All Episodes
Previous Next
May 29, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:28
May 29, 2008, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No, no, no, I know I just was looking here at the call roster to see what Snerdley's put up there.
Okay.
A couple people who disagree with me, you know.
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 uh program, it's just the subway story, I'm through with it.
Is that 800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbow 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 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 strategy.
The strategy, 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, uh people are conflating ideology with party.
You have a lot of Republicans who look at Obama and say, oh my God, no, because it's so liberal, the most liberal guy.
Oh my God, listen to what he was saying.
We gotta vote Republican.
But then they know that that's not, it's just 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 gonna, they're not gonna work in the uh in the current structure, because the third party, even if a 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.
Uh he would have the people behind him if he knew how to lead them, uh, 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-lifist.
You know, they've been 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 hobna parties in the Hamptons.
They hang around Georgetown with the libs, and libs are always laughing at them, but all the hayseed hicks that are in their party.
And they all are embarrassed, and then 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 and 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 uh 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, you know, it's 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.
Uh 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 mother, the mother's milk of politics is money, and the party will get you your money.
If you are a Romney, if you are, you know, a Huckabee, or whoever you are, if 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 it'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 this is wishing and hope in 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 Ronaldus 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, hey, 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 evil 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.
He's...
Believe me.
I tell you, we're seeing the real McCain.
He's been free, he's been liberated.
He's the nominee, he can do what he wants, and this is the...
you know 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 the AmericanThinker.com by somebody named Roy Lofquist, and I don't know who Roy Lofquist 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 Billory in the White House ever again, even as visitors.
Note that Obama won the caucus states, where the politically active determined 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 64, 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 was an 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, uh with a radical like Goldwater, and that plus the Kennedy assassination and the Perot factor in their watering down.
In our history, we have seen stretches where one party controlled Congress.
It averaged 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 Lofquist.
I don't know where Mr. Lofquist lives.
It's entirely possible.
You know, some people, you know, the you've got Carl Rove has his electoral map out there.
You've got uh Novak has his.
And there's some people out there saying that uh McCain can win by fifty electoral votes.
It 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 uh real clear politics.
And when 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 Lisk Hungarian rap city number two from the grooveyard.
Forgotten favorites.
Classical music rotation, lifting and elevating the cultural appreciation of America.
Doing this today because an 18-year-old from uh 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, uh I have only a slight, really a slight disagreement with you on public education.
Yeah, but slight, it's not worth mentioning, then, is it?
Well how you want to luck yet.
Oh, okay.
I'm just gonna do my best here.
Okay, my wife has worked as a charter school teacher for eleven years now.
What is a charter school?
How would you define a charter school to be?
Oh man, uh 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, yeah.
Uh anybody can go to the 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, oh, see, this is one of the problems.
Yes, and and four, yes, yeah.
Free doesn't take four.
I should just say free.
But you know what I'm saying?
Uh 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 to look like that to know if you want Hillary care or or Obama care.
But uh the schools, the per child allocation isn't really a huge amount for what they're being asked to do.
And uh it's not it's not as though and I can like I say can only speak for Michigan, the per child uh allocation is something like a little over five grand.
Uh but if you were to have a private education for your child, and I'm not talking about they serve uh 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 can take him over to twenty-one for lunch with caviar, bring them back to school and have money left over, and you can pay you could go out and hire the most expensive professor from MIT.
Well, that is absolutely insane.
They're throwing money away then.
Well, that's the whole point.
I mean, I realize a lot of people are gonna 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 it's uh it's going to the wrong places to the wrong people.
The classroom is not the focus.
Oh, I agree.
I agree with you, I agree with you.
I stand corrected.
Twenty thousand dollars.
Now maybe only five where you are, twenty thousand dollars in New Jersey.
Well, some it's like you say, some I uh it's the idiot, isn't oh it's not New Jersey, isn't that something like uh Taxachusetts or something like that?
Don't they uh I don't know how they can afford to do that.
But we're talking about Well, have you looked at the they can't?
Have you looked at our deficit?
Have you looked at the New Jersey state deficit or the New York State that 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 trud uh a three trillion dollar budget is announced, and the Democrats say it's uh got a little too many cuts in it.
Draconian cuts.
Uh oh, it's insane.
It's insane.
Uh ultimately, uh not to uh quote uh Reverend Wright, but the chickens ultimately sometime have to come home to roost.
And they will at some point, unless, like you say, we could grow our way out of it, but we're not gonna grow our way out of it with all this whole liberal idiocy that's going on.
You were quoting Malcolm X. Oh, okay.
Reverend Wright just plagiarized Malcolm X. Oh, okay.
Well, okay.
I didn't realize learned something new every day, have been listening to you since ninety-two, so there you go.
Scott, thanks so much for the call.
All right, thank you.
I realize I know a lot of you people are gonna tell me that your local school district is in big pain, that they don't have it and having a closed 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 sturdy exactly what it is.
It's Franz Lish again with the Hungarian Rhapsody number two.
And coming up will be the Flight of the Bumblebee by Rimsky 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 uh great to talk to you.
Thank you.
Uh you know, uh a few years ago and you were going through uh your struggles in life.
I was going through struggles myself, and uh turned my act around and um now I'm a small business owner and um thriving unbelievably, even though my business is dependent on the price of gasoline.
Why?
What kind of what kind of business are you in?
Uh mobile pet grooming, Rush.
Mobile pet grooming.
All pets like animals like cats and dogs?
Uh I don't do cats.
My wife does, I do the dogs.
You don't do that.
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, uh, but I like making money.
Well, okay then.
We're close.
No, I'm calling you uh because I disagree with your uh 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 b I believe Rush.
I 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 unamerican.
I think that Subway is basically being bullied by a special interest group.
Well, the bullied by a special interest group.
Well, they were forced to apologize.
Well, this you may have a point here in a in a theoretical sense.
The the homeschooling crowd is very, very much discriminated against.
I mean, 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 I 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 uh uh 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 more than it's more a marketing thing because they're able to, you know, they're they're they're buying physical education equipment uh for these uh screwels, 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 they're buying exercise equipment.
They're subway's whole plan is eat our stuff, eat healthy.
And a combination of eating healthy and exercise, a great old American cliche, uh 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 with 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, let me I'm gonna 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 um gasoline price.
Well, I'm not complaining about gas.
Yes, you were.
I think I think it's you mentioned it, so you're complaining.
But no, it's no.
It's no mat calm down.
I'm trying to do that.
No, no, no, I 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 four dollars a gallon.
That's great attitude.
That's the 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?
Fourteen, eight, and five.
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.
Oh.
So should Subway.
Yes, exactly.
You've you've you've made your point.
You've tried to be a nice guy here.
Look, I'm gonna put you on a hold here.
Uh Terry.
Well, thank you very much.
You remember it's more than it's more an honor to talk to you.
You gotta ask him, do you have a barbecue pit?
Uh yes, I do.
Good.
Do not use any other method other than barbecue pit, even for the jumbo hot dogs I'm gonna 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.
Uh I'm gonna send you some Wagyu, which is American Kobe, steak burgers.
I'm gonna send you I'm gonna send you some strips and I'm gonna send you some fillets.
I'm gonna send you some jumbo hot dogs from Alan 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 he won't get this himself.
This is something he can sneak his teeth into.
He's got enough pair 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.
AB Stakes.com.
Michael in Butler, Pennsylvania.
You're next.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Rush, how are you doing?
Never better, sir.
Thank you.
Okay, I want to uh 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 uh 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 uh 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.
Uh 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, uh well, a lot of it was ghostwritten.
This is this is it look it.
Scott McClellan's been out of there since 2006.
He didn't have a job.
Most people who leave the White House press secretary ship 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 uh jobs are offered from various cable net.
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 in 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 gonna be friendless when this is all over.
And if Gregory is any example, he's not gonna have the respect.
Well, I know he's not.
These libs are gonna 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 gonna 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, Rimsky Korsakov.
It is just funny as hell to watch snertily listen to this stuff trying to figure it all out.
Okay, we are back to the audio sound bites.
This was yesterday on NPR's morning edition, the media reporter David Fulkenflick interviewed Fox News polster Frank Lunch, Democrat strategist babe, Susan Estrich, and former Clinton press Secretary Dee Dee Myers.
The media reporter David Fulkenflick said journalists and pundits do constantly describe Hillary in different terms than they would her male rivals in the following clip.
Fox News polster Frank Lunch was asking voters what kind of campaign they wanted Obama and Clinton to wedge.
How many of you want them to really argue?
Let raise your hands.
And how many of you want them to make love to each other?
Just try imagining John McKean 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's 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, McCackle?
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.
She remembered Gerald Ford what happened to Gerald Ford on Saturday Night Live.
Anyway, this is just basically NPR to a bunch of women complaining that Hillary's been treated in a sexist fashion by Frank Luntz and me.
Uh-huh.
Well, it is no, it would not be stereotypical to say these women are whining.
Didi Myers is a professional whiner.
She's gotten good at it.
Uh Estrich, uh she's okay.
She I like Susan Estrich.
She's and I like Didi too.
I I just I do think look at we've said we they're just they're women that are really upset about what's happened to Hillary.
They just I understand it.
I've talked to them about it.
You know, I've I've I've I've reached out to them on this program.
I understand how they feel.
I'm actually sympathetic to Didi Myers and Susan Estrich, because this was this is it for their lifetimes.
I mean, to see a woman president, this is it.
It's a gone.
It's gone.
I mean, they've they've chosen 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 can understand why they are angry about this.
Let's see.
One more here.
Um's campaign manager yesterday.
This is Internet quality.
We are not encouraging our people to gather and protest on Saturday.
Obviously, uh 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 helpful dynamic to uh to create chaos uh and in the interest of party unity.
Um we're encouraging our supporters not to uh to protest.
Um I think it's unf we just don't think a scene as we uh window the primary season here is is helpful to bringing the party together.
That's Obama's campaign manager urging people not to create chaos.
That's already happened.
Uh, ladies and uh gentlemen.
Story from the UK.
And this story actually wouldn't come out uh September fifth no.
Yeah, it's from September 07.
I've been holding it for almost a year.
What is political correctness cause?
Let me let me get into this story by asking you that question.
What is political correctness cause?
What one of the things, I mean, there are many things that result from it, but one of the one things what is 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 fourteen.
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 UK, it's from last September.
But it's a it's a great illustration of the outgrowth of political correctness and the fear that it incites or s inspires in uh in other people.
Another thing, I'm gonna have to spend some time on this tomorrow.
I'm not gonna have time to get into great detail, but the soundbite with uh Didi 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, uh, although she knows nothing's ever going to come with it, but I'll share this with you tomorrow.
Uh well, no, the nanny 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.
Look forward to it.
▲
Export Selection