All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 2, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:17
January 2, 2009, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, happy new year, the first live Rush Show of the New Year.
America's Anchorman is away, and this is your undocumented anchor man subbing for Rush.
Rush will be back on Monday, having been through re-education camp.
He'll be all rearing a go for the coronation of King Barak coming up in just a couple of weeks.
And don't forget that even though Rush is not here, some things stay just the same.
Live from New York City, it's Open Wine Friday!
Yeah, Open Wind Friday, 1-800-282-2882.
It's a free-through.
You don't have to have the right-wing talking points shoved down your throat.
We're not getting our orders direct from Karl Rove here.
You want to disrupt the show?
You want to bring up some left-wing talking point?
You feel free to do it.
1-800-282-2882.
Anything you want to talk about.
We've covered the spectrum in the last couple of hours.
We've talked about the economy and we've talked about the gay leather fetishists.
And they're holding their convention in Washington, same time as the inauguration.
I shouldn't say, I make it sound when I say from the economy to the gay leather fetishists, as if those two subjects aren't connected.
I mean, the way things are going in this country, it's probably the gay leather fetishist convention that's probably up what's left of the economy.
I was told that a lot of people were kind of downheartened at the beginning of the year.
I was saying, you know, talking about American decline, remorseless incremental decline.
And people have been calling in and saying, well, when is it over?
When is it over?
Well, the good news is that it's not going to be, I don't think it's going to be over during the first Obama term.
The total societal collapse may not kick in until midway through a second term.
So if you're worried about your property prices falling, they've still got a long way to go.
But underlying it, there is a serious point.
Societies in decline are often very agreeable places.
Everyone, if you read Paul Krugman in the New York Times, he's always raving about how the French have done a much better job than Americans have of balancing the demands of work and family, which is to say that they don't do a lot of work over there in France.
They have a lot of time off.
When you go over there, it looks great.
They're all sitting around sidewalk cafes, sipping their cafe au lait, having a croissant.
It seems to be three o'clock in the afternoon.
You're thinking, well, hang on a minute, don't these guys have any jobs to go back to do?
It all seems very agreeable.
Slow decline in civilized societies can seem very agreeable, but you reach a point from which it's impossible to return.
And I don't want America to reach that point.
But for all those people who've been calling in saying, wow, he keeps talking about decline, decline, decline, decline, is it going to kick in soon?
No, as I said, total societal collapse, my best guess is midway through Obama's second term.
So there's no reason to worry about it happening imminently.
Prioritizing, that's the thing.
That's the issue.
What are the real problems?
Can you focus on them or are you going to carry on just focusing on fictional problems?
What is the greatest fictional issue confronting the world today?
It is climate change, climate change.
We have had global cooling.
Now, they used to talk about global warming.
Then in 1998, the planet actually began getting cooler.
We've had global cooling now.
We've been in a cooling trend for 10 years.
10 years.
People are still talking about global warming because they now say the cooling trend is itself a symptom of global warming.
It doesn't matter whether if it's hot, that's a sign of global warming.
If it's cold, that's a sign of global warming.
If it's just like 53 and cloudy, that is a sign that global warming is rampaging out of control and you should probably head for the hills because the apocalypse is coming.
When I moved to New Hampshire, I love weather philosophy.
I love the way you'd talk to some gnarled old guy in plaid and you'd say, Well, it seems a bit chilly today.
And he'd go, If you don't like the weather, wait 10 minutes.
Or if you don't like the weather, cross the road.
In other words, weather is changeable.
The whole thing about living in New Hampshire is the weather is changeable.
There's a potential 100-degree difference in January day.
You might get a January day where it's a freakish hot January melt and it's 70 degrees, or it might be minus 30.
There's a hundred degree variation of temperature.
That's just normal.
That's normal.
Yet suddenly we get a one-degree variation in the planetary temperature across the course of a century.
And this one degree variation in the course of the century means that suddenly we have to collapse the entire global economy, reorient the global economy, and just give up all the good things we have in life in order to return ourselves to some Stone Age civilization, some Edenic, ideal meteorological condition of the planet.
This is all nonsense.
I mean, I'm not actually in favor of climate change.
You remember that movie that came out in the 2004 election, and Al Gore said it was going to change the course of the election and get John Kerry elected.
No, not Al Gore's movie.
I'm not talking about Al Gore's movie.
I'm talking this one, The Day After Tomorrow.
It's unlike Al Gore's movie, it's actually watchable.
It's a hilarious film.
There's like this Dick Cheney figure, and he gives a speech at some international conference and says that there's nothing to any of this global warming, climate change stuff.
And the next thing that happens is the entire northern hemisphere has flash frozen.
And it's a speech by, I don't want to give the plot away.
If you haven't seen the film, just put your hands over your ears for the next five seconds.
But essentially, a speech by Dick Cheney brings on flash freezing of the entire northern hemisphere.
And they're all in the New York Public Library.
New York is frozen.
New York Harbor is frozen.
And there's the Statue of Liberty poking its head up out of the frozen ice in New York Harbor.
It's like the famous scene at the end of Planet of the Apes, except that instead of nuclear Holocaust doing this, because nobody worries about nukes now.
People worried about nukes when it was just crazy people like Reagan and Thatcher that had nukes.
But now that, you know, Ahmed Interjad and Kim Jong-il of nukes, nobody worries about them on the when it was Reagan and Thatcher, the left did plays about nukes, they did films about nukes, everything.
They did books about nuclear winter.
It was nuke, nuke, nuke.
Now nobody cares about that.
Nukes are fine.
Ahmed Innerjad's got nukes.
Kim Jong-il's got nukes.
We're all cool with that.
So now we worry about the weather.
It's still the same scene.
We've got the same scene of the Statue of Liberty sticking up out of a frozen New York City harbor and all these people huddled in the New York Public Library burning books, burning books.
They're tearing pages out of books and throwing them in the fire to keep warm.
The New York Public Library is full of wood-paneled wainscoting all over the place.
Why don't they rip a few boards off the paneling of the New York Public Library and burn that to stay warm?
This crazy film makes no sense.
People in there tearing up sheets of paper and shoveling them into the fire and saying, oh, we don't seem to be getting a lot of heat from this.
Anyway, that was the day off.
It's a wood-panel building.
Burn the building.
The day after tomorrow.
That was the day after tomorrow.
It's a fabulous film.
But the point here is that this is like a fictional delusion.
The planet gets hot, the planet gets cold.
Basically, every 30 years there's a mild warming trend.
Next 30 years, there's a mild cooling trend.
And nobody should pay any attention to it except for people who write books like they used to write in the 60s and 70s warning about the new ice age.
And then the same guys who write the new books warning about the new ice age then switch and write about how everything's going to be a desert.
And then another couple of decades go by and they switch back to reissuing their original ice age books from the 70s.
And the rest of us should pay no attention to it.
But it's interesting.
Environmentalism is interesting as an insight into government.
If you take Schwarzenegger, for example, California, he's supposed to be a great guy on the environment.
This is a guy who's got real crises on his hand.
His state is broke.
You know, he came as a penniless immigrant, Arnold did, to a land of plenty.
Now he's an immigrant of plenty in a penniless land.
That's the history of California since Arnold got there.
Does he do anything to correct the real, is he doing anything to correct the real crises facing California?
No.
Instead, he's obsessing on lunatic regulation to warn off fictional climate change.
And again, this is the ambition of big government.
Big government, if you say to big government, well, look, there seem to be a lot of people just walking into this country and claiming medical care and benefits, they just walk straight over the border.
Do you think we could build a fence?
Oh, no, no.
There'd be no question of building a fence.
It'd be absurd to even talk about building a fence.
That's pie in the sky stuff.
It's never going to work.
In the famous words of Senator Trent Lott, he's yet to see a fence that his billy goats can't leap over.
So the idea of building a fence along the border, that is completely preposterous.
But changing the very heavens, changing the very climate, and not just of the planet, but even into outer space and the outer solar system, as Al Gore talks about in his More Ambition Moments, changing the very climate, the very heavens that we can do.
Build a fence, that's pie in the sky, utopian stuff, never going to happen.
But changing the very heavens that we can do.
Environmentalism is interesting mainly as a glimpse of the ambition of big government.
But the fact is, it's nonsense.
We're celebrating the 10th anniversary of global cooling.
And the best way to do that is to just laugh, laugh out loud the next time you meet some environmentalist who tells us time is running out to save the planet.
This is Mark Stein, Open Line Friday on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Rush is going to be back in on Monday.
And it's Open Line Friday, so we'll be taking your calls straight ahead: 1-800-282-2882.
And don't forget also rushlimbo.com.
Mark Stein at the EIB Network celebrating the 10th anniversary of global cooling.
By the way, there's a terrific picture in the New York Times on Monday of a guy in Minnesota sweeping the snow off his solar panels.
He's not getting any heat from the solar paddles because he had like a foot and a half of snow on them.
So he's got a, it's a big problem.
It's a big problem you're concerned about the environment.
Got to start keeping the snow off those solar panels.
Otherwise, global warming could be rampanting out of control.
Let's go to Mark in Portland, Oregon, Cascadia, where they take all that global warming nonsense seriously.
Mark, welcome to the EIB Network.
Thank you very much, Mark.
Great to talk to you.
My pleasure.
I'm a retired GM UAW member.
So I know a little bit about socialization here, socialized medicine and everything is worried about.
I'm worried about that.
I assume, I don't, I've never heard you before, so I assume you're from England.
Well, I've had, I've lived in countries with socialized medicine.
I'll put it that way.
Okay, that's what I wanted to talk about.
If you could explain to the people a little bit what the Democrats are trying to do to us as far as putting us into a socialized medicine situation.
Well, the point about socialized medicine is that the minute you have a system of socialized medicine, you, the sick person, are the only point at which you can control costs.
Because if you go to see a doctor as a private citizen, and you've got cancer.
It's in the doctor's interest to get you treated for that cancer, get the cancer cut out, get you treated as quickly as possible so he gets his check.
It's to get you into surgery and the cancer cut out.
It's in his economic interest.
It is in the economic interest of a socialized system for you not to be treated.
Because every Friday, they've still got to pay the doctors and the nurses and the janitors.
And the only point at which they can control costs is through you, the sick person.
So what you find is the minute you have a socialized system, you have huge long waiting lists for anything.
You wait two years to get your hip replacement in England.
In the province of Quebec, which has a socialized healthcare system and now has the lowest doctor patient ratio in the Western world, you get cancer in Quebec.
They wait until it's metastasized and spread throughout your body, and then they send you south of the border to Fletcher Allen in Burlington, Vermont, or Dartmouth Hitchcock in Lebanon, New Hampshire, so you can die in a foreign hospital unsurrounded by tiresome loved ones.
That is socialized healthcare because you're the point at which they control costs.
You know, there is absolutely no end to the absurdity about it.
There was a story in the paper, I think it was last year, about a Canadian woman who gave birth in Great Falls, Montana.
I believe it was for triplets.
Anyway, she went to her local hospital in British Columbia, I believe it was, and they didn't have any beds for her.
And they called maternity wards all across the province of British Columbia and then across the rest of Canada, and they couldn't find beds for her.
So in the end, she had to be put on a little twin prop and flown with a nurse and a respiratory technician 300 miles across the border to a hospital in Great Falls, Montana, where her children were safely born.
Because it would be unreasonable to expect a G7 economy of 30 million people to offer the same level of natal care as a remote town in Montana of 50,000 people.
That is what happens the minute you have a socialized healthcare system.
I remember at the time this story happened, and of course, you know, if you're like the way people do now when they go to these Lamars classes to learn the breathing exercises that when you're giving birth, because it's a, I don't want to go into all the icky details, but it can be a bit of a problem for women.
You want to do the breathing exercise, you go to the Lamars classes.
There are no Lamars classes that prepare you for a flight in a twin prop across the Rockies when your contractions kick in.
But that is what you've got to be prepared for if you are pregnant up in Canada.
And I mentioned this story to Peter Robinson, who wrote the great tear-down-this-wall speech for President Reagan.
And I said, that's socialized health care for you, the 10-month waiting list for the maternity warden.
He said to me, he said, oh, God, he goes, Reagan would have loved that line.
I can imagine him saying it.
But, you know, the danger is that, again, with socialized health care is when you try to do it all in one go, like with Hillary care, people get riled and mad and they rise up and it gets voted down.
The danger is what we've had over the last 40 years now in America is the remorseless annexation of the health system by government through government programs and government entitlements.
And through nibbling it away at the edges to say, well, old people and poor people and then young people, you know, now they want to talk about insuring all kids.
And eventually the proportion of the health system that is still in a private system between the consumer and the supplier is no longer the majority of the system.
And then you're in real trouble.
At that point, you know, we think of doctors as a middle class profession.
It isn't in a lot of countries that have socialized health care.
If you remember that system from that story, new story out of Britain, I think it was last year, about the guys driving the Jeep Cherokee into Glasgow airport, the jihadists.
These are fellows who were doctors in the British national health system, national health service, which is the biggest employer in Europe.
It's got like tons of people.
And because middle class people don't want to be doctors and nurses in a socialized health system, they've got to import them from elsewhere.
And so in Britain, they come from, as these doctors did, they come from India and Pakistan and Iraq.
And these guys were pulling down good jobs as doctors and nurses at these hospitals and decided, hey, you know, nuts to that.
I'd much rather go and self-detonate in the concourse of Glasgow airport.
I'm not saying that every doctor in a socialized health care system is a suicide bomber in waiting.
I'm saying that socialized health care is a suicide bomb in waiting, that there is simply no way you can make the math add up.
There are more MRI machines in the city of Philadelphia than in the whole of Canada.
And that's the problem.
The minute you have a socialized health care system, it's all about waiting.
You wait, you wait, you wait.
You've got a hip problem.
You wait, you wait, you wait in pain.
And whenever they do these things, whenever they do these things about comparing the percentage of GDP spent on health care in America versus the rest of the world, they never factor that in.
They never factor the fact that you're waiting for your hip replacement for two years.
So you're underperforming at work all that time because you're crippled up in agony and you can't do – you can't work 100 percent.
That's a cost to the economy too.
If you think – as the famous line goes, if you think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free.
That's the lesson.
The 10-month waiting list for the maternity warder, that woman in British Columbia flying in the twin prop to give birth to her babies in Montana because there was nowhere to give it anywhere in the Dominion of Canada.
That is socialized health care.
More straight ahead on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
This is Mark Stein sitting in for Rush.
1-800-282-2882.
And don't forget, Rush will be back, fight and fit, on Monday.
Open Line Friday.
Rush will be back on Monday.
But great to be with you for the first show of the new year.
You know, I forgot to mention when we were talking about socialized health care just before the break.
The big thing about socialized health care, if you're interested in freedom, is that the minute you have socialized health care, the government can justify anything on the health costs of it.
So, for example, in the United Kingdom now, they won't treat you.
If you're a smoker and you get heart disease, there are places that won't treat you because you should have known about that before you started smoking.
If you're overweight, they won't give you the hip replacement because you shouldn't have got overweight.
So it's a way of the government telling you how to live your life, how to live every aspect of your life because every aspect of your life has a potential health component to it.
And if it has a health component to it, then it's the government's business because the government is paying for your health care.
And it doesn't – so it doesn't just stop at, you know, you smoke a bit and then you get heart disease or whatever.
It becomes preemptive.
It becomes preemptive.
They've installed cameras all over British highways now that can photograph you in your car and see whether you're eating a sandwich because if you're eating a sandwich, that might be dangerous and you might have an accident.
And if you have an accident, you might have to be taken to hospital.
So, you know, the country is riddled with jihadists.
Basically, Britain is like Somalia with chip shops now.
Now, it's essentially hollowed out by jihadists, but they can't do anything about that.
But they can fine you and charge you and arrest you for eating a sandwich in your car.
That's the way it goes.
That's socialized health care.
It's essentially a way of justifying government intervention in any area of life whatsoever.
Let's go to Ken on Open Line Friday.
Ken is calling us from Danville in California.
Ken, welcome to the EIB Network.
Thanks, Mark.
Yeah, I'm in the middle of Arnold Schwarzenegger land.
Yeah.
The thing that concerns me most when I look at government versus capitalism is that government is programmed to finance that which doesn't work very well.
And capitalism is programmed to finance that which works well.
And the two examples I think of are the auto bailout where Ford appears to be making the turn already and basically doesn't need government assistance.
But GM and Chrysler wind up not riding their ships in time.
And who does the government give money to but the two organizations that aren't riding their ships?
And Ford, of course, to their credit, says, no, thanks.
We've already were in process of making the turn and we don't need the money.
But societies need to be built on funding organizations who do things right rather than funding organizations who don't know how to do it right.
Yeah, you're absolutely right on that and the world you create because there's always going to be people who fail, who fall through what they call the so-called safety net.
But if you actively devise systems that reward the failed model, then in fact the people you're ensnaring in the net are the successful people.
It's not that people fall through the safety net.
It's that other people can't rise through the safety net to do the extraordinary things, to create the extraordinary companies on which successful societies depend.
Yeah, and the other example that I see here in California is we experience about a 50 percent dropout rate in our schools in California.
And the area that I'm fortunate enough to live in receives about $9,500 per pupil for education.
And they get about 80 to 85 to 90 percent graduation rate in going to college.
In other parts of California, the state pays $18,000 to $19,000 to $20,000 per pupil, and they get about 25 to 30 percent of their graduates going to college with about a 70 to 75 percent dropout rate.
So they're funding, in fact, like you said, the organizations that don't produce.
Yeah.
Well, you know, the education system is a very good example about that because by any reasonable measure, about a third of the money in the U.S. education system is entirely wasted.
And when you get up to those numbers, when they're spending $20,000 per pupil, you know, it would be cheaper to actually just close down the school system and stick those people on a plane and send them to the same Swiss finishing school John Kerry went to.
Because at that point, at that point, there is no – when it gets to $20,000 per pupil, there is no point whatsoever to public education because if you give – if you put that $20,000 into use anywhere in the private sector – and by the way, I'm not saying that John Kerry's Swiss finishing school is right for all.
It didn't really seem to work out for him terribly well.
But, you know, that is the hard math of it, that at $20,000 per pupil, there is no point in a state – at that point, the education system is being run entirely for the teachers' union and for nobody else's benefit.
Well, if there was any evidence that $20,000 per pupil created a better pupil, I might support it.
But in fact, the opposite seems to be true.
Yeah, yeah.
I think you're right there.
And your basic point is very sound, Ken, that essentially when you – if you set up a government system, you reward mediocrity.
Everybody knows this in the end.
When they have direct contact with the government, you think most of the time, most of these government programs, as a foreigner, I get to see more of it than I want to.
Because when it comes to renewing my driver's license or my social security card, that kind of thing, sometimes I have to go and show myself in person at the head office in the way that if you're just a native-born U.S. citizen, you don't – But you've got to take the paperwork with you, all the paperwork with you to the – like your long-form birth certificate and the – actually, maybe I should have run for president.
Apparently, you don't.
It's easier.
I wouldn't have had the birth certificate problems with that.
Ghost Stein 2012.
That's my new cabinet.
As you can tell from my accent, I was born in the general vicinity of Hawaii.
You know, you don't need to ask any more questions.
That's all you need to know.
That's all you need to know.
But – and when you go there – but for most people, unless they have to directly go to the DMV and then they see – and then they're standing in line and they're confronted by the torpor and mediocrity of most government programs.
You think of anything you like.
You imagine what it would be like if government ran your email.
You imagine if instead of going and renting a DVD from Netflix, you had to go and rent a DVD from the Federal Bureau of Movie Rentals.
You imagine what it would be like.
It's a recipe for sclerosis, for seizing up.
I said a couple of weeks ago, I was thinking of that fabulous, you know, Dinah Shaw thing in the 50s.
Every week she'd come on TV and say, see the USA in your Chevrolet.
And they were great, but they got old and they got – and their arteries hardened.
And that's the beauty of capitalism, that if you don't stay on your toes, if you don't mind the store, you're over.
I like the Atchison, Topeka and the Santa Fe.
I like the Sears, Roebuck catalogue.
But their moment passes.
And if you're not nimble enough to move on to the next new thing, then you're over.
And there's no point government trying to prop you up.
There will be no point government bailing out the Sears, Roebuck catalogue.
There's no point government bailing out the Atchison, Topeka and the Santa Fe.
It ain't going to work.
And that is the beauty of capitalism.
It's inbuilt dynamism.
Thanks very much for your call, Ken.
And here's hoping that California, which is a glorious state, one of the great iconic states of this union, and here's hoping that even the malign alliance between Arnold Schwarzenegger and a democratic legislature will not totally destroy it.
Happy New Year to you, Ken.
This is the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Mark Stein sitting in for Rush.
Open line Friday, 1-800-282-2882.
And we'll have more straight ahead.
2009 on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
It's here.
The whole era of Hopi Changemas is about to begin, and we're thrilled about it.
Rush will be back on Monday to start the tough work of broadcasting three hours a day in the Obama era.
But this is Mark Stein sitting in for Rush.
And let us go to Zaron in Detroit on Open Line Friday.
Welcome to the Rush Limbaugh Show, Zaron.
Hey, you have a Canadian governor in Detroit.
That's how progressive you are.
That's right.
That's very true.
Happy New Year, Mark.
It's an absolute privilege to speak to you.
I always enjoy your enlightening thinking.
I wanted to find out.
I didn't realize you were born in Canada, and I know a number of Canadians that listen to this program.
Wouldn't it be ironic if four or eight years from today, liberal socialist Canada ends up looking more conservative than Obama's America?
But my question for you is this.
Are you following what's happening with the conservative leader, the conservative government in Canada, which appears to me, from everything I've read, to be doing a pretty good job trying to keep their economy stable and not follow some of the pitfalls and mistakes that we've made over here?
Are you watching what's happening, the liberals are trying to throw out Stephen Harper?
Yeah, that's actually true in a strange way, that the conservatives are the conservative Canada.
It's like a very mildly writer's center, but it's basically a kind of, you know, the Switzerland of North America.
It's got a very sound banking system.
It's got a very sound currency at the moment.
But that is not anywhere that anyone wants to go.
Nobody knows about it.
It's a best-kept secret.
But the liberals, they had an election, oh, what was it now, October, just a couple of weeks before the U.S. election.
And the conservatives were returned to power as the biggest party in parliament.
And then the liberals ganged up with the New Democratic Party and the Bloc Québécois.
That is basically the soft left, the hard left, and the separatist left.
And they tried to basically hijack parliament and take over the government without having an election.
The way to think about it is, if you remember Jim Jeffords here, jump in Jim Jeffords.
Do you remember about whatever it was three or four years ago?
In 2002, he switched from being a Republican, which he never really was, to being an independent, which he wasn't either, because he always basically just voted for the Democrats.
But anyway, jump in Jim Jeffords.
Do you remember he got mad because he wasn't invited?
The White House, for some reason, held a reception for the Vermont Teacher of the Year.
And they didn't invite Jim Jeffords.
This is the kind, when people have been calling in and asking, when is America over?
Because I've been talking about decline.
It's on these things that history turns, folks.
You mock, you mock, you think the idea seems ridiculous.
The Vermont Teacher of the Year reception.
How important can that be?
On such hinges of history do mighty empires hang.
The White House didn't invite Jim Jeffords to the Vermont Teacher of the Year reception.
And he threw a big hissy fit.
And he switched to becoming an independent and caucusing with the Democrats.
Remember, John McCain was furious because John McCain was Mr. Maverick, Mr. Independent, and still in the glory days of his hot press coverage.
And then suddenly he's picking up Time magazine and there's Jim Jeffords on the cover saying, at last, a man of independence.
Well, you know, I don't mind the Democrats taking control of the Senate if they do it in an election.
But Jim Jeffords flipping control of the Senate to the Democrats, simply because he wasn't invited to the Vermont Teacher of the Year reception, I don't think is Democratic.
And that is what the Liberals and the New Democratic Party, that's the hard left party, and the Bloc Québécois, who are the crazy separatist party, they all got together and tried to change the result of the Canadian election and take over the government without having an election.
I like elections.
You know, when people say, take back America, the left have all these things, take back America, take back this, take back that.
It's not actually difficult.
You don't have to take it back.
All you've got to do is, say, run for office and get elected and people will get it.
And you don't have to bring the Vermont Teacher of the Year reception into it.
There's no reason why this country should dissolve into civil war and total societal collapse over the Vermont Teacher of the Year reception.
I don't remember.
I'm sorry.
I'm ashamed to say I don't remember who won Vermont Teacher of the Year that year.
But whoever she is, I'm sure she's aghast at the idea that the Vermont Teacher of the Year reception should precipitate all this chaos and ill feeling.
And that's basically what happened up in Canada a couple of weeks ago, except they didn't even have a Vermont Teacher of the Year reception.
Vermont seems like it's in Canada, but I believe technically it's still just about south of the border.
So they don't celebrate Vermont Teacher of the Year Day up in Canada.
Anyway, thank you for that call from Detroit, Sauer.
And yes, it's true, they do have a Canadian governor there, Jennifer Granholm, who the Democrats at one point, when they wanted to get the Constitution changed to enable people who weren't born here to run for office, I believe that's not a problem anymore.
Anyway, back when they were pickier about these things, Jennifer Granholm, they always used to say they wanted to change the Constitution for her because she was telegenic, which is what these sort of progressive Democrat males have to say instead of hot.
You know, if you're a Democrat and you're dating a woman, and if you're a Democrat male and you're dating a woman of the opposite sex, I don't know whether there are any fellas like that still in the Democratic Party, but if they are, and you take a gal out for dinner, now don't tell her she looks hot because that's sexist.
Tell her she looks telegenic.
So that's what they said about Jennifer Granholm.
They said she looked telegenic.
And then, of course, she does look telegenic.
But then you think, after a while, you get bored with looking at her and you look at what she's done to the state of Michigan.
And at that point, nobody is that telegenic.
And so I don't think we'll be seeing President Granholm any day soon.
This is Mark Stein on The Rush Limbaugh Show.
We will have more for you straight ahead on the EIB Network.
Happy New Year, America.
The EIB Network.
Mark Stein sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
Rush will be back Monday.
You know, I joke about being an illegal immigrant, and I mainly do that so any members of the Border Patrol listening aren't entirely sure whether it's true or not.
But I must say that without getting out the old violin obligato and the sob story, it is always a great honor to be here sitting in for Rush because there are jobs that Americans won't do, but this is not one of them.
And I'm always very appreciative when I get to be here sitting in on America's number one radio show.
You know, people say that we need to change in conservatism.
I take the line that we actually need to change some of our policies, but we need to remember the principles.
And I love that line from Ronald Reagan's inaugural address.
We are a nation that has a government, not the other way around.
Too much of the thinking that we're about to see after January 20th is predicated on the basis that we're a government that has a nation.
That's not the way it is, America.
▲
Export Selection