All Episodes
Previous Next
May 12, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:40
May 12, 2008, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
In case you're just joining us, ladies and gentlemen, Ted Kennedy says that Hillary Clinton must be worse than Chappaquitic Pond scum because she is not qualified to be Barack Obama's vice president.
I think one thing that we can say is that whoever Obama chooses, it is going to be someone who has and needs grubitas.
Greetings, my friends, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh.
What they said about Bush choosing Cheney.
Cheney brought Graffitas to the ticket.
Obama's gonna need it.
Great to have you with us, Rush Limbaugh at 800-282-2882.
The email address is L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
Operation Chaos, ladies and gentlemen, still being dissected and discussed in the drive-by media Saturday on CNN's Lou Dobbs this week.
He and Democrat strategist Hank Scheinkopf have this exchange about Operation Chaos.
Operation Chaos is Rush Limbaugh describes it.
Is it effective?
Is it working in your opinion?
Hard to have a definitive way to examine it.
We'll go with Limbaugh and say he's having some impact because he's got a lot of stations, a lot of people listen to him.
Is it a good use of time?
Why not?
Is it helpful to the Republicans in the fall?
Potentially.
But uh, should a radio personality be doing that?
The answer is it's been done again and again and again, so why not?
What do you mean it's been done again and again and again?
Who else has done Operation Chaos?
I mean, the Democrats have been doing Operation Chaos for years.
I think this is what he means.
Democrats have been urging their own voters to cross over and vote for Republicans in the most recent time, 2000 and 2008.
Uh Democrats' independents purposely crossing over in early primaries to vote for uh Senator McCain.
Lou Dobbs again talking with the Washington Times, Diana West.
And Dobbs says, Diana, what are your thoughts on Operation Chaos?
Well, I agree with that.
I I think what's interesting about it is that the inspiration for Operation Chaos has to do with the ineffectiveness of the Republican establishment to be making the case against the Democrats, to be exposing the weaknesses of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
And so in this way, Rush Limba has effectively forced Hillary Clinton on to make these points to reveal these things about Barack Obama.
Somebody gets it.
Somebody actually gets it.
Diana West of the Washington Times.
What's interesting about it is that the inspiration for Operation Chaos has to do with the ineffectiveness of the Republican establishment to be making the case against Democrats to be exposing the weaknesses of Obama and Hillary.
How long did this take?
Two and a half months.
Two and a half months of Operation Chaos for someone to finally get it.
On CNN's This Week in Politics, the host Tom Foreman was talking to Republican strategirist Rich Galen, and they have this exchange about Operation Chaos.
Rush Limbaugh doesn't like Barack Obama, and he always has something to say.
Listen to what he was saying this week.
We have done our part to expose Obama through our support of Operation Chaos, effectively using the Clinton campaign as our foil, and Obama and the Democrat Party are the weaker for it.
Well, I don't know, really, in the end, if the Democrats are the weaker for it.
As much as Republicans may wish it, because the simple truth is what you're saying.
McCain and Obama are going to be playing an awful lot on the same field.
The field of the moderate middle, the strength of the people who might go either way.
That's going to be a tough battle, isn't it, Rich?
This is a 50-50 country.
And what what nobody can figure out, and if they say they can, they are lying.
It's a 50-50 country, and we're that doesn't take much to move that fulcrum and tilt it one way or the other.
Pardon the sighing, uh ladies and gentlemen.
Just utter frustration.
I love Rich Galen.
I've known him for a long time.
But I really frankly uh get frustrated at all this talk.
It's not 50-50, these people, it's 40-40 with 20 in the middle.
And uh, you know, the old rule of thumb in politics was for each party during the primaries, you go gangbusters here as far extreme to the left or right as you need to to get your base and get the nomination, then the old Nixon theory.
And once you go to the general, you moderate and you move to the center.
And that's a formula, and it the formula has been shown to be beaten.
You can beat this formula.
Now, the reason that people say that the formula is is almost etched in stone, and they'll cite Reagan Democrats, for example.
Well, Rush.
I mean, here you had a bunch of people, Reagan Democrats, who crossed over and voted for Reagan.
That's the wrong way to look at it.
Those Reagan Democrats were not undecided.
They were not moderates.
They were not independents.
They were disaffected Democrats.
They were Democrats upset at how far left the Democrat Party had gone.
And they're still out there.
And they're not voting for Obama in any of these primaries.
They are voting for Hillary or they're voting for whoever, but they're not voting for Obama.
Now, they are not independents.
There is a way.
There is a way to get the way to attract independents is not to be independent.
The way to attract moderates is not to be moderate.
By definition, it it just everything that has again, I'm sorry for the sighing.
This is a sign of my frustration.
But if you want to go get and win national elections, you simply articulate a clear-cut conservative agenda, and you'll pick up every one of these so-called or enough of them Reagan Democrats that are dis dissatisfied with pure unadulterated liberalism.
But you're not going to get them if you go get them by trying to be what they are, which is Democrats with a little conservatism here and a little conservative, a little liberalism there.
That's not how you if if it's if those are the two choices, Democrats are going to stay with the Democrat Party.
It's just that simple.
So I don't know about you, but I get a little tired of hearing every year from the political pros and the drive-bys that all presidential elections are only about 20% of the population.
Because that 20% of the population is so-called independents, so-called moderates.
They're the ones of all the virtue, right?
And they're the ones that are smarter than everybody else.
And they're the ones that are above everybody, and they're the ones that are not ideological.
They're the ones that are not closed-minded.
So you go out and you get those people.
So 80% of the population's already accounted for, it doesn't matter.
We know X are going Democrat, we know 40% are going Republican, and so we all have to play around for this 20% in the middle.
And the way you go get the 20% in the middle is B rock ribbed, staunch conservative.
You contrast yourself with the members of their own party that they're already dissatisfied with.
And if you try to be like members of the other party and try to give them 50% of what they're getting from their own party, because I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats.
Because by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal.
Not moderate, not independent.
It's going to be liberal.
By defin because liberalism's easy.
Liberalism takes no intellectual application.
Liberalism's all about how you feel.
Liberalism's all about making yourself feel good about yourself while you don't solve diddly squat.
Liberalism is all about thinking you're better than everybody else.
Liberalism is all about thinking you're smarter than everybody else.
Liberalism is all about ignoring every failure of liberalism and asking instead for your good-hearted intentions to be examined and credited.
So by definition, these people are not moderates and independents.
They are they're they're quite something else.
And you can you can attract them and get them because they're not that committed.
All they need is a little leadership.
All they need is a little guidance, confidence, bravado, positive optimism, American exceptionalism.
They want to hear about how great their country is.
Most people don't want to hear how rotten we are.
Most people don't want to hear what a sad sack nation we are.
Most people do not want to hear that we're to blame for every ill and bit of evil in the world.
Some that do, and those are rock rib liberals, and you're never going to get them.
But don't cater to them.
Try to pick off a few of them here and there.
They are to be defeated.
Anyway, I don't know what that's got to do with Operation Chaos, This 50-50 business, but or 4040 business, what uh whatever it is.
Anyway, got to take a brief time out.
A feminist update coming up next.
As I have predicted, feminists sharply divided between Clinton and Obama.
I know, I know, I know.
Just examining a late-arriving bit of show prep.
As uh as you uh ladies and gentlemen know my adopted hometown is Sacramento, California.
I worked out there at KFBK, and uh uh 50,000 watt blow truck brotorch till to this day carries uh the program been on the air this since 1984.
So 24 years at KFBK Sacramento number one.
And while there, one of my nemesis was the Sacramento B, the local newspaper owned by the McClatchy clan.
It is still owned by the McClatchy clan, and it is still refused to accept what has happened to me.
As evidenced by a story that is special to the B published yesterday.
Headline Federal Rules Give Corporation backed conservative radio all the local voices.
This is about this is a story, this is a hand-wringing tearjerker story of how liberal talk radio couldn't make it out there, and it's just damn it, it's not fair.
It's not right.
And it's because federal rules give corporation back conservative radio all the local voices.
Listen to how this thing starts.
It's by Sue Wilson, who I don't know.
I don't think Sue Wilson was.
She probably still in diapers.
When I was in Sacramento.
She says there's a there's a mournful hush.
A mournful hush in Sacramento these days, the empty sound of an entire political viewpoint quieted.
More than 32,000 weekly listeners who once tuned to the local Lib outlet to hear partisan Democrats beat up on President Bush, now hear only Christian hip hop.
Now, if that's not the funniest opening of a news story that I have ever read, I don't know what is.
32,000 weekly listeners is nothing.
Do you know what people don't understand radio ratings?
32,000 weekly listeners would add up to about 1,500 every 15 minutes.
The average quarter hour would have been about 1,500 to 2,000 listeners every I mean for crying out loud.
It's it's it's like a it's a 0.1 or 0.2, but it's barely, it barely shows up as an asterisk in the uh in the rating books.
Now, Sue Wilson says, well, there's nothing wrong with Christian hip hop.
It's a great outlet for artists breaking out of the gangster rap mole, but there are six commercial radio stations licensed in Sacramento programming the Christian message.
In the political realm, three local stations program 264s of partisan hours uh of Republican radio talkers beating up on Democrats every week.
Now, zero stations program any Democrat view whatsoever.
So it's two hundred and sixty-four hours of partisan Republican bashing to zero hours of partisan liberal bashing.
This follows the national trend revealed in the 2007 Free Press and Center for American Progress Study, the structural imbalance of political talk radio.
This is this is a John Podester group.
This is the thing pro this is a far left wing group.
We remember their report came out.
Their report was filled with lies and distortions.
The liberal station shared another characteristic with other liberal stations.
It had a tiny 1,000 watt transmitter.
Oh.
Oh, so it was Wampoo Wom.
Tough for a little station that barely reached Sacramento's suburbs to compete with 50,000 watt giant KFBK, whose signal stretches from Chico to Modesto, from Reno to that little town of San Francisco.
Despite KFBK reaching millions more potential listeners, the little lib station mustered an audience nearly 20% of that of KFBK.
Uh-uh.
At any rate, it wasn't that that the Lib station didn't have any listeners, it's that it didn't have any advertisers.
Uh I I I no, that's what it says here.
It wasn't, it wasn't that the little lib station didn't have listeners, it's that it didn't have advertisers.
If it well, not necessarily.
H.R. just said if it had listeners, it would have it would have advertisers.
Not necessarily.
I would I would defy anybody outside of a couple of markets that are probably in a top ten.
I would defy anybody to find me a liberal network show, nationally syndicated liberal show that registers uh any significance, any ratings anywhere.
They don't.
And even those that get some numbers do not have advertisers, uh Sue Wilson here swerved into it.
There's a very simple reason why.
No, what what are you saying?
What?
Here's it's it's no, it's very simple.
It's it's not that, Mr. Snerdley, it's not that nobody wants to be part of the well that's that's the overall thing, the umbrella, nobody wants to be part of the environment.
But if you are a corporation or a small business, why in the world would you spend any money on a radio station or a show which is demonizing you and the business community as the greatest modern focus of evil in the country outside of the U.S. military?
Why in the world would you do it?
Not to mention advertising on these stations got no results.
Because their audience, here's a commercial for corporation.
Hey, it's a screw that corporation, I'm not going there.
Uh, you know, if if the corporation doesn't do commercials bashing Bush, I mean, this is an insane lunatic fringe audience these people are trying to reach.
Sacramento voter registration when I was there was 72% Democrat.
They've got to start asking themselves, why does liberal programming not work?
But they're ringing their hands.
It's just unfair because corporations won't put liberal talk radio on powerful statenth.
That's right, Mithra Limbo, it's really not fair.
You got the big faith and and they get the little poll station's no wonder.
I got the big station and earned the right to be there, as does everybody else on KFBK via content, content, cont.
This is not hard to understand, but these libs and the drive-by media want to portray this as some some sign of corporate unfairness.
Here it no, KFBK would not keep anybody No, anyway, why would advertisers steer clear progressive talk?
Chris Jones, managing editor of the blog, The Hot Points.
So basically what I said, what respectable business is going to send millions of dollars in ad revenue to people who bash the president, bash the country in the war on a constant basis.
Not only that, but liberals never miss an opportunity to bash corporations is evil and crooked.
Why the hell would big business support the enemy?
But Sue Wilson says, oh, wait a minute.
Plenty of advertisers supported radio shows that bashed then.
Uh President Bill Clinton calling his pursuit of Osama bin Laden wagging the dog, but this misses the real point.
Why are corporate dollars the sole arbiter of what information we the people get to hear on publicly owned airwaves?
This is the reporter asking the question, which illustrates a a glittering ignorance of how the market works.
Corporate dollars are not the sole arbiter of what information you, the people get to hear on publicly owned airwaves.
Your little Lib station, your little Lib programming has had a couple of opportunities in Sacramento.
Nobody wanted to listen to it.
Corporations are not required to lose money in order to present a point of view and a in such a way that irritates people.
Just so there is so-called fairness.
Besides, you've always got NPR, Sue, and there is an NPR outlet out there, and a sorted other liberal outlets with no ratings and no advertisers, because they don't have to.
They're paid for by the government.
There is not one conservative radio network in the country paid for with government dollars.
You got NPR.
NPR is paid for with government radio and television.
So go there.
What has been demonstrated here is if we're all to talk about a 50-50 country and this and that and the other thing, the simple fact of the matter is that the liberal point of view, as constituted today, repulses people.
They have chosen and demonstrated they have no desire to listen to it, not even lunatic fringe libs like it.
All right.
One more little uh a couple more little blurbs here.
Who again is this?
Sacramento beast Sue Wilson, isn't it who knows me?
Sue Wilson, yes.
Considering a 2003 Gallup poll showing that 22% of Americans get their information from talk radio, we're not just talking about what's fair play.
We're talking about a threat to the democracy that we hold dear.
Lib Talk Radio dying.
Lib Talk Radio has been taken off the air in Boston, Fresno, San Diego, Eugene, Oregon, Austin, Texas, New Haven, Connecticut, Columbus, Ohio.
That may be back there.
And a lot of other markets all across the country.
Because it failed, because it got no listeners.
But yet there's this 2003 Gallup poll showing that 22% of Americans get their information from talk radio.
We're not just talking about what's fair play.
We're talking about a threat to the democracy we hold dear.
You know, if I were if I were these libs, I'd forget it.
They've already got television news.
They have every television network sands Fox.
Some people might even argue that in certain programming segments, Fox has tilted a little bit less right, or maybe left of center.
They've got NPR, radio and TV.
Do you know what this really says?
What this really says is that good talk radio, done well, is far more effective than any of those other media, like cable TV, like the broadcast networks.
It's far more influential.
It is far more effective.
It's far more popular because audiences are far more tied to it in a direct way.
in an active way.
And the libs want to control everything.
But if they can't do it on radio, they should take solace in the fact they own everything else.
But here's where we're really headed with Sue Wilson's piece.
What to do?
The FCC could bring back the Fairness Doctrine, but Republicans in Congress are fighting tooth and nail to prevent its return.
Even when groups favor media reform, believe restoration of the Fairness Doctrine would face First Amendment challenges.
But as a producer who actually worked under the Fairness Doctrine, I personally don't see what's wrong with proving to the community that I at least attempted to provide both sides of the story.
This is embarrassingly ignorant of what the Fairness Doctrine is, how it works, and what it would achieve.
Maybe it's not ignorant.
Maybe she knows full well that the Fairness Doctrine would destroy talk radio.
She's an out-of-work liberal producer.
She's an out-of-work liberal producer writing these pieces for the Sacramento Bee.
Pure and simple.
Feminist update time, ladies and gentlemen.
Lots of feminists in Sacramento, most of them listening to this show on KFBK.
As they always have.
They never left to the Lib Talkers.
Let's hear it for the Forester sisters, show the Forester sister.
Yes, yes.
That's actual, actual audio of a pro-choice rally with a bunch of feminazis in the Capitol steps back in the uh in the early 1990s, and we uh we did speed it up.
They don't sound like chipmunks normally, only when they're mad.
Uh and this was uh on the Capitol steps long, long time ago.
Here's the story by David Crairy from the Associated Press.
No constituency is more eager to see a woman win the presidency than America's feminists yet.
Despite Hillary Clinton's historic candidacy, the women's movement finds itself wrenchingly divided over the Democrat race as it heads toward the finish.
Now, the last we heard the uh official membership In the women's movement, as defined by the NAGS membership was about 200,000.
So 200,000 women gnashing their whatevers over the Hillary Clinton candidacy, said now to represent all of America's feminists.
At breakfast forums in op-ed columns across the blogosphere, the debate has been heartfelt and sometimes bitter.
Are the activist women supporting frontrunner Obama betraying their gender?
Are Clinton's feminist backers mired in an outdated women's liberation mindset?
It goes on with inane formulaic questions like this.
And its premise here is only a woman can represent women, and if a woman doesn't vote for a woman, then she's a traitor to the sisterhood.
The balkanization of our society, and you can lay it right at the feet of liberals.
Having said all this, I want to reprise something, ladies and gentlemen, that uh came up last week.
Because I know how women feel about this campaign.
We've been chronicling it.
We've been talking about it on this program.
We know that there are women out there who've been with Hillary for years, and they're middle-aged, and this is the last chance they'll ever have to see a female president in their lifetimes.
And they just don't get it.
They don't understand how the Democrat Party could just so easily cast aside this hard working woman who's given up everything, her own life, giving up her own future to serve her country and her party, and she's been cast aside by some rookie who's been in the Senate a year and a half, who's got this kook for a pastor, and runs around with anti-American protesters and terrorists.
They don't understand it.
I know that many of you loyal Democrat women are stunned.
You're watching the male-dominated drive-by media gang up on Hillary.
Who last week, I mean, they they they even changed the narrative on you.
The original narrative was Hillary wins Pennsylvania, Obama wins North Carolina, Indiana the tiebreaker.
They changed the scenario.
They changed the scenario.
Now Indiana or North Carolina was the tiebreaker, according to the drive-by media.
So here we are with neither candidate with enough delegates to openly win the nomination, and the drive-by pundits, largely men, are calling on Hillary to do the right thing for the party to get out.
To quit, to be pushed aside.
Doesn't that all sound too familiar, ladies?
And I include you, Sue Wilson at the Saccharino Bee in this.
Doesn't this all sound too familiar?
Once again, a woman told to put her dreams aside to benefit a man.
Obama, freshman senator, paid no dues, treated like anointed royalty, while this hardworking woman who has battled her entire life to break the glass ceiling is treated like a leftover meal and thrown down the garbage disposal.
I know you ladies know how it feels.
You've been in Hillary's shoes.
You've seen the pretty boys, you know who I'm talking about.
These young studs that come in the office have hardly any experience at all.
They glad hand a boss, they're out there apple polishing, kicking butt, kissing butt, all this stuff, and they're taking credit for your work.
They talk a good game with real specifics, and what happens?
They get promoted.
They're treated like heroes, and people swoon and faint when they come around, love their cologne and so forth.
And you don't read wear perfume because you you know that that's pollution.
But these guys come in wearing their metrosexual clothes and all their new sense, and people just swoon out there.
They get promoted.
While you, you women, the hardworking backbone of the office, you're told to still go get the coffee or to set up meetings for this new dweeb.
Another pretty pony lifted up to the top while the woman is treated like a broken down mule, and she's just supposed to accept it.
Hillary Clinton stood by her man in the worst of times.
She was a working mother.
She raised a family, she kept a roof over their heads while the husbands out there earning peanuts as a governor of Arkansas.
She had to go to Rose Law Firm to get the six-figure income.
She's the one that had to get involved in all these scandals.
She's the one that had to go out and invest $10,000 or a thousand dollars at stupid cattle futures and make a hundred grand because her husband wasn't pulling his weight.
The only place his husband's weight was was on top of another woman in some secret bedroom somewhere.
And she had to stick around and she had to do all of this.
While she knew all that was going on, she had to put up with it.
The lies, the cheating, the lies, the more cheating, the humiliation.
And what did her own husband do her last week?
What did he do to her last week while they were in Indiana at the so-called victory speech?
Stood behind her looking bored, disinterested.
As she faced the cameras, vowing to press on after losing North Carolina.
He's gone out there the whole campaign talking about himself.
He's tried to derail her candidacy with his rap race card business.
He's treated her quest like it was just an afterthought.
And now he stands there looking bored.
All the while people say, Well, what a supportive husband.
This guy's done everything he could to subterfuge sabotage her campaign.
And about this race thing, jumping all over Mrs. Clinton for dropping the race card and so forth.
You imagine what would have happened if Jeremiah Wright had been Hillary's pastor.
Instead, Obama gets to mumble a few lame excuses, the new dweeb, the new kid on the block.
Everybody's heart throb gets to utter a couple of little lame excuses, and everybody forgives us, and let's move on.
This guy Obama doesn't know ladies, you know this.
This guy Obama doesn't know anything about anything.
You ever heard him talk about taxes?
This guy is a lightweight.
Hillary can outwonk this guy in the middle of hot flashes, but Barack is a guy that says it all.
He's a good looking guy, long, slender, great deep voice, never cackles.
How is it, ladies?
The only man coming in this whole race who has stood tall, the only man who has stood up for Hillary's right to fight the good fight to the bitter end is me, Rush Limbaugh.
Why has the liberal male establishment forsaken Hillary and thrown her under the bus?
I even heard one male media type saying Hillary Clinton make a freight train take a dirt road.
This is the kind of thing that is uncalled for, and they're ganging up on her, and you know it.
You have been there.
This has happened to you.
They say it's going to take a miracle for Hillary to win.
But hey, we all believe in miracles, don't we?
We can make miracles.
Happens every day on Oprah.
Now listen, ladies, I mean this in the bottom of my heart.
I know Democrat liberal men like I know myself, like I know every square inch of my glorious naked body, and sadly, right now.
Liberal men, Democrat Party, liberal men in the drive-by media are planning and scheming how to screw Hillary Clinton out of this nomination, get her to quit this before she gives it everything she's got.
And in the process, they're out to screw you.
Politically, uh speaking.
Of course, yeah.
Now, ladies, in addition to having his new young, fresh guy show up in the office.
After you've been there for years, this dweeb shows up, no experience, glad hands, has all this charisma, and everybody just goes nuts over and you get aced out.
Let's not forget something else that happens.
The guy's wife.
That you've reached 55, 50, 60 some cases.
You've given up everything for what you want.
Here come these two punks.
The young guy and his wife.
His wife's out there doing all, getting all this great attention, his great publicity.
You have been where the wife is, and they never said those things about you.
And the young wife is really nothing more than she's just angry all the time, and she's doing she just she just nothing likeable about her at all, but everybody's swooning.
And so you getting double dipped.
You getting double dipped with all the idolatry of this new young guy who's coming in with no experience whatsoever, and his wife they're swooning over to.
And meanwhile, when they look at you, they see the coffee machine.
And they see an appointment book.
And they know how the wife got where she got.
You know how she got there.
You know this.
And you refuse to do it.
Maybe because nobody cared, but you still refuse to do it.
So I feel for you.
I know exactly how you feel here.
You've given your life to see that women finally are emancipated.
Now all of a sudden here comes this brash young couple with this anti-American pastor.
And they're just anger and rage all around them.
And you're being bypassed again.
By a bunch of males in the Democrat Party and in the media.
A bunch of guys.
And it's always the guys that do this to you.
Always.
And they're doing it again.
After you thought you had them wrapped around your little finger.
I I can understand your rage, and I can understand your your anger over this.
But what are you going to do?
It's bend overtime again.
Democrat Party has once again told you what they see when they look at you.
And they don't like it.
And they don't want it.
And if I were you, I'd be living all the money that you have given to Democrats, all the fundraising you've done for Democrats, all the cover you ran for Bill Clinton.
And this is what they're doing for you.
Believe me.
I understand.
George in Barbersville, West Virginia.
Welcome to the EIB network, sir.
Nice to have you here with us.
Hey, Mountaineer Miracle did it.
Well, great to have you here, old George.
Nice to have you.
First time caller.
Listen to you for several years, and wife and I will be going out early in the morning to vote for Hillary for president.
And we won't be voting for her in the fall, but.
Operation Chaos, you're an Operation Chaos volunteer.
Yes, I have I'm still a registered Democrat.
We both are.
I guess I'm just afraid my ancestors will come up and get me if I switch.
I understand this.
There's a lot of that in West Virginia, and it's a legitimate concern that you have.
One of my best friends is in West Virginia, and he's told me about that curse.
But I'll tell you this Operation Chaos is going to deliver a landslide tomorrow for Mrs. Clinton in West Virginia.
There's no question about it.
Look at this, Bob Novak had this on Saturday.
Michelle Obama herself has vetoed Hillary Clinton as Barack's vice presidential running mate long before Ted Kennedy got in the game.
Details coming up.
▲
Export Selection