All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 19, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:33
November 19, 2008, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome back once again to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plain.
Rushland Ball from high atop the EIB building in Midtown Manhattan for the next three days.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 if you'd like to join us.
And the email address is lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
I want to continue on this business of the auto bailouts and oil and so forth because I really do believe that if we can stabilize the price of oil, that we would do more for the auto industry than any bailout is going to do or any bankruptcy is going to do.
We're going to get the bailout anyway.
Obama is going to do it.
Mark my words.
And it's not going to be a bailout of big oil.
It's going to be a bailout of the United Auto Workers and Jennifer Grand Holman in the state of Michigan.
That'll be, I mean, they won't say that.
They'll say they're bailing out big oil, but that'll be the motivation for it.
So just steal yourselves to that happening.
Regardless what you think of it, it is going to happen.
But this volatility in the price of oil, leading to volatility in the price of gasoline, is what led people to shy away from buying any new car.
Some people did try to go out and find the low-cost, high-mileage little lawnmowers that you could get out there.
But it was amazing to see how much was affected in a profoundly negative way with the rapid rise, the price of gasoline to $4.
We learned what the tipping point is, four bucks, and people will start making drastic lifestyle changes.
Now, the prices come down now.
And this is going to lead to people in Washington deciding to tax it.
Because, see, you've been used to paying $4.
You've been there.
And you survived.
You got through it.
And so they're going to people say we can raise taxes on gasoline to get it at least up to $350.
People put up with that because they become accustomed to it.
And I think people instinctively realize that the price of oil and gasoline in this instability and this volatility can easily rise again.
And Obama even made my point Sunday night on 60 Minutes in his interview.
He said, now remember, by the way, let me preface this with this quote from the Washington Post editorial on Sunday, which is entitled Raise the Gas Tax.
They said, in a perfect world, we'd like to see a gas tax that was the equivalent of oil at $100 per barrel.
Well, you know, bully for you, Washington Times.
Who the hell are you?
In a perfect world, we would like to see.
But Obama went out there on Sunday night and he echoed what the Washington Post said in a 60 Minutes interview.
He basically agreed.
He said, you know, we go from shock to trance.
Oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up.
Everybody goes into a flurry of activity.
Then the price goes back down and suddenly we act like it's not important.
And we start, you know, filling up our SUVs again.
And as a consequence, we never make any progress.
It's part of the addiction.
And now's the time to break it.
Meaning the addiction to oil that we have.
We do not have an addiction to oil.
I resent the whole connotation.
It's a commodity.
We don't have an addiction to oil any more than we have an addiction to wheat or that we have an addiction to soybeans.
It's a commodity.
It's in the market.
It is used.
It happens to be, I think, crucially important.
It's the fuel of the engine of freedom and democracy, development, growth, and all those things.
But yet here's this leftist guy that said, Obama, we break our addiction on it.
Okay, if we've got to get off oil, what are we going to get on?
There's nothing to get on.
There's nothing that replaces it.
This is just a long way of saying that even though the gas price and the oil price are down, that fact is going to lead to the people who raise taxes to get a gleam in their eye and say, oh, we got an opportunity to tax this stuff at a higher rate now.
Be tough to raise taxes on gasoline at four bucks a gallon, much easier to do it when it's two bucks.
And especially when you have people whose sole reason for political power is to raise taxes.
So get ready for that too.
And big oil, you know, I mentioned earlier in this monologue, why should they go investigate and drill and try to discover new sources of domestic supply at 40 or 50 bucks a barrel?
When it was $125, $150 a barrel, it made sense.
And CNN, in their little story here, CNNMoney.com, it would be tempting to say they told us so.
Back when oil prices were going nowhere but up, public officials, consumer rights groups, newspaper editorials chastised major oil companies for not investing enough in new production.
Big oil, they argued, was simply lavishing shareholders with massive stock buybacks and dividends at the expense of the motoring public.
The results illustrate an industry with plenty of resources to produce more oil in the U.S., but slow to spend the money to do so.
Said Judy Duggan, research director of Consumer Watchdog.
In a normal market with prices for a product rising like they have for oil, manufacturers in competitive markets would be spending like crazy to make more of it.
Yet oil companies are able to sit back and make more money by selling less.
That's not how they make more money.
And they don't make more oil.
They go out and find it.
They make money by not having to have all these R D costs.
If they choose not to invest in future exploration and development, at least in this country, because the tax on that is going to be exorbitantly high.
And now with the oil price what it is, it doesn't make any sense to do it anyway.
And then they say later in the CNN story, with oil prices now barely a third of what they were just four months ago.
It seems they were right, meaning big oil.
They've been very good stewards of their investors' money, said Rayola Dower, the senior economic advisor for the American Petroleum Institute.
The majors are well positioned to move forward with investments over the next year.
So big oil being praised for business acumen in the drive-by media.
All because the oil price has come down.
By the way, Tom Daschell not only going to be the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Dashel has also negotiated the following position.
He's going to be the health czar.
No, no, no, I'm not making this up.
He is going to be the health czar or the point person so that he will report directly to Obama.
And he will end up wearing two hats.
This means that Dashel and not a bunch of White House staffers will be writing the health care plan that Obama submits to Congress next year.
Now, Congress is going to write its own.
Ted Kennedy and the gang have been writing their own version.
Hillary is going to have a role in that.
Max Bauc is taking the lead among Democrats in the Senate on a health bill.
So the White House will have its own, but it's going to be written by the puffster.
And try this in the Los Angeles Times today.
Headline says it all.
Political temperature may be just right for health care overhaul.
Oh, political temperature may be just right.
Wonder what the political temperature is.
Well, the temperature is the bleak economic environment, the ballooning budget deficit may paradoxically spur the kind of costly, sweeping overhaul of the nation's health care system that has eluded policymakers in Washington for decades.
Hospitals and physicians are increasingly worried about the escalating burden of newly unemployed workers being thrown under the rolls of the uninsured.
Liberal advocacy groups see the Treasury Department's $700 billion commitment to banks and other financial institutions bolstering the case for a similar investment to help sick Americans get medical care.
So this bleak economic environment will lead to a bailout of the health care system.
That's what the LA Times story is saying.
And on page two, they even make the point that runaway health care costs don't slow down during a recession.
Healthcare is immune to market pressures of cost.
Runaway health care costs do not slow during recession.
Other costs do, but health care doesn't.
And so this means it's only going to keep going up with people having less disposable income.
We're going to have to move in there and help out.
This is the perfect environment to get national health care.
And the market just doesn't work.
Even in a recession, when you ought to have prices coming down because of lack of demand, the health industry is immune.
See, the market doesn't work.
We have to step in.
We as government have to step in and we have to finally do this.
Plus, you know, Ted Kennedy's health is going to be a large factor in this because there will someday be a health care bill in the Senate and it will have his name in it and it will be authored and promoted in his memory.
And it is going to be real tough for anybody in the House or Senate to vote against something that is essentially a memoriam or an award, a remembrance to the great worker, that old great liberal lion, Ted Kennedy.
So what can we count on?
What a great day.
We figured out here.
We figured out that the Obama camp will bail out the auto industry, but it's actually going to be a bailout of Michigan, Jennifer Grandholm, and the unions.
We have also figured out there's going to be a gasoline tax increase.
If the prices of oil stay this low, there's no question these people are going to see an opportunity to tax it since you are already accustomed to paying more than what's being charged now.
Plus, it'll come down in the guise of, hey, you're saving the planet by doing this, folks.
We're going to see to it you drive less just like you were four months ago.
I mean, that was really great for the planet back then.
It didn't last.
So we're going to raise taxes there and we're going to get national health care.
We can see this coming.
We can see this coming down the pike.
It's right there in front of us.
It's just and it's just, you know, it's like we're with the Lemmings.
We're with the Lemmings.
They're heading for the cliff.
And there's nothing to stop.
There's no net down there.
There's no giant wall.
We're just headed there.
Quick timeout, my friends.
Sit tight.
We'll be back.
Your phone calls continue right after this.
By the way, these Somali pirates, I need to ask a question out there.
These guys, these big tankers, you know, they're only popular with 10 to 12 guys because they're so mechanized now.
They're so computerized.
And this thing from Saudi Arabia, the Sirius Express or whatever it was, 100 million barrels of oil and 10 pirates or 15 pirates took it over.
Now, Somali pirates.
I need to ask a little question because the drive-bys, once again, just don't seem to be telling us this.
Who are these guys?
Who are the Somali pirates?
And also, do you know that it was similar type of pirate behavior that was, I don't know if it led to it, but it was instrumental in the creation of the United States Navy.
The United States Navy, when first constituted and used, was used to wipe out the pirates of the Barbary Coast.
Now, these clowns, these Somali pirates, they're not Captain Jack Sparrow, you know, from the pirates of the Caribbean.
They're not these guys.
Who are these guys?
Well, besides 10 guys in the Boston Whaler, who are they?
Who are these guys?
Who are Somali pirates?
Who are they?
Well, they're terrorists.
Let me go.
Okay.
You're close.
You're getting warm when you say Al-Qaeda.
They're Muslims.
Remember Mogadishu.
What was the name of the warlord?
His name was last name was Skyhook.
Yeah, it was Mareed Fahid, whatever it was.
Skyhook, these guys were followers and devil tays of Osama bin Laden.
And when Bin Laden saw the way we cut and run, cut and ran out of Mogadishu, he did an interview with ABC.
John Miller happened to get the interview, and bin Laden said, yeah, you guys, you'll cut and run at the first sign of trouble.
And that's when Bin Laden said to the world, these guys, they're paper tigers, meaning the Americans.
But I just, America has nothing to do with this now.
In fact, we found that the Indian Navy and all the nations I was going through yesterday asking which Navy would stop, I forgot that India has a navy.
And the Indian Navy went in there and they sank a Somali pirate mothership earlier today.
The Indian Navy went in there and kicked butt.
But these are a bunch of Muslims.
And I find it fascinating.
Drive-bys will not tell these are, I'm not mainstream, whatever, Islamists, but they're Muslims from Somalia committing all these acts of piracy.
Now they've asked for a ransom.
How stupid are these guys?
They've got, what, $100 million worth of oil.
Let me check the ransom.
Let me check.
Maybe they're not stupid.
Let me check this real quick.
Sit tight here, folks.
I can't find it.
It's been moved.
Well, no, I thought that they asked for a ransom of 10 million.
Yeah, it is.
It's $10 million.
They've got $100 million worth of oil, and they've asked for it.
I don't mean to laugh at these guys.
These are dangerous little thugs.
But $10 million when you're sitting on cargo worth $100 million is a good deal.
It's a good deal.
What are the Saudis doing to get their oil back?
Why don't they just bomb the ship, did you say?
Surround the ship.
Well, I don't, because the crew has been taken off the ship, I think.
The crew is being held somewhere.
You surround the ship, big deal.
I don't think you probably have some Somali guards on there, but that's not going to get it back.
You might want to think about in the future arming the crews.
I don't know that the crews are unarmed, but if they're unarmed, you might want to think about giving them some bullets.
Mike, yeah, have tanker marshals.
I mean, you got to stop these hijackings on the high seas.
These guys may as well have used box cutters to do this.
Here's Richard in Ohio.
He's on the road.
He's an over-the-road trucker.
Great to have you here, Richard.
Hello.
No, thank you, Rush.
You're a great American.
Thank you, sir.
I just, I'm going to get off your subject here.
I just thought I would let you know I'd like to thank you for introducing me to a product.
As you said, I'm a trucker.
It goes up and down the road.
And I've tried your Zycam, and I tell you what, it keeps me trucking.
Now, don't give people the wrong idea.
There's no buzz in Zycam.
No, no.
What Zycam does?
No, no, exactly.
Don't give people the wrong idea.
But I tell you, it's like a golden brick.
I mean, when you start feeling bad behind this wheel, and especially when you're out on the road, you don't want to get sick because you're losing money.
You don't want to get sick anytime.
You don't want to get sick anytime.
And I'm like you.
I mean, I hate having a cold.
I'm like a child with a cold.
The only time I act like a baby is when I have a cold.
I do better when I have the flu than when I have a cold.
For some reason, it's not bad enough to keep you in bed, but other than that, it's miserable.
And the last thing I want is get when this stuff, if you catch it early, Zycam works.
I'm glad you have that testimonial and endorsement from you very much, Richard.
Here's Joe in Orlando, Florida.
You're next on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Yeah, Rush, I didn't think you went far enough when you said the oil prices slowed down the car sales.
It also tipped the balance of the mortgage companies because a lot of people lost their homes when the prices went up.
Yeah, I mean, I think there's some of that too, because when the gasoline price shot up that much, almost a 100, maybe 80% increase in a matter of months, it was a shock to everybody's disposable income.
And some people decided they got to get to work and they have to eat and they decided to wait on paying the mortgage.
Yeah, it threw the mortgages off and then that stupid ethanol threw the food prices out of line.
Right.
It just chipped everybody over.
I mean, once diesel hits $450 and the trucking industry had to start putting on the fuel surcharges, everything went up.
I know.
And that's, oh, the diesel.
We didn't even talk about that because that was even higher, and the truckers were up in arms over that.
There's no question that the gasoline price, accompanied by the oil price, was a huge shock throughout the economic system.
But this mortgage business, you're talking about people that were paying their mortgages.
Mortgage problem is not involving those people.
Well, this is interesting.
The Treasury Secretary, who happens to be Henry Paulson, who, by virtue of the $700 billion bailout legislation, has total power and authority over how to use the money.
And remember, it was originally to stimulate the credit markets and lending and also to purchase up toxic securities, toxic assets.
And they went out and said, well, you know, we're not going to buy up the toxic assets.
We're not going to do that.
Now he's, Bloomberg anyway, is quoting him as saying something else.
The Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, says now he opposes bailout aid to homeowners and automakers.
Well, I can understand opposing the bailout to automakers, but a homeowners is what this was.
What is a toxic asset?
A toxic asset, among other things, is a worthless mortgage or a security that's purchased with it.
And I thought the original purpose was to fix this housing problem that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter had created.
Now he's against bailing out homeowners.
Guess we need to know what kind.
And now he says we shouldn't be bailing out auto companies.
And I guess everybody else is getting in line.
Better stop getting in line because he's the final authority.
I don't even know why he's up on Capitol Hill answering questions.
You know, Capitol Hill's up there, Barney Frank, the House Senate committees.
Well, how come you haven't done this?
How come you haven't done that?
Where's the oversight?
Well, you guys wrote the oversight into this.
Where have you been?
But the way I, I mean, I've read the preamble and the introduction of the first two paragraphs of this bailout bill, and he's got sole authority to do with it what he wants.
So now he's out there saying it's not for homeowners and automakers, which ought to throw cold water on this stuff and just end it, right?
We ought to be now back to the whole purpose of stimulating the lending markets.
But the problem is the banks got the money so far, and they're, as predicted here, holding on to it.
Here's Brenda in Chico, California.
Hi, Brenda.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
I, first of all, want to say thank God for you.
Yes.
And thank God for Fox News.
I am calling because I wanted to tell you that my husband and I just purchased a 2008 Cadillac Escalade over the weekend and had no problems getting a fantastic rate on a loan.
And we absolutely love the GM car.
How much did you put down on this?
Did you ever put a down payment on?
What was your financing rate?
I had a trade-in, and then I also put $5,000 down.
They told me I could put whatever I wanted to down.
And I got a rate of 5.5%.
Okay, so the point is that you were able to go out without any credit in the U.S. system.
You were able to go buy a car on credit.
Absolutely.
And you went out and you bought a gas hog.
Absolutely.
And away, by the way, I am proud of you.
I am proud of you for not buckling down to all this political craze.
You went out there and you got what you wanted.
You know what?
I'm turning the tables on the left because I'm tired of tolerating their craziness and their hate when they don't tolerate me and my views and my family.
And I...
That's exactly right.
You know what?
We mentioned this earlier today.
Brenda, tolerance is a one-way street.
We have to be tolerant of all the aberrant behavior that exists on the left.
We have to be tolerant of their extremism and their radicalness.
We have to be tolerant.
And if we aren't, then it is us.
It is we who are said to be intolerant.
And they're the ones that protest and act like spoiled, rotten brats when they don't get what they want.
It's actually worse than spoiled, rotten brats.
They start engaging in actual intimidation and near-criminal activity in order to end up getting what they want.
This is Michael in Columbia, South Carolina.
You're next, sir.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Thank you.
This is really cool to talk to you.
Thank you, sir.
I have a very quick point.
I had sort of forgotten about the $150 billion in pork in the bailout bill, of course, because the media conveniently leaves it out of their discussions.
But, you know, the folks on Capitol Hill, why don't they do the patriotic and the patriotic thing and sacrifice and give up that $150 billion in pork to bail out the car industry?
Hell, they could bail them out for a number, probably for quite a long time.
You know, this is an interesting question, and I know you mean it somewhat facetiously, but I'm going to answer this seriously because you have, once again, nailed and identified a serious problem.
And that is that whatever the financial circumstance, the government will not, cannot ever do with less.
No matter how hard individuals are hurt, they will not do with less.
Whenever there is talk of a tax cut, the first thing that is said in reaction to it is, well, how are we going to pay for it?
Meaning, where are we going to get it back?
Like if we give tax cuts to one-armed amputees in Chelsea, then who are we going to have to raise taxes on in order to make up our revenue lost?
There's no such thing as the concept of losing revenue in Washington.
All money is theirs.
They start with the amalgamation, the total dollars and cents of the productivity of the American people, because Washington produces nothing.
They look at the GDP as a function of government.
They look at the annual production of goods and services and, of course, the accompanying income.
And they look at that as all theirs in terms of, okay, we've got this much to spend.
They look at taxes as basically what they determine you will be allowed to keep.
They are the source of your money.
They actually believe this.
They think they are the ones that permit business to function.
They are the ones that permit entrepreneurs to start up businesses.
They are the ones that permit people to buy houses to deduct the mortgage interest.
They are the ones who permit you to not have to report as income your health care benefits at work.
They look at every dollar in this country as theirs and what you end up with as something that they have to spend as a cost to them.
So you have a $700 billion bailout, and it's an emergency.
The country can't survive without it.
And yet, they had to sweeten the deal with $150 billion worth of pork to get the votes of people who weren't inclined to go along with this.
So it's actually an $850 billion bailout, but only $700 billion is ostensibly going to be used.
And this reverts back to the whole notion here, folks, that everything in this country seems to be centered around government.
It hits me in strange ways.
But I saw during the break here at the top of the hour, I saw a news story, replay of yesterday, Senator Lieberman, in front of a bunch of senators after Dingy Harry had gone out and said, okay, Senator Lieberman's going to stay in our caucus.
He's going to keep his committee chairmanship.
He moved aside.
Lieberman moved to the microphone.
And I saw Durbin and all the whole Democrat caucus, five or six Democrats behind Lieberman.
And I'm watching this.
I'm saying, why do I care?
This matters nothing to my life other than what these clowns are going to put in my way.
Why do I care where Joe Lieberman ends up?
Nice guy and all that, but why this, it's almost getting to the point these people are royalty.
And there's Durbin standing back there.
And I just wonder how many Americans watch this stuff And gauge their own happiness and their own mood by virtue of what they see on television that is happening with the Democrats in Washington.
And these people at this press conference acting like this was the most important thing of the day, as they always do.
And it just hit me again.
Everybody's just too focused, way too focused on government and what it does and what it can do and whether government's being penalized or hurt by this or that economic activity.
I would love to break this cycle.
I would just love to have people, as many Americans as possible, when there's a problem, look to themselves first.
But man, we're up against 50 or more years of propaganda and brainwashing to convince people that the health of the government equals their personal health.
The health of the government equals the health of the nation.
And of course, the government is not what makes the country work.
It is people with freedom and liberty and individuality seeking their ambitions.
That's what's always made the country work.
Anyway, I got to run brief time out.
I really want to play some audio soundbites on this McNabb business, but I'm thinking with the bailout and all this other stuff, it just kind of might be a little, it's a day late and a dollar short.
Although I can play this.
Except because what I've got, I've got these local weeds at ESPN commenting on it.
That's these local weeds at ESPN.
You got to hear a couple of these.
You just got to.
We'll do that.
We come back from the break.
Okay, don't go away.
Actually, you know, we better start with number 22 here.
Hello, attention.
We better start here with number 22 in order to get this some context.
This is Sunday afternoon in Cincinnati.
The Philadelphia Eagles had just ended up a tie game with the Cincinnati Bengals 13 to 13.
And identified, unidentified reporters said to the Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb, if you're sad after a loss and happy after a win, how do you feel after a tie?
I've never been a part of a tie.
Never even knew that that was in the rule.
But when the play was called, you know, I kind of figured that I guess there's ties in the NFL.
So you seriously got no.
No, I didn't know that.
I thought there was like another overtime.
Yeah.
In college, there's multiple overtimes.
I mean, high school and Pop Warner.
I never knew in a professional ranks that it would kind of end that way.
Okay.
That's it.
They didn't know that National Football League games could end in ties.
Now, you know, forgive me here, folks.
I'm just a fan.
And I watch football on television, meaning I'm not there on the field.
And I have watched countless overtime games.
And I see that they send out players from both benches for the coin toss to signal the beginning of overtime to determine who gets the ball.
And the referee goes through the rules.
Referee says, everybody, we're going to play.
First team to score, game's over.
If nobody scores in the first 15 to 15-minute period, it gets a tie.
You get two timeouts and one coach's challenge in the overtime.
I'm not a player and I know this.
I've heard this said, I don't know how many times.
And I don't know if McNabb's a captain.
I don't know if he goes out there, if he's been in an overtime game.
I don't know if he's actually been out there when coin toss has taken place.
But this just struck me as strange.
The reason why it came up is because the Cincinnati Bengals are among the worst teams in the league, and the Eagles are an elite team, or they thought to be.
And it appeared to people watching the game the Eagles didn't really put that much into the overtime.
There were something like 21 punts in this game.
This had to be one of the dullest, most boring football games to watch.
And people didn't seem to be like there was any impetus to win this thing.
So that's why they said, well, how does it feel to end in a tie?
Well, I thought the game was going to go on until we had a winner.
Well, this led to shock and disbelief throughout the NFL.
And it also has led to a circling of the wagons here among people defending McNabb.
But it was interesting to see how they did it.
Tom Jackson, on ESPN's Monday night countdown during a panel discussion of McNabb saying he didn't know that games in the NFL could end in ties.
Chris Berman said, certainly unusual, Tom.
I want to preface this because one of our Philly affiliates, a fan called Donovan McNabb a cement head.
I think it's a euphemism for something else, not being very smart.
And everything in his life, professionally, business world, academically, speaks to something else.
So I want to clarify that.
But it begs the question: how do you not know?
Okay, that's all we need.
That's it.
So basically, Tom Jackson starts out by, this guy brilliant academically, business-wise, oh, no, this guy's brilliant, covers his bases, CYA.
And this is, how the hell do you not know this?
See, they were caught between a rock and a hard place because nobody in the NFL is going to come down on McNab.
And if they do, they're going to end up being positive at the end.
That's what Tom Jackson was doing.
Chris Carter did the same thing on the show later on.
He said, I didn't know that.
I can't believe he didn't know this.
A great field general.
Oh, one of the smartest guys ever played a game.
Him can't believe he didn't know this.
So then the Pittsburgh Steelers, who were played in the last tie game in the NFL in 2002 against the Atlanta Falcons, 34-34.
I watched a game.
The Steelers should have wiped them out.
It was one of the most frustrating games for Steelers fans ever.
So the Steelers play in a tie game.
Here is Ben Rothlessberger, Steelers quarterback, late yesterday in the Steelers locker room.
People, you know, make too big of a deal and are too hard on Donovan because you'd be surprised.
I bet at least 50% of the league didn't know that at the time.
You'd be real surprised.
I mean, people would just assume that the quarterback should know it all and that everyone should know that stuff.
And it's not necessarily true because whoever thinks about that situation, how often does it come up?
And the rules change so often that you never know what happens.
So people are way, way too hard on Donovan, making way too big of a deal about this.
It's not really as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.
Now, look at the Steelers of my team, and Rothlessberger is my quarterback.
In a manner of speaking, you can see how they circle the wagons here to protect.
Half the league, no, not dumb, sturdily.
You got on me for saying stupid here, they would say ignorant.
They just, they don't know the rule.
I don't believe, I just, I cannot.
We're talking about professionals here.
We're all professionals here.
This isn't Pop Warner.
But what's more interesting even than this is that Heinz Ward, who is one of the finest dudes in the NFL, just classy, he came out, circled the way.
He said he didn't know the rule either.
He played in a tie game in 2002.
Now, Rothlessberger didn't.
You know, he was drafted after that.
But Heinz Ward played in the 2002 tie game.
He came out and said he didn't know about it.
Didn't know about the rule.
So this is.
And why do you think, dare I say this?
Why do you think the whole league decides it has to circle the wagons around Donovan McNabb?
Why?
Imagine, ladies and gentlemen, if Rex Grossman, the quarterback of the Chicago Bears, after playing in a tie game, had said he didn't know that games could end in ties.
Well, you take it from there.
We will take a brief time out of 21 hours and be back and do it all over again from the EIB building tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection