All Episodes
Previous Next
June 9, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:20
June 9, 2008, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back.
Great to have you with us, Rush Limbaugh and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Telephone number if you want to join us is 800-282-2882.
The email address, Lrushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
I just got a note from a friend who says that the newsmax story on McCain's camp declining to meet with Billy Graham isn't true.
There's a blogger at the Christian Broadcast Network who is uh says it's not true, uh, which actually is uh is is very comforting.
Now, I I checked the email here during the break.
Rush, it's the same old question I keep getting after we've been getting this question for two or three weeks.
Anytime I discuss the failure of the Republicans to counter the leftism of the Democrat Party, and so, well, what can we do?
What can we do?
Well, let me give you an example.
To those of you in Seattle.
Now, I know that a majority of the population in Seattle is leftists.
And when they read about the bonfire ban, because of the possible bonfire ban, they're going to limit the number of bonfires this year and maybe ban them next year on a couple beaches in Seattle to avoid global warming.
I mean, why just two beaches?
If it, if it leads to global warming, why not ban it, period?
Why not ban forest fires, ban the lightning strikes that cause them for crying out loud?
Eight million lightning strikes a year, ban lightning.
At any rate, my hope is that even leftists in Seattle, who do I obviously set most of the bonfires for crying out loud, will sit there and say, no way, pal.
But that's probably hoping too much.
So what can you do about it?
Here's here's to me something that's very simple.
There will have to be public hearings on this.
Whatever local government agency is behind this, whatever board, whatever town council, whatever county government, whatever the hell it is, just show up when they have the hearings.
Whether you set bonfires or not, just show up and say no.
That it's pointless.
Object to it.
Instead of just laying down idly by the side of the road and saying, okay, run over me again.
Why don't you do that, Rush?
Well, stand by.
You know, I'm I'm we we all dealing with these kinds of regulations that encroach on freedom and this sort of thing, but the right time you do it, and I'm gonna be one that's going to.
It's just it's gotten, it's it's it's getting out of hand.
It is ridiculous now.
And it's getting to the point where everybody ought to be saying, enough.
A little funny note, I have a friend.
Had some health problems recently, been going to the doctor for four years to deal with the health problems, been doing everything the doctors say to do, been doing everything the media says to do.
You know, don't eat this, don't eat that, do eat this, don't drink that, do drink this.
Make sure you get enough sleep, blah, blah, blah, blah.
So my friend goes to the doctor for a check him and says, You need surgery.
And they sent him a letter along with his um report.
Say you could die during the surgery.
And I said, That's just that's just the tort lawyers.
They just have to put that in there for liability purposes.
I mean, you could die during surgery.
He said, that's not the point.
They told me that life is finite.
My doctors told me that life is finite, so I could die during surgery.
I've been doing everything my doctors said for four years, and now they tell me I could die.
I said, exactly right.
You're following all these stupid, ridiculous, forget the doctors, all these stupid, ridiculous things like don't drink coffee, do drink coffee, don't eat oat brand, do eat oat brand, all these other stupid things.
Eating certain things that cause global warming, you're trying to do the best thing you can do under the premise that you're lengthening your life.
Maybe you won't die.
And then the doctors tell you you're gonna die.
Yeah, I was shocked.
I thought I was doing everything right and they tell me I could die.
*sad*
You know, I'm thought long and hard about mentioning this story, but you need to hear it.
Vallejo, California has filed for bankruptcy.
Vallejo is a San Francisco suburb, it's a little northeast.
You know why they filed for bankruptcy?
To get out of paying pensions to their public employees.
This story by Janice Revell from Money Magazine.
The jig is up.
For years, politicians have been playing what amounts to a multi-trillion dollar shell game with state and local pensions.
They've doled out lush retiree benefits to their heavily unionized workforces, knowing that they could shove the cost for those benefits onto future generations of taxpayers.
But a recent financial bombshell dropped by a San Francisco suburb, Vallejo, shows why that shell game is now starting to unravel in a nasty way, and it's a cautionary tale you cannot afford to ignore.
Here's the skinny.
In late May, Vallejo became the largest city in California history to declare bankruptcy.
Its financial demise was brought about partly by the real estate crash, which decimated home prices in the area and thus put a major dent in the city's property tax revenues.
But the real nail in Vallejo's coffin was the city's labor costs.
Under the current labor agreement, the average police officer walking a beat in Vallejo will be paid $122,000 this year before overtime.
An average sergeant will make $151,000.
A captain will make $231,000.
The average firefighter, meanwhile, will bring in $130,000 before overtime.
That's just the salaries, though.
The final budget crusher was the city's pension plan.
Thanks to retroactive benefit enhancements approved of the city council in 2000.
Police officers and firefighters can now retire at age 50 and receive an annual pension equal to 90% of their final pay, assuming they've spent 30 years on the job.
That's an amount that gets increased every year to help keep pace with inflation.
The old plan had given the workers a pension equal to 60% of their final pay at age 50.
So a Vallejo police sergeant making $150,000 a year can now retire at age 50 and receive an annual pension of $135,000 increased each year for inflation.
To put that amount in context, you would need to amass a retirement nest egg equal to about $3.5 million to produce a similar retirement income on your own.
It wasn't just the police and firefighters who benefited from the city's largest.
The annual pensions for rank and file city employees were jacked up from 60% of final pay at age 55 to a whopping 80% of pay increased each year for inflation.
The scary part is that what's going on in Vallejo is not unique.
Now why you might be saying, why'd city do this?
Well, get re-elected.
City Council and all this to get reelected.
Promise all these public employees, yeah, you can retire at 50%, get 90% of what you made for the rest of your life with inflation increases factored in every year.
Then all of a sudden a housing bubble and debt crisis and property taxes down, and they can't pay it.
So they just said to the city employees.
File bankruptcy.
So in normal cases, if this were a corporation, the federal government has an agency that takes it over, but the people who are promised what they get never get the full amount of it.
Now, two things wrong with this.
A, the city made the deal with these people, and these people deserve and they should get what they were promised.
Damn right.
City made the deal.
Firefighters, the unions all agreed to it.
They should get it.
They damn well are a deal's a deal.
But they're not going to get it.
And these people running Vallejo are no different than the 535 dolts running the U.S. Senate and a House of Representatives.
The difference is they can go print money when the City Council of Vallejo can't.
All they got to do is call Ben Bernanke, say hey, need a couple zill here for this or that, and bam, it just somehow shows up in the money supply.
And then it'll Be covered with an interest rate cut and everybody's supposedly happy.
Meanwhile, we got inflation because there's more money in the money supply.
Supply and demand, don't you know?
But the real culprit here is not what these people were making when they were working.
The culprit is retiring at age 50, and with a life expectancy being 76, 77 years old, paying these people when they're not working for 26 years.
In addition to their social security or what have you.
This is what got the auto companies in big trouble.
You just can't pay people that kind of money who are not productive.
Nothing against the people for not being productive.
It's just it's just lousy business.
It's just bad business.
Hello, Social Security.
It's in the same circumstance.
Social Security is for all intents and purposes bankrupt.
It just gets covered up and they're not going to deal with it.
My point here, these are the very people making deals with people that they break, but filing for bankruptcy.
It's going to happen in other cities.
These are the people that want to turn turn over much of your life to themselves, running your life, running your health care, running your this, running your that.
And they can't even run their own party.
They can't even run their own primaries, right?
They can't even run their own governments.
Can't run their own restaurants in the Senate.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
From the UK independent.
The headline.
Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over.
Report admits.
A quarter of a century after the outbreak of AIDS, the World Health Organization has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.
May I give you people a little hint?
There never was one.
It was made up.
There was.
I know, certainly you think I'm going to get in trouble.
There never was a global heterosexual AIDS pandemic.
It was a threat.
It was a myth.
In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major AIDS organizations may have been misdirected.
And I'm not making this name up.
Kevin Decock, the head of the World Health Organization's Department of HIV AIDS, said that there will be no generalized epidemic of AIDS in the heterosexual population outside Africa.
Dr. Decock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against AIDS, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed.
Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognized that outside sub-Saharan Africa.
It was confined to high-risk groups, including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users and sex workers and their clients.
Sex workers?
Is that like prostitutes?
Is that what they mean?
Or people who work in sex clinics.
I think they mean prostitutes.
Um this little liberal organization here led by Dr. Decock is saying it after 25 years.
It's now recognized that outside sub-Saharan Africa.
AIDS was confined to high-risk groups, including men who have sex with men, not women who have sex with women.
Well, it doesn't say that.
This is men who have sex with men injecting drug users and prostitutes and their clients.
Dr. DeCock said it is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual.
If I if I if my name was Decock and I ran this organization, I'd change it.
I would, I would lose I would change my name.
It is very unlikely that there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.
Ten years ago, a lot of people were saying there would be a generalized epidemic in Asia.
China was the big worry with its huge population.
It doesn't look lightly likely, but we have to be careful.
As an epidemiologist, it's better to describe what we can measure.
There could be small outbreaks in some areas.
Despite this, AIDS still kills more adults than all wars and conflicts combined.
Even the Iraq War, yes, it's hard to believe, ladies and gentlemen, but AIDS kills more people worldwide than the Iraq war.
I'm I'm not making it up.
This is what Dr. DeCock says of the uh World Health Organism.
There's a little story here in um I guess this is Madison, Wisconsin Madison.com.
It's by somebody named Michael James Moore.
Why do men hate the movie Sex in the City?
Dawn, have you have you been to see Sex in the City?
Never watched the show.
She had no intention of going to see the movie.
Well, it it did gangbusters out there in its opening weekend.
I don't know if Dr. DeCock was in the audience, but it is something $55 million, and chick flicks do not do that well.
You know, most people do not go see chick flick movies.
The chicks do.
But this this ex this this attracted all kinds of chicks.
This story.
Why do men hate Six in the City?
Sex in the City.
They don't hate sex in the city.
They hate sex and the city.
The reason that these men don't go to it is is theorized here.
Would you like to hear some of the theories from Michael James Moore?
Media coverage is trying to assess how and why Carrie and Company, the babes in the movie, induce such massive female bonding.
And then there's the other question: why are men turned off?
Vast swathes of the male population will not under any circumstances go see this movie.
The theory is that it's the friendships that run so deep.
That's what the men are envious about.
Men don't want to go see sex in the city because they are envious of the deep bonded relationships that these four women have.
That's what it says here.
Individually, each was merely interesting, together they are wizards, describing the four women.
But that's a guy thing in a nutshell.
Individual heroes as opposed to being part of a group of kindred spirits, Superman, Rocky, Rambo, Zorro, the majority of heroes in Westerns, war films, almost always their solitary.
Men do not bond, goes on to say in this story that the only time men get together as friends is when they're either boozing it or playing golf or basketball or some such thing.
And that they just are envious of the deep bonded friendships in sex in the city.
Do you want to know, Mr. Michael James Moore, why men don't go see this movie?
I will be glad to tell you.
The reason men don't go see this movie is a these kinds of women make them sick.
The kinds of women that are always shopping for the latest high heels that sit around in bars drinking drinks, bitching about men all the time.
People that are constantly involved in relationship analysis will drive men to the golf course to the bar.
Wherever they want to go faster than anything.
The last thing a guy wants to hear about is relationship analysis.
Ain't gonna happen.
And there's another reason, Mr. Michael James Moore, why men are not going to go watch sex in the city.
The women in this movie are not hot.
I hate to be so blatantly honest here.
The only way to get a man to see a chick flick is if Cameron Diaz or Julia Roberts or somebody similar is in the damn movie.
Hot women.
This new movie, as well as a TV show, offers horseface, giraffe neck, skank well past her time, and that brunette who's not bad looking, but certainly not enough to make up for all the rest.
So any man considering doing his duty by accompanying a date to this movie knows beforehand that he will have nothing to distract him from the interminable relationship analysis that comprises the chick flick.
You might watch Cameron Diaz or Julia Roberts or take your pick.
I mean, uh there's lots of actresses out there talking about relationships, because you can ignore what they're saying while you look at them, but that doesn't work in this movie, Mr. Michael James Moore.
Please pass this on to the friends at Media Matters for America and the uh Obama campaign.
And by the way, pass it on to the McCain campaign.
They'll be very upset with me since they're trying to woo Hillary voters back after this.
Back to sex in the city for just a second.
There's a um method here to my madness in naming the four women, as I did mere moments ago in describing why men are not going to go see the movie or have no interest in it.
I get the usual emails, right?
How dare you refer to them?
It's so unnecessary.
Why do you?
Okay, you're right.
It was unnecessary, except to make this point.
You want to know why women are really going to see this movie?
It's precisely because of undeniable truth of life, number 24, which states feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream.
There are it's just it is the guys who want to see Cameron Diaz, Julia Roberts, and the rest of these clowns discussing relationships.
But women want to see horseface, over-the-hill sex kitten, uh Grand Canyon neck, you know, whatever that because they can relate to them.
This Decock guy, you know this uh this this guy from the World Health Organization, this Dakock guy what you still in shock, and I'm still talking about this, Don.
Mm-hmm.
Uh uh Dawn is telling me that I'm out of touch if I think that Kim Catrala, 51-year-old is uh uh no lon a s a sex kitten or whatever.
And she says you need to look at other 51-year-olds.
No, I don't.
That's not that see, that's the point.
Want to look at 31-year-olds?
You have to suspend what did Hillary say?
You ha whose disbelief to accept the fact that what's going on with that munch is actually happening to them in real life.
In their dreams.
Doc, what's his name?
Kevin Decock, Dr. Kevin DeCock of the World Health Organization, who has proclaimed that uh AIDS is it's strictly it it other than the sub-Saharan Africa, it's it's the threat of it becoming a heterosexual disease is over.
You know what so many people on the left are going to be talking about this guy.
Oh, Decock, what a bonehead this guy is.
This guy's on our side.
What I want to know is does Kevin DeCock know George Lackoff?
Rhymes with.
But let me get serious about this for just a second.
Billions billions of dollars later.
We are now told that heterosexual aids wasn't at all what it was supposed to be.
And who's gonna pay for the price for this?
Any of the advocates of this position, any of the libs, any of the leftists who went out there?
Remember all the condom instructions in your school?
Remember all the teaching your second and third grader how to do a condom on a cucumber?
Remember all the free condom giveaways back then, all of that to try to protect Who's gonna pay for this?
Just another oops moment for the libs.
Another Gilda Radner moment?
Never mind.
Just like with the Soviets.
When they resisted Reagan's efforts to destroy them.
Another oops moment, like when they pulled funding from Southeast Asia and millions were murdered.
They said you can't beat the Soviets.
Reagan says we can.
Did it's like global warming after they destroy our economy.
Are we gonna hear the left say, oh, by the way, 25 years later?
Guess what's not warming?
It's cooling.
Back to the phones.
We've had one phone call in this show.
Let me grab uh Ruth and Hemett, California.
Great to have you here.
Thank you, Rush.
Thank you for your continuing education.
I'm I'm calling regarding the bonfires on the beaches.
Yes.
The government has already restricted many uh uses of camps campsites in the mountains.
Now they're working on the beaches.
And by extension, I think that so many people uh celebrate the Fourth of July with bonfires, and uh they're on the beaches, many of them.
I think that that's part of the whole conspiracy.
And I'm very slow to believe in conspiracies.
Uh you think it's actually related to July 4th celebration, celebrating America that they want to stop these bonfires because eventually that's what it will lead to, because the people go to the beaches to celebrate holidays, especially Fourth of July, which is so important.
Okay, here's here's here's here's my point.
I no longer care about their motivations.
Uh motivations are interesting and it's fascinating to speculate, and it may be even at some time speculation uh on motivation could be instructive and educational.
But just like I don't care why Al Qaeda hates us.
I don't care why people that want to wipe us out hate us.
I don't care I don't want to sit down and talk to them and find out.
I want to eliminate the threat.
That means get rid of them.
That means make sure Obama gets nowhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
By the same token, I don't care why the Seattle Council or whoever it is is gonna ban bonfires.
I don't care what their motivation is.
I already know what it is.
It's simply the denial of individual liberty based against a concept that we're destroying the planet, blah blah blah.
I don't care.
All I care about is stopping this.
All I care about is getting these people defeated and restoring and maintaining individual liberty.
Pure and simple.
I don't care why they're doing with it.
I know why they're doing it.
They are leftists.
They don't like this country.
That's why they want to take it over and run it and turn it into something they do like.
Olivia in Dallas.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, thanks for taking my call.
Yes.
I only started listening to you uh this year around March.
Wow.
Yeah.
Are you up to speed?
It normally takes, you know, six weeks to get the context of this program.
Yeah, but um I remember you talking to one of the callers and you were talking about how you're afraid that Democrats are gonna some Democrats are gonna swamp the Republican Party and not really stay true to the party, but I really think that there's some undiscovered conservatives in the Democratic Party, and I believe that I'm actually one of them.
So Well, can you then tell me what conservative in the Republican Party is appealing to you to get you to join us?
Right.
Well, I think it's um I think it really is Obama, oddly enough.
I think he's really brought out all the things that I thought conservatives had been talking about that I thought were maybe wrong.
And I think that they're actually right.
Like um Wait, I want to make sure I heard you right.
You say you are a conservative Democrat.
No, actually I I realize that I'm just a conservative, not a Democrat, not a Republican.
I'm just are you a registered Democrat.
I'm a registered Democrat.
Okay, and it's Obama that's drawing you or I think yeah, I mean it's other things like a personal experience in life and blah blah blah.
But I think Obama has made it like crystal clear.
I understand that I have nothing in common with the liberal agenda and part of the Democratic Party.
The problem is there's nobody on the Republican side saying, Come on in as a conservative.
They'd love you to come over as a Democrat.
What would be optimum here is if we had somebody on our side other than me, I'm talking about an elected official who appealed to people like you and said, My home is the Republican Party.
So what this election's gonna turn on, she's exactly right.
You're exactly right on the money, Olivia.
This election is gonna turn on people voting for Obama or against him.
Right.
But I'm I'm totally ready to work.
I live in uh Texas, but I'm totally ready to work for um on the local politics.
Yeah.
You know, getting in like congressmen and other people that can start changing the agenda, because I'm just I'm really tired of this crap.
I started l I've started reading Barry Goldwater.
I've started, you know, watching Fox News and reading Weekly Standard and listening to your show, so I just wanted to make that point.
I'm sure that's what happened first, by the way.
Listening to my show, I mean.
Oh, yeah, listening to your show was definitely the first thing.
And I had I had heard of you like a long time ago, even though uh everyone had been telling me how horrible and awful and evil you were, but I thought the feminazi thing was honestly one of the most hilarious things I've ever heard in my life.
So I've been secretly a fan for a longer time than you would think, so.
Well, I appreciate Olivia, nice to have you here.
Welcome home.
Thanks.
All right.
Interesting.
There it it I hate to say it, but it it really is going to come down to Obama being elected or not elected.
Uh uh it's incidental on the uh on the other side.
I got a good friend coming to visit me tomorrow night, Professor Hazlet.
I've talked to you about Professor Hazel on this program before.
Professor Hazlet I met when I was in Sacramento.
He was an agriculture economist and uh instructor, a teacher professor out at UC Davis.
We uh struck up a good friendship.
He has solved many economic dilemmas for me that I have since passed on with you.
And uh uh Professor Hazlet is now totally devoted to the broadcast spectrum, meaning frequencies, those that are used and unused, and how best to get them into the free market and so forth.
And he wanted he wanted to come and show me some of his ideas that he had tomorrow night, and I said, sure, come on down.
He said, could we have Allen brothers?
I said, Sure, Professor, we've always I've always got Allen brothers.
What do you want?
He said, I don't know.
I either want a fillet or a strip.
So we're gonna have Allen Brothers tomorrow night with some uh macaroni and cheese with bacon and onions.
It is just superb.
Father's Day's coming up Sunday.
You still have time to get a sample, rush pack, rush pack two from Allen Brothers for your dad, something he can really sink his teeth into, something not a card, not a tie, something that he will genuinely appreciate.
Dads around the country asking for Allen Brothers, and of course their family is saying, Really?
Really?
One day a year, Dad gets to ask what he wants for, just let him just let him have it.
It's worth it.
The biggest challenge of having Allen Brothers is you're gonna want it again and again and again because you can't get Allen Brothers beef at the grocery store, and you ought to try some of their other dishes, uh, some of their other desserts.
AB stakes.com is the website.
I dare you to go there.
Look at the rush packs, but look at the food.
Look at the various cuts of beef, look at the various other items that they have, including the desserts.
You can also call them 800-260-0111, or go to ABstakes.com.
Two and a half percent of U.S. Prime is all there is.
Two and a half percent of all beef is U.S. prime.
Allen Brothers gets it.
They are the only ones that sell it to the public, everybody else and Allen Brothers sells it to restaurants.
ABstakes.com.
Back after this.
Always trying to help out here at the EIB network, always trying to come up with solutions.
I think I've come up with one for those of you in Seattle all concerned about your upcoming bonfire ban.
There's a way around this.
Just use the American flag to get the fire going.
Just get a whole bunch of American flags and do your bonfire with American flags instead of wood.
And thereby you can call it free speech.
And voila, you have your banfire.
Just burn the American flag.
Everybody from the Supreme Court on down said you can do that.
And nobody has said that burning the American flag causes global warming, like they say burning wood does.
I'd do stuff like that.
I'd I'd grab I'd grab the whatever flag of the local community is that's making this rule, I'd get a bunch of their flags made and I'd burn them.
Right along with the American flag, and call it free speech.
And I'd do it on the fourth of July.
Here's Bob in Lady Lake, Florida.
Nice to have you on the EIB network, Bob.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush.
Uh, with Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley Jr.'s passing, you are now my top conservative hero.
Well, thank you, sir.
Very much.
Um, I had a question about Hillary's speech.
Um, one of the many things that made my jaw drop during the speech.
Uh, she said, uh, no one thought a woman could be commander in chief, and I proved one could.
No one thought a black man could be president, and Barack Ob Obama proved one could.
Now, my question is doesn't one ask to actually obtain the office first in the general election and then succeed in it to prove they can be commanded.
Yes, that's a good point as an excellent observation.
Neither of them have accomplished diddly squat.
And Mrs. Clinton was sitting there claiming that they've already proven they could do both those jobs.
One could be black enough to get elected, and one could be female enough to be commander in chief.
And also mentioned maybe sixteen times uh that eighteen million uh people voted for her, but isn't the population of this country three hundred million and maybe two hundred million plus uh eligible voters, and eighteen out of two hundred million just doesn't quite cut the mustard.
No, no, because she was she was comparing herself to the number of votes Obama got and in the uh in in the in the popular vote they were very close.
So no, she was trying to keep her advisors riled up.
She was trying to keep her supporters involved and engaged, and she was a little uh you know, despite the drive-bys and their uh infatuation with her getting out and endorsing Obama, they missed what she was actually doing, and that's keeping her supporters alive.
And she's actually, even though tonally she didn't do it, she was whining a little bit.
She couldn't look I got eighteen million votes in it making me quit.
And and but and then she was going every time she mentioned Obama's name, he gets booed.
So she mentioned his name fifteen times.
Yeah, uh the uh uh it just uh it just seemed to me the the whole speech was uh I was afraid she was gonna uh rip uh a hole in her arm pit uh uh patting herself on her back during the speech.
Well, it was her last speech.
I mean you gotta expect some of that.
And the Obama camp says it, yeah, let her let her do her last speech and I don't care about that.
I I'm I'm uh more interested in the phony you can be whoever you want to be, never give up.
Tell the rest of country that.
Instead of treating them like a bunch of has been incompetence.
Uh anyway, Bob appreciates phone call.
I got I gotta move on here to get some of these people been waiting a while to Irvine, this is Robin.
Great to have you here.
Yes, hi, Rush.
Big ditto to you.
Thank you.
Yes, I live in Southern California, and regarding the drought situation, I was doing my part to conserve water and so forth, but then last week when I heard on the local news that it was due to a fish that I wasn't getting my water.
No, it was due to a federal judge who's who determined that the fish was more important than you.
Right, and that's how I felt, and I was so angered that I decided, okay, I'm not going to conserve anymore.
I'm just gonna use water to my heart's content.
And just, you know, they can't tell me I can't have water, so I've been using it.
Yeah, all they can do is try to make you feel guilty and responsible for the drought.
But the drought, the drought, the drought's not due to lack of rain.
The drought's due to that federal judge who shut off for six months a year the flow of water from the Sacramento Delta on down to you people because of that fish in the pump.
The smelt.
A smelt, a smelt.
Of all the fish, a smelt, at least get a fish with a decent sounding name.
Exactly.
Well I don't know who appointed the judge.
I didn't bother looking it up, but Well, you see, that's the problem too.
We don't really have information about our judges when we go to vote.
We have information about all these candidates, you know, for senator or you can't get rid of the judges.
Yeah.
But you know who they are.
You pass Prop 187, they tell you no, that's unconstitutional.
You know that most of the judges you have in California, particularly in the Ninth Circus, are uh are going to be leftist judges appointed by Democrat presidents.
Anyway, Robin, thanks for the call.
I'm out of time.
I've got to speed out of here.
We'll be back to close it up.
Just a second.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence is in the can on the way to the warehouse housing artifacts for the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.
▲
Export Selection