.
And the wilder effect.
Can we discuss the wilder effect in these polls?
Phone rings, ring-a-ding-ding.
Hello.
I'm your friendly neighborhood pollster from CNN.
We're taking a little survey here on the civil rights movement.
Do you think you're pretty optimistic that things have gone well?
Oh, God, yes.
Why, I've wanted this for years.
Hell yes, things are going well.
You put me down for very satisfied.
Fine.
Be glad to.
By the way, would you be more inclined to vote for a black as president or a woman?
I'm not a racist.
Black, you put me to black.
I'm damn right I would vote for a black.
Hang up the phone.
Person who receives a call says, I know they know who I am.
Caller ID.
They know who I am.
I'm not going to tell them no.
Bamo.
So you get this poll.
I'm looking at South Carolina.
You know, Mrs. Clinton's pulled out of there.
The story is Mrs. Clinton's conceding it.
She's left after debate last night, got aboard the charter jet, paid for with Norman shoe money, and flew out to States getting ready for Super Tuesday on February 5th.
And of course, the conventional wisdom is that Mrs. Clinton knows that Obama is going to win the state of South Carolina.
And why?
Because of the black population.
Now, what a coup it would be for Mrs. Clinton to win this thing Saturday while not even there.
They've set up all this conventional wisdom that Obama is going to clean up.
And he probably will, but I mean, wouldn't put it past these people to have the whole thing staged like they did New Hampshire.
And for her to end up winning, I had no clothes.
I love the people of South Carolina at this point of it.
And there's, you know, there's Barry left, you know, regretting he ever brought up the fact she served on the Walmart board.
It's unlikely.
Now, when Barry wins South Carolina, say he wins South Carolina, what are Clinton's going to do then?
Is he going to sit there and just take it that a majority of black people, Democrats, voted for Obama when Bill Clinton's the first black president?
So you'll have some version of the Clinton-Southern strategy.
And it will go something like this.
I mean, these will not be the words that they use.
But when asked about it, somebody like Howard Wolfson or Terry McAuliffe, somebody at a Clinton organization will say to the press asking him, well, what do you expect on the blacks in that state?
Fud.
Duh.
Giving nothing to Obama, blaming it all on racial identity politics or crediting it for that.
You watch they'll do something.
All right, who's next?
This is JD in Randolph, Vermont.
Hi, J.D., welcome to the program.
Yeah, Rush, thank you very much.
I have an answer for Ron and all the other people who are worried about the stimulus package.
You must not have one.
I've been in the workforce now for 30 years, if you count high school jobs.
That is option C. Just don't do anything at the market correct.
Yes, I've been in the workforce for 30 years, including high school jobs.
I hung my shingle out two years ago.
My dad told me, be prepared to struggle for five years.
I said, okay.
Wait, wait.
It means you're a lawyer.
I'm sorry.
You hung your shingle.
You're a lawyer?
No, actually, I'm a carpenter.
But I mean, I'm just, I work for me.
Okay, good.
I went up.
I'm chasing the dream.
Self-employed.
I'm chasing the dream.
Good.
I had a lousy year.
So what?
That's capitalism.
Big deal.
I'm doing my taxes.
It turns out that I don't owe anything this year because I didn't do so well.
Now the government wants to give me a refund of money I didn't pay in.
By the way, thank you.
I assume that's coming out of your pocket and other people like you.
And then they want to give me $800 more on top of it.
It's not a refund, it's a subsidy.
They want to pay me for not accomplishing anything.
They want to encourage me to not work or something.
I don't know.
This system drives me crazy.
Yeah, but it sounds like it's working on you.
No, it's not.
I don't want a subsidy.
I want to work and make money, which I will do this year and I will continue to do.
And I can't get to paying taxes.
Wait a second.
I got less than a minute.
People want to know: you had a great year last year, a not good year this year.
How does that result in you not owing any income tax?
Just because of my deductions and everything, I come out, but I have a child, so I get this earned income credit and all this other stuff, all these things that are piled up.
You are in the bottom 50% that's paying 3% of the total tax burden.
At least this year I'm paying none.
You and others like you are giving me money.
Okay, so you're paying none and you're getting a refund to boot.
How much was the refund?
Do you mind my asking?
Between the state and the feds, almost two grand.
You didn't pay any income tax.
I didn't pay a dime.
And then they want to give me $800 on top of it.
We can't spend like this.
We just can't keep pouring out money we don't have.
It's stupid.
Here's the problem, though.
And I look at JD, I appreciate your attitude, and you're absolutely right.
But when the government is giving away money, most people aren't going to have your attitude about it.
There's a new crisis, ladies and gentlemen, out there.
I can't tell you about it today.
We'll talk about it tomorrow.
New economic disaster.
We're losing our topsoil.
No more dirt in America because of greedy farmers.
Can't wait to tell you about this.
Can't wait to be back tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection