All Episodes
Previous Next
July 18, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:13
July 18, 2008, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
You know, thank you, Johnny.
First of all, and I never really thought about it that way.
What is the difference between me and the Republican revolution of 1994?
Um I'm still in progress.
Hi, Mark Davis.
Thank you so much, and thank you, Rush, and thank you everybody involved in the EIB network for letting me hang out on a Friday with you.
We might examine that as one of our themes today.
That's a theme you could pretty well do on any day's limbaugh show, whether Rush is in the chair or I am or anybody is, and didn't Jed Babin do a wonderful job yesterday, thoroughly enjoyed listening to him.
Um that's the notion that that Republicanism seems to change with the wind, but conservatism never does.
When Gingrich rolled in in 1994, I mean with that contract with America and the doctrines of responsibility and smaller government, more responsive government and personal responsibility does all of those things.
Where did it all go?
Well, that's a grand theme we might examine today.
Let's take a look at matters large and small, matters that I care about, and some that you care about.
Why?
Well, because Rush is still out.
He was at Tony Snow's funeral yesterday.
He'll be back on Monday, and and uh I I'd got five or six opportunities, maybe more like ten over twenty years to hang out around Tony Snow.
And a little later on I'll I'll share a word or two about him because like Russert before him, uh we need we need voices like that, not just in the media, voices of fairness and toughness and equal opportunity tormentors.
And in Tony's case, I mean Russert was no conservative hero, and Tony was, but uh Tony brought the same fairness and bright outlook and love of family and country, and doggone it, I I'm I'm tired of losing guys like that.
I I just am.
It's been uh been a tough couple of months.
But I'll have a word or two about that uh a little later on.
But anyway, my point being that no matter who's sitting in this chair, Friday is open line Friday, so you know that's the case.
So bring it on 1-800-282-2882-1-800-282-2882.
Again, I'm Mark Davis down here in uh George W. Bush's own state of Texas.
But y here in the Metroplex, there's a story I'll share with you later today.
SMU, Southern Methodist University, a proud and wonderful university filled with people who generally actually like the president, from the student body to the administration.
But you know who some of the people are in the SMU community who don't like the president and have chosen to use a presidential library and think tank in his name as a political football.
They have chosen to channel their political bigotry, not just you know, through the university, but through their faith.
The M in SMU stands for Methodist, and there are people who are using the absurd and I would argue blasphemous argument that Methodist teaching is antithetical to the Bush presidency, that laissez-faire capitalism or or the way we've uh gone about the war are somehow hostile to Methodist teaching.
What?
Oh, trust me.
Trust me, you'll enjoy it.
And all of that lies ahead.
But first up today, let's take a look at some of the broad sweeping things that have occupied this week in the news.
And then we're gonna hop on the phones with you uh just a little bit down the road here this uh this hour.
And it's one-eight hundred-282-2882, which you know well.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Davis in for rush.
Now, oil, energy prices, right?
These are all things that we want to get better.
When we all gather around our dinner tables and water coolers, boy, those oil prices.
Ugh.
Our man at that war.
Gosh, I wish that was going better.
Or any, you know, the economy.
Boy, it's in the toilet.
Wish that was going better.
I offer you here at the close of this week in mid-July, the possibility that all of it is getting better.
All of it.
Those of you who've been paying attention know full well that the war is getting better.
And it has been ever since David Petraeus put together the surge, ever since President Bush and John McCain, yes, John McCain, helped um hatch the surge in their in their minds, and then uh actually bring it through legislation to the battlefields of Iraq and through executive will and commander-in-chief um determination, the war has been going much, much, much, much better for months.
So for those in a mood to complain, they've had plenty.
Skyrocketing oil prices and the attendant increase in gas prices, and of course the entire economy seems to be in somewhere between a doldrum and a tailspin, depending upon your perspective.
Well, have we noticed this week that oil prices have dropped?
Have we noticed this week?
And maybe let's call it this month or the last couple of months, that what has brought oil prices down is not some goofy windfall profits tax, not some lame finger wagging by Democrats in Congress teaching those evil oil company executives a lesson.
No, what has brought oil prices down are the same things that sent them to the stratosphere in the first place.
Market forces.
Those words are just kryptonite to to Democrats who seek to punish the oil industry just as they embark on a task to bring us more of the oil we need.
Market forces, why we can't exert government control over that, by definition, government uh shouldn't have control over and doesn't have control over market forces.
Market forces are market forces.
If government sticks its nose in, it's no longer a market force.
It's a government intrusion.
So that, of course, is just garlic to the vampires in the Democratic caucus of the House and the Senate, though they're scared to death of the market.
I'm not to start this whole thing up again unless you want to.
It is open line Friday, but that's why the fairness doctrine uh is is such a stake through their heart, because it's real people making real decisions about what they want to listen to.
Oh, all the humanity.
And that just gives them the the shakes and the willies and conniption fits.
So real people making real choices.
Danger Will Robinson.
This does not work in the Democrat world.
As conservatives, we are supposed to embrace these things.
Well, and that starts with understanding these things.
Market forces led to a huge increase in the price of oil because in America, we were using a gazillion barrels every minute, it seemed.
India and China are growing like absolutely never before, and a speculation market existed that made investors fairly confident that nothing was really going to change.
This past week, the president holds a news conference, and in there makes frequent mention of his desire to, as the saying goes, drill here, drill now, pay less.
And suddenly oil drops six, nine, ten bucks a barrel.
Coincidence?
I think not.
And there is also one other thing, because it's not all speculation.
I mean, it's hard to know exactly how much the speculation market has to do with this.
And oh, by the way, there's Harry Reed with a plan in Congress to shut down the freedoms of the speculation market.
Now look, I'm not feeling real warm and fuzzy about the speculation market right now myself.
That's why, you know, it's costing me, you know, $4.25, probably instead of $375 to fill up my car, and I and that's and I hate that.
But you know what?
Being freedom means, here's one of my favorite things.
Somebody probably said it, but I say it a hundred times a day.
Freedom means people will sometimes do things you and I don't like.
Freedom means they may sometimes write something that you and I don't like.
There may be a TV show that you and I don't like, there may be some political speech that you and I don't like, there may be a movie that you and I don't like.
Have we seen Batman yet?
We will have a segment on that today.
Freedom and liberty means that sometimes people will do stuff that you and I don't like.
Our job is to be big boys and big girls, live with it, ignore it, criticize it, whatever, but you don't try to shut it down.
So the speculation market is probably not a real popular, warm fuzzy thing right now.
But the the last thing you do is tell people how they can invest.
And to the surprise of no one, that is exactly what Harry Reed is doing.
But the way to bring the speculation market, the way to rein in the speculation market is create a landscape, quite literally, create a landscape in Anwar, the outer continental shelf, a seascape in some cases, if you will, Create a metaphoric landscape in which the speculators no longer think that things are going to continue in the status quo for years to come.
Speculators notice things.
It's their job to notice things.
And I you could just feel them clench this past week.
Uh-oh, President Bush talking about uh drill here, drill now.
Uh-uh.
And the other thing that they've noticed, and this is the grandest market force of all, we're using less gas.
Simple sentence, right?
And then that's it.
We're using less gas.
We're buying Prius and biking to work and taking public transportation in cities that have it.
People are lunging toward these options because their cars have simply become too expensive to drive.
So less gas usage, less driving in the supply and demand dynamic that drives all open markets, the price is coming down.
There is no mystery here.
And and that may and as the oil price situation gets better, which I believe it will continue to do, it may take the rest of the economy with it.
The mortgage issues, the banking issues.
They can only spend so much time in the crapper.
if you'll pardon me.
It's a law of not just of economics, but of physics.
The pendulum does swing.
When things are really, really, really great forever...
Housing boom, dot com boom, it's gonna the bubble's gonna pop.
And it did.
But the good news is that conversely, after things just go right into uh, you know, the the Toy D bowl, th it's gonna come out.
Things do not stay miserable forever.
And as economic downturns go, please.
It's it's funny, I've just as proof of how totally old I am, I'm fifty, which of course makes me older than many of you, younger than others.
I was talking to some people the other day and said, Don't you remember the Carter years and how terrible things were during the Carter years?
And one of them looked at me and said, uh, Mark, I was born during the Carter years.
Okay.
Point taken.
But yeah, 30 years ago, we were in a deeper hell than any of you can even realize, right?
Now do we remember inflation of twelve percent and and and interest rates of eighteen and and and unemployment ridiculously high?
Thank you, Phil Graham.
We are a nation of whiners.
Now I know why, you know, Senator McCain couldn't exactly cozy up to that comment, had to throw Phil Graham under the bus because sadly, this may be another theme we could examine today, the truth does hurt.
Talk show guys can sit here and hit you with sentences like this, and uh and even the occasional Senator a member of Congress can.
But uh when you're running for president, you can't really do or say anything that makes big crowds of people in economically hurting very popular states like oh, Ohio, Michigan say, wait a minute, is he calling me a whiner?
When I think Senator McCain could have come out and said, Look, uh if you really are on hard times that are not your fault, and you have chunked your cell phone and and you and you have uh, you know, uh really reined in your your lifestyle, then no, of course I'm not calling you a whiner.
Everybody else, yeah, I am.
I would love that.
It won't be happening on the campaign trail.
All right, let's break and come back.
We'll talk about some things that are happening on the campaign trail, including John McCain in Missouri saying essentially that the U.S. military has succeeded.
He's ab absolutely right about that, but this will be covered as taking one step closer to declaring victory.
There's a difference between success and victory.
It is a string of successes that leads to victory.
We are on that trail.
Barack Obama can only derail us, and it's John McCain's job to make that clear.
So anyway, we'll talk about the kind of job he's doing, various other things, the upcoming uh Barack Obama round the world uh rock show, I guarantee a silk jackets are being marketed online for that, even as we speak.
And I'm very glad that you and I are speaking today.
I'm Mark Davis in for rush, back in a moment on the EIB network.
Yeah, you can't really have open line Friday without some devo.
So let's uh let's whip some topics up right here.
1-800-282-2882, whip up some phone calls.
We're gonna go to them here in just a second.
I wanted to share uh the McCain development on the uh campaign trail from Fox News, and then we're right on the phones with you.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Davis in for rush, down here in Dallas, Fort Worth, Texas.
Yes, it's a hundred degrees, and we're proud of it.
John McCain took one step closer to declaring victory in Iraq Thursday.
I don't even well.
I can't read anything without stopping down with a complete ADD festival of analysis, so excuse me.
What Senator McCain said is that the United States military has succeeded.
His quote is from Kansas City, Missouri Town Hall meeting.
I am happy to stand in front of you to tell you that this strategy has succeeded.
It has succeeded.
He then reiterated that line for reporters aboard the campaign bus.
Now the writer here, and it's Fox News, so I'm inclined to trust them.
John McCain took one step closer to declaring victory.
Victory will either come or it won't.
Number one, we've got to figure out what it is.
To me, victory in Iraq has always been definable by some period of security, stability, and self-determination.
It may be years before we can actually say we have won in Iraq.
So today's claim by Senator McCain, an accurate claim that we have succeeded, is not necessarily a step closer to declaring victory.
Everything could still get very nasty and very ugly in, you know, August, September, or October.
And in fact, I would suggest to you that they might.
Because as as as the terrorists of the world recognize that the jig is up, as Al Qaeda stands in tatters, I could absolutely see a few remaining hardcore warriors saying, let's go out in a blaze of glory.
You will see some massive explosions.
You will see uh some serious bloodshed, even as we continue to make progress against this inhuman beast of terrorism.
So it's it's not a continuum.
Things don't get better, better, better, better, better, better, just in a straight line.
It could go i it could be like, you know, four steps forward and one step back, four steps forward and one step back.
Senator McCain is absolutely right to say that we have succeeded, that the military has succeeded, the strategy has succeeded, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he or we are one step closer to declaring victory.
Those are the success and victory are two very different things.
All right.
I mentioned that there had been a big battle at SMU here in Dallas about having a George W. Bush uh presidential think tank and some just some haters, man, some political bigots in the hierarchy of the Methodist church, not rank and file Methodist, not even the student body or or or faculty at SMU.
Just troublemakers and bigots uh have have come out with this nonsense that uh that there's something about the Bush presidency that is antithetical to to being a Methodist.
In Monroe, Georgia, Joshua heard that and wanted to uh chime in in some regard.
It's a pleasure to have you on the Rush Limbaugh Show, Joshua.
Mark Davis, how are you?
And happy Friday.
Uh I'm doing fine, Mark.
How are you doing today?
Just super, thanks.
Uh well, first of all, I'd like to say that uh I'm not a Methodist, but I do have somewhat of a I guess a right uh you could say to speak on this.
I I grew up in a Pentecostal church, which is an off uh branch of the Methodist movement because of the emphasis on sanctification, John Wesley, you know, in my opinion, has always been the apostle of sanctification to the the Christian church, and probably no one within the last three hundred years up until the very last few years had more of an impact on the church than Wesley.
Um the call screener asked me if uh it was legitimate at all, basically, to think that uh Wesley or you know, at the founding of the Methodist movement would have thought that you could have a um I guess the viewpoint to believe that uh government should be impacted in a way uh or that you what the Bush administration would anything they were doing would be um you know related to to Methodist theology in general.
Right.
And my basic response was yes, because you know, Bush one of his favorite hymns is a charge to keep.
Uh that's written by Charles Wesley, John's brother.
And Wesley had a great emphasis on sanctification and the role of the Trevor Burrus.
So in what way I we got about a minute and a fraction, I need to provide a little guidance here.
In what way do you think Methodist doctrine is somehow in conflict with the policies of the Bush presidency?
I think they're in great conflict with I I didn't necessarily say they were in conflict with the Presidency, but I was what the S that's what the SMU troublemakers uh said, so uh you seem to partially agree.
So what do you mean?
No, no, no, no, I don't agree with them at all.
I think that the I think my point was the Methodist Church today is in great conflict with John Wesley, their founder.
Oh, I get you.
Oh, so so the the disconnect is not between Bush and Methodism, but Methodism and its true roots.
Right.
I would say if you're I get you.
Wesley had a great emphasis on uh getting involved politically as far as writing injustice, which I believe has done with Iraq.
And I'm saying that Bush had the correct interpretation of that, whereas the Methodist Church today is i even in their uh views against Israel.
You know, in the right.
Understand.
And I don't even really I don't even want to paste the entire thank you, Joshua.
I don't want to pace the whole method, not at all.
The whole Methodist church with us.
I believe you mean I got a pretty big Methodist audience here in Dallas, and and they're all calling me saying this is insane.
It's crazy.
It is a few bitter old cranks trying to make the Bush library and think tank look bad by inventing ways in which he is in conflict with Methodist doctrine.
It has failed.
The think tank will be built.
The good guys won.
Mark Davis in for us.
Back in a moment on the EIB Network.
A very good Friday to everyone.
1-800-282-2882.
Let's grab some more phone calls because doggone it, that's what open line Friday is all about.
As we head your way, I will share the Diana Henrique story out of the New York Times, just the opening paragraphs.
It essentially involves uh what we were just talking about with the speculation market.
That the Democrat response, the liberal response to any societal ill is, well, let's have government crank uh clamp down on it.
Financial industry executives are mustering on Capitol Hill to head off a congressional effort to rewrite the rules for the nation's energy markets, saying it could unsettle already nervous markets and push more energy trading abroad beyond the reach of domestic regulators.
The primary focus of Wall Street's concern is a bill entitled the Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act of 2008.
I love when the wacko left offers up bills that instantly almost lampoon themselves.
The stop excessive energy speculation act.
Well, who in the world is Harry Reid, who led the group of Democrat senators uh putting this uh this act together.
Who in the world are they to determine how much speculation is excessive?
What would the bill do?
It would substantially broaden federal regulators' authority over the vast marketplace for privately negotiated derivatives.
They're called swaps.
It would also limit the stakes that speculators and other noncommercial energy traders could take, both in private transactions and in the public futures markets, which allow oil producers and users to hedge their price risks.
The this entire marketplace, this speculation marketplace, this selling short or whatever else is happening, is a proper balance in a free market.
It doesn't mean you and I have to like it, but it's a proper balance in a free market.
And the attempt to dally around with that can only bring more instability, more uncertainty.
This is not how you bring the price of oil down.
All right, it is a multi-topic phenomenon as it always is on Open Line Friday, so let us dive in to College Station, Texas, just down the road.
Hey, Mike, Mark Davis, in for Rush Limbaugh.
It's a pleasure to have you.
How are you doing?
I'm doing fine, Mark.
It's nice to be on your show.
I a question I have a question.
Uh do you think it's possible for the GOP to garner enough support from the Democrats that are leaning towards drilling in the United States to put enough pressure on Nancy Pelosi to at least force her to bring the uh the fact to a vote on the floor.
The sh it's funny.
The answer is no, but that doesn't mean that the news is bad.
Consider your phraseology.
Is it possible for Republicans, possible for the president to place this pressure on Nancy Pelosi?
Nope.
Her Democrat colleagues will have to place that pressure on her.
How would that happen?
Democrat colleague after Democrat colleague after Democrat colleague getting her on the phone and saying, Madam Speaker, I am getting my brains bashed in at home.
I go home for town meetings, and they are saying to me, Mr. Democrat Congressman or Ms. Democrat Congressman, we're with you on so many things, but doggone it, drill here, drill now, pay less.
You know, you don't have to say the president was right.
You don't have to say anything, just do it.
We obviously need more oil.
Talk of more drilling, talk of more drilling brings the price down.
Four dollar thirty cent gas is killing us, go do what you gotta do to get more oil.
If enough of Nancy Pelosi's Democrat caucus gets with her and says, Nancy, we're we're we're dying out here.
And these rampant victories that we're supposed to experience in November may not happen.
If we're on the wrong side of this, only that will bring her around.
Okay.
Well I was wondering if the if perhaps the the dem or at least the J GOP could at least uh make that kind of announcement just as you just did, which is let's get some of the Democrats to at least step up to the plate here and uh make a statement for uh the United States really absolutely the the Republicans among us just need to the the people who know how oil oil and energy markets work just keep saying the right things, doing the right things.
We'll just have to sort of wait for this to spread across enough of America.
And what's the latest polls?
What, 70-some percent of America wants to actually do more American energy production, actually wants to drill for more American oil?
It can be a slow process.
But when something takes on a certain amount of urgency, and there's nothing like spending $100 to fill up your car to give something a certain level of urgency, when constituents start calling Democrats in districts,
from C to shining C then those Democrats will internally look at the mirror look at the speaker and say you are killing us with this this f this fetish for uh for for uh stopping American oil production.
1-800-282-2882 thank you sir one eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two let's drop down and head out oh truly God's country man in Wyoming in Lander, Wyoming Michael Mark Davis in for Rush Limbaugh it's a pleasure to have you how you doing sir.
I'm doing good Mark I thank you guys for all that you're doing I wanted to comment on the interview that sixty minutes did with the SBI agent that was assigned to Saddam I think about a year before he was executed.
Yeah I saw it and and it should be rebroadcast every hour on the hour.
Go ahead and tell everybody what was in there I'll let you do that and then we'll take it and run with it.
He won the confidence of Saddam it was brilliant the strategy he said that he was sent as a special envoy from President Bush to Saddam Saddam was obsessed constantly with time what time it was he was the only one allowed to wear a watch all the army people around him treated him as if he was totally in charge.
He flew Saddam over Baghdad for medical reasons and took the blindfold off, let him see that Iraq was still functioning, the lights were all on, which made Saddam, of course, very angry.
He showed him videos of his statue being knocked down.
He listened to Saddam's poetry, talked about his sons.
And, of course, the question he really wanted to ask was about weapons of mastery.
destruction which he finally had the opportunity to ask.
Saddam's comment was that they did have them and that he ordered them destroyed uh Saddam's advisors said that there's no way we can win a war against the United States and Saddam's comment was give me two weeks and then the insurgency none of this was covered on the press as far as I know.
No.
I mean just as recently as a couple of weeks ago there was a story about some just some random nuclear material that uh we found and uh just sort of tied the lice uh loose ribbon around that and disposed of it properly.
Uh Michael thanks for bringing this up and surely a lot of this has been YouTube.
It was a sixty minutes interview with the FBI agent who spent a whole lot of quality time with Saddam thank you for the for the call and we will probably be hearing the term weapons of mass destruction until we all die and I mean in the specific context of why that term WMDs as we now know them by the happy abbreviation why they were so much of the motivation for the war that we are now in how they became such an obstacle,
an embarrassment for those of us who support that war.
History needs to observe I believe the following there was an objective reason To expect Saddam's regime to have a whole lot of weapons of mass destruction.
President Bush believed it.
Republicans believed it.
Democrats believed it.
John Kerry believed it.
Bill Clinton believed it.
The French believed it.
Everybody had an expectation based on the prevailing intelligence of the time that Saddam Hussein was running a WMD festival over there in Iraq at roughly the time of 9-11.
Time means everything.
It was a year and a half from 9-11 to the beginning of shock and awe.
A year and a half.
Give me some flatbed trucks and some storage units, I'll eat some sand, I will get rid of the WMDs in 18 stinking months.
So when a year and a half later, the war begins, and there are lots of eyes and ears, soldiers' eyes and ears, reporters' eyes and ears, and everybody was just gunning for a reason to undercut this war.
And I intend that metaphor completely.
Gunning for a reason to shoot holes in a war effort that was despised by the dominant media culture and by Democrats.
So when there was not mountain after mountain after mountain of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, everybody thought that they were entitled to some massive.
I told you so, when in fact they were not.
What we were all entitled to was some explanation as to where they went.
An explanation that has slowly unfolded in the more than half a decade since 9-11 and since the war began.
He absolutely had them.
How much?
We'll never know.
How much did he hide?
How much did he bury?
How much did he destroy?
How much did he spirit over the willing borders to Iran and to Syria?
We will never fully know.
But we know this.
We know this.
You ready?
Roll tape, write this down, whatever.
It's some simple math.
You and I do not know how much of a weapons of mass destruction threat Saddam was when we went to war against him.
We don't know.
The percentage of possibility that he was going to attack Israel, attack America, attack his neighbors, attack the Kurds, just do some kind of WMD attack.
The chances of that might have been two in ten, might have been six in ten, might have been nine in ten, might have been one in ten.
I don't know.
You don't know.
No one does.
But I know what those chances are now.
Because he's dead.
And there's a new sheriff in town in Iraq.
That chance right now is zero in ten.
So whether Saddam's WMD threat was one in ten or ten in ten, it is mathematically less now because we toppled him.
It is zero in ten.
The region, America, and the world are mathematically safer than they were when he was in power.
That we know, and that's what history should record about the WMD controversy.
Mark Davis in for Rush, more of your calls next on the EIB network.
It is a Friday, and that is to say, an open line Friday on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Rush is back with you on Monday.
I'm Mark Davis from WBAP in Dallas Fort Worth, enjoying a midsummer day of talking to you.
Many, many topics, lots of places to go, so let's dive back in.
Again, the number 1800-282-2882.
Let us go to Pueblo, Colorado.
And Justin, that is you, Mark Davis in for Rush.
How are you doing?
How are you doing?
I just wanted to say first off that the last comment you made at the last stop before the last break was absolutely 100% true.
I did both Afghanistan and Iraq and they were there, and I was proud to serve.
Bless your heart.
Thank you so much.
And well, my question is I just heard on the news on my way to work that San Francisco now is trying to pass a bill that would name a treatment plant, sewage treatment plant after George W. Bush.
With the context in the bill, it says that with the context meaning that that's what his presidency was worth.
Of course, in San Francisco.
Exactly.
And to me, I don't under I mean I understand, but I don't think it's fair and right that liberals can get away with doing that, but if a conservative tried to name like a pornographic shop after Quentin.
That would be the original sin.
I just don't get it.
And conservatives, well, Republicans, I should say, and take it.
And it's a good thing.
Well, here but here's the thing.
Let me let me give you let me put some spring in your step.
I I hope, I hope this will work.
First of all, Republicans, conservatives, we've got more important fish to fry than trying to find a red light district to name after Bill Clinton.
So that probably would not happen.
You're completely right that if some uh some small burg somewhere were wacky enough to do it, they'd be identified as as haters and idiots and extremists.
And in San Francisco, it's just it's hilarious.
It's funny.
It's a wink and a nudge and ha ha ha ha.
I want you to reach out and embrace this story.
For those that don't don't know exactly what it is.
Uh uh in November.
San Francisco voters will be asked to decide whether to name what is now the oceanside water pollution control plant.
They don't it it's it's they're even going to change what it is.
They're gonna call it the George W. Bush sewage plant.
It was a satiric measure, but it caught fire.
They got more than twelve thousand signatures.
Some organizer named Brian McConnell is very full of himself.
Well, he's full of something, and just and they're just thrilled and they're laughing all the live long day.
Now, here's why you reach out and you embrace it.
Because this does exactly what I think you and I want to be done, and that is for the Bush haters and political bigots and and wacko left to do something that is so stupid and so mean and so ugly, and will be viewed as such by most people.
So bring it on.
Let them do it.
Laugh all day.
It just identifies, and I hate to besmirch an entire city, which is filled with some very good people and even a couple of conservatives, and a beautiful city, but San Francisco is a hellhole of political lunacy, and all this does is prove it.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
So be happy.
Be happy.
Well, you're you're very kind.
And Rush is back on Monday.
And I I just take every single one of these things like this, every single little episode.
I mean, somebody is right to bring up the double standard and say, man, if a conservative tried to do that, blah, blah, blah.
Well, I'd like to think the conservatives aren't stupid enough to go looking for for you know tawdry things to name after Bill Clinton.
Or uh, you know, I I or an Al-Qaeda cell to name after Jimmy Carter, or whatever you might want to do.
We've got we're tr we're trying to run the country here.
We're trying to govern here.
We're trying to have good ideas here.
And if if San Francisco's political community has enough free time on its hands to uh to do something that they think is hilarious, but which is really is just moronic, and they get in the news for doing it, put it on the front page of every newspaper in America if it succeeds.
And they can laugh themselves silly, and the country can look at them and just shake their heads and go, Good lord, what's with those people?
Mark Davis in for Rush.
Let's take the break, come back.
We'll actually have room for a call or two before the top of the hour.
That'll be different.
Love you.
Be right back.
Little pre-Saturday night fever bee gees.
Very nice.
All right, let's see here.
Okay, executive decision making.
Um rather than give somebody short shrift, let's just uh let's let's wrap things up here, head into the top of the hour news that your local stations will provide, and then we'll dive right back in for hour number two of the Rush Limbaugh show.
I'm Mark Davis and Dallas Fort Worth, Texas, WBAP Proud Affiliate filling in when we come back.
There's a gentleman who's gonna mention something about what uh former CIA director George Tennett had to say about WMDs.
Uh there is a gentleman who is gonna talk who was a former Methodist minister who got in trouble for having Republican values.
Hello.
Uh and somebody's gonna bring up something that I was about to anyway, which every talk show in America should be talking about, and that is the insanity of Al Gore's call.
What?
Al Gore said something crazy?
Knock me over with a feather.
Ten years off of fossil fuels, ten years.
Oh, sure.
How expensive will that be?
And a number of other things all lying ahead.
It's the Mark Davis show on a Friday, filling in for Rush.
Rush is back on Monday.
Pleased to be here 1 800 282 2882.
Back with your calls in just a couple of minutes.
▲
Export Selection