All Episodes
Previous Next
April 30, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:31
April 30, 2008, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
It is exactly as I said it would be.
On yesterday's excursion into broadcast excellence, I predicted flawlessly the drive-by media reaction to Barack Obama's press conference yesterday threw the Reverend Jeremiah Wright off the planet.
I said they would be sympathetic.
I said they would talk about how courageous Barack was.
And they would do their best to sanitize this, and they did, and we have examples.
Greetings, my friends.
Great to have you with us.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Here's the telephone number if you want to be on the program.
800-282-2882.
The email address is LRushbo at EIBNet.com.
Before we get to that, you have to hear this.
A TV station in Indianapolis thinks they caused the operational pause in Operation Chaos.
WISH-TV, Wish TV.
The anchor Eric Halverson and his report last night on Operation Chaos.
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh called for a pause in what he calls Operation Chaos.
It's a call to conservatives to vote in Democratic primaries to extend the nomination battle.
Yesterday, 24-hour news age Jim Scheller reported on official reactions to Operation Chaos here, a story Limbaugh referenced on the air today.
So they're implying, ladies and gentlemen, that Operation Chaos, the operational pause, was due to their report.
I can understand, I mean, I can understand a local television station wanting to think they're a factor in a major nationwide operation.
And they're doing a hard-hitting investigation out there is what local TV news is known for.
But I wish to, I don't want to deflate them.
I don't want to ruin their day out there in the newsroom at Wish TV, but the operational pause in Operation Chaos was due strictly to the Obama press conference yesterday while we awaited, though I knew what was going to happen, media reaction because we had to determine what course of action we would order next, given the media reaction to Obama yesterday.
And I can just tell you, the operational pause is now lifted.
Operation Chaos is back at full speed, and we have no change in direction.
Orders from headquarters remain exactly what they are.
You are to go out and sustain the Democrat primary season by virtue of voting for Hillary Clinton.
Nothing has changed, ladies and gentlemen.
Nothing whatsoever.
And this, I predicted.
Give you an example here last night.
Well, here, let me, just to show, for those of you who weren't here yesterday, I want to validate that I predicted this.
This is what I said on yesterday's program.
So we'll watch the drive-by media tonight do their best to spin this into an act of courage, something that's worthwhile of the Kennedy School of Government's award for the profiling courage.
You know every year, Caroline Kennedy awards a profiling courage award to great political operative.
The Kennedys have endorsed this guy, right?
Kennedys have endorsed this guy.
So this is going to be spun as an act of political courage today.
We have put together, ladies and gentlemen, a montage of the drive-by media the last 24 hours.
We have here the Reverend Al Sharpton, former President Jim McCarter, Democrat analyst Tanya Acker, the Reverend Eugene Rivers, Pat Buchanan, Chris Wallace of Fox, David Manningley at CNN, all talking about Obama's courage.
Barack Obama showed a real profile and courage.
I think he's very wise and courageous.
He did something politically courageous.
He was very courageous and is to be commended for the courage he exhibited.
Feel a sort of anguish for Barack Obama.
You could feel his personal anguish.
A very private anguish.
Whereas the reaction on this program was precisely the right reaction, the drive-by media, left and right, you heard Pat Buchanan in there.
The left and the right talking about how this was courageous.
This is a classic illustration.
I know these people like every square inch of my glorious naked body.
Ladies and gentlemen, predicted this right down the path.
Newspaper stories.
Our old friend Carla Marinucci in the San Francisco Chronicle, Obama praised for rebuking his pastor.
Here's a quote from James Taylor, who teaches politics in black history, University of San Francisco.
Wright seems to have gone on a path that might actually benefit Obama in a twisted way.
Now, instead of being associated with him, we see a break.
So now it's Barack Obama versus Jeremiah Wright, and that's more to Obama's advantage.
But his handling of the right controversy, many political observers said appeared to be effective.
Barbara O'Connor, professor, political communication, Sacramento State, he satisfied the concerns of those willing to be satisfied.
He's being intellectually honest.
Professor O'Connor, he was everything but intellectually honest in this speech.
In fact, we have learned, ladies and gentlemen, that the primary reason why he did the speech was that he did polling the night before to find out where he stood on this.
That's why he waited all that time from Friday when Wright appeared on Bill Moyers, then did the press club thing on Monday.
Obama reacts yesterday.
He was polling it.
I'll have the details coming up.
The New York Times, Mr. Obama and Reverend Wright.
It was the most forthright repudiation of an out-of-control supporter that we can remember.
We would like to say that it'll finally take the racial charge out of this campaign, but we are not that naive.
And then they go on to say that McCain ought to now stop the North Carolina GOP ad and let's have a real discussion on race.
I kid you not predicted this, folks.
Boston Globe today, Peter Canelis, candidate faces down his former pastor.
But what took so long?
Obama did disinvite Wright back in 2007.
And of course, we're going to get into the details of this, ladies and gentlemen, because the drive-bys have done it.
We knew what they would do.
They would do everything they could to paper over the fact that this was a damaging speech that Obama did, a little press conference yesterday.
Let me make a brief observation.
Do you think it's possible?
Let me give you the poll data first because I'm sure you want to know this.
This is from Ace ofSpades.com, which is a blog.
The word on the street is that Barack Obama did not repudiate or further distance himself from Wright last night, but rather waited until today because he was polling on whether he should make the move all night.
That's the word on the street.
The word from Mary Catherine Hamm's dad confirms that as Mary Catherine Hamm's dad, a North Carolina resident, received such a phone call from a pollster on Monday night.
So Obama was polling what to do.
Everything about this man is straight down the line, average, typical run-of-the-mill cookie-cutter politician.
He just happens to be an extreme left-wing radical.
Another question I would have, ladies and gentlemen, for you: is it likely that we know Barack Obama's preacher better than Barack Obama does?
Well, that is what it is being made to sound like.
And I think this is a crucial point, my friends, because we are being told here that Barack Obama, they didn't know what he was doing.
Didn't know what his preacher was saying.
Didn't know what he was doing.
The story is even now coming out.
Barack wasn't even in church that much.
And that's why he didn't hear some of these things.
So we knew Wright better than Obama.
Does that make any sense?
Obama chose the guy.
This guy's his preacher.
And yet, Barack has to go out and say, I didn't know any of this.
And when I heard it at the press club and when I heard about it, when I heard him amplifying it on Bill Moyers, the dirty little secret here is that Obama didn't give a ratch rear in what Wright was saying until Wright went after him.
When Wright was going after America and ripping America to shreds with his hate America rhetoric, that was fine with Obama.
But when he went after Obama, that made it personal.
And he hides behind the notion that Wright was amplifying all of this beyond the sermons and beyond the pulpit.
Everybody's been smoked here.
The people on the left, the Obama supporters, want to be smoked.
They've bent over forward and grabbed the ankles.
They had at me.
And to do whatever it takes.
Stories out today that the congressional superdelegates, it's over.
They have chosen Obama.
Not officially, but somebody's done a headcount.
The congressional superdelegates have chosen Obama.
That's right.
There's a majority of them who have rung in and supported to the politico today.
Obama may win Hill superdelegate fight.
Superdelegates are not moving.
They're just waiting to announce for Obama.
They've already decided there's a majority of them in Congress just waiting to announce and so forth.
But I want to go back to this business that, you know, we supposedly know Jeremiah Wright better than Obama does.
You know, Obama, do you know he went to the Million Man March?
He went to the Million Man March.
And who was the speaker at the Million Man March?
Louis Farrakhan.
That's where he got this big speech on the number 19.
This guy, this Wright guy, I think is probably Nation of Islam.
His bodyguards at the National Press Club are Nation of Islam.
He knows everything Wright stands for.
Obama's church gave Farrakhan the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Trumpter Award.
Did you know that?
Obama's church gave Farrakhan the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Trumpeter Award.
It is absurd, ladies and gentlemen, to believe that Obama knew less about this man than we do.
But that's what he's asking us to believe, is it not?
Much more straight ahead.
Lots to do on the program today, not through the Obama stuff, because there's some stories in the press that contradict, most notably the New York Post here today with Fred Dicker, what this is all about with Obama and his preacher.
And Roseanne Barr, who I didn't know this.
Roseanne Barr now has a talk show on something called Air America.
And she has a shirt in the afternoon.
She has an afternoon show on something called Air America.
And she's called for riots in Denver.
Here, grab audio sombre number one.
I'm hoping that Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado, I don't know if they're on the air out there.
I don't know Air America.
The name sounds vaguely familiar, but I can't place it.
Anyway, this is what she said.
Her co-host is some, well, the co-host isn't here, so it doesn't matter what his name is.
He's an Air America.
Nobody's ever heard of him anyway.
We have a lot of power.
And there is a Democratic convention in Denver in just a short time.
And we should, a bunch of us, go there and repeat the Democratic Convention from Chicago.
Just like, let's cause a bunch of trouble.
Let's wrest back our government from like six or seven, you know, guys like McCain and Romney and Bush from the top.
Let's just go take it.
It's ours.
Nobody gives it to you.
Just go take it.
Let's meet in Denver and let's do it.
Let's get on a bus or whatever.
Let's all meet up in Denver.
I mean, seriously, I'm willing to do it.
I'll even put some of my own money into it because I'm like committed.
Repeat the Democrat Convention in Chicago.
That can only mean one thing.
Roseanne Barr on something called America or America advocating riots in Denver during the Democrat National Convention.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Rush Limbaugh with half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
An observation, ladies and gentlemen, you remember Barack Obama complained that George Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibson in the Philadelphia debate and Mrs. Clinton, of course, were dwelling on distractions by going after Obama and Reverend Wright.
They were just distractions.
Can't we get back to the issues?
Well, a question, ladies and gentlemen, if that's true, why has Obama acceded now and decided to dwell in the distractions himself?
Which is what he did yesterday.
Barack Obama launched an entire news cycle over this very issue that just days ago he condemned as a distraction.
Nothing has changed about Wright's message.
As I so keenly, brilliantly pointed out yesterday, there's nothing Wright said over the past four days that he hasn't said in the last 20 years.
What apparently miffs Obama is that he's amplifying it from beyond a pool pit and that he's taking it out on Obama personally.
But Obama's acting like this stuff is offensive.
I can't deal with this stuff.
I refuse to believe Obama did not know this.
I refuse to believe that I, El Rushbo, and you, the audience of this program, know more about Reverend Wright than Reverend or than Senator Obama does.
I refuse to believe that.
Yet that is what we are being asked to believe.
The only thing that's changed is that Obama's no longer able to duck and deny this.
So now, because of Obama's own choosing, it is a major germane issue.
It's not a distraction any longer.
So was he telling the truth then, or is he telling the truth now?
As we have learned, polls are driving his reconsideration to address Wright's message.
It is simply impossible to believe that he could have been unaware of it, even if he attended infrequently, which is the latest attempt they're making.
Well, he didn't go that much.
Black liberation theology is racially oriented.
It's the opposite of what Obama claims to stand for.
He chose a church espousing liberation theology, and yet he's running on a completely different ideology.
So he chooses one thing for his private life, and that would be spiritual nourishment from a racist, anti-American, divisive pastor, claims, on the other hand, that he will lead the country to unity in his public life.
To me, this is typical liberalism, promoting the lie that he can divorce his private self from his public one.
Barack Obama has fully exposed himself as a consummate fraud.
And by the way, some of you might say, consummate?
It's consummate.
No, well, it is.
It's both.
Back in the old days, in the glory days of radio, before there was television, if you wanted to go to work for NBC, you had to go in and do a live audition.
And they gave you sentences.
And one of the words that they gave you was consummate.
And if you didn't pronounce it consummate, you didn't pass the audition.
I kid you not.
It has since evolved to consummate by the original pronunciation in the official annals of NBC back in the old days when there really were broadcast standards.
Consummate was the way that it was pronounced.
It's just a little aside.
Barack Obama said yesterday, I am outraged by the comments that were made.
I am saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday.
The candidate said that after watching Wright's appearance from Monday, what became clear to me was that he was presenting a worldview that contradicts what I am and what I stand for.
When did that become clear, Obama?
You've been...
None of this.
None of this washes...
And the sycophantic treatment and reaction to this in the drive-by media is precisely why there is a new media.
That was journalistic malpractice the way this was reacted to last night and the way that it was reported.
And I want to go through a couple sound bites here to illustrate some of the contradictions.
Now, remember, Barack Obama did his best to distance himself from Jeremiah Wright.
But before Obama spoke, and this is key, when Wright was on Moyers and when Wright appeared at the press club, the drive-by media both nights tried to sanitize Wright.
They, oh, what a great speech this was.
What marvelous, marvelous intelligence this man has.
They did everything they could to spin and recast the actual words and intentions of Jeremiah Wright.
So after the drive-by media, which is in a tank for Obama, goes out and spins Wright as, hey, that was really great.
That was good.
Obama then goes out and says, I can't handle this.
I'm not going to listen to this.
I'm disowning this man.
The drive-bys are so far in the tank.
Obama contradicts his own backers in the drive-by media, and yet they sweep it under the rug.
Now, what we've done here, I've put together some examples of the audience applauding various things that Wright said at the National Press Club.
Some of the applause is tepid, but some of it is not.
And we've left the applause in so you can get an idea how the audience reacted to the words of Jeremiah Wright.
This most recent attack on the black church.
It is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright.
It is an attack on the black church.
Keep in mind, Obama has disavowed all of this.
Here's the next one.
I do not subscribe to the views that he expressed.
I believe they are wrong.
I think they are destructive.
So the media and everybody in the audience is applauding what Wright said, and Obama is denouncing.
You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you.
Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic, divisive principles.
Some of the tepid applause.
Here's Obama.
When he equates the United States' wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses.
They offend me.
They rightly offend all Americans.
And they should be denounced.
See, but he's just learning this?
He's just learning this?
We're dealing with a typical liberal here, folks.
He's tried every which way.
He's tried as hard as he could to keep Jeremiah Wright in the close circle.
And finally, it got to the point where he couldn't because he was polling it.
We got a quick timeout.
We'll come back and continue your phone calls straight ahead.
And lots more audio soundbites on a variety of things here on the EIB network.
Keep telling Donovan, you've got to redo that and put the Nobel Peace Prize nominee in that litany.
Welcome back, folks.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
I'm really excited to have with us for a couple of minutes here, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison from Texas.
And I wish to speak to her about this ethanol problem because she's really on the case and has written an op-ed piece in the Investors Business Daily about this.
Senator Hutchison, welcome to the program.
It's always nice to have you here and talk to you.
It is great to be with you, Rush.
We are listeners in our family.
We think you've done a great job for kind of changing the thought processes of America.
I appreciate you.
What's going on with this?
Where are we headed with this?
Why is it that you are one of the few voices in the elected government that's trying to stop the growth of ethanol, given the problems apparently related to it?
Well, of course, there are many interests that don't want to stop this ethanol mandate.
And I think that the time has come for us to really, Rush, look at the things that we can do that might bring the cost of fuel and the cost of food and the gasoline at the pump down.
We can't do a lot, but one of the few things we could do is put a freeze on this ethanol mandate.
And just let's take a pause and not have this kind of requirement where we are, on the one side, subsidizing this product, but on the other side, the price is so high that it's causing really a ripple effect throughout our food industry.
And around the world.
Yes.
I mean, even Prime Minister Brown is suggesting something similar to your idea that it's just gotten out of hand.
It's just, it's, you know, it's typical.
I'm sure people behind this at some point, I'll be gracious, had good intentions.
But the unintended consequences of this make it clearly a boondoggle.
But there's some politics involved here.
I remember talking about this, Senator, not long ago in the program, and I was besieged with phone calls from people in Iowa who said, Rush, don't you know who votes for Republicans out here?
Meaning agricultural people and this sort of thing.
And so that's, you know, that's a factor in this, too.
Do you feel like you're taking any kind of a risk by proposing this?
Well, yes.
I mean, they have, they're in a different system, and they're used to it.
And we have to understand everybody's problems.
But right now, the price of corn is so high.
Farmers are doing great.
And we don't need a mandate.
The price will stay high, but it will just come down some.
And it will also, I mean, I think the market can work here.
I think that farmers will continue to do well.
But this emphasis on corn is now crowding out people who used to plant wheat.
The emphasis on ethanol is also affecting soy and maize and palm oil.
It's having unintended consequences.
I think when we do something in Congress and it has an unintended consequence, our responsibility is to assess the situation.
We're on the brink of a recession.
We're not technically there yet, thank goodness, but we need to assess where we can make a difference.
And this is one area that would be relatively easy.
Well, to us out here, it seems like a no-brainer.
There are problems related with it.
It's not the sole reason why transportation costs are up and fuel prices are up and food prices and scarcity are happening, but it's a contributing reason.
And those of us out here who don't understand the day-to-day workings of what goes on in these bodies such as the House and the Senate, it looks to us like it's not working.
Stop it.
Just, it isn't working.
We've tried it.
The intentions might have been honorable, but it isn't working.
So we move on, but we're not going to do that.
It's going to keep wreaking this damage.
And you're right, it has ripple and residual ancillary effects throughout the culture.
I met with a group of people who process chickens, Pilgrim's Pride, Sanderson Farms, Tysons, and they are shutting down parts of their plants, their operations.
They are all going to report drastically reduced, not just profits, I mean, losses.
They're going to have big losses at the end of this month.
And they're just saying they have got to have some relief.
And I sympathize with them.
They're putting the food on the table for us.
And I've talked to cattle producers.
I've talked to pig producers.
They are all saying the same thing.
The cost of food and the cost of fuel is just killing their ability to continue to operate.
So I think it's going to get worse.
And I'd like to try to do something that might mitigate this and not cause the crisis.
But this is just one element.
This is, you know, I know the agriculture community likes this.
It's something very profitable for them.
But at the root of this, you find liberalism.
You find the environmental movement.
This is all part of global warming.
This is all part of reducing carbon emissions.
They're reducing dependence on oil and so forth.
None of that is possible.
And yet, we go down this road because people want their lives to have meaning, and so they buy ethanol, thinking they're saving the planet and so forth.
It's a devious scheme that we're up against.
This food price, this is serious, Senator.
I remember the first time I learned when I was a young boy that the profit margin in grocery stores on food, not the ancillary things they sell, but the profit margin was 1 to 1.5%.
And I asked my dad, how can they survive?
He said, son, people have to eat.
Food is not a commodity.
It's not something that you can mess around with price-wise like you can other, like electronics or televisions or whatever.
Everybody has to eat.
And so it has to be affordable for people from all economic ranges.
And it's not now.
I mean, people are reorienting the way they live based on the price of gasoline and the price of milk and rice and so forth.
And this is going to have devastating consequences if the problems here that cause this are not really addressed.
And that's why I hope you succeed.
Your column is very courageous.
Well, thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
I have gotten the same kinds of calls that you have, but it's just something that we've got to say, look, we did have good intentions, but now we have a lot of other alternative fuels.
What we need to do is drill for our own natural resources.
We need to go into Anwar.
We need to go into the outer continental shelf where we have our own resources that can help us through this.
We need to continue to do research into other forms of renewable energy.
Besides solar and wind energy, we can also use waves and currents in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic and Pacific.
We've got so many alternatives that we need to pursue.
We need more nuclear power plants.
We need more refineries.
These are things that, honestly, Rush, the Democrats are stopping in Congress.
Every time we put forward something that could really make a difference, the Democrats are stopping it.
Why do you think that is, Senator?
Well, I think they wrongly believe that it's going to hurt the environment to drill in Anwar.
Anwar is an area the size of the state of South Carolina.
The part that would be drilled is an area the size of JFK Airport or Washington National Airport or Dallas Love Fields.
It's an area the size of an airport that would be drilled because the new technology allows us to drill underground for just hundreds of yards, and you don't have to have a lot of wells to drill anymore.
But they're not acknowledging that.
The people of Alaska want this.
They have had referenda.
They want the jobs.
They want the economic security, and they know it won't hurt the environment.
And yet we cannot get a bill through Congress that would allow drilling in that small part of Anwar.
These are the kinds of things that just don't make sense when the price of gasoline is so high.
Sadly, they do make sense if you understand Democrats.
I know you do.
Now, we're talking, by the way, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison from Texas.
Now, yesterday the president made a presentation on energy and said much of the same thing you've just said here.
And Senator Schumer from New York went out and responded to it and said, if we started drilling in Anwar today, we wouldn't have a drop of oil for 10 years.
Well, of course, Bill Clinton vetoed the first time this came up in 1994.
We could have been at this four years according to his 10-year plan.
He also said something that I just mathematically doesn't make sense.
He said that this million barrels a day that Anwar would produce would reduce the price of gasoline or oil, I forget which one he specified, by a penny.
Well, that's absurd because when the price of oil, you know, when we put a million or lose a million barrels in the supply, does the price only go up a penny?
I mean, they're using scare tactics.
We need resources.
We need our oil.
And you got Schumer out there saying, no, we have that wouldn't matter.
And they're misleading people thinking that there's a substitute for it right around the corner when there's not.
You're right.
When President Clinton vetoed Anwar, we would have been producing.
But I totally disagree and reject the argument that it would be 10 years.
We could start drilling in Anwar, and I think within a couple of years, you would start seeing the results.
But more important, if we were drilling there and people in the markets, in OPEC, if the people who are hedging in the market for futures in this oil industry, if we were drilling in Anwar, do you think the price would stay up?
No, people would know that there would be an availability.
They would know that there was going to be a real difference in what we could produce.
The 1 million barrels a day is the amount we import from Saudi Arabia every day.
And that's what we would be getting from our own resources and control it.
And that doesn't count what we could do if we were drilling off the Atlantic and the Pacific in environmentally safe ways.
That's the key.
And if we took control of our own destiny, we could become energy independent and self-sufficient and not depend on places that don't like us very much, like Venezuela.
All this makes so much sense that we out here don't understand why it isn't done.
We understand the politics of liberalism and the Democrats trying to create as much chaos as they can for re-election purposes in November, but they consistently oppose this kind of independence, despite the fact they're the ones claiming and whining and moaning how dependent we are.
But they're the ones that always stand in the way of becoming energy independent.
And there has to be more to it than just their own desire for electability.
I think it's a little bit more hideous than that.
I know you wouldn't want to comment on that, but this is really serious stuff to all of us.
The price of everything going up, all based on the price of oil and energy, it's all related.
And there's an ideological group out there, the environmentalists, who are getting, they're the only ones that are happy with it.
They're getting everything they want out of this.
And of course, the people they donate to and vote for are thus happy about it too.
And the country, in the meantime, suffers.
Well, Rush, if we would do this, if the Democrats and if the people understand this issue enough to force them, if we could open refineries, make it easier to do so, open nuclear power plants, which is the cleanest form of energy at the best, most efficient prices that we could possibly produce it, and drill in Anwar, the Outer Continental Shelf, and deep drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, we could be a country that doesn't have to rely on anyone else.
And I think we need to make this an issue in this election.
Don't let the Democrats get by with saying that, oh, it's just terrible that the price of gasoline is so high and it's the president's fault.
It is not the president's fault.
It is the Democrats in Congress who continue to keep us from drilling in ANWAR.
And we had almost enough 60 votes to pass that last time.
We were one vote short, couldn't get it, and so here we are again.
Quick question, last one.
I know you have to go.
Senator Obama is running a campaign on unity and solving these kind of problems.
Could he bring people together on this senator to renew our effort to become energy independent?
Well, I haven't seen any ideas yet from the Democrats that would actually make a difference in our energy independence.
That's the key.
It's walking the walk as well as talking the talk.
We've got to have real action, which could be done right now in Congress today.
The Democrats are in control of both houses.
And yet, we can't even get free trade agreements with Colombia, much less.
Oh, that's dead.
That's to protect the unions.
Well, it's just wrong.
We've got to have action, and we could make a difference in our energy independence.
And we could certainly make a difference in price because I think the price of oil would start falling when the other countries that produce oil see that we are taking our destiny in our control.
And I cannot leave before I say that I listened to you on WBAP when we're home in Dallas.
So I hope that you keep running there so that all these messages get out.
Thank you, Senator, very much.
I appreciate that.
And it's nice to get so much time with you today.
We really appreciate it.
Thank you, Rush.
Great to be with you.
Same here.
Senator K. Bailey Hutchison of Texas.
And we will be right back.
There's a story here in the Associated Press.
One billion people are food insecure now.
Some top international food scientists yesterday recommended halting the use of food-based biofuels such as ethanol, saying it would cut corn prices by 20% during a world food crisis.
If leading nations stopped biofuel use this year, of course, we're not going to do that.
But if we did, leading nations did, it would lead to a price decline in corn by about 20% and wheat by about 10% between 2009 and 2010, said Joachim von Braun, who heads the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington.
And he said the United States is the biggest biofuel producer.
Great!
It's our fault.
Everything is our fault.
Let's not talk about Brazil and their biofuels using sugar.
I don't know.
It's always our fault, which is one of the aims of all this.
All this price chaos, all these food riots, all this stuff happening in China and India, Egypt.
Finger of blame will eventually come right back to us.
We're the biggest producer.
We're doing this and that.
You watch, folks.
That's one of the objectives here.
Cheryl in Montgomery, Alabama.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, thank you.
Yeah, Rush, I just wanted to make a couple of comments.
One of them is, you know, I'm just really curious as to why you feel it necessary to continue to run excerpts of Reverend Wright and Reverend Wright and Reverend Wright as if your listeners aren't intelligent enough to make decisions based on the issues.
Because he keeps talking.
Well, I'm saying, but why do you keep giving him a platform?
And it's I believe that.
Because I don't believe Barack Obama's statements about him.
I don't believe anything Obama's saying about this, and Obama's running for president.
Okay, if that's the case, then, if it's based on what it reflects about Obama, then why is it that you were such a staunch supporter of Mick Romney?
And he belongs to a church that he says, you know, at one time he believed that people were human.
Cheryl.
So I had an issue with you.
Cheryl, you're not going to sit here and use this program to start telling a bunch of garbage about religions when this is not about religion.
Well, he said it himself that they no longer.
Nope, nope, nope, nope.
My objection to Jeremiah Wright has nothing to do with religion.
As long as he keeps it in the church, I think it's a problem for him.
It doesn't have anything to do with religion.
Well, then why did you bring up Romney?
What's Romney got?
Your comments about Romney were total religion.
This is about Romney.
You said that you're holding Barack Obama responsible for the things that supposedly he believes in the same thing that his pastor believes in.
No, no, I'm not saying that's the case.
You're missing the point here, madam.
Why wasn't that same standard applied to Mick Romney?
But that's just one thing.
I don't have to answer it.
One thing Romney did not have a wacko lunatic fringe anti-American preacher running around saying, this is what I told in my church, and Romney was in the audience.
We are examining the character of people who run for the United States of America, who they associate with, like this nutcase preacher, is crucial for us because Obama is a blank slate.
He's been trying to hide who he is.
We're starting to find out.
That's why you don't like it.
Operation Chaos, the operational pause, has been lifted.
Original battle plans have been re-implemented.
▲
Export Selection