All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 15, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:38
January 15, 2009, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host of this program make more sense than anything anybody else out there happens to be saying because we are engaged in a relentless and unstoppable pursuit of the truth, and we find it.
Rush Limbaugh with half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Great to have you here.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
I want to do a little side-by-side comparison here of uh Obama and and uh Steve Jobs.
Uh he's in the news recently with his health problems, and what the news of the health problems he's encountering is causing to happen to the stock of his company, Apple Incorporated.
Now, before the reason for this is the fear that we all have that the uh country is slowly becoming a majority slacker country.
People who think that they are entitled to things because they're Americans, that America owes them something, that the American government owes them a life of no suffering, uh a life of no sacrifice, a lag a life of uh of of ease, so to speak.
That's their birthright, and they large part in some cases you can't blame them because there's been an entire political party apparatus that's been convincing them of this, that life is unfair because of Republicans and conservatives who steal all the money and uh and and don't there's none left for the little people, the little people's money is in effect being stolen, so they end up angry all the time, and uh whenever the rich are soaked or whatever are harmed.
Um the clients of Bernie Madoff that got uh wiped out.
I I guarantee a significant number of Americans are happy about it.
The rich finally find out what it's like to be one of us.
Blah, blah, blah.
So there's this this mentality is pervasive.
But before we get into this side by side, a couple of uh of interesting things in terms of polling data, two polls out uh yesterday that say Americans want tax cuts in a stimulus plan and that they don't trust the federal government.
There's also a poll out that says just the opposite.
One is a Rasmussen poll, the other is the NBC Wall Street Journal poll.
Now, the Rasmussen poll would indicate that Reaganism is not dead.
Tax cuts and a clear realization by Americans that government's the problem, not the solution.
But is anybody in the Republican Party listening?
Anybody that attended the fantastic Obama dinner on Tuesday night, any of them listening.
To me, it's another fantastic wake-up call for Republicans, but they are so obsessed with not being seen as critical that they're passing up what I think is a golden opportunity for crying out loud.
Here you have I mean, you you the new deal too.
Call it what you want.
Collectivism, socialism, massive government, collect to call it what you want.
There is an opportunity for stark contrast here that is passing us by, at least at the elected level.
It's not passing us by.
Now, let's see what's been handed to the Republicans on a silver platter in the recent past.
The first bailouts, Americans by a large margin didn't think that bailout was the right thing to do.
And we bailed out we bailed out those banks, right?
And we even had specific bailouts for some banks and their the banks, the market's down today big time, and the bank stocks are one of the problems, faith in the bank.
We're back, we're back to where we were in October when the banks were in big we're we're back there.
We're exactly deja groundhog day.
At least that movie ended.
We're still in it.
If you didn't know any better, this is the middle of October and the election's yet to happen.
The bailout of the car companies, Americans didn't want that.
They have rejected a current FDR spending spree proposal without tax cuts, according to polling data.
But then you go to the MSNBC poll, uh the MSNBC Wall Street Journal poll, solid support for Obama's economic plan.
supports the economic stimulus plan that Obama has proposed, according to the NBC Wall Street Journal poll.
But the public also is concerned that the stimulus price tag might be too expensive and would increase the U.S. debit.
Now this makes my stomach turn.
What are we to believe here?
Two polls that say entirely different.
Well, they're not all that different in the sense that the public is wary here, but at the same time, in one poll, they love Obama.
They love the stimulus plan, but they're concerned it might be too expensive.
Democrat polster Peter Hart said Americans want to do something and they want to see it done.
But what they're warning Obama collectively is be careful.
Now, according to the poll, 43% believe a stimulus is a good idea compared to 27% who think it's a bad idea.
24% who don't have an opinion.
So let's add the 24 to 27.
The people that don't like it, and the people that have no opinion.
That to me is 41% who do not solidly support the plan.
And yet the headline of the story, solid support for Obama's economic plan.
Popular details in the stimulus are more popular than the whole program.
The individual parts of the stimulus are much more popular than the whole concept.
Well, of course, that makes sense because you divvy up the what where the stimulus is going to go, and the people in those groups are going to say, hell yes.
Show me the money.
I want to take you back to when, let's see, when was this?
Market snapshot, November 21st, 2008.
Yeah, this is I guess market snaps should be CBS market watch.
Stocks surge on Geithner pick.
Indexes erased Thursday's steep declines after Obama's choice for the crucial Treasury Secretary job was revealed.
U.S. stocks surged Friday after word leaked that Obama plans to nominate Timothy Geitner as his nominee for U.S. Treasury Secretary.
That's November 21, 2008.
Let us now go to Wednesday, January 24th.
Stocks plunge on banks, retail sales.
The article, it's it's uh at Foxbusiness.com.
The article below is a summary of a report card to me.
I mean, this is how I would look at it.
A report card of the market's performance for yesterday and the past few months.
I would call this the Obama stock market.
The Obama stock market, if we're gonna if we're gonna if the stocks are gonna surge in November in the drive-by media because of Timothy Geitner being chosen, then by God, the stocks plummeting for whatever reason after that is also due to Obama.
The drive-by's cannot have it both ways.
So to me, this is the Obama report card.
It's entirely fair to call this Obama's stock market because it's reacting to what Obama's plans are for the economy.
It's not reacting to Bush.
Bush isn't on anybody's mind here.
Financial markets are a rough predictor of future economic performance, and based upon what the markets know of Obama's plans, it's giving him a failing grade.
I'm not being political.
The markets deal in bottom lines.
It takes the pulse of millions of investors, both in this country and abroad, to report the results unfiltered.
Keynesians can spin this all day long, but the people with skin in the game aren't buying.
They're selling.
They don't like massive budget deficits.
They don't like the omission of tax rate cuts from Obama's plan.
Slashing government spending and tax rates would provide a joke, like I said yesterday.
He could writ the markets up 500 points tomorrow without doing a thing.
Just say he's considering massive tax cuts.
Just considering it.
And you watch the difference.
That's precisely why he won't do it.
So the markets are selling off.
It's Obama's stock market.
His decisions are not inspiring the country's economic activists.
They have chosen to sit on the sidelines until they feel it's safe to invest again.
How many people do you know that are going in cash?
How many people do you know going into gold?
How many people do you know buying Krugerands?
Whatever little and they actually want it delivered.
They don't want it kept in some vault someplace.
They want it in their possession.
And then how many people do you know who have cash at certain banks who are worried about whether or not the bank is going to be there?
So the market back in November interpreted Obama's future plans as a way out, a quick fix.
A man wearing a white hat had arrived, stocks soared.
That was Geithner.
As of that moment, it became Obama's stock market.
It's still Obama's stock market, and it isn't inspired.
Now, let's let's build on the claim that news or appointments can and do influence markets.
And let's look at the impact Steve Jobs has had over the years on his company, Apple Incorporated.
We're talking about a single individual.
But unlike Barack Obama or Timothy Geitner, Steve Jobs has been an individual who actually created things, invented new technology that millions, billions, millions of people wanted.
He has been a producer.
He's been an economic activist.
He's been an original thinker.
He has built wealth.
He has helped improve people's lives around the world.
I know he's a big lib, but forget that for a second.
The market has reacted negatively to Steve Jobs' health issues.
Because this has been a man who can actually influence the future performance of his company.
His presence alone, reported as healthy, is all the market needs to hear to have Apple computer continue to rise.
His presence with questionable health gives the market pause.
His departure from the company, five-month leave of absence, with uncertain health aspects in the future is causing real problems.
Steve Jobs is rightly perceived as the key man driving the Apple bus.
Wall Street has rightfully looked jobs and the performance of his company for reasons to invest.
And that's how it ought to be, folks.
Wall Street should look at individual companies as opposed to a few bureaucrats in Washington to determine how and when they should invest.
The private sector should not be dependent on the public sector for their future well-being.
It makes perfect sense for the market to look at Apple based on Steve Jobs' health, his presence, and so forth.
But I'm telling you, it is a crying shame when the simple naming of a treasury secretary can cause an upward spike in the market.
The government ought not have this much influence on what people in the private sector do, but unfortunately the government's so big that it does, and that's why this is Obama's market.
And that's what this market's plunging.
Because the people, the entrepreneurs, the people in the market who create, produce things, they're worried about the climate that they're about to step into.
They're selling.
They're not investing.
Take a look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average if you don't believe me.
Take a look at what's happening to Citibank, and they got a bailout.
And look at what's happening to them.
Barack Obama, Timothy Geithner, unfortunately, are looked to for future performance of the American economy the way Steve Jobs appropriately has been looked to for the future performance of Apple Incorporated.
I think there's an important lesson in looking at the impact of Obama and Geitner as leaders of the public sector and Steve Jobs on his private sector company.
See, what we need in the United States economy is more Steve Jobs.
We don't need more Barack Obamas, and we don't need more Timothy Geithners.
And we don't need more Eric Holders.
We don't need more Hillary Clintons.
We didn't need more Bill Clintons.
We don't need more Bill Richardsons.
We don't need more John Carey's.
We don't need more Rama Manuels.
We need more Steve Jobs.
The Obama administration is trying to act like a CEO for every American company.
They are absorbing industry after industry.
Instead, what the government ought to be doing is making life easier for Steve Jobs and future Steve Jobs.
This is what Reagan understood.
He understood that government needs to get out of the way.
You know why Reagan was optimistic?
I mean, Reagan inherited a malaise and economic melee from Jimmy Carter that was far worse even than what we're going through now.
Double digit unemployment, double digit interest rates.
Do you note the difference in Reagan and Obama?
Obama is about to assume office on a mantle of pessimism.
It's bad and it's going to get worse.
Did Reagan ever do that?
Reagan was the epitome of optimism, can do.
He believed in the goodness of the American people.
You know why Reagan was optimistic?
Because he knew David Packard of Hewlett Packard.
He knew that there were people like Steve Jobs out there.
He knew that Stephen Bechtel was out there at Bechtel Incorporated.
He knew the Halliburton people were out there.
He knew the general motor.
He knew of the greatness of the people in the private sector who, if turned loose and unshackled, would bring us out of the malaise of Jimmy Carter.
He had confidence.
He had optimism in America and in the American people.
This current bunch that's going to be inaugurated immaculately on Tuesday doesn't.
They're pessimists.
It's going to get worse.
We're all going to have to sacrifice.
There's not one word from the Obama camp about how we are going to prosper.
We are going to sacrifice.
We are going to suffer, and we're going to suffer equally.
We are all, they say, we're all going to have skin in the game.
You wonder why Reagan won 49 states twice.
You wonder why he was so beloved.
He was of good cheer.
He was happy.
He was enjoying life.
Took two years for Reagan's plans to kick in.
They tried to destroy him after his tax cuts were enacted because it wasn't immediate.
It's a giant economy.
You can't fix it with bailouts of a trillion dollars, 750 billion.
You can't do it.
And they tried to destroy Reagan's recovery even before it began.
Today, they still rewrite the history of the success of the Reagan years.
Because contrasting conservatives and liberals is as easy as contrasting a smile with a frown.
Optimism, pessimism.
I don't understand why the American people are so eager to embrace misery.
Well, yes, I do.
We learned it.
If they think everybody else is miserable, they're happy.
Remember that story?
People would rather earn 50,000 than 100,000 if everybody was earning 50.
Remember that?
Something's happened, but people seem to be enmeshed in the misery.
And they seem to be willing to invest in this messianic figure.
Hope, chains, survival, salvation, what have you.
Reagan knew all that came from individuals with freedom, being entrepreneurial with as few shackles around their chains and neck or ankles as possible.
Stock market's been in a downward spile ever since it figured out that bailouts, TARP, and FDR-inspired deficit spending were to be the primary fixes for the economic turndown.
Obama has owned these financial markets for several months now.
And it's time he turned them loose, gave them back to the American people and people like Steve Jobs.
We've got one minute till the next break, and I'm going to use it here.
Why do you think the bailouts, the 350, the 700, the 350 preview?
Why is it not working?
Because there's no plan with it, folks.
They're just throwing money up against the wall, and they're hoping some of it sticks.
They're hoping that it works.
Interestingly, Michael Cranish in the Boston Globe today, amid echoes of FDR, debate rekindles over New Deal.
And he quotes Jonathan Alter, who wrote the defining moment, a book on Roosevelt's first one hundred days in office.
So listen to this.
Roosevelt threw a lot of things against the wall to see what stuck.
Many of them not only stuck, Alder said, but remain mainstays of American life, such as Social Security and aid to poor families.
So we're doing FDR all over.
There is no plan.
Just throw it up against the wall, all this bailout money, and see if it sticks.
And in the meantime, we're amassing trillion dollar deficits amidst pessimism.
They're gonna get back to your phone calls here, El Quico.
I just want to uh remind you of our new partner here, the Heritage Foundation, and give you an illustration of their value.
Uh you can become a heritage member and access a great new website, AskHeritage.org.
And there are a bunch of different membership levels.
The uh the most economical one is $25, and that's all it takes to have access to their humongous database of information that is updated regularly with special reports, a number of things.
Now, right now what's going on in Washington is the confirmation hearings of all of Obama's nominees.
Now you may think you know some of these people and their histories, and you may think you know what the history uh or the future uh uh holds as a result of these people.
But the Heritage Foundation can provide all of us information that we don't know.
And the Republican Party is nowhere on the table in Washington, D.C. They're just not.
The Republican Party has caved.
Much of the conservative media in Washington is caved, but the Heritage Foundation is now one of the prominent voices of conservatism in Washington, D.C. is i i there's a huge need for a big voice from the right in Washington, and it is heritage.
I mean, will the next Homeland Security Secretary support amnesty or enforce immigration laws?
Will the new energy secretary engage in climate change hysteria?
Will the education secretary who can't speak grammatically correctly entrust parents with education decisions?
Or are they gonna wipe out homeschooling?
The Heritage Re Foundation has researched all of this.
They have c scholars that are working constantly producing output on this.
It's www.askheritage.org.
Uh we're gonna be talking about them throughout the year.
This is this is uh uh invaluable to me over the years in improving my not just education, but confirming my conservative instincts as to why I felt this way, and they've gone a long way to helping me to explain what I instinctively knew and can do the same for you.
Well worth it.
What askheritage.org.
Ask him anything.
You have to ask about the cabinet secretary, ask him anything.
Just ask the question.
You will be amazed at the encyclopedic documentation you have access to.
Here's Danielle in Chelsea, Michigan.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Well, hello, Mega Global Cooling.
Oh, I'm sorry, Global Warming Diddles from the great state of Michigan.
Thanks very much.
Great to have you here.
Um, I just I I'm as I get older, I'm in my thirties, and I see the hypocrisy, the double standards of our government, particularly the Democrats, and it it's frustrating.
I do it right.
You know, my husband has a good job.
We didn't borrow too much money.
We put 20% down on our house, and now I'm told I have to sacrifice, I have to give.
Well, wait a minute.
My husband works hard.
I work hard.
We raise our family, we take care of our family.
I just want the government to leave me alone.
Let me raise my family, let me keep more of my money.
Um and I don't need 'em.
I agree a hundred percent, but unfortunately, American people elected somebody who didn't want to leave you alone.
I know.
I the They elected somebody that wants to blame people like you.
Well, and I'll tell you the blame.
I mean, I I have spoken with liberals.
I have five children.
You can imagine, as a conservative, wait a second home mom with five.
Whoa, ho, time out.
Yes.
You are in your early thirties, and you got five crumb crunchers.
No, I'm a little past my early thirties.
Oh, All right, okay.
But not quite my late thirties.
And yes, but five children that my husband and I could afford, we could raise, we could love, we could take care of.
But to liberals, I am I'm I I'm a terrible person.
Right.
You know, the world's overpopulated.
I'm contributing to global warming and it is not overpopulated, and there is no global war.
You're gonna go frustrated dealing with them intellectually.
I beat them intellectually rush.
I know, it's easy to.
That's why they they'll start attacking you personally, they'll start attacking the people you believe in.
I mean it's fun to do if you can if you can keep your sanity about it.
Uh but look at the hypocrisy that you say, I'm glad you're spotting it at your relative young age.
You're seeing all these double standards.
You're seeing all the there's a different set of rules for Democrats and Republicans.
I'm gonna tell you why that is, Danielle.
The reason why Republicans are held to uh higher standards is twofold.
Two reasons.
One, they actively suggest that they have higher standards, that they seek to um reach and and attain.
At the same time, uh they are despised, this is the second reason by liberals and the media, precisely because they attempt to maintain standards.
Not everybody can.
We're all human and we're all gonna stumble and fail.
And when we stumble and fail, why we become hypocrites.
We become the biggest hypocrites, and they try to strip of us any credibility.
The left, on the other hand, they don't talk about maintaining any standards, behavioral, personal or otherwise.
There aren't any.
Liberalism, in fact, is not based on standards.
And so they really can't commit ethics violations.
Unless they happen to be Blagoyovich.
Uh, and then of course they're gonna nail him because he's embarrassing the Messiah.
But Blogorievich wouldn't even be in trouble if he hadn't gotten caught if he was stupid enough to put on tape what he was trying to do, sell the Senate seat.
Don't think that's the first time that's ever happened in Chicago or anywhere else.
But a party that maintains it has no standards, in fact, it's standards are judgmental.
Standards are discriminatory, standards are unfair.
So you can have a guy like Sandy Burglar who steals documents from the National Archives, who's loved and adored.
You have his guy Holder, who had Pardon terrorists, pardon Mark Rich.
He's allowed to say he's gonna be better next time.
He learned from it.
Then you have Palin, who they'd rather put on a cross.
You have Joe the plumber who they tried to destroy.
So that's always going to be the case.
There are two sets of rules.
Nothing's fair, and the so-called arbiter of the rules have chosen up sides, the media, and they're they've thrown in entirely with the uh with the Democrats.
Debbie engulfed Brees, Florida, your next Rush Limbaugh program.
Great to have you here.
Hi, it's an honor to speak with you.
I admire you so much.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome, sir.
You're so smart.
I listen to you every day.
Now, this is what I want to ask you about.
Yes, ma'am.
Um Geithner is obviously a fiscal crook.
He has no f fiduciary, you know, um example that anybody should want to be following.
He um he obviously did this on purpose with his taxes.
Because I know because my daughter is a student and my husband trades on her account, and because one piece of paper wasn't sent in, she got a bill for a hundred and forty thousand dollars from the tax man.
And uh, you know, a student doesn't earn that kind of money.
I wanted to know where it was.
And um so you know, we had to get the paperwork, and then of course she didn't know the money.
But he should have been getting things from the IRS immediately.
I mean, at 2001 and 2002, she'd already have been in the mail two or three years ago.
So he's just a crook.
I mean, it's obvious.
And and all the things that he claimed.
I didn't even know some of the things until you told me when I heard it, you know, this morning.
The extra things that I didn't read about.
Like claiming is his kids stay at a sleepaway camp and tax deduction.
Uh and but all of the tax payment information forms, blah, blah, even payments that he was being given by the IMF and he didn't make them.
Uh y the it I know it's very difficult to believe that this is innocent mistake, but look at the circling the wagons around us.
It's innocent mistake.
A lot of people make these mistakes.
I don't think so.
Not one, not when you're in business for yourself.
But then there's the question of Holder.
I mean, this man is obviously I don't care if he learned his lesson.
Other people would go to jail if they did things like that.
They would lose their jobs if they did things like that.
I mean, these you know, his whole cabinet is dirty.
The whole cabinet is dirty.
And he's um he's having a Well now that maybe let's I mean, I don't even I can't name every cabinet member off top of my head right now.
It's a little bit of a stretch here to say that they're all dirty.
They all came from the Clinton cabinet, most of them.
And I didn't like the way the Clintons ran the country.
Yeah, but like Carol Browner, I don't think Carol Brown is dirty, she's just a socialist.
You know, and I I um turns out Richardson may be dirty, he may have a problem, he had to quit.
But notice they threw him under the bus, but they're going everywhere out of their way to keep Holder, out of their way to keep Geithner.
And I love the way they're doing it.
Obama is investigating and clearing these people.
Yeah.
Wouldn't you like wouldn't you like to be able to IRS audits you say, okay, I'll check my files and get back to you.
And then you tell the IRS, hey, you're wrong, I didn't do anything.
And they say, okay, cool.
And uh and and drive off, wouldn't you love that?
Oh my goodness.
You're like a stand-up comedian.
You're just so brilliant.
I love you very much.
Listen, I w I want to go back to you guys over there, because I have I want to just have them take my phone number, okay?
And I'll talk with one of your people back there.
Okay, I want to send you something, but I know I can't.
Okay, fine, fine and fine and indie.
We'll put it we love you.
Thank you.
Love you too.
I appreciate it.
I'm glad that you're out there.
Uh Mr. Snerdley will be the next voice that you hear.
We got a quick time.
Well, she wants, she wants Brian's little.
What are you doing?
She asked to talk to Snerdly.
We'll be back after this, folks.
Stay right where you are.
Timothy Geitner, he was just called a crook on this program.
We gotta give him some slack.
We gotta cut him some slack.
At least he didn't try to deduct his old underwear that he gave to the uh uh what uh what what is it uh Salvation Army?
Like the c you know the Clintons did that.
The Clintons took a tax seduction for their old clothes and underwear.
They gave away old underwear to the uh Salvation Army.
Or no, it was goodwill.
They gave it to goodwill.
You know, they dropped it in those bins out there.
At least we haven't heard of Geithner trying to take a tax deduction on his old underwear.
prayer.
Drinking coffee reduces the risk of Alzheimer's, according to a new study.
Middle-aged people to drink moderate amounts of well, so does you know what?
They said that nicotine reduces the risk of Alzheimer's.
So smoke and drink out there, folks.
Uh and here coffee may protect against oral cancers.
This is from Reuters.
So um probably just gargle with coffee from now on, get rid of the mouthwash, which causes oral cancers.
Well, we learned earlier this gargle with coffee.
And you can do it, make it a cup at a time of that curing thing that we told you, but those things are fabulous.
And you heard about the fact if you don't get enough sleep at least seven hours a night, you are more susceptible to colds, and you won't be if you use Zycam.
I got three hours sleep last night.
I got involved in something, I just I hate going to bed.
I hate turning off the day.
I just hate it.
I hate getting I well waking up is tough too.
It's just it's tough.
I but but gosh, I hate going to bed.
I never get more than six.
And now that we've learned that getting that much sleep makes you more susceptible to a cold.
Go ahead.
If you don't get seven hours a night, and if you don't want to take the time to get seven hours, who wants to sleep seven hours?
Stuff to do, stuff to learn, stuff to get ready for.
So if you don't want to have because well, you know how people react to news.
Oh, okay, I gotta adjust my schedule.
I gotta start gargling with coffee and uh and then drink it after I gargle with it, and then I gotta start getting seven hours sleep, so I won't get a cold.
Forget it.
You won't get a cold if you use Zycan the nasal swabs soon as you think you are coming down with.
I'm not kidding.
It works.
Z-I-C-A-M.
Here's Brad in Arlington, Virginia.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
How are you?
Good.
Hey, I want to reference the uh Breitbart.com article that you were discussing earlier and the issue of uh cultural uh uh I'm I'm lost now.
The the issue of cultural um This is the the the uh the Nobel Peace Prize winner that got did a study.
He got a bunch of normal cats and then he injected some steroids into some other cats and made them wacky.
Right.
Cultural peer pressure.
Yeah, cultural in on steroids, peer pressure on what happened was in his study was that the normal cats surrounded by the wacko cats became wacko.
Right.
Uh my father uh was a career marine, you know, he he w old enough to remember the depression and and World War II, which he barely survived.
And whenever he he sensed that I was succumbing to peer pressure growing up, he used to tell uh he had a knack for putting uh complex uh life's lessons in simple terms.
And he used to tell me it's easier to go down the stairs than it is to go up.
And I think that was a implicit way of saying, you know, would you rather live in my basement or would you rather aspire to something higher than that?
Uh I'd rather get an elevator and not deal with the steps, but that's just me.
But you know his point, and and he also talked about how it only took a little bit of cancer to ravage the body and by spreading.
And and I think that the cultural cancer that we face now is liberalism.
And uh so I always uh think back to the things that he told me, and and when I hear you talk, he was not nearly as eloquent uh as you or the person that wrote that piece, but his lessons always stuck with me.
And when I listen to you, I I I sometimes hear him speaking to me.
Well, now that that is that's one of the nicest things you could say to me.
That is just you're uh you're melting my heart here.
I can't I I I I really appreciate that.
What he's calling about, what uh what Brad's calling about is uh the Breitbart.com, the bigHollywood.com has a story about uh a column today about why it is so many Republicans are caving to the Democrat majority.
And it's just it's it's peer pressure on steroids.
It's just it's it's you know, wanting to be part of the big click.
Uh and there's a scientific name uh for this uh phenomenon.
What people suspend their principles when people suspend their gut, when they get rid of what they know, when they throw away who they are.
It is to be accepted by others or to join the crowd or what have you.
Mike in Denver, you're next on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hello, how are you?
Good.
I shouldn't ask that.
I heard you tell the last guy you were good, sorry.
Um You had said earlier that Citigroup was uh insolvent.
No, I said there was a media guy on a business channel this morning that said so.
Right.
You were relating the story.
That's right.
That's all that and the def and the definition was that they owed more than they were worth.
That's what he said.
By definition, isn't that America?
Yeah.
And and how can America who's insolvent be bailing out companies who were also insolvent.
Well, because the government can print its money.
Right.
And the other outfits can't.
I didn't can I make another or ask you another question.
If you can do it in in ten seconds, that's all I got.
All right.
Give me liberty.org.
There's no way we're going to vote ourselves out of this mess.
We got to stand up and and put the kibosh on him.
Well, I haven't been to that website, but I can imagine that it's probably rooted in Thomas Jefferson saying sometimes you gotta overthrow the government to clean it up.
Revolution.
If no other choice.
Just a wild guess, folks, just a wild guess.
Okay, we're gonna have Ann Coulter in here tomorrow in our second hour.
A portion of the second hour should be live here in the studio talking about a new book.
And also trying to arrange Hutch will not return my emails.
He's busy saving souls out there in Seattle.
But I'm trying to get Ken Hutchison the Hutch on in a third hour tomorrow to talk about the uh NFL championship games coming up on Sunday.
Uh Phoenix and Pittsburgh.
I will be back in Pittsburgh for that one.
▲
Export Selection