All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 18, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:01
November 18, 2008, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It happened again.
The Dow Jones industrial average was up 200 points.
Bernanke, Paulson, go up there and testify.
We're down 70 points.
They destroyed another rally.
The Wizards of SMART that are going to save the United States.
That are going to save us with their bailout.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back, El Rushbo, the EIB Network.
Great to have you here.
We have audio soundbites coming up of some of the stuff that happened this morning as the Wizards of Smart all gathered to examine what's gone wrong here with the bailout.
How come it hasn't worked?
How come it didn't stave off the emergency?
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, email address El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
Let me amend one thing here.
Mr. Snurdley, who's not the boss today, by the way, told me in no uncertain terms that he thinks I've overstepped here in saying that criticism of Obama as the criticism of Clinton didn't work.
And I simply mean by that that both guys won despite voluminous information that should have disqualified both of them from ever being president.
The criticism didn't work in defeating them.
Now, that is not to say it didn't work.
After all, how many people voted for McCrazy?
58?
McCain, 58 million people.
What was it?
40, how many, it was a 7 million points from the point of 50.
A lot of people voted for McCain.
A lot of people voted against Obama.
See, obviously the criticism worked for some.
And look, I'm not a dunce here, folks.
I know it really boils down to this.
Our standard-bearer not only did not have any charisma, our standard-bearer didn't have a campaign, did not have a core theme, did not have a core set of principles and beliefs.
He's articulating.
He's running as a war hero with a heroic story.
And it didn't work.
Look at all the war heroes that can't win elections anymore.
We have George Bush.
I'm going to go through this list here.
Bush 41, great war hero, 1942-44, whatever, World War II.
Shot down over the Pacific, got back on the aircraft carrier.
Lost to a draft Dodger.
Lost to a guy who wrote in his past he loathed the military.
Now, the draft Dodger only got 43% because Ross Perot was in there.
Ross Perot himself, in his own way, is a military hero, given his support.
So maybe if Perot's not there and George Bush 41 gets those votes, but some polling data indicated he wouldn't, that Clinton would have still won, even were Perot not there.
We go forward to 96, another war hero, Bob Dole, Skunk City.
We get to 2000.
And we don't really have a war hero.
They tried to make Gore a war hero by saying he was a journalist in Vietnam.
2004, Vietnam-era war hero, the haughty John Kerry, versus a guy that the Democrats tried to claim lied about going to National Guard duty and serving.
Yeah, McGovern.
McGovern's a war hero.
He got blown out in 1970.
He was a war hero.
He was a pilot in World War II.
Now we come forth 2000.
He got another war hero.
We had a war hero lose to the most unknown, the most inexperienced, the most unqualified, and perhaps the most opposed to America as it was founded Democrat candidate ever.
So the war heroes, I mean, it's not, God love them and God bless them, but they're not the ticket to victory anymore.
Now, why is that?
Very simple.
And I warned you people of this not long after I began to serve this nation from behind the golden EIB microphone.
We are, well, Vietnam ends when, 72, 75, 30 years.
That's a generation.
In 30 years, we've had a whole generation born that has no direct experience or knowledge with an America victorious in war other than the four-day Gulf War.
And that was over so fast it looked like a video game to a lot of people.
So we have a lot of people who have no knowledge of an America victorious.
In fact, our war heroes in 2004, 2008 came out of the most hated war in our adult lives.
That's Vietnam.
A war hero for Vietnam.
Yep, yep.
Whoop, whoop.
We had a war hero run in 2008 from the most hated war in American history after six years of the American people being told how lousy and rotten the U.S. military is.
Unfairly, of course, it was unseemly what was done, but we had the Democrat Party, the drive-by media praying for defeat.
The military is immoral.
The military is unjust.
So we ran a war hero against all of that.
But it was not the war hero stuff that doomed McCain.
It was that, what's he going to do?
What's he standing for?
Earmarks and he's a maverick.
Okay, next.
Certainly no charisma.
But also about this criticism business, McCain wouldn't criticize Obama.
So we really don't know if criticism would have worked.
Now, Dole did try to criticize Clinton in 1996.
He said, where's the outrage over all this?
Where is the outrage over the way this country is being run and who this guy is?
He's a moral reprobate.
Where's the outrage?
And of course, Clinton's answer was, with a smile on his face, no attack ever fed a hungry child.
And people just marveled.
And so, well, Dole said he wanted to take us back to yesterday.
Some Americans do want to go back to yesterday.
I guarantee them to you.
They'd love to go back to August.
Some Americans, yesterday would be just fine to a lot of Americans, Mr. Snerdley.
Last month would be fine.
Two months ago would be fine.
Can we do this over?
But regardless, I'm not saying that criticism should be taken off the table.
I'm saying it should be redirected.
Especially now, when it's a waste of time to criticize Obama.
He hasn't done anything.
Whaley does something.
He stands for something.
It's going to be very easy to explain it once he starts doing it.
And therein lies the opportunity.
I know full well that because McCain was not criticizing Obama, that most Republican voters in this country were chomping at the bid for somebody to get the truth out there because the media wasn't.
So it would not be totally accurate to say it didn't work.
It did generate a significant number of votes for old Yosemite Sam.
But since he wasn't joining in it, Yosemite Sam couldn't get the dynamite to go off.
You know, and you know, you remember what Yosemite Sam looked like when a dynamite failed to go off.
He's just prancing around there, not having a clue what happened here.
Doesn't care if he was trying to kill a roadrunner, if he was trying to kill a Wiley Coyote, whoever, Elmer Fudd, the dynamite never went off for old Yosemite Sam.
And it was the same thing in this campaign.
Well, I'll give you another example.
The economic crisis, the bailout.
Oh, we got to, oh, this is horrible.
It says, Rod, we're now going to be a country in two days if we don't do something about it.
McCain says, I am suspending my campaign.
I'm going to Washington to deal with it.
And Obama said, no, I can multitask.
They need me.
I'm here on the phone.
We laughed at it at the time, but it turned out there's Mr. Cool.
Mr. Cold, actually, but there's Mr. Cool versus, you know, Mr. Grandstander.
I'm going to go back.
I'm going to fix this.
And then the meeting happened in the cabinet room of the White House.
We heard it McCain didn't say diddly squat till the end of it.
And the word that came out of there was that Obama ran the meeting.
It also came out of it.
A meeting fell apart with Obama running it, but we didn't hear about that enough.
We just heard that Obama ran the meeting.
You know, it's, you know, everybody got to look at these things in hindsight and find out what you did wrong and what you'd like to do over again.
I just, I'm just telling you, I think going after all this personal stuff, personally criticizing Obama, even if it's policy-oriented, just wait for his inauguration for something to actually happen.
And the way to go about it then will be to go after Obama-ism, collectivism, because you don't take him personally.
Even he's going to have a honeymoon with his supporters.
He's going to have a while.
You're not going to persuade anybody that's for the guy to change their mind right off the bat.
Just isn't going to happen.
But you can frighten them about what he's going to do.
You can frighten them about what's going to happen because he's president or because the Democrats are running a show or what have you.
Just seems to me to be a better bet.
How about this headline?
This is from the Associated Press Obama, in fact.
Wisconsin woman pleads no contest in toilet corpse case.
You don't get to see that headline every day, folks.
A woman accused of helping her religious leader hide a decaying corpse on her toilet so they could continue collecting her Social Security was convicted of a misdemeanor in a deal for her to testify against the religious leader.
A prosecutor said yesterday, Tammy Lewis, 36 of Wisconsin, pleaded no contest to obstructing a police officer.
She was fined $350 in the plea bargain that defers prosecution of more serious charges.
Juneau County Circuit Judge John Romer ordered her to pay the fine within 60 days or serve a seven-day sentence.
Lewis and Alan Bushy, 58, were accused of hiding 90-year-old Magdalene Alvina Middlesworth's body on a toilet in Lewis Bushy's home after she died in March.
Investigators said that Middlesworth and Lewis were members of a religious sect that Bushy led.
It was called the Order of the Divine Will.
Bushy told Lewis that God would revive Middlesworth, who friends and family said was from Washington state.
Lewis Bushy in May initially told a sheriff's deputy that Middlesworth was on vacation.
The deputy later discovered the elderly woman's rotting body in Lewis Bushy's stench-filled home.
She also told authorities that she was Middleworth's power of attorney.
The older woman used all of her money to support their six-member religious cult.
Investigators believe that Middlesworth's Social Security and annuity checks, totaling nearly three grand, were deposited after her death into a bank account that she shared with Lewis Bushy.
Okay, Dawn, you said you wanted to hear something funny.
There, you've heard something funny.
And I'm going to mention this at the top of the hour.
This headline is just these stories.
In fact, you know what?
I can't believe that these stories are actually happening now that the Messiah has been elected.
This is from the Associated Press.
Some 691,000 children went hungry in America, sometime in 2007, while close to one in eight Americans struggled to feed themselves adequately even before this year's sharp economic downturn.
This, according to the Agriculture Department, almost a third, 119 or 11.9 million adults and children, went hungry at some point.
That figure has grown by more than 40% since 2000.
The government says these people suffered a substantial disruption in their food supply at some point, classifies them as having very low food security.
A new term from the Agriculture Department, very low food security.
Until the government rewrote its definitions two years ago, this group was described as having food insecurity with hunger.
That's what it was called.
Food insecurity with hunger has now become very low food security.
And then the paragraph that follows says this.
The findings should increase pressure to meet President Obama's campaign pledge.
Jesus, believe this.
Pardon me for saying Jesus.
I'm sorry.
So the AP does a story on all these hungry kids out there, and then they say this should increase pressure to meet Obama's campaign promise to expand food aid and end childhood hunger by 2015, said James Wilde, president of the Food Research and Action Center.
So that's why they're doing the story, to help Obama keep a promise.
Now, folks, this is the United States of America.
And I traveled to a lot of it over many, many years.
And I have seen, as what everybody reports, the obesity problem that exists in this country.
I've seen it everywhere.
We heard news last week that the number of people, number of families have grown into an income level of $100,000 a year or more is profoundly high.
A great number of people have moved, even the lower income levels moved up.
There's something terribly wrong every time there's a story about hunger in America.
Very low food security.
Very little.
We have an official government term called very low food security.
If you go out and you ask the parents of kids that are 14 or younger, ask if their kids are hungry.
Yeah, they're always hungry.
They always want to eat.
They always want Snickers.
They always want a Coke.
They always want a pizza.
They always want Kentucky Fried Chicken, pizza.
They always want to eat.
It's not that they're hungry.
They just want food.
Kids might even tell anybody who asks that they are insecure about food because they can't get it on their own.
They have to wait till mommy and daddy go buy it.
Or if they're typical spoiled American kids, they have to wait till mommy and daddy fix it.
Now, when you offer these same little kids an apple or yogurt instead of cookies and candy, I'll bet you they're not so hungry.
You offer them McDonald's.
I know that McDonald's is having no trouble in these hard economic times.
This is just, this is another one of these endless stories to make this country look like a dismal failure.
I'm here to tell you the idea of perpetual hunger and starvation in this country is a myth.
It is absurd.
It cannot be.
Just to check the email, rush, rush, rush.
It sounds like you think the bailout isn't going to work.
It's not, I'm sorry if I'm being so unclear about this.
It's not that I don't think it's going to work.
It's that I know it's not going to work.
And the reason it's not going to work is because Bernanke and Paulson are fighting the market and the market will always win.
The market is the market and it will always win and they can't manipulate.
Folks, if anybody had figured out a way to manipulate the market, do you realize there would never be anything other than 100% growth and prosperity for one and all at all times?
If anybody were able to manipulate the market to make that happen, he would be president for life.
And then they would clone him.
And his cloned offspring would be presidents for life.
No government has ever been able to guarantee prosperity.
No government has ever been able to fix the market.
The market takes care of itself.
And until all of this pressure, all of this desire to manipulate, and there's more going on here.
This is not just altruistic.
This is not these congressional leaders and financial leaders trying to save the country.
This is a bunch of people trying to use the government's pile of money to save their own bacon.
It's just, it's no more complicated than that.
But when they do that, when they use other people's money to shore up their own businesses, then you see what falls out of that.
Utter, total chaos.
There is no guarantee that any entity, be it a human being, a small business, a large business, or an animal, there is no guarantee that that entity always enjoys prosperity, never encounters problems, and doesn't fail, and never gets fired, or never goes broke.
Those things don't exist because every entity sees itself having all kinds of problems, challenges to overcome, and some of them are worse than others.
Some fail, some get killed, some die off for causes, natural, what have you.
And this effort to manipulate all this is just going to make it worse.
And the people doing the manipulating know it's going to make it worse, but to them, there's something more important in the short run, and it's saving themselves.
Members of Congress do it every day, save themselves from decisions they've made.
Greatest example is this.
Most recent great example is this.
They write a piece of legislation, $700 billion to save America's economy.
They put one guy in charge of it, the Treasury Secretary.
They give him dictatorial control, total authority, no oversight.
And today they're doing hearings wondering where the oversight is and why this guy's doing what he's doing.
He doesn't even owe them an answer.
In truth, he was given total authority to do what he wants.
How about these Somali pirates?
How about this?
I mean, Somali pirates, or those of you in Riolinda, the Somalian pilots, this pirate, is a third world country.
And these guys are hijacking giant oil tankers owned by Saudi Arabia.
And they're holding crews hostage, the second one today.
One of their tankers that they, these Somali pirates, have hijacked, holds $100 million worth of oil.
And of course, the Saudis are out there.
What are they going to do about it?
They don't have a military.
You think Iran's going to help them out?
Iran's are going to help them out.
Who's going to go to the rescue of Saudi Arabia here?
Where I know the German, no, we don't let them have a navy or an air force.
The French, Sarkozy, surely will.
Maybe.
Maybe NATO will.
No, NATO didn't even get involved when Russia invaded Georgia and South Ossetia.
Let's see.
Belize is a Caribbean superpower.
Belize, maybe they could.
Oh, China.
China will go teach.
No, they benefit from this.
Sorry.
Who's going to stop these little Somali warlords?
It's not going to be us folks.
I mean, we might convene and have a meeting with them and try to find out what their grievance is.
But I don't think that we're going to deploy military might here to try to get back that oil tanker.
Let's see.
Who could do this?
UK?
They wouldn't do it without our permission, and I don't think that we're going to grant them permission.
Let's see.
Who else?
Who am I leaving out?
Greece.
They don't have a navy.
Italy.
They don't have.
Spain.
That's right.
Spain.
No, that.
United Nations.
Well, no, because the United Nations thinks that the Somalis probably deserve.
They've been so mistreated.
They've had so many starving people.
The world doesn't care about the Somalis that the Somalis have to hijack an oil tanker to feed themselves.
The UN probably won't understand that.
Let's see.
The rapists of Congo.
UN peacekeeper.
Well, but no, you can't send a peacekeeper force in a military act.
You can send them in to keep the peace or they can rape innocent women and children when they're keeping the peace.
But you can't send them in there in the military for the blue helmets don't go where there's action.
The Saudis ask Israel?
I don't think that's going to be the case.
I don't think so.
I don't think they'll ask Israel.
Of course, the Israelis, if they got ticked off enough about it, wouldn't wait to be asked.
They just go take the oil tanker back.
See, I don't know who's going to do anything about this.
I really, Hugo Chavez has not completed his deals with the Russians to buy a Navy.
Castro, I don't think, has the means yet because they haven't solidified their deal with the KGB.
So I don't know what's left other than to convene a meeting and talk, find out what the grievance is, and maybe they'll give the ship back.
Maybe they'll maybe give the oil back.
I don't know.
It's very puzzling to me because I was under the impression that this kind of anger and animosity had vanished since the United States presidential election.
I thought the world was a much happier place, that the world was a much more relaxed place.
America certainly more loved and respected.
And let's face it, some of this oil was no doubt headed our way.
I mean, this is, you could say, this is our oil.
I'm sure that we're buying some of that oil, or we have already bought it.
I don't know.
I think.
And plus, you know, you'd have to say this is terrorism.
We call it piracy, but it's terrorism.
And I just, I just, I guess I'm laboring under a misconception, but I really thought that after this presidential election that there was going to be so little need for anger and animosity and acts like this.
So keep a sharp eye, find out.
I mean, I saw a picture of the hijacked crew.
It looked like they're being tortured out there.
So I know that that picture was not taken at Guantanamo Bay.
So wherever they're being helped.
I don't think they're going to try to sell the oil.
I think it's a ransom for something.
I don't think the Somali pirates are trying to get any oil business here.
I think they're sending a different kind of message.
We don't know.
I'm sure they have.
We just got to take some time to understand this.
I'm sure they have a legitimate grievance and a thoroughly understandable reason why they're hijacking oil tankers.
You know, to make money, of course.
But, I mean, there could be an altruistic purpose behind their hijacking.
We'll just – no, no, no, no, no.
We've got people in charge now that can get to the bottom of this and find the answers, and we'll be fine.
There have to be, moving on to something, there have to be, folks, some hurt feelings out there among the left-wing Kook base.
In fact, I know that because this Lieberman thing, there already are the left kooks.
They are fried.
They wanted Lieberman strung up and flogged.
After all the public threats, Harry Reid walked out to the cameras.
He said nothing was going to be done to Lieberman for leaving the reservation and backing McCain.
And Lieberman's still chairman of Homeland Security.
No punishment, no nothing.
And it was Obama who interceded to guarantee it.
And on the various websites out there, I've checked it out.
They are fit to be tied.
They're saying we count for nothing.
We mean nothing.
Democracy is a nice word, but it should never threaten the entitlement of the most exclusive club in the world.
No matter what Lieberman does, the people who are protecting him hate you much more than they hate him.
These are libs talking to each other.
Now, this decision to hold on to Lieberman and not punish him came the same day.
More bad news for Kooks hit the drive-by media.
Two advisors for the Messiah, Lord Barack Obama the most merciful, told the press there is little, if any, chance the Justice Department will bring criminal charges against Bush officials who authorized or engaged in harsh interrogations of the terrorists at Club Gitmo.
There were going to be, they were a set of war crimes.
They wanted trials.
They wanted Bush and Cheney and everybody in charge of torture strung up, and that's not going to happen.
Adding more insult to this injury, another favorite of the Kook left base, Senator Pat Leakey Leahy, was asked during an interview on Vermont Public Radio if Bush administration officials would be brought up on war crimes charges.
Leakey said in the United States, no.
Now, that implies that maybe some other countries will do it.
So these kooks, do you understand what they were hoping?
They wanted impeachment.
They wanted war crimes trials.
They wanted Nuremberg-type things.
They wanted Lieberman strung up and flogged.
None of it's going to happen.
And they're the ones feeling sold out.
They're the ones thinking, my God, we bought a bill of goods.
We have been used.
We have been, he's not who he says he was.
And this is just the first wave of it.
There will be much more of this as we move from the kooks to what we think we call the left-wing mainstream, if you can say there's such a thing.
They too will have their eyes opened in the coming months.
Michael Ratner is a professor at Columbia Scruel of Law.
He's president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, and he's also mad.
He wants the Bushies to pay for protecting us from terrorists.
Here was his quote.
I don't see how we regain our moral stature by allowing those who were intimately involved in the torture programs to simply walk off the stage and lead lives where they are not held accountable.
So now even a Columbia law school professor has been left out in the cold.
Let me tell you, those of you at the Daily Coast and wherever else are you all upset about Lieberman, those of you at the Democrat Underground or wherever else upset that Justice Department's not going to bring criminal charges over anybody at Club Gitmo,
those of you who lurk at various, like the Huffington Post, if you're all upset that the Bush administration will not be brought up on war crimes charges, relax.
Don't give up hope for change.
Little program note, ladies and gentlemen, won't affect anything, but we're going to New York.
And we'll be doing the program from New York Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday.
Is it tomorrow, HR, we're doing a thing with Barbara Walters?
Tomorrow's, yes, that's tomorrow.
Barbara Walters has named me, unbeknownst to me, a clear surprise, one of the 10 most fascinating people of 2008.
I know.
I know I'm told I'm fascinating, but one of the top 10 on the, I mean, I've been one of her top 10 one time, like back in 1990 or 92.
I forget exactly, it might have been 93 or 90.
I forget exactly when it was.
But that we're taping a short little interview tomorrow afternoon after the program at a super secret location.
And I think it airs December the 2nd or the 4th.
I'm not sure it's the 4th right now, but it could change.
Depends.
But it's scheduled for December 4th.
And HR, would you make sure with Cookie that she has plenty of Zycam in my desk waiting for me?
I have some in the briefcase, but I just want to make sure there's a stash.
Well, it's cold up there.
Gentlemen, we've got a cold front coming through.
You know what?
We've got cold fronts going through down here earlier than I ever remember them.
Well, it's 65, and it's barely going to bid 65 or 66 tomorrow.
It's going to be down to 50 some places inland and going to be in the high wind chills in the 30s.
But the point is that I've never seen cold fronts go through here this soon.
Normally, Christmas is when you get the first one.
So I'm not taking a chance on getting a cold.
I can't.
I just hate them, and I despise them.
They're nuisances, but they're worse than the flu to me.
I just can't handle them.
And this Zycam stuff either knocks it out or shortens the duration as fast as anything that you can get.
Simple to use.
It's Z-I-C-A-M.
And it works.
That's the best thing you can say about it.
Just cut in swabs, put them in each nostril every four hours and tench the nostrils for like five seconds after you do it.
And don't blow your nose for 30 seconds or so.
And you've got to catch it fast.
You have to do it right when you think you're getting the cold.
Here's Dave in Western Pennsylvania.
Nice to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Well, Rush, thanks for taking my call.
Dittos.
Thank you.
Rush, I would like to know who Obama is beholding to or who he owes all this to, because in any circumstance like this, I mean, there's got to be somebody that's got to have a payback on this.
Yeah, I have thought for the longest time that somebody chose Obama to run and was a secret sponsor, if you will.
I have no idea.
Financially, probably George Soros.
I think Soros is involved.
I can't prove it, though, so I really don't like saying it.
All I know is Soros has raised all kinds of money.
And if you look at his transition team, Podesta and Rahm Emanuel and a bunch of people, I mean, these are seasoned Clinton administration types who have a little bit more experience under their belts than when they were working with the boy president Bill Clinton.
But, you know, somebody had to say, Brock, you're the guy that can do us this year because nobody's going to criticize you because you're black.
Nobody has the guts to use that.
You're articulate.
We can put good words in your mouth.
Republicans, they don't have anybody worth talking about running.
But I don't know who it is.
I'm under the impression somebody, you have to have, when you have no experience, when you have 143 days in the Senate, there has to be somebody behind the scenes doing this.
And it might be a collection of people.
It might be the mentors that he's had all these years.
I don't know what political experience they have in terms of advising him, but I understand what you're talking about.
You just don't see people singularly coming.
But as the Newsweek reporters are talking about, he does do everything singularly.
We do know that Axelrod wrote a lot of those messianic speeches and so forth.
Joe and Reno, nice to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Rush, University of Nevada Dittos.
Yes, sir.
I want to know what's your take on Obama when he, in the 60 Minutes interview, said that he would use his weight to throw around to implement a college football playoff.
Yeah, he wants a playoff system for the Bull Championship Series, right?
Well, we all do, but not like that.
You mean you don't want the president doing it?
Well, I mean, I don't want to wait around anymore.
When I heard that, you know, my reaction was when I heard Obama say that he is going to do it.
My guess is that a majority of people who voted for him want him to do that and much more.
They want him to say, here's your health care fixed.
And here's your gasoline price at $2 a barrel, a gallon.
And by the way, here's your mortgage is paid off.
And by the way, we're going to have a playoff system.
I'm just going to decide this is going to be done.
We're going to do that.
It's done now.
I think people who voted for him would welcome this.
Well, I didn't vote for him.
Do you think this committee that put together the BCS whole system to come up with a national championship can do it any better?
What a mess that is.
Yeah, well, you know, who do you think that the tax, who do you think he's going to go after for the taxes?
The rich BCS people.
He's going to really do everything he can to...
What's taxes got to do with his streamlining, having a playoff system?
Well, they're the rich.
I mean, that's why they built the BCS is to get rich off of it.
That's what's going on here.
He's going after them in numerous different ways.
I'm for a playoff, but I'm not for the president throwing his weight around in such ways.
I think actually, if you want to fix the Bull Championship Series, if you want to really come up with an unassailable way to determine the national championship, Division I, college football, you wait till Donovan McNabb retires from quarterback to the Philadelphia Eagles and give him the problem.
And I'll bet you.
Well, I don't know.
Okay, folks, heading back to New York.
As I said, for a host of reasons, they'll be up there through Friday.
When's the last time I was up there?
It's been probably since the spring.
I have reasons not to go.
Many of them you've heard about recently.
They tax every step that you take up there.
And then after you pay everything they say that you owe them, they audit you again.
And I always do get sick when I go up there.
I'm doing this with great trepidation.
I always come back sick.
Got my fingers crossed and I've got my Zycam.
▲
Export Selection