All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 24, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:14
November 24, 2008, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh behind the golden EIB microphone, the EIB Southern Command meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Great to have you here.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
Email address, LRushbow at EIBNet.com.
Okay, Obama at his big announcement today with his economic team, he did not announce any kind of real economic program.
He said that you are in a lot of pain, and he knows it.
That's supposed to make you feel good.
And he repeated essentially, I mean, as best I can tell, he repeated essentially his campaign agenda for the economy.
The unions, the environmentalists, and the government will own the auto industry.
They are going to run it.
That's my guess here.
Let me say something controversial.
I was talking to Sterdley here at the top of the hour break.
You know, we've come to the conclusion that this is not nearly as, well, I don't want to say it's not as bad as we thought it's going to be.
But in a way, let me try to explain it.
Suppose Obama really were something brand new that we've never seen before.
So we have no way of dealing with it.
Suppose he brings a paradigm and an operational manual to the Oval Office that nobody's ever seen before, like his campaign suggested would be the case.
What it turns out, this is the same old garbage leftist bunk that we've been dealing with for 60 years.
We've seen it all before.
It's going to be tough to battle it because they own everything.
They own the House, they own the Senate, and they own the White House, obviously.
To illustrate just how unremarkable all this is, would somebody look up for me very quickly and see if there is a town in Arkansas called Change?
Because we know there's a town in Arkansas called Hope.
And the Hope is the Clintons.
Every major cabinet position has a tie to the previous Clinton administration.
And I'm trying to understand why.
I just, I do not have the slightest understanding of this.
It's almost like Obama, and if you look at his appearance today announcing his economic team, there were no specifics, no specifics whatsoever, no kind of real economic program, just assuredness and confidence that he feels the pain you're in and he's going to deal with it.
There was no, you know, he was asked about tax cuts because his aides are all over television over the weekend saying, well, you know, we're in this recession here.
We'll probably not do anything on tax increases on the wealthy until the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, which will be an automatic tax increase.
But he was asked about that today because his advisors are all over television on the weekend, and he wouldn't even get specific about that.
So it's almost like he's going to be a figurehead, and that just doesn't, that doesn't compute with me.
It doesn't compute with the way he ran the campaign.
I thought he was going to be this hands-on revolutionary new kind of change and stuff, and it's just a Clinton crowd recycled with a Clinton, by the way, in the cabinet, it appears, over at the Department of State.
You know, and some of the drive-bys even are starting to spend, what's the change here?
There's no change.
That's the whole point.
We have seen this game.
We have been playing this game with these guys for 60 years.
It's just more of the same of what we have already said.
And in that sense, let me say something controversial.
People say I'm controversial.
Let me say something controversial.
There are no bold new ideas.
There are bold old ideas that rely on more and more government spending and lending.
Call it collectivism, socialism, whatever you want to call it.
It is a bad idea.
Everything the Obama team is talking about doing has been tried in country after country after country, and it has failed.
You can have new policies based on sound principles.
I don't disagree with that.
But policies based on bad old ideas are bad policies, and that's exactly what we're getting.
There's nothing new that's bold here.
These are bold old ideas proven to be wrong.
And they're going to be employed and they're not going to work because they don't work.
They never have worked wherever they've not over the long haul.
Now, here's Greg Burns at the Chicago Tribune today.
General Motors Assembly Plant, making Yukons, Tahos, and Escalades has put its workers on overtime.
Dealers from Texas to Montana report that the big vehicles clogging up their lots for months like so much radioactive waste have started moving again, even at slashed prices.
So people are buying SUVs with the price going down.
What does this mean?
There are some certain things about the American and his car that we know.
Americans have an individual relationship with their car.
They love their cars and they like them big.
When they can get them, when they can afford them, they like them big.
Every chance Americans have to buy big cars when they're affordable, when the gas price is affordable, they go out and buy big cars.
They transport the family in them.
They're safe.
Americans want big cars.
And so what has happened here is, well, there's a whole series of things that have happened.
Listen to these numbers here.
The big three automakers are forced to pay idle UAW auto workers 85 to 95 percent of union wages and benefits indefinitely, even if their plants are closed.
We had a call last week from a guy who told us about the job bank.
If you're out of work, you still get paid.
But they find a job for you at a plant in a town other than where you live.
You don't have to go there to get the job.
You can stay in the job bank and get paid.
Right now, if a one expert testified on Capitol Hill, this is an expert, a quote from an expert testimony on Capitol Hill.
Right now, if a plant closes in St. Louis and a new one opens in Kansas City, the workers don't have to move from St. Louis to Kansas City.
They can opt to get a $105,000 payout or they can go on Jobs Bank where they can collect 95% of their pay for the rest of their lives.
Industry analysts say that union labor agreements that obligate the big three to pay millions of dollars to workers who are no longer working, those agreements are a major reason why the automakers are in trouble, a problem that no short-term bailout can fix.
For example, General Motors is contractually obliged to allocate $2.1 billion in job bank payments over four years.
Now, the job bank, again, is where unemployed workers can get 95% of their paychecks for the rest of their lives without having to move to where there is a job.
Those obligations, GMs alone, $2.1 billion over the next four years.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
And this is an example here of some of the comments made over the weekend on Obama's tax cut.
Brokaw talking to former Commerce Secretary Bill Daly on Meet the Press that the New York Times has reported today that in light of the downturn, Mr. Obama is also said to be reconsidering a campaign promise, his proposal to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
According to several people familiar with the discussions, he might instead let those tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2011, effectively delaying any tax increase while he gives his stimulus plan a chance to work.
Is that your understanding, Mr. Daly?
That looks more likely than not, Tom.
But the president-elect is very committed to the fact that there must be greater equity in the responsibility of taxes in this country.
We must bring tax relief to the middle class.
He has said this now for two years as he's been out there on the campaign, and he's going to deliver on that.
That's an integral part of his economic recovery package next year, is to bring some tax relief to the American people and the vast majority who are in the middle class, not those of us who do much better than that.
It's always those of us who do much better.
We don't need it.
Those of us always eager to place themselves here in the top income tax rate.
And as you know, there are already large numbers of Americans paying no income tax.
So if they're going to get a tax cut, it's going to be a welfare payment or the equivalent.
James Baker was on Meet the Press also.
Tom Brokaw said, Secretary Baker, is there anything short of bankruptcy the Republicans would sign off on to help Detroit?
What I think the president-elect could do in this case is take a page from President Ronald Reagan's book back in 1987 when every major automobile company chief executive came in pounding on my desk as Secretary of the Treasury and then over at the Oval Office demanding protection against Japanese and Korean imports.
And it wasn't easy for President Reagan to do this, but he said, wait a minute, I'm not going to do that.
We believe in free trade.
What you're going to have to do is get competitive.
You're going to have to downsize and streamline.
And they did that.
There's James Baker advising Obama what to do.
But that's not going to be the case.
See, this crisis is an opportunity for them to advance, like never before, their radical leftist agenda on as much of the fabric of the country as possible, including the auto companies.
Brokaw then said, but look, they lost their way.
And a lot of people blame this administration and others for always pushing back when people wanted to raise the cafe standards on mileage, not saying anything about Detroit and its great binge when it came to SUVs and big gas-guzzling vehicles of all kinds.
Of course, that's a big part of the problem, but another large part of the problem is that they're simply not competitive.
Given the pension benefit obligations that they've incurred over the years under both Republican and Democratic administrations, and given the wage rates and salaries that they pay, I mean, other automobile companies come into this country.
They locate in the South or the West, and they build cars, and they build them very effectively and very competitively.
Got to take a brief time out.
We'll do that.
Be back right after this.
No, go away.
Standby audio soundbites three and four.
In fact, let's get to these right now.
Austin Goolsby was the economic advisor for Barack Obama during the campaign.
He was on Slay the Nation with Bob Schaeffer.
And we've got two bites of this.
Bob Schieffer said, Look, Obama's talking about tax cuts, building roads and bridges.
Some people are saying that it may have to be something in the neighborhood.
I think Schumer this morning said it may be in the neighborhood of $500, $600, $700 billion.
Is that the sort of thing, the scope that we're talking here?
This is as big an economic crisis as we face in 75 years, and we got to do something that's up to the task of confronting that.
I don't know what the exact number is, but it's going to be a big number.
It has to be.
That's the point is to kind of get people back on track and startle the thing into submission.
Stop the tape, stop the tape.
Did you hear what Austin Goolsby just said?
I don't know what the exact number is, but it's got to be a big number.
The point is to kind of get people back on track and startle the thing into submission.
Do these people think they can startle the United States economy into submission?
What kind of now this?
Trying hard not to attach specific meaning to this because if I do, I'm going to be really scared because this is stupid to look at the economy as something that has to be tamed, to look at the economy that has to be startled into submission, as though the problem here is the economy is running wild and we can't control it, and we need a stimulus package that's going to startle the economy into submission.
We have to make the economy give up.
Please tell me that they don't look at it this way.
I fear that they do.
We have to startle the economy into submission.
They really think that they can do that?
That perspective is even valid?
Here's the rest of what he had to say.
Era of dithering is going to end.
Starting January 20, Obama's coming in.
We're out with the dithering.
We're in with a bang.
That's what it's going to be.
But you're talking about something in this neighborhood, in this ballpark.
It has to be big.
In the campaign, he was looking at stimulus that was in the $175 billion range, and the economy has gotten substantially worse since then.
So, I mean, as I say, it's going to be a number big enough that when they spell it out, it looks like, ooh, you know, with that many zeros on it.
Folks, grab on to something and hold tight.
This is just $175 billion now up to $700 billion.
The national debt, not the annual budget deficit, the annual budget deficit next, well, this current fiscal year, which started October 1st, is going to be $1.3 to $1.4 trillion.
We've never operated under that kind of deficit.
All this money, all this bailout money, where's it coming from?
We're borrowing it.
We are going further into debt.
Does it not strike anybody as strange?
Every day we wake up and there's another $700 billion going over there, another $20 billion for that bank or for that company, another $50 billion or whatever for that auto business.
Where does this stop?
Does anybody ask, where is this money coming from?
Any of you who have been paying attention to presidential or electoral politics since the Reagan years, since the 80s, that's when the liberals first started going nuts about the deficit.
The deficit was a monster that was going to eat us up and it was going to kill us.
And that was when it was $200, $300, $400 billion.
We're going to have a deficit next year, this current year, fiscal year.
$1.4 trillion?
Do you wake up and say, oh, wow, Democrat stimulus may reach $700 billion, $20 billion for Citibank?
And have you noticed something about all this?
I don't want to be a downer here, folks, but let me mention something.
We bailed out AIG, and everyone, yay!
And then there was the next day.
We found AIG was going to spas, having meetings, and we found out they needed another $80 billion.
Not so good.
And then we bailed out a couple of, well, $700 billion for the toxic asset.
Yay!
And then there was the next day where it didn't help.
And people said, we may need even more.
Yay!
And then there was the next day where the Secretary of Treasury came out and said, by the way, we're not going to buy up the toxic assets.
And we're not going to use this as we originally planned.
And I can do it because I have sole power here.
We're going to help try the liquidity markets and to get the banks to start lending.
Yay!
Then the next day came, and the banks hoarded the money and didn't lend it.
And then the automobile companies took $25 billion.
And the Fed said, maybe.
And there was no yay.
Then the next day came and the auto execs flew in on their jets.
Boo!
Hiss.
Then they went up and they got grilled and they said what they wanted.
And the markets waited with eager bated breath.
Yay!
Then there was the next day.
Harry Reid and Pelosi went out there and said, screw you, we don't have the votes.
And you're going to make us look bad.
We can't continually have losing votes up here.
So you guys, you've got a term paper to do over the Thanksgiving holiday.
You've got to get back to us on December 2nd.
You've got to come back with a plan that we can support for this money you want.
People went, yay!
Then there was the next day.
What's the plan going to be?
Nobody knew.
Then the GM execs and the Ford exec announced that they're not going to fly their corporate jets anymore.
Yay!
And then there was the next day.
Then they announced they're going to carpool from Detroit to Washington when they present their term paper.
And some liberals are going, good, good, because liberals don't like CEOs.
They don't like corporations.
Then Obama has his big meeting today.
Yay!
Well, he announced it yesterday.
Yay!
Then a meeting came today.
There were no specifics on tax cuts or economic plans, just the announcement of some people.
Yay!
Then there was the next day.
My point is that after every one of these bailouts is announced, then the next day comes, the next day, and the day after that, it didn't work.
After the first $700 billion bailout, we find out that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are overdrawn, if you will, to the tune of $30 billion each.
Yay!
Oh, no, boo, hiss.
Then the next day, bail them out.
Yay!
Then the next day came, and we're still foreclosing on people.
How can this be?
So every day they announce all this new money that we do not have.
People go, yay!
And then the next day happens when all these monies and dollars don't change anything.
Long faces set in.
I think it's safe to say things are out of control.
I think we got to just look use dead in the eye and tell we're out of control.
We're looking at a federal deficit this fiscal year of $1.3, $1.4 trillion.
That's a deficit over half the size of the budget.
And by the way, our receipts, with all these unemployed people, are tax receipts going to plunge?
Are we going to have as much revenue generated to the Treasury during this?
No, we never do.
So we're going to, in a recession, you don't.
So we've not seen anything like this since, what, 1945 when we were in the war effort, right after the war effort and coming out of all the things that we had to do there to fight World War II and the Marshall Plan and everything.
We haven't seen this in our lifetimes.
You know, I can't help.
I can't help but remember here.
It's Thanksgiving and I start getting nostalgic.
And I do through Christmas too.
And I can't help but remembering my mom and dad, my grandparents, warning me to save everything I could because of the Great Depression.
And I poo-pooed it.
Dad, I don't know.
I can't even relate to that.
I mean, I can't relate to it.
I can try to understand it, but son, they kept trying to pound into us.
You don't want to have to live through one without being prepared for you.
I'm not saying Great Depression here, but I'm, folks, things are out of control.
We are trying bold, old ideas as something new.
They are old ideas.
They have not worked anywhere they've been tried.
And we're about to reinstitute a bunch of them all over again.
I think the reason that we're out of control, I think this crisis is loved.
I think this crisis is adored by politicians who do not want to let go of their power.
I mean, on the contrary, they see this as enhancing their power.
I look at Schumer.
I look at these guys on the Sunday shows yesterday.
They look giddy.
All of these guests, the Obama people, they look giddy.
Rahm Emanuel, they can barely constrain their excitement over the chance to deal with this crisis that is too important to waste.
By the way, Thomas Donlin is the editorial page editor of Barons, which is one of these Wall Street journal magazines.
And asked him, why aren't the banks lending bailout money?
Why aren't they lending money?
The bailout money they've been getting, why aren't they lending it?
He said the bank's best customers don't want to take on more debt right now.
They're trying to pay off some of their existing debt.
They're trying to get rid of it.
Their worst customers would love more credit, especially if they don't have to pay it back.
But who wants customers like that?
So his theory is it's not just that the banks are hoarding it, is that their best customers don't want the money right now, and the people that do want it are poor risks.
And they don't want to go through that game again until and unless they're forced to.
Tad in Brazleton, Georgia.
Nice to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
Ditto Cam watching Rush Baby Dittos, buddy.
Thank you, sir.
How are you?
Oh, I'm great.
This weekend, I decided to do my part to help the economy and became one of those statistics you were talking about and bought a brand new SUV.
Well, good for you.
Was it something you really wanted, or are we just being patriotic?
Well, I'd like to think a little bit of both, but actually, it was something I really wanted, actually.
And it was practical for the family, too.
Not everyone could fit their whole family in their tow their boat with a little Vocano box.
Wait a minute.
You have a boat?
Oh, yeah.
Well, it's a sailboat, but it's heavier than most motorboats.
You have a boat?
Well, you're doing better than I thought.
So you still use it.
You still tow the boat around?
Oh, yeah, all the time.
Steve, I'm looking for something.
You have reminded me of something I have buried here.
Oh, yes.
Oh, yes.
Well, it might apply to you because your sailboat, you have to have a little engine on the back of it, right?
Well, this one doesn't, but yeah, you can put one on there.
Well, how big?
This is bigger than a toy sailboat, then, isn't it?
How you get around?
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, it's a 20-foot boat, so it's, you know, I can't run it really nilly around the lake or anything like that.
Oh, okay, 20 feet, so you don't have a problem maneuvering it into dock.
Like it's a big, well, get this.
This story is from the Naples, Florida Daily News, and it was published on Saturday.
There's an ailment afflicting boats in Florida and elsewhere with symptoms of poor performance and clogged fuel systems.
The problems may be staved off by preventive measures, but boat owners caught off guard may face repairs that can cost hundreds of dollars, maybe even thousands.
The culprit is ethanol.
Required in Florida following passage of a law this past spring that gasoline contain 10% ethanol, which is called E10 fuel, by the end of 2010.
A half dozen other states have similar laws by early summer.
Now, stick with me on this, folks.
This is just classic.
By early summer, gas stations statewide in Florida began receiving E10 fuel, gasoline, 10% ethanol.
Notices on pumps say the gas can contain 10% ethanol or less.
Marinas and airports are exempt, and then they can sell ethanol-free gas, but since spring, until recently, many marinas had no choice but to accept E10 fuel.
Apart from that, many people with boats on trailers pull up at the gas station or fill portable gas tanks for cheaper fuel, unwittingly setting themselves up for disaster.
Ethanol is alcohol.
One characteristic of alcohol is that it attracts water and therefore pulls moisture into vented fuel tanks on boats.
If the E10 fuel sits long enough, the water and ethanol separate from the gas and can cause poor engine performance and damage the fuel system.
A second and equally damaging trait of alcohol for boats is that it is a solvent.
The ethanol loosens fuel varnish buildup and rust in the fuel tank, and that gunk gets carried into the fuel system, potentially clogging and damaging parts like carburetors and fuel injectors.
Two lawsuits in California and Florida have been filed to date against oil manufacturers that produce E10 fuel on the basis that companies knew of potential harm to boat engines and failed to warn the public.
The defendants are Chevron, Exxon, BP America, Shell Oil, and ConocoPhillips.
Now, this is just great, folks.
Big oil having to play this ridiculous green game and produce all this ethanol by federal mandate now getting sued because ethanol causes huge problems in boat motors.
So after causing starvation problems around the world, we've now learned that ethanol is, by the way, there are some homeowners in Florida reporting the similar problems with their lawn equipment.
Lawn mowers and this kind of thing, simply because it attracts water.
These things get wet.
We were basically forced.
This is the Naples City dock, the dock master, Mike Klein.
We were basically forced to take ethanol in the beginning because they didn't want to have separate tanks.
Ports did not set aside a tank for ethanol-free.
I knew the law excluded marinas, but all we could get was E10.
So your yard equipment keeps crapping out on you.
Well, it might be that you're using fuel with ethanol and it's getting contaminated with water.
Now, folks, let me tell you the point of this.
The point of this is not once again to poke fun at the incompetence of people in Washington passing mandates.
Ethanol, by the way, is a SOP to the agriculture industry and the corn growers in various states, Iowa, Nebraska around the country.
But the issue is one of freedom.
All of this, when we deal with what kind of cars Obama is going to mandate General Motors make, or Congress mandate what kind of cars General Motors is going to make in order to get their bailout and so forth, or this ethanol business being forced on people under a false premise, the man-made global warming.
But even without the false premise, these kinds of things happen.
It's just the nature of government to assume more and more power, and that means taking away more and more liberty.
And those of us on my side of the aisle, we look at all of this that's happening, and we see just encroachment after encroachment after encroachment on liberty and on freedom.
And we had a caller earlier in the program today who I, you know, he was a typical liberal who wanted to take issue with me for being, in his opinion, opposed to green cars and healthy cars and all this sort of stuff.
And I told him, you're missing the point here.
It's a freedom issue.
If I want to buy an SUV, I ought to be able to buy one.
That's the free market at work.
But I'm afraid we've got an administration here that's going to do its best to wipe out those kind of cars for whatever well-intentioned reason.
If I mounted up all the good intentions of liberal programs and paid myself a penny for every one of them, I could retire.
But we're never supposed to examine anything but the good intentions.
We're never supposed to examine the results.
They always fail.
And once you give up a freedom, once you give up a liberty, it's really, really tough to get it back.
And this is the primary thing that bothers me about all of these stories.
It's not the federal government's business to be mandating how the automobile business runs.
The CAFE standards alone are bad enough because that's a false premise as well.
That's all designed to save the economy or to save the climate and so forth.
Now, don't misunderstand.
I'm not for unnecessary pollution and all that, my friends.
I've never believed that all these problems are as crisis-oriented, bad as everybody made them out to be.
We do a better job of cleaning up our messes in this country than anywhere else around the world does for large industrialized nations.
But it's a liberty issue.
It's a freedom issue.
So now here we've got ethanol in boats that's causing damage to boat motors and so forth.
And people have no choice but then to use it.
We just see everything being announced by this administration, all the money we're going to be spending.
It's just, you know, you worry about your kids, you worry about your grandkids.
I know this is something that's common in this country for my whole life.
You know, we've grown up, and I've met people who think that it's dire circumstances for their kids in the future.
Mr. Limbaugh, I just don't think my kids are going to have the ability to exercise freedom and opportunity and prosperity like I've had.
People, this is a normal concern, I think, that every parent, every generation has.
We're getting to the point now where with all this debt and all this liberty that is being taken away under the guise of security, you start wondering at some point, you know, are we seeing the demise of the country?
It's not going to be instant.
It's not going to be something happens tomorrow.
But, you know, you reach the tipping point when 50% or more of the people are willing to give up their freedom in order for whatever their wants and needs happen to be that they believe the government can provide for them.
Then we have a real challenge.
And we have been inching that way.
Now, my brothers would be for these guys just to get out of the way.
If he would just, if he would have today announced a corporate tax cut, if he would have announced a capital gains tax cut, and he got a question wanting specifics on his tax increase on the rich, and he wouldn't answer it.
And the market wants answers on these kind of things.
The American people, business communities want answers.
They need to be able to long-term plan and have some kind of notion of stability.
But all this borrowing of money to create 2.5 million jobs with $700 billion make work projects on roads and bridges is not the way to do this.
If you really want the economy to rebound, there are a bunch of taxes that could still be cut.
Even the top rate, you could take the top rate right now from, what is it, 36 or 35 and drop it just two points.
And I guarantee you, it would renew activity to start earning dollars.
When you get to keep more dollars of what you earn and produce, the incentive is to earn them.
And as you earn more at a lower rate, the Treasury benefits proved out with a capital gains rate.
This is what leads me to believe these people aren't serious about a recovery because they know what they're serious about is encapsulating their power, putting an exclamation point on it, and holding it for as long as they can.
This is FDR redone over again.
So look at the irony here.
Obama and the Democrats have demanded specifics from the big three automakers on December 2nd.
You better get specific and you better tell us what you're going to do to get that bailout money.
Then today, Obama delivers not one specific about any element of his plan.
The auto dealers, the auto manufacturers, rather, ought to ask for the same deal.
Well, Mr. Obama, of course, pipe dream, not going to happen.
Everybody's running scared from the government now, which is exactly what the government wants.
This is Gary in Southington, Connecticut.
Hey, Gary, thanks for waiting.
You're on the EIB network.
Rosh, huge fan.
I'm so honored to be on with you right now.
Thank you, sir, very much.
I appreciate that.
I just wanted to make a quick comment on something you said earlier about jobs to be created by Obama to fix the roads and bridges.
I have a friend that works for the New York City DOT, and for those in Rio Linda, that's the Department of Transportation.
No, no, no, no.
Rio Linda's been excused here.
From now on, it's for those of you who voted for Obama because it is they are the most uninformed people in the country among the voting population, according to exit poll data.
Thank you for the correction.
You bet.
Well, my friend works for the DOT, and he basically drives a truck to fix potholes for the city of New York City.
And he drives a truck of a six-man work crew.
And basically, after he's done with all of his, and he tells them this very easily, once they're done with all of their setup and breakdown between all their breaks, they fix about six potholes per day, a six-man work crew.
Does he tell you this with great pride?
He sure is.
He's proud, and he's a total lib.
But he's a good friend, and I love him.
It's funny how he speaks about his job.
So he's happy that the workload is no heavier than six potholes a day with six guys on the crew.
Well, sometimes he wishes he would work more for a living, but he's pretty happy the way it is.
Obviously, he's a member of a union.
Yes, he clearly is.
So the union probably negotiated this rule: no more than six potholes a day, so our crew won't get exhausted.
So basically, one pothole per crew member.
Basically, yeah.
Nice work if you can get it.
Yep.
Well, I appreciate the call, Gary.
Thanks much.
There's not enough time to be fair with another call here before we go to the break.
I'm just looking, there was one thing, it was something at the top of my mind when I was talking to him.
He said something that spurred something, and then I looked at the clock, so I didn't have enough time to mention it and forgot it.
No, didn't forget it.
It just temporarily left the frontal lobe where the memory is.
Anyway, brief timeout here because it's important.
It's funny, too.
It'll come to me.
Soon as I go to the break, you watch.
It'll come to me.
Soon as I went to the break, I remembered it.
You know, they're always saying, the drive-bys of Democrats are always saying that we conservatives are the hypocrites, moral values, family values.
But the talk here from Obama in his economic meeting today and over the weekend from his team about all these new green cars, alternative energy that you're going to demand that Detroit make and that we buy, he is going to exempt himself from his own restrictions with his limousine.
▲
Export Selection