All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:42
July 21, 2008, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, Snerdley, I was dead serious.
All this talk about getting out of Iraq, 16 months, 12 months, 8 months, whatever.
You just wait.
All this is just talk because it adds up to another timeline.
And a timeline is disastrous.
I don't care if Malachi wants it.
Malachi's going to do what we want to do.
I don't care whether Bush is the president, whether Obama's president, Malachi's going to do what we want him to do.
It's just that simple.
And I'm telling you, you know who's sitting over there?
I've got a story in the stack here.
Mookie's boys, the Mahdi army of Muktada al-Sadr.
They are deliriously happy to hear about all this 16 months business.
Mookie's boys are making a mistake at talking about it.
If Mookie's boys would shut up, then there might be a different chance here.
But as long as these insurgents and so forth, the Al-Qaeda guys, if they think we're going to be out of there in 16 months, folks, they're just salivating at the thought that they're going to be able to take this country back once we leave.
And I'm telling you that the Democrats are not going to let that happen on their watch.
Mark my words.
Greetings and welcome back.
It's Rush Limbois.
This is the EIB network, the one and only.
Our telephone number, if you want to join us, 800-282-2882.
The email address, lrushbo at eibnet.com.
Last Thursday in Washington, D.C., at an Alliance for Climate Protection event, the former Vice President Al Gore spoke.
We have one bite from that particular speech, and this is it.
I ask you to join with me to call on every candidate at every level to accept this challenge.
For America to be running on 100% zero carbon electricity in 10 years.
It's time for us to move beyond empty rhetoric.
We need to act now, and we need to act boldly.
Okay, we need to move beyond 100%.
We have to have running on 100% zero-carbon electricity in 10 years.
Can I ask a question?
Somebody help me out here.
Does it include coal as well?
Obviously, okay.
So we got to get not only get off oil and the derivatives, we got to get off coal, and coal is primarily how we power our electricity plants in this country.
This is ridiculous.
It is impossible.
It would wreck the economy.
It would leave us vulnerable for crying out.
It's just, it is nonsensical.
By the way, I'm going to take the occasion of these Al Gore sound bites.
There was a story in scienceandpublicpolicy.org that discusses the myth of consensus on global warming.
The American Physical Society, the APS, has 50,000 physicists as members.
Now, a unit of the American Physical Society called the Physics and Society Forum is apparently not buying into this.
Here's a quote from them.
There is considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC, the UN, and its conclusion that man-made global warming emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that's occurred since the Industrial Revolution.
A paper by Lord Moncton has everybody in a Twitter.
Lord Moncton mathematically proved in his paper that there is no climate crisis at all.
He uses 30 equations to prove that the computer models used by the UN's climate panel were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is climate sensitivity, i.e., temperature increase in response to the greenhouse gas increase.
This resulted in a 500 to 2,000% overstatement of CO2's effect on temperature in the UN's latest assessment report.
In other words, the UN models were wrong.
Our own climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer, has maintained this for many, many months.
These models were programmed to give fundamentally fraudulent information to scare people into acting.
Here are a few of the facts published by Lord Moncton, who has, by the way, challenged Al Gore to numerous debates.
Al Gore refuses.
Al Gore will not debate this with anybody.
The UN's 2007 climate summary overstated CO2's impact on temperature by 500 to 2,000%.
CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 degree Fahrenheit, 0.6 degrees centigrade, to the global mean surface temperature by 2,100.
That's infinitesimal.
None of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly.
The UN's values for these three key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500 papers.
The UN's values for each of the three variables and hence for climate sensitivity are overstated.
Global warming halted 10 years ago.
Surface temperature has been falling for seven years, which we've documented with the satellite temperature charts that we've put on the website.
Not one of the computer models relied on by the UN predicted so long and rapid a cooling.
The UN inserted a table into the scientist draft overstating the effect of ice melt by 1,000%.
It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible.
Mars, Jupiter, Neptune's largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed.
The only common factor is the sun.
In the past 70 years, the sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years, based on a number of research data of things on Earth.
Lord Moncton has proven what anybody with any common sense instinctively has known and understood for 19 to 20 years.
This is a hoax.
A pure unadulterated hoax.
This piece appeared July the 16th at dailytech.com.
The myth of consensus explodes.
And there's another piece at scienceandpublicpolicy.org featuring Lord Moncton and his work.
Now, the reason I asked about coal a moment ago, ladies and gentlemen, our very good friends at Der Spiegel, German news magazine explained earlier this month why the Persian Gulf states are switching to coal.
Did you know that they are?
This is fascinating.
The Persian Gulf states are switching to coal to power their own power plants.
Now, you might be saying, Rush, why the hell are they doing that?
Even if it's sitting there on an ocean of oil, well, With the prices of crude skyrocketing, the oil sheikhs have determined it makes more sense to sell it than to use it.
So they're turning to coal for their own energy needs to the detriment of the climate.
Demand for coal plants is growing rapidly across the globe as the price of oil skyrockets and people are using it less.
So it is ironic.
Expensive oil means more of that dirty coal is going to be used, which is ironic that the environmentalist dream of driving up the price of oil to make alternatives more attractive ends up making coal more attractive.
I love it.
I absolutely love it.
The unintended consequences of their own stupid plans.
That's right, Mr. Limbaugh.
Drive up the price of oil.
Get the price of oil so high that people don't, you know, they want to clean up the planet.
Yeah, pal, but more people using coal now.
Cheaper.
Here's Al Gore in Austin, Texas on Saturday at the Net Roots Nation Convention.
A bunch of kook fringe leftist bloggers.
Am I the only one that finds it strange that our country is so often fooled into picking a remedy for a problem that has absolutely nothing to do with the problem that is being talked about?
Proposing to get a slight increase in oil drilling for fuel to be sold to China 10 to 15 years from now as a solution to our rising gasoline prices makes about as much sense as responding to an attack from Afghanistan by invading some other country that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking us.
It's out of his mind.
He's literally out of his mind.
And the one thing nobody talks about is all the investments Al Gore has in these alternative energies and these carbon offsets that he wants everybody to be steered into.
During a Q ⁇ A at the Net Roots Nation Convention, an audience member said, Vice President Al Gore, I heard that meat causes more carbon emissions than our cars.
Is this true?
What should we do?
It is true that it would be healthier for us as individuals and healthier for the planet if we consumed less meat.
And I acknowledge that, and there's an undercurrent in the question.
You didn't state it, but I understand that part of the question is how come that hasn't been a more prominent part of this effort so far?
And I guess I will plead guilty to the idea that we can only do so much at once.
I myself am a meat eater, and maybe that has had an impact on my definition of the problem.
But I want to forthrightly acknowledge that this is a significant part of what needs to be done.
We've got to walk before we run.
And, you know, none of us are perfect.
My God.
My God, folks.
He got a question from a kook.
He took it seriously, said we all need to start working on eating meat, but that he's not, because he's addicted to it, maybe creating part of the problem.
He can only do so much at once.
So before he's going to stop eating meat, we're going to get rid of all carbon-generated electricity.
I just got some interesting numbers from our official climatologist here, Dr. Royce Spencer, University of Alabama at Huntsville.
The U.S. uses 1,000 gigawatts of electricity on a continuous basis.
That would be 1,000 one-gigawatt power plants or 502-gigawatt power plants.
You get the idea.
It takes 10 years to license and construct just one nuclear power plant.
So if we're going to get rid of all of these electricity-generated power plants, we better get moving fast on building nuclear power plants to replace them.
I mean, this is lunacy.
This is sheer lunacy, and it's not going to happen.
It can't happen.
If it does happen, we have totally lost any self-pride in our nation, and we are willing to kick ourselves back to the Stone Age.
Back in a second.
After Al Gore left his NetRoots kook convention in Austin, he showed up on meeting the press with Tom Brokaw yesterday.
Brokaw was so adoring, so, so mesmerized.
He must have forgotten.
Brokaw must have forgotten to challenge any of the flaws in Al Gore's scheme.
He must have been so mesmerized, like a Messiah II coming in.
This guy's the Democrat Party's savior next to Obama.
And this is so Brokaw just mesmerized there.
I'm sure it was just that.
I'm sure normally his journalistic tendencies would have kicked in and challenged some of the stupid premises that Al Gore was mentioning.
What we have here is, well, here, Brokaw puts words in my mouth.
With all due respect, Mr. Breshaven, I can already hear your critics, and I don't do Rush Limbaugh.
I will not attempt to.
But I can hear him saying on radio, well, there's Prince Albert.
There he was, 25 years hanging out with lobbyists, raising big money, and then he lost, and now he's above the process.
It's a trivial announcement.
I'm not saying I'm above the process.
I was in it for a long time.
And when I first was elected 32 years ago, I called for full public financing of every federal election.
I introduced legislation and proposed that.
And your guy Obama has turned it down.
He said he was poor public financing, and now he's decided to stay in the private sector.
Well, there's a new reality now with the internet-based small donor playing the dominant role.
Oh, yeah, which he invented, by the way.
Al Gore invented the internet.
John F. Kerry served in Vietnam.
And so all these small donors, it's the equivalent of a publicly financed campaign.
I know that they don't play the dominant role.
I know they don't, but still, this is the myth that they're trying to create.
But as an aside to Comrade Brokaw, I would never ask Al Gore about this.
Prince Albert, 25 years hanging out with lobbyists, raising big money, then he lost.
Now he's above the price.
I wouldn't ask that at all.
I'd ask Al Gore about the foolishness of his global warming beliefs.
I would have said, do you really think we can get rid of power plants produced by electricity, powered by electricity, in 10 years?
Do you really believe this?
Do you know what would happen to our economy if this happened?
I would ask him, why do you not debate anybody on global warming?
You know that Lord Moncton, who's just proven everything about this to be a hoax, wants to debate you.
Why won't you?
Wouldn't ask him about lobbyists.
Hell's bills.
Folks, lobbyists aren't even on my menu half the time.
That's inside Washington talk.
That's political speaking.
Lobbyists are always going to be around.
They always have been around, and nothing's ever going to change it.
They're just going to talk like they want you to think they're going to change.
It's never going to change.
Brokaw then says, well, what have you outlined, in fact, is a goal that may not be achievable.
May have less than 10 years in order to make dramatic changes, lest we lose the chance to avoid catastrophic results from the climate crisis.
We're building up CO2 so rapidly that we're seeing the consequences scientists have long predicted.
And the only way to take responsible action is to get at the heart of the problem, which is the burning of fossil fuels.
And the quickest and easiest way to back out the coal, which is the worst of the problem, and oil, is to look at electricity generation.
Now, this, folks, trying to be restrained and the modicum of decorum here, but this is lunacy.
We have less than 10 years now.
Every scientist has a different, every pro-global warming scientist has a different number.
We've got to 2050.
We've got to 2030.
Gore said, we have less than 10.
Ted Danson said in 1988, we only had 10 years to clean up the oceans or we're all going to perish.
We all know what this is, but this is a former vice president.
He says these things, and one of America's leading news anchors just waves as the words go by.
Is not inspired to challenge them to less than 10 years?
Somebody needs to tell Broca that for the last seven years, the global temperature has been declining and it was not predicted by the global warming models.
How can we have less than 10 years when the temperature hadn't gone up yet?
And finally, Brokaw says, let me ask you about your personal lifestyle.
Why was it necessary for you to have a 10,000 square foot home?
Because it's going to be more energy intensive and a smaller home for just the two of you.
I don't claim to be perfect, and all of us who care about this issue are trying to do our part, but I will say this: we buy green energy.
The issue is carbon.
The issue is carbon.
And we have essentially a carbon-free home.
We buy from wind energy and solar energy.
Our roof is covered with solar electric panels and geothermal system with all these deep wells.
This is what we cut our natural gas bill by 90%.
We're walking the walk and not just talking the talk.
There are always people who are going to try to aim at the messenger if they don't like the message.
And I don't claim to be perfect, but we are walking the walk.
But you're not.
We just had to report six months ago.
Your electricity usage has skyrocketed with all the greening of your house.
It has skyrocketed.
We use green energy.
Folks, there's no such thing.
There's no such thing as green energy.
All of this is just a consumer racket.
Little Murray head here one night in Bangkok.
And the world is your oyster.
Ladies and gentlemen, before the final Al Gore soundbite, let me alert you to what my instincts are telling me.
There is a crisis brewing in drive-by media network newsrooms as we speak.
I, ladies and gentlemen, have been tracking the progress of Tropical Storm Dolly, which is soon to become a hurricane.
It might reach a category two with 90 mile-an-hour winds before it strikes land in Texas.
Looks like it's going to start right at the Texas-Mexico border near Brownsville, Texas.
And according to current track information, that is supposed to happen sometime Thursday.
But here's the problem: you got a hurricane.
It's going to strike land.
It's going to strike America.
It's going to strike Mexico.
Get Al Gore out there saying things.
That hurricanes are worse.
This is made to order for the global warming crowd.
The crisis in the drive-by newsrooms is the anchors are all with Obama.
Who are they going to send into the eye of this storm?
I know Fox has Shep Smith.
They can send him in there.
But who?
And NBC is going to go.
Brian Williams doubles on cable and the network.
He's with Obama.
And he's not getting his interview with Obama till Wednesday.
Katie's over there.
She's not getting her interview until Thursday.
I. El Rushbo have a solution for CBS.
I can't help the others.
Charlie Gibson at ABC.
Who can they send over there?
To the eye of the hurricane.
CBS has got a mean little lawsuit going with old Dan Rather.
And they might want to offer old Dan some goodwill.
Send Dan Rather to the eye of Hurricane Dolly.
Texas is his home state, knows it well.
Send him down there.
That way Katie can do her Obama interview.
Her little hair won't get musked up or anything.
I think Katie's been to a hurricane anyway.
But this global warming and a hurricane, I mean, this made or the, well, you watch pretty soon the panic on the drive-by news networks is going to be ratcheted up because it fits the narrative and template that this hurricane would not be happening, even though it's a little squat podunk hurricane.
It wouldn't be happening without global warming.
Here is Al Gore, Tom Brokoff from Meet Tom Brokaw on NBC.
If Florida approves it, do you think they should be allowed to offshore drill?
Areas that have environmental values and economic values connected to the environment at stake should be protected.
People used to propose cures for hangovers by having what they call the hair of the dog that bits you, just more in the morning.
Well, we've got a big hangover right now because oil is so high in price.
The climate crisis is really the heart of this.
It is the most serious threat that our civilization has ever faced.
Look at the fires out in California right now.
Look at the epic flooding in the Midwest.
The entire North Polar ice cap, Tom.
Been there 3 million years.
It's the size of the lower 48 states.
And the scientists now say that there's a 75% chance it'll be completely gone during the summer in as little as five years.
Make a bet.
Somebody ought to bet these guys.
Somebody ought to bet if they're so damn sure of this, somebody ought to ask Al Gore to put up $10 million on this or bet his house that all this is going to happen.
Put your money behind it.
By the way, these fires, I saw something interesting over the weekend, the California wildfires.
Some spokesman for Schwarzenegger put out a statement.
The worst fire season, more acres, more trees, more destruction than ever.
Reuters ran with it.
And then they sent out a correction.
It might have been AP, forget which.
Sent a correction.
Another California official said, uh-uh, this is not the worst fire season that we've had.
It's not the worst fire season that we've had.
So they retracted it.
AP or Reuters, whoever it was, told their member papers not to run the story.
But anyway, somebody in Schwarzenegger's office trying to get it out just for the scare factor.
And the same thing with the floods.
It's as though none of these things have ever happened before.
Back to the phones for a couple secs here before we have to take the next profit break timeout.
This is Heather in Morristown, Tennessee.
Hi, Heather.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hi, Rush.
How are you?
Very well.
Thank you.
Well, I just love talking with you.
You are just a wonderful man, and I appreciate your radio and your words.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
My question is this: how in the world did Barack Obama get as far as he's gotten?
He's come from nowhere.
Nobody knew who he was.
It's sickening.
Well, it all started.
Actually, it's a good question.
It all started in 2004 when Obama delivered a bang-up speech at the Democrat convention, reminiscent of Mario Kumo's Democratic Convention speech in San Francisco in 1984.
And in fact, if you look at those two speeches, they mirror each other.
I mean, Obama took a lot contextually and premise-wise from Cuomo's speech.
That's what got it all started.
And then somebody in the Democrat Party decided that they didn't want the Clintons.
They decided this in back rooms, and nobody was privy to it.
But the Clintons, they've had vice grips in this party and its money for a long time and they're fed up with it.
And some people thought, we've got to come up with somebody who can beat Hillary.
And they figured they needed to find an articulate black guy because an articulate black candidate is immune to criticism.
Nobody's going to criticize the black guy because any criticism is going to be accused of being racist and racist-oriented.
It was important to get somebody who could speak well to be able to speak the speeches that the handlers were going to write for the guy, which is exactly what has happened.
And then they went out and got all these puff piece profiles.
This is about anywhere from a year to 14 months ago in the New York Times, in the Washington Post, and in the news magazines that just heralded this guy as a never-before-seen in America kind of politician.
And they went to work sanitizing everything about the lack of experiences, portraying him as something super special.
And at the time, nobody took it seriously, and nobody was really criticizing it because the handlers, whoever they are, were right.
We have the first black candidate for president that has a serious chance, and nobody was saying a word, not even Clinton's.
As Hillary figured it was all a coronation, she just had to get through the Super Tuesday primaries on February 5th, that it would be hers.
And Obama started clicking with people because of the drive-by media coverage.
He started going out there and making the speeches that people had written for him, and he delivered them pretty well, and all this fainting started, and the hope and the change and so forth.
The dirty little secret is that Obama lost all of the important primaries in the last two months of the race.
He had built up a delegate lead that Mrs. Clinton could not overcome, and that delegate system that was created by the Clintons and Terry McAuliffe to keep people like Obama out, but they just goofed it up.
They were too confident.
They didn't plan for anything beyond February 5th and Super Tuesday.
And Obama was this is a great illustration of what happens when you get fawning, never-ending puff piece coverage from the drive-by media.
And it also unveiled something else that we did not take into account, and that is just how much anger, dissatisfaction, sort of get out of here, will you?
The Democrat Party held for the Clintons.
If that weren't present, this would not have happened.
So my other question would be: if he gets into office, are the handlers going to be running the country and not him?
Somebody, yes, because he doesn't know what he's doing.
I do not.
I am not making a joke about this.
No, he doesn't.
I don't know.
He's been in the Senate 143 days.
He was a community organizer.
Think Al Sharpton.
He says things that indicate he does not have, he's dangerous.
He does not have an ideological understanding of the tyrants of the world and what drives them.
He knows what he has been taught.
He's not even a thinker.
He has learned what he was taught in the Ivy League classrooms.
And what he's been taught is that America as a country is in a constant state of decline.
We're to blame for most of the world's evils.
He believes this.
He's not a thinker.
Wow, it's pretty scary on my votes for McCain, but I sure hope everybody else jumps on board with that.
I'll tell you what else is going to happen out there, Heather.
If he does manage to get elected, you're going to see something fascinating.
Yeah, whoever's running Obama will be right there in the Oval Office doing it somewhere, somehow.
But old Pelosi and Harry Reed, they're going to be sitting there and they're going to properly understand this guy is just waiting to be picked apart.
They like power, too.
Congress instinctively isn't always in combat with the executive branch.
I guarantee you, they're going to do everything they can to make sure they get their agenda if Obama's doesn't dovetail with theirs.
Now, if we have all these increased Democrat seats in the House and the Senate, we've got experience with this.
Yeah, they ran the country, but they just did a rotten job of it.
Exactly.
How much more are they going to run it?
In this guy's case, it won't be just enough to say they did a rotten job.
This guy is dangerous with his lack of experience, lack of understanding of just who our enemies are.
Sure, because our defense, our national defense is at stake.
Well, no, no, see, that's where you're wrong.
The only reason we even are at risk is because of the way we have been, and because who we are and the way we have treated people.
Look, Obama actually said after 9-11, our buddies at World Net Daily recycled this today.
Obama actually said, the only reason they hit us is because they're in poverty.
They're mad that we have all the world's riches.
This is what happens when the United States denies the people of the world economic progress.
This is so ignorant.
The world is not our, I mean, well, not our problem, they're economic.
Wait a second, but that's not who the terrorist.
Bin Laden's a billionaire.
Al-Zawahiri, these people have money.
That is true.
They're not recruiting people from poor economic circumstances.
They're recruiting zealots who are being trained in these mosques and madrasas to hate America.
It has nothing to do with economics.
It has to do with religious ideology.
Pure and simple.
He doesn't even get this.
So he's been taught, he has learned we're the focus of evil.
We're the problem.
And he thinks that with him in charge, people will see that we're a different country now.
We will regain our world respect.
People will love us.
And they will have no more use for us as enemies.
Back in just a second.
I don't believe this.
Cybercast News Service, a news story that libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr has praised Al Gore, who challenged the United States Thursday to run on 100% zero carbon electricity within 10 years.
Bob Barr said Gore's plan makes sense.
America responds well to challenges if it's laid out, if it's in terms that people can understand and relate to, if it makes sense.
And what he's laid out makes sense.
Bob Barr said in an interview with the Cybercast News Service.
Somebody, you libertarians, do you realize what just happened here to your candidate?
Somebody needs to explain what libertarianism is to Bob Barr.
Because Gore's plan is socialism.
At the least.
By the way, Barbara Boxer also thinks that Gore is brilliant.
MSNBC this morning, Joe Scarborough said, Al Gore said that we could be energy independent in a decade.
That's very exciting to me, said Scarborough.
Come on, Joe.
Joe, come back.
I really need you.
Very exciting to me, Scarborough says.
I think it's a visionary approach.
Is it pie in the sky?
Do you think it can happen, Senator Boxer?
I think setting a goal like that makes a lot of sense because we Americans like that kind of vision.
What he said was so, I think, inspiring.
He said, every 40 minutes, the power of the sun as it beams onto the earth could power the whole world for a whole year, every 40 minutes.
But we have to harness it.
We have to distribute that energy.
And I'm very excited about it.
You say the same thing about a thunderstorm.
You're going to say the same thing about lightning in a thunderstorm.
Maybe someday.
I mean, I'm not denying, but the ability to harness energy from the sun so far, folks, is just, it ain't there.
It ain't going to be there in 10 years.
It's just, you know, come out, come out and just, yeah, I think pretty soon we're going to be flying at warp speed, too, through outer space.
It's easy.
Just harness the energy of the sun.
Just, you know, just call up to Spock and say warp too and go there.
I don't know what we're waiting on.
I don't know why we're still using electricity anyway.
All this is just big plot.
Big utility.
Here's Ginger, Gulfport, Mississippi.
Hi, Ginger.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hi, Mr. Lindbaugh.
Thanks so much for taking my call.
Yes, ma'am.
I'm really a frustrated listener to some of these stations.
To think that 99% of us will vote for Obama is outrageous.
It's mind-numbing.
We don't all run in a herd.
Many of us, thousands of us, are independent thinkers.
And what we're looking for is a leader.
Now, while Obama is off gallivanting around, Mr. John McCain is simply reacting to what he's doing.
He should be at least choosing a vice president or doing what you said do out at some of the oil rigs so that he can also get some newspaper space.
Instead, he just sits back and just reacts to whatever is going on.
As far as Jesse Jackson goes, I really think that he sees through Obama.
That's why he said what he did.
He does talk down to us, and he also talks down to other people.
Well, now, wait a second here.
Just a second.
Just a second, Ginger.
Two things.
I think in the case of the Reverend Dax, what you have here is sheer unadulterated jealousy and hatred.
The Democrat Party has thrown Jesse Jackson under the bus for Obama.
They never gave Jesse a genuine chance to be president.
That was all just affirmative action.
They never promoted Jesse and talked about Jesse the way they've been talking about Obama.
And Obama not even down for the struggle.
He didn't have slave blood.
He's not even 100% black.
Jesse is livid.
He knows he's been used all these years by the Democrat Party.
He has to support Obama because of the race business.
He's trapped.
He's supporting a guy that's going to ace him out of a career.
As for McCain, I think McCain's doing some responding to Obama.
McCain needs to be an oil rig.
He needs to go to a nuclear power plant.
Needs to be doing a bunch of things that focus on what the American people are most interested in now, and that's energy and its price.
I remember back in the 70s, Jerry Brown saying nonsense stuff like Pelosi and Gores, and they called him Governor Moonbeam back then.
That stuff's been mainstreamed.
These people are brilliant.
See you tomorrow, folks.
Look forward to it.
▲
Export Selection