No, I just was looking here at the call roster to see what snerdley's put up there.
Okay.
A couple of people who disagree with me.
You know how odd, infrequent that is.
Ha, how are you, Rush Limbaugh?
Great to be with you, ladies and gentlemen, and it's a thrill and delight to have you here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program, it's just the subway story.
I'm through with it.
Is 800-282-2882, the email address lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
Let me continue this thought on what's happening to the Republican Party.
We had a guy called in the latter part of the previous hour who, and I know a lot of you people are thinking this.
Okay, Rush, you have once again, defying the odds and all the experts, you have once again demonstrated your impact and your power with Operation Chaos.
So when is it time to turn this on the Republican Party and to fix it?
Will you be our Moses, he said, and lead us out of the Republican Party to a new place, somewhere with a bright vista and a bright horizon, where the sun never sets.
And will we be alive when we get there?
Will we escape the hordes who are trying to wipe us out as we escape?
This is not the strategery.
The strategery, ladies and gentlemen, is more like Trojan horse.
We stay where we are because the party is going to essentially make it easier for us to retake it.
As I mentioned, people are conflating ideology with party.
You have a lot of Republicans who look at Obama and say, oh, my God, no, guys, this is so liberal.
The most liberal guy.
Oh, my God.
Listen to what he was saying.
We got to vote Republican.
Then they know that that's not, something's wrong about it.
But what do we do?
What do we do?
We've got Obama.
So where we are with all this, you know, third parties don't work.
They just, they never have.
They're not going to, they're not going to work in the current structure because the third party, even if the third party president got elected, he doesn't have any third-party members in Congress to speak of.
And the two parties would unite to cream this third party president, make sure he got nothing done.
He would have the people behind him if he knew how to lead them, say as Ronaldus Magnus did.
At the same time, all this is going on, Rockefeller Republicans, liberal Republicans, who have long been embarrassed of some of the conservatives in the Republican Party, most notably Southerners and evangelical Christians, the pro-lifers.
You know, they've been, for years, they've wanted to just get rid of these people because it's embarrassing to them.
They go out to their little hobnob parties in the Hamptons.
They hang around Georgetown with the Libs.
And Libs are always laughing at them about all the hayseed hicks that are in their party.
And they're embarrassed.
And their wives are nagging them because their wives are pro-choice, all these liberal Republican guys.
And their wives are nagging them.
And nobody wants to be nagged.
You can't get the wife to be quiet.
That doesn't work.
So what you do is you run around, complain to somebody else about the makeup of the party.
And then you add to that, the same time you have third and fourth tier pseudo-conservatives, and they know who I, I mean, even without mentioning their names, they think I'm talking about them.
And they always, well, they frequently react.
But these many of these are in our so-called conservative intelligentsia and primarily media.
They have no influence with the grassroots, meaning the people who make the country work.
They work at magazines with a subscription of 60,000.
They write for the editorial page of the New York Times, the op-ed page, which is read mostly in the upper west side of Manhattan, sometimes in San Francisco, South Florida.
It's got a liberal readership.
So they write conservatism for liberalism.
But Republican grassroots people do not read these people.
They're not impacted by them.
But they are seizing the moment to claim that their supposed brand of conservatism is on the ascendancy.
And their brand of conservatism involves a big, activist, engaged executive in government, which is liberalism.
They see McCain, they don't have any personal love for McCain, but rather they see McCain as a vessel for their new redefinition of conservatism.
And his nomination is widespread acceptance of their views.
And these are the same people suggesting that he go out and get Sam Nunn to be his vice president or go get Lieberman or some other Democrat.
Their views are not conservative.
They are a bizarre rehash of big government Republicanism, which has put us where we are today, which is why I say what's really happening that nobody wants to acknowledge or say is that liberalism is ascending in the Republican Party.
When John McCain's signature issues are indistinguishable from Barack Obama's, what are we talking here?
Let's just be honest.
Liberalism is on the rise in the Republican Party.
So party regulars, the hacks, and the elected officials, they've got no choice but then to support this if they want to have a future in electoral politics in the Republican Party.
Now, I think they're wrong in that calculation.
There aren't any leaders there, but their calculation is based on the fact that the mother's milk of politics is money, and the party will get you your money if you are a Romney, if you are a Huckabee, or whoever you are.
If you have a future, if you have an ambition for futural electoral office in the Republican Party, the rules of the game say you go along with the party because there's just one less problem you have when it's your turn.
Loyalty and all that.
But at the same time, party regulars, some conservatives are not quite sure what to do or how to react because they're afraid of being accused of helping to elect a radical like Obama if they don't support the party.
But they are disgruntled with McCain.
Still, what they end up doing is hoping that McCain, who is solid on Iraq, will somehow reveal at some point that he really is one of us.
The current theory is that McCain, and this is wishing and hoping, Dusty Springfield, 1964.
What they are hoping is that this is all just a public calculation by McCain to get elected, and then when he gets elected, then here comes the real McCain, which will be conservative a la Rinaldus Magnus.
This is what people are hoping.
This is what little they have to grasp to.
Because if it's not that, then they know we're in trouble.
But they just can't vote Obama.
Just can't do it.
Just won't do it.
And they don't want to sit out because they think that'll give it to Obama.
Just cannot have Obama.
But then the alternative, just so they construct a theory.
It's really not that bad.
This is all just a game.
McCain's just doing what he's doing to get a lot of Obama's votes so he'll get elected, but then when he gets in there, that's when he'll become the real conservative.
They're hoping he really doesn't believe all this radical nonsense about global warming, for example.
They're hoping he really doesn't believe all this stuff he's saying about the oil companies.
They're hoping he really doesn't mean it when he says we need to close Club Gitmo and, by extension, shut down my thriving merchandise business there.
They're hoping he doesn't mean it when he says that he's going to put the telecoms on the griddle for working with the Bush administration on warrantless wiretaps.
But they are wrong.
McCain believes in his own press.
He believes he's a Pied Piper.
Believe me.
I tell you, we're seeing the real McCain.
He's been freed and liberated.
He's the nominee.
He can do what he wants.
And this is the real conundrum for a lot of people.
So I just wanted to explain in greater detail what I meant when I say that the Republican Party's ascendancy right now is actually liberalism.
Now, let me share something with you that disagrees with me on this, just to do both sides.
There's a little entry at theamericanthinker.com by somebody named Roy Loughquist.
And I don't know who Roy Lufquist is, but I'll read what he writes.
It's very little, very short.
Actually, it's a letter to the editor of the American Thinker, so he's not one of their contributors.
He's just a reader.
I suppose.
I have been following politics for a while since 1952.
I've never seen the conventional wisdom about an election more baseless.
Why Obama?
Charisma?
Ideas?
Hope?
None of these or any other reasons that have been bandied about.
The only reason the Democrats are choosing Obama is because he's not Hillary.
The dirty little secret is the Democrats do not like the Clintons.
The Clintons embarrass the Democrat Party.
Many, many Democrats were ashamed of their president.
They don't want to see Billy in the White House ever again, even as visitors.
Note that Obama won in the caucus states, where they politically active determine the outcome.
A Democrat year?
How do you figure that?
Just because the New York Times says so?
Look at 2006.
Yeah, let's look at it.
In the preceding six midterm elections where the incumbent president's party lost seats, the average loss in the Senate was 6.1.
In the House, 29.3.
In 2006, Republicans lost seven in the Senate and 30 in the House.
Right on target, right on average.
No big deal.
Now let's look at Democrat presidents.
JFK.
JFK and Nixon tied in the popular vote, even though Nixon was extremely unlikable.
LBJ beat Goldwater in 1964, but Kennedy had been assassinated.
We were in the middle of a war, and Goldwater was portrayed as a radical.
Carter beat Ford in 1980.
Nixon had resigned because of Watergate.
Ford wasn't appointed vice president.
The pattern here he's saying, just follow me on this.
And then Clinton beats George H.W. Bush in 1992 with only 43% of the vote.
Ross Perot got 19%, which arguably was 60% to 70% Republicans.
It seems that Democrats only win the White House in extreme circumstances.
Post-Watergate, post-Kennedy assassination, with a radical like Goldwater, and that plus with the Kennedy assassination and the Perot factor in their watering down.
In our history, we have seen stretches where one party controlled Congress, an average of about 30 years with occasional one-term reversals.
I'll go with history every time.
From where I'm sitting, it doesn't look like a Democrat year at all.
Regards Roy Loftquist, I don't know where Mr. Lofquist lives.
It's entirely possible.
You know, some people, you know, you've got Karl Rove has his electoral map out there.
You've got Novak has his.
And there's some people out there saying that McCain can win by 50 electoral votes, which should be pretty close to a landslide.
So Bob Beckle, our old buddy Bob Beckle, read that today, and he's already filed a piece at Town Hall or Real Clear Politics.
And he says, hell's bells, ain't no way.
I can see McCain losing by 50 to 150 electoral votes.
Nobody knows.
But it's clear that McCain and Obama will be fighting over the same voting blocks back after this.
Recognize this one, Brian.
This is Franz Lies, Hungarian Rhapsody number two from the Groove Yard of Forgotten Favorites.
Classical music rotation, lifting and elevating the cultural appreciation of America.
Doing this today because an 18-year-old from what was it?
Houston, yeah, called and accused me of not having an appreciation for classical music.
Okay, back to the phones.
This is Scott in Mount Pleasant, Michigan.
Thank you for waiting, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
I just cannot believe that I'm actually talking to you.
Well, I'm glad you got through, sir.
Well, I have only a slight, really a slight disagreement with you on public education.
You have a slight it's not worth mentioning, then, is it?
Well, I don't know how you want to look at it.
Okay, I'm just going to do my best here.
Okay, my wife has worked as a charter school teacher for 11 years now.
What is a charter school?
How would you define a charter school to me?
Oh, man.
A charter school is a school that can be started by a private group, but it can receive public funding, the per-child allocation.
Yeah, anybody can go to the school as one of the school of choice kind of things.
The charter school cannot issue bonds.
Basically, it's a government school that people don't think of as a public school.
Exactly.
In fact, they changed the name of the school to have public in the name because people didn't even realize that they could bring their kids there for free.
Seriously.
For free.
Well, see, this is one of the problems.
Yes, and four, yes, yeah.
Free doesn't take four.
I should just say free.
But you know what I'm saying?
Public schools, the whole system is a disaster in the same way that a socialized medical care system would be an utter disaster.
All you have to do is look at the public education system in this country and say, do I want my medical care system to look like that to know if you want Hillary care or Obamacare?
But the schools, the per-child allocation, isn't really a huge amount for what they're being asked to do.
And it's not as though, and I can, like I say, can only speak for Michigan.
The per-child allocation is something like a little over five grand.
But if you were to have a private education for your child, and I'm not talking about they serve caviar and sparkling grape juice at lunch kind of thing.
But you could do that with what we are currently spending in New Jersey.
You could give every kid a limousine to take him to and from school.
You could take him over to 21 for lunch with caviar, bring them back to school and have money left over.
And you can go out and hire the most expensive professor from MIT.
Well, that is absolutely insane.
They are throwing money away then.
Well, that's the whole point.
I mean, I realize a lot of people are going to call me like you and say, Rush, we're out of money in these schools.
We're not out of money.
We got idiots allocating it.
Well, it's going to the wrong places to the wrong people.
The classroom is not the focus.
Oh, I agree with you.
I agree with you.
I stand corrected.
20 grand a pupil in New Jersey.
$20,000.
Now, maybe only five where you are.
$20,000 in New Jersey.
Well, it's like you say, it's the idiot.
Isn't it not New Jersey?
Isn't that something like Taxachusetts or something like that?
I don't know how they can afford to do that.
But we're talking about...
Well, have you looked at...
They can't.
Have you looked at our deficit?
Have you looked at the New Jersey state deficit or the New York state?
They can't afford it.
This is what's outrageous.
We are being taxed and taxed and taxed in ways people don't even know.
And then a $3 trillion budget is announced, and the Democrats say it's got too many cuts in it.
Draconian cuts.
Oh, it's insane.
It's insane.
Ultimately, not to quote Reverend Wright, but the chickens ultimately sometime have to come home to roost.
They will at some point, unless, like you say, we could grow our way out of it, but we're not going to grow our way out of it with all this whole liberal idiocy that's going on.
You were quoting Malcolm X. Reverend Wright just plagiarized Malcolm X.
Oh, okay.
Okay.
I didn't really learn something new every day.
I've been listening to you since 92.
So there you go.
Scott, thanks so much for the call.
All right, thank you.
I appreciate it.
I know a lot of you people are going to tell me that your local school district is in big pain, that they don't have it having to close classes or whatever, this and that and the other thing.
Find out what size yacht the janitors in your school district have if you live in New York, for example.
You've heard Sterling's technology don't know what it is.
It's Franz Lis.
Again, with the Hungarian Rhapsody number two.
And coming up will be the Flight of the Bumblebee by Rimske Korsakov.
I don't want it on accordion.
I don't want to listen to the Flight of Bumblebee on accordion.
Back to the phones.
Terry, San Diego, you're next to the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
It's great to talk to you.
Thank you.
You know, a few years ago, when you were going through your struggles in life, I was going through struggles myself and turned my actor around.
And now I'm a small business owner and thriving unbelievably, even though my business is dependent on the price of gasoline.
Why?
What kind of business are you in?
Mobile pet grooming, Rush.
Mobile pet grooming.
All pets, like animals, like cats and dogs?
I don't do cats.
My wife does.
I do the dogs.
More specifically, I do the big dogs.
Big dogs.
Okay.
Well, congratulations.
You're obviously following a passion.
You like grooming animals.
No, I don't like grooming animals.
I like animals, but I like making money.
Well, okay, then.
We're close.
Now, I'm calling you because I disagree with your side of the subway story.
What was my side of the subway story?
You were frustrated that Subway was giving money to the public schools, even though public schools have too much money, as it is.
Well, I believe Rush.
I don't care how much money they're getting.
I don't care where they're spending it.
I think that to see a small group of people like the homeschooling crowd tell a company what they're supposed to be doing with their money is un-American.
I think that Subway is basically being bullied by a special interest group.
Well, bullied by a special interest group.
Well, they were forced to apologize.
I love this.
Well, you may have a point here in a theoretical sense.
The homeschooling crowd is very, very much discriminated against.
I mean, Rush, you know what?
I still think Subway should be able to give their money to whoever they want.
I do, too.
I'm not upset with it.
My only point about it was that Subway gives the money away for whatever reason they want to.
It's probably good PR.
It's probably charitable in some sense.
But there's probably also a component here that they have been made to believe the federal government's not funding education enough.
No, that's not a good idea.
But it does.
It's more a marketing thing because they're able to, you know, they're buying physical education equipment for these screws, which, of course, is crucial to our nation's education.
Now, are you sure it's just physical education or is it for athletic departments?
Well, because I read the story.
They're buying exercise equipment.
Subway's whole plan is eat our stuff, eat healthy.
And a combination of eating healthy and exercise, a great old American cliché, will lead to a long life where you'll never die.
Hey, good for Subway.
They're using the government BS for their own marketing.
They are.
I have no core.
My whole point was the idea that the federal government, the public school system, is out of money and doesn't have enough money offends me.
It is absurd.
All right, then you should be happy Subway's chip it in.
All right, I'm going to run a test with you.
Let me run a test with you.
You're a small business guy.
Yes, sir.
You have a pet grooming business being impacted out there by the gasoline price.
Well, I'm not complaining about gas.
Yes, you were.
I think it's.
You mentioned it, so you're complaining.
But no, it's no matter.
It's no matter.
Calm down.
I'm trying to.
No, no, no.
I want to tell you, I think it's unbelievable that somebody goes halfway around the world, pulls oil out of the ground, refines it so I can put it in my gas tank, and they only charge me $4 a gas.
Because that's great attitude.
That's the truth.
Run for Miss America.
Now, are you married?
You are married.
Do you have any kids?
Three boys.
Three boys.
How old are they?
14, 8, and 5.
Okay, they don't have the means to do what I want to do for you.
I want to give you a Father's Day present.
I want to give you a sample of goodies from Allen Brothers.
Oh, Rush, you're killing me.
Oh, my God.
Will you accept it?
Absolutely, Rush.
I greatly appreciate that.
Because you think, and you realize I have the freedom to give away whatever I want to whoever I want, whenever, right?
Absolutely.
And you probably have a lot of beef in the refrigerator, or you could get it if you wanted it, right?
Yes, I can.
So you probably don't even need it, but I'm going to give you some, and you're going to take it because you realize I have the right to give it to you.
Yes, I can.
And so should Subway be able to give it to whoever they want.
So should Subway.
Yes, exactly.
You've made your point.
I've tried to be a nice guy here.
Look, I'm going to put you on a hold here, Terry.
Rush, thank you very much.
It's more an honor to talk to you.
You've got to ask you, do you have a barbecue pit?
Yes, I do.
Good.
Do not use any other method other than barbecue pit, even for the jumbo hot dogs I'm going to send you.
I don't know how to cook otherwise.
Good.
You do the cooking?
Yes, I do.
Even better.
Even better.
Okay, so use the grill.
I'm going to send you some Wag U, which is American Kobe steak burgers.
I'm going to send you some strips.
I'm going to send you some fillets.
I'm going to send you some jumbo hot dogs from Allen Brothers.
And I just want you to taste it.
My birthday present or Father's Day present to you.
Since you have a deep and abiding understanding of the capitalist system and the way it works, I want you to benefit from the largesse.
Think of me as Subway, except in this case, I am Allen Brothers.
And it is for Father's Day.
In fact, here's what you should do.
Terry, go to abstakes.com and just look at the pictures.
Just look at the pictures.
All of you, go to abstakes.com.
Mouth will water.
This is great for Dad because he won't get this himself.
This is something he can seek his teeth into.
He's got enough pair of underwear.
He's got enough ties.
The card's a big deal, but it's not enough.
This is a great Father's Day president, abstakes.com.
Michael in Butler, Pennsylvania.
You're next.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Rush.
How are you doing?
Never better, sir.
Thank you.
No, okay.
I want to say that it's a pleasure to call you from Butler.
I've been trying for a lot of years.
We're the only county in the state that actually voted for Len Swan.
That tells you how conservative we are.
I appreciate that.
That's nice to know.
Hey, I wanted to get back to when you were talking about Scott McClellan.
I was watching Morning Joe, and Mika was trying to make the point big time that there's collusion in the White House, and they're all using the same terms, talking about how confused and upset they were from the reaction of Scott McClellan in his book.
And I almost fell out of my chair when David Gregory actually corrected Mika twice and said, No, I feel the same way.
If you're working in the White House Office of Media, you're working with the press and for the president, and you have to get along with both.
And he can't, he couldn't believe that this guy did this.
So I think it goes directly to your point that Scott's sold out, or as you say, and I believe entirely possible, this thing was ghostwritten, and now he's stuck with it.
Yeah, a lot of it was ghostwritten.
This is this is it.
Look at Scott McClellan's been out of there since 2006.
He didn't have a job.
Most people who leave the White House press secretaryship have all kinds of private sector jobs like that.
Like that.
They're considered skilled communicators.
Corporate people love to snap them up.
Maybe talk show hosts jobs are offered from various cable networks.
This guy got nothing.
Got nothing.
So this is money.
Book is money.
And he got what he wanted out of all this.
Number one at Amazon.
It'll be on the New York Times list.
They'll probably keep it there for a long time, even beyond when it belongs there, because it's exactly what the Times would write.
But he's going to be friendless when this is all over.
And if Gregory is any example, he's not going to have the respect.
Well, I know he's not.
These libs are going to use him in the media for however long it's worth it to them.
And then see you later, Scott.
And he's burned his bridges with his friends, so to speak.
So he's going to be alone quite soon for quite a while.
We've used this as our Nancy Pelosi theme now and then: the flight of the bumblebee, Queen Bee syndrome, of course, Rinski Korsakov.
It is just funny as hell to watch Snirdly listen to this stuff, trying to figure it all out.
Okay, we are back to the audio soundbites.
This was yesterday on NPR's morning edition.
The media reporter David Fulkenflick interviewed Fox News pollster Frank Lunch, Democrat strategerist babe, Susan Estrich, and former Clinton press secretary Didi Myers.
The media reporter David Falkenflick said journalists and pundits do constantly describe Hillary in different terms than they would her male rivals.
In the following clip, Fox News pollster Frank Luntz was asking voters what kind of campaign they wanted Obama and Clinton to wage.
How many of you want them to really argue?
Raise your hands.
And how many of you want them to make love to each other?
Just try imagining John McCain and Mike Huckabee in that scenario, or Joe Biden in these remarks by conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
Mrs. Clinton's testicle lockbox is big enough for the entire Democrat hierarchy, not just some people in the media.
Clinton supporter Susan Estrich says Clinton's struggle with her image evokes women CEOs who strive to be feminine, but not too feminine, and capable, but not overly assertive.
I think that's why there's been so much attention to Hillary's clothes and to Hillary's cleavage and to Hillary's husband and to Hillary's marriage and to Hillary's motherhood and her own daughter.
Dee Dee Myers says the media seems blind to its own behavior.
Have we had male candidates with funny laughs?
Almost certainly.
Have they gotten as much attention?
Absolutely not.
Did the Times write about that the cackle because people were talking about it?
Arguably that's true, but it just reflects a sexist strain in society that certain things that are acceptable in men are not acceptable in women.
Do you remember Gerald Ford?
What happened to Gerald Ford on Saturday Night Live?
Anyway, this is just basically NPR'd a bunch of women complaining that Hillary's been treated in a sexist fashion by Frank Luntz and me.
Well, it is, no, it would not be stereotypical to say these women are whining.
Dee Dee Myers is a professional whiner.
She's gotten good at it.
Estrich, she's okay.
I like Susan Estrich.
And I like Dee Dee too.
I do think, look, we've said there are women that are really upset about what's happened to Hillary.
I understand it.
I've talked to them about it.
You know, I've reached out to them on this program.
I understand how they feel.
I'm actually sympathetic to Dee Dee Myers and Susan Estrich because this is it for their lifetimes.
I mean, to see a woman president, this is it?
It's gone.
It's gone.
I mean, they've chosen this little dweeb that doesn't know anything, with no experience whatsoever, with a wacko-nutcase anti-American preacher, runs around with terrorists and embezzlers and so forth.
And he's a messiah.
I mean, you don't understand why they are angry about this.
Let's see.
One more here.
This is great.
Number 17.
This is Obama's campaign manager yesterday.
This is internet quality.
We are not encouraging our people to gather and protest on Saturday.
Obviously, with the click of a mouse, it'd be pretty easy for us in the Mid-Atlantic to get thousands of people there, but we don't think it's a helpful dynamic to create chaos.
And in the interest of party unity, we're encouraging our supporters not to protest.
I think it's unwe just don't think a scene as we wind down the primary season here is helpful to bring the party together.
That's Obama's campaign manager urging people not to create chaos.
That's already happened.
Ladies and gentlemen, story from the UK.
And this story actually went to come out September 5th.
No.
Yeah, it's from September 2007.
I've been holding it for almost a year.
What is political correctness caused?
Let me get into this story by asking you that question.
What is political correctness cause?
One of the things, I mean, there are many things that result from it, but one of the one things, what is a one thing it causes?
Fear.
Political correctness creates fear in people.
Say what they think, to report what they see.
A homosexual foster couple were left free to sexually abuse vulnerable boys in their care because social workers feared being accused of discrimination if they investigated complaints.
The two guys were one of the first homosexual couples in the UK to be officially approved as foster parents.
They looked after 18 children in only 15 months.
With no prior convictions, they came across as respectable men who simply wanted to help boys with a variety of problems.
In reality, they were pedophiles who repeatedly abused the children in their care.
Even when the mother of two of the children reported her suspicions to the council, officials accepted the men's explanations and did nothing.
Instead of banning them from staying with these two guys, they sent youngsters with more serious problems to them.
Between them, the couple abused four boys aged between eight and 14.
The fear of being discriminatory led investigators to fail to discriminate between the appropriate and the abusive.
They were simply afraid they would be called homophobes if they investigated and reported this.
And so the abuse continued.
Now, this is UK, it's from last September, but it's a great illustration of the outgrowth of political correctness and the fear that it incites or inspires in other people.
I'm going to have to spend some time on this tomorrow.
I'm not going to have time to get into great detail, but the soundbite with Dee Dee Myers and Susan Estrich reminded me of it.
Plus, you know, we've had the last couple of days a discussion of, you know, maybe people don't understand limited government because they've never seen it.
John Lott Jr. has written an entire column that suggests that the growth in government exponentially is directly tied to the day women got the right to vote.
And he is not a sexist.
This is a scientific scholarly analysis that the size of government started ballooning when women got the right to vote.
Ann Coulter has joked about this, although she knows nothing's ever going to come with it.
But I'll share this with you tomorrow.
Oh, no, the daddy.
No, no, no, don't.
This is Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata taking us out of the program today.
Great to be with you.
We'll have the women's suffrage equaling big government story tomorrow, as well as Open Line Friday.