Rush Limbaugh Program - February 10, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 10, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program

33:29

February 10, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.
	I was just getting some stuff here out of the stacks that I wanted to get to before the program ends because, of course, you can do all the show prep in the world and then live news breaks in front of you like this disgraceful.
	And I know, folks, I know you need to be prepared for it.
	I'm going to get beaten up in the press.
	I'm going to get beaten up all over the place for commenting as I have on the questions Obama got from these poor desperate people.
	Obama showed true compassion when these people asked him for a kitchen and a car and a house and a better job than at McDonald's.
	By the way, Julio, I have a suggestion for you, pal.
	McDonald's also has a thing called a clown college.
	Perhaps you could get a scholarship there and apply to be Ronald McDonald and maybe get a raise that way.
	Greetings, welcome back.
	Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network.
	Great to have you here.
	800-282-2882 is the number.
	I know, I know, Startly.
	They're going to be dumping all the press.
	It's going to say Obama showed such compassion.
	These poor people in desperate straits in the worst economic times and Great Depression.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	And here's Limbaugh.
	And here's Limbaugh playing their sound bites and laughing at them and making fun.
	And that's not exactly what we did here.
	But it's sad.
	It is just these people think that that's what his presidency was about.
	Somebody made these people think this way.
	And it's not just Obama, it's the Democrat Party for decades that has made people think that's what politics is.
	Where's the new era of responsibility we kept hearing about?
	I guess that's gone now.
	We're just watching Dingy Harry, Dingy Harry Reid, the Senate leader, came out.
	He's busting buttons in pride here over passing the pork bill in the Senate.
	And he said, doing nothing is not an option.
	Doing nothing would be better than what we are doing now.
	But the option is not doing nothing or doing only what the Senate and House porkulus bills are.
	There is no sense.
	There is no intelligence whatsoever.
	This is strictly a bill that's designed to entrench and enhance the power of Democrats.
	It's not about job creation.
	It's not about any of these things.
	It is just so sad to see this.
	The United States of America.
	There's a great piece here today, by the way, at popcenter.org.
	It is a website.
	And, you know, Obama's been running around saying there's a consensus of economists that think this is a great thing and it's got to pass and so forth.
	And there's not.
	There are hundreds of economists who oppose this and who have signed a big ad in national newspapers suggesting they don't support it and that it's not any good.
	One of them is a guy named Munger.
	Michael Munger.
	He is at Duke University.
	And what I found here, and by the way, it's the Cato Institute that took out the newspaper ad that was signed by hundreds, several hundred economists who said that they disagreed with the stimulus, porculus approach of Obama.
	And so he was interviewed by somebody at this website, GeorgeLeaf at PopeCenter.org.
	And some of the answers that Michael Munger gave it, I want to share them with you.
	One of the questions was, you signed the Cato Institute's ad that takes issue with President Obama's assertion that everyone agrees the federal government needs to spend much more money to help the economy out of recession.
	Why don't you go along with this idea of stimulating the economy through increased federal spending?
	Well, Munger says, look, I'm willing to give the president the benefit of the doubt.
	He probably actually believes that there is a consensus, but there isn't.
	It's not even close.
	There are two problems here.
	The first is the problem of what Milton Friedman called the long and variable lag.
	It's like steering a huge ship with an old rubber band for a steering cable.
	The cable stretches, gets hung up, so you may turn the wheel really far in one direction and nothing happens.
	So you turn some more, you turn some more, then finally the ship starts to turn.
	And when it finally reaches the heading you want, you straighten the wheel, but the boat keeps turning.
	Long after you've straightened the wheel, the previous turn keeps affecting the boat's direction.
	So we're going to see nothing for a long time.
	And then when the economy does start to recover, we're going to see a sharp burst of inflation.
	As we've seen in the past, most recently in the early 80s, inflation is expensive to cure and hard to combat.
	I just don't think that we know enough to steer this ship.
	Second, if you think that we can steer the ship with fiscal stimulus, I disagree, but let's just suppose that you can, then most of the projects and spending being packed into this bill are not stimulus.
	Shovel-ready projects have already gone through three years or more of review and planning.
	The money is already allocated.
	And the social spending on pet projects like contraception planning and health care, those may be good projects on the merits, although I think they're not.
	But the point is that there is no stimulus in this bill or in the congressional plan.
	Next question to Michael Munger.
	Well, is it your view that the stimulus package just won't work very well or that we'll actually make matters worse worse?
	And Munger says both.
	It won't work in the sense that it'll provide no stimulus.
	And it'll do harm in the sense that we're all grabbing our children by the ankles and shaking them upside down to get the change out of their pockets.
	Our children will be paying for this mistake in terms of the increased deficit and consequent reduced discretionary budget for the rest of their lives.
	Next question.
	President Obama and his circle of advisors are well-educated people, yet they support policies that seem deeply flawed.
	Would you say that they simply haven't read the right books and taken the right courses to comprehend what's going on?
	Or is the problem that politicians sometimes pursue objectives other than long-run prosperity for the general public?
	Munger, the problem is this.
	It's hard to claim credit for the vitality of the market.
	Politicians claim credit for doing things.
	There is no way a politician is going to sit by and let the economy fix itself.
	He can't claim any credit.
	So they have to get involved so that they can claim credit.
	Politicians want as many people as possible to think that government can level playing fields, that government can pick winners and losers, that governments can fix markets when they can't.
	Imagine you had a six-year-old daughter.
	She has a high fever.
	The year is 1820, and we don't understand germs or fevers very well.
	You call the doctor.
	The doctor comes to the house.
	Please do something.
	Do something and help my daughter, you say.
	The doctor takes out a lancet, makes a small incision on your daughter's wrist.
	The theory was then that the fever was in the blood itself, and bleeding was the only treatment that people in 1820 knew.
	It doesn't work.
	Your daughter's fever is still very high, so you tell the doctor, do something.
	You're the doctor.
	The doctor bleeds your daughter some more and she dies.
	The next day, you blame the doctor for not bleeding her more and sooner, but bleeding was the wrong thing to do in the first place.
	This stimulus is the wrong thing to do.
	The fact that the first round didn't work leads me to think that we need to stop.
	But all the desperate economic parents out there say, do it more, do it longer, do it fast.
	I don't blame the president, Munger says.
	I blame voters who have the naive idea that government's responsible for the economy.
	Next question.
	If you had a few minutes with the president to explain why the economy's gotten into so much trouble, what would you say?
	Munger says, well, I would need at least an hour and maybe two.
	There's no one factor, though in two hours, I could explain how we got here.
	If I had two minutes, I'd say, Mr. President, do no harm.
	Resist the temptation to panic and act just for the sake of appearing to act.
	Don't expand the deficit anymore for this pointless stimulus.
	Michael Munger, Duke University economist, one of many who signed the ad, the full-page newspaper ad run by the Cato Institute, saying that he and the rest of the economists who signed do not support this plan.
	This was to counter Obama's notion that there's a consensus of economists who do.
	Valentine's Day is coming up, folks.
	I don't know if you're like me, but when these holidays come up, there's different kinds of holidays.
	They're the honeydew holidays, and there are the holidays that the holidays are created.
	Like they all joke that Hallmark invented Valentine's Day to go out and get people to buy cards.
	These holidays that come up where it is mandatory, not because you feel like you want to, not because there's real love and emotion behind it.
	Just because it's Valentine's Day, the expectation is you got to come up with something for Valentine's Day.
	And it's in these kind of holidays, you go, what the hell am I going to get?
	I mean, I don't even, Valentine's Day, candy, candy, candy, everybody gets candy.
	Who wants to give somebody candy and have them gain weight?
	Who wants to do that?
	Jewelry in this economy, come on, get real.
	Plus, who wants to go to a store and pick something out for a forced holiday?
	Who wants to do that?
	Now, Dawn's in there shaking her head at me, but I happen to know that there are millions listening to this program who understand exactly what I'm talking about.
	This is a holiday that you just have to get out of the way, right?
	Therefore, what am I?
	I am L. Rushbo, who am I?
	I have solutions.
	And one thing that we all have learned is you cannot go wrong with flowers.
	You just can't.
	Would you be surprised to learn that you can get fresher flowers delivered to your honey via FedEx than you can by going into a flower store and picking them out yourself?
	Pro Flowers will deliver roses, whatever flowers you want, to your intended or to your beloved, and you don't have to do anything but call them.
	And we have them right here.
	We have pro flowers arrive here every day.
	They last seven days.
	They have the greatest aroma.
	When I was first told about ProFlower, I said, this cannot possibly be true.
	You can't convince me that I can order flowers via FedEx or UPS or whatever.
	And when they get there, they're fresher than when they come out of the store.
	But they are.
	ProFlowers has an exclusive offer just for EIB listeners.
	But you don't have much time left before Valentine's Day.
	Here's what you choose between these options.
	One dozen red roses, free ruby red vase, or two dozen assorted roses in a clear glass vase.
	Every bouquet will come with the free truffles, too.
	$39.99 is the price.
	You save over $20.
	It's an unbeatable deal.
	That's roses, a free vase, free truffles.
	You're not going to find a deal like this this close to Valentine's Day.
	And you can do it all on your computer.
	You can do it all on the phone, and you don't have to go anywhere.
	But you got to act fast because supplies aren't going to last long.
	Just go to rushproflowers.com or call them 800PRO flowers.
	Mention Rush.
	That's 800PRO flowers.
	Either 12 red roses, free ruby vase, 24 roses, free clear vase, free truffles with both options.
	Go to the internet, make a phone call, and you are done, pal.
	It's the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and Rush Limbaugh.
	Other news items out there before we get back to the phones that's coming up soon.
	Governor Schwarzenegger sued the state's Democrat controller Monday trying to force furloughs for 15,000 more government workers to address California's $42 billion deficit.
	The Republican governor already ordered more than 200,000 state government workers to take two days off every month without pay, projected it would save $1.3 billion through June of 2010.
	The first furlough day was last Friday.
	Got to give Arnold credit for one thing here.
	When he furloughs his workers, they don't get paid for staying home.
	Other places, they do get paid for staying home.
	So here you have what do California and the United Auto Workers have in common?
	And you can ask that question about this story.
	You could call this liberal on liberal crime.
	Their unsustainable perks led to layoffs and furloughs, and now they're suing each other in California over this because everybody just assumes that the money will never dry up.
	It will never stop.
	It will always be there.
	Anyway, who's next?
	Where do we go on the phone, Sterley?
	Where do we want to go next?
	Oh, before we do that, this is a great story, a great object lesson here.
	Tennessee Republicans ousted the new House Speaker from their party Monday.
	Tennessee Republicans got rid of the new House Speaker from their party Monday.
	They did this while giving up their first chance in 150 years to control the entire legislature.
	They instead chose to punish their new House Speaker for banding with Democrats to win his seat.
	Tennessee Republicans got rid of their House Speaker.
	That means they got rid of the first majority control in 150 years because their House Speaker was acting like a Democrat.
	That is amazing.
	Charles in Greenville, South Carolina.
	You're next on the EIB network, sir.
	Hello.
	Here it is, Russ.
	Glad to talk with you.
	Thank you.
	I was listening to your account of Obama's press town meeting.
	I think there's a hidden message here in that Mrs. Hughes, who has no job, may get a new house and a car and a kitchen.
	Julio, who has a job, is going to get peanuts in terms of cutting his payroll tax.
	So the more you do, the less you get, something like that.
	Is that his message in his economic plan?
	Well, you know, that's an interesting take on it.
	Here's poor old Julio.
	You know, after four and a half years, I would think you'd end up in a management program at McDonald's.
	So I don't know what he's been doing, but he's been four and a half years.
	He still doesn't make enough.
	He doesn't have enough benefits.
	So he asks Obama what Obama's going to do, and Obama says, well, we're going to give you a little tax relief on your payroll taxes, which at his salary level is not going to be very much, be enough for Julio to go get a happy meal.
	This other baby shows up.
	She got nothing.
	She needs a house, a car, a kitchen.
	Obama may get her one.
	So your point is the people that have nothing are going to be given things to people working.
	Deal with it.
	Yeah, and that's at the low end.
	The people who are really working are going to probably be paying for all of it.
	Well, exactly.
	But do you think Henrietta Hughes is going to get all this stuff and that they're going to do a big PR story about how she got it?
	That's right.
	No, you think Henrietta Hughes, you think Obama's going to see to it she gets a house?
	Right.
	I think there's something going to come out.
	I like your Oprah.
	Yeah, if I had to think of anything, it'd be Oprah.
	She'll end up on Oprah.
	A big sympathy play.
	Oprah will make a big deal about how tough it was to find her, but they finally found her.
	She was so proud, so embarrassed, she didn't even want to come on the show, but they talked her into it.
	And they got her on the show.
	And look at the end of the day, they'd be like, let's make a deal.
	All you got to do, Henrietta, pick what you want.
	Door one, number two, number three.
	And no matter what door she picks, you're going to have a house, a car, and a kitchen.
	That's it.
	Good show.
	Thanks much.
	Rudy in Racine, Wisconsin.
	Great to have you here.
	Mega Ditto's Rush.
	You are the man.
	Thank you, sir, very much.
	I told Mr. Snerdley he was super.
	This is my first time ever getting through to your rush.
	Thank you.
	And I got to take a deep breath.
	Okay.
	I see absolutely no stimulus whatsoever in any of this package.
	That's right.
	And when you brought up the health care issues about what is in this package, I see a conditioning that's going on.
	I told Mr. Snerdley, this is like Friday the 13th, the original version, and every version that comes after it is just going to get gorier and nobody even sees it.
	It's incredible, Rush, that they're going to take the health care system.
	And I know there's a lot of young voters out there that voted for Mr. Obama.
	I work with a lot of them.
	And they voted for Obama.
	They don't think about their health care, what it's going to look like in 10, 20, 30 years.
	They don't have any idea.
	I'm 47 years old, and I see a health industry that's going to just be turned upside down.
	And on top of that, there is no stimulus in job creation.
	I work in a floor covering business that generated millions of dollars over the last eight years.
	And we're sitting here with builders who cannot finish houses.
	And I've seen and talked to builders and their co-workers looking at people getting these houses on financing that absolutely don't have nothing, don't belong in a house.
	Incredible.
	And we're back, ladies.
	I apologize for that.
	I literally got sick to my stomach here on just a out of the blue.
	Everything fine now.
	Appreciate the delay.
	That's the first time that has ever happened in 20 years.
	Anyway, we are back, and it's back to the Fonz.
	John in Allentown, Pennsylvania.
	I'm glad you waited, sir.
	Nice to have you on the EIB network.
	Yes, sir.
	Thank you.
	I just wanted to share that I was so frustrated this morning and yesterday trying to voice my displeasure with our Senator Arlen Specter's decision to vote for the impulse bill.
	I couldn't get through an email, couldn't get through phone.
	He was always busy.
	He said the voicemail box was full.
	So I got to the point where I took a copy of my email to Arlen Specter's local office and I just had to register my protest about his arrogance and for not hearing the voice of the voters of Pennsylvania.
	It's just frustrating beyond belief.
	And although they have a count of the number of calls that have come in and emails, I said there's just no way you could know how many calls and emails haven't gotten through.
	And they said they're swamped.
	And I said, obviously there's a lot of people that don't want to see our inspector vote for this bill.
	And they said that's true.
	There are a few that are for it, but most are against.
	And I just thought it was arrogance.
	Well, you know, I heard yesterday that the calls coming into Washington offices are hundreds to one against this, that it is rivaling the amnesty bill and so forth.
	Look, I can't explain it to you.
	I mean, I don't, even after Senator Specter understood this morning what health care provisions are in this, I can't explain this to you.
	I wish I mean, I could try to come up with something pithy that would rely on the fact, well, they made a commitment before they knew what was in it, or they've been hounded by the press, or who knows what.
	But it's a crying shame when this thing wins 6137 and it passed with three Republicans.
	These guys in the Senate had a chance to distinguish themselves like the Republicans in the House did.
	And they might be relying also, John, on the fact that they can straighten this out in conference.
	Olympia, or Susan Collins actually said that there's some things in this she doesn't like.
	And if they don't get fixed in the conference committee with the House version of this bill, she's not going to support it.
	So we'll see.
	In the meantime, the market's down 350 or somewhere in that range, 381 now.
	And there are a number of reasons why the market's down.
	But chief among them, nobody, so the markets are not being successfully conned.
	Obama apparently can easily con the Democrat Party base and the media in this thing, but the markets are not being conned.
	Geithner didn't con them.
	And one of the things, and I heard an explanation just a minute ago, somebody trying to tell us why the markets are down today.
	And I don't know that I believe this, but this is the drive-by mantra.
	The markets are down today because Geithner wasn't specific.
	All Geithner did was outline something.
	If Geithner had presented a specific plan, then the markets would not be down so much.
	It might even be up.
	Now, the theory here is that the markets are all fired up and ready for this stimulus package, but they didn't get any reports today.
	They didn't get any details.
	So it's just going to be a long, long time.
	The House version barely passed, or the Senate version barely passes.
	So now it goes to conference.
	And so some people in the media are trying to tell us that the markets are saying today that since it's not going to happen soon, it's going to drag on.
	That's why they are reacting negatively.
	Now, I hope that's just spin.
	What I'm hoping is the markets are, this is a boondoggle and they're learning more and more about what's in it.
	And because of that, they want no part of it.
	We'll just have to see.
	Regardless, it is slow going.
	Geithner actually said we're not going to get you the details of this.
	Let me get his exact words here.
	We're not going to put out details until we can get it right.
	Now, I'll tell you what I think is up with that.
	I think they're trying to avoid attaching a dollar amount to this that would be added into the Obama stimulus package.
	I think that they're trying to create distance between the stimulus, the porculus bill and Geithner's bill so that nobody can run around and say, $2 trillion?
	They want it to be looked at as Obama's stimulus of 800 and some odd billion.
	And then over here, quite distant and separate, is the bank bailout.
	Not to be confused with the Porculus bill.
	And so this is one thing, and it's separate.
	So I think Geithner's just in a delay mode just to keep a money figure off of it.
	Because how in the world can they get it right before they know what they're doing?
	It's just nonsensical, this statement.
	We're not going to put out details until we get it right.
	And the fact is, nobody knows what they're doing here.
	Nobody knows what they're doing in terms of bailing out the budget.
	Until they get it right, it's like Mike Munger said, we've already tried it once and it didn't work.
	Don't do it again.
	The evidence is that it didn't work.
	And I know what's going to happen because Obama's already set it up.
	What's going to happen when this doesn't work?
	We didn't spend enough money soon enough.
	Or that's what they're out saying that FDR's mistake was.
	He didn't spend enough money soon enough.
	So that's how they're going to take care of this not working when it doesn't work.
	Mark, my words, thanks for the call, John.
	I appreciate it.
	Did you hear, saw this story?
	This was, I think, late last.
	No, it was yesterday.
	The number of Americans ensnared by identity theft is on the rise.
	Victims are striking back more quickly and limiting how much is stolen.
	In 2008, the number of identity theft cases jumped 22% to 9.9 million.
	Identity theft.
	Now, I find this fascinating.
	Number of Americans ensnared by identity theft is on the rise.
	Victims are striking back more quickly and limiting how much is stolen, so the costs are falling sharply.
	I wonder why this could be.
	I saw this story and I had to think that it has to do with lifelock.
	People are going out and they're protecting their identity against identity thieves.
	I mean, look, as if paying hundreds of billions of your tax dollars in bailout money isn't enough.
	The threat of identity theft is also on the rise because of the global financial crisis.
	And here it is right here in this news story from AP.
	What's happening is this.
	Identity thieves have threatened businesses with large-scale data breaches of millions of consumer records.
	They have increased the scams where they send emails that look like they're from your bank, but are really just a way to get your password and log in.
	In fact, I got a call just the other day from one of my credit card people.
	There have been some activity here in your account that looks a little unusual.
	I have somebody cashing in some of my accrued points.
	So we just want to double check with you that this is actually activity you knew about.
	Yes, it turned out that it was activity I knew about.
	But Life Lock can stop all this before it gets going.
	I have to think that one of the reasons that thieves are getting less is because more and more people are signing up with Life Lock.
	You don't have to worry about any of this if you have Life Lock.
	The industry leader, because LifeLock works to stop identity theft before it happens.
	And what they don't stop, they'll fix at their expense up to $1 million.
	You ought to talk to somebody who has had this happen to them, and you will not want to go through it yourself.
	Call 1-800-440-8333.
	That's 440-4833.
	Use the promo code RUSH.
	They get 30 days absolutely free.
	1-800-440-4833.
	LifeLock.
	Or doLifeluck.com.
	Either way works.
	I have a story here from the Los Angeles Times.
	I read this.
	It's hilarious.
	It's funny, but then it's not.
	A panel.
	A panel of three federal judges, it's the Ninth Circus, a panel of three federal judges, the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals, saying that overcrowding in state prisons has deprived inmates of their right to adequate health care, tentatively ruled yesterday that the state must reduce the population in those prisons by as many as 57,000 people.
	Now, that's drive-by wording.
	What's going to happen here, if this holds, is that 57,000 crooks, 57,000 rapists, murderers, and whoever knows whatever else will be let go from California prisons, all in the name of health care.
	Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the crowding is violating their right to health care.
	The sitcom continues.
	The judges issue the decision after a trial in two long-running cases brought by inmates to protest the state of medical and mental health care in the prisons.
	Although their order is not final, the judges Felton Henderson and Lawrence Carlton and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Reinhart effectively told the state that it had lost the trial and would have to make dramatic changes in its prisons unless it could reach a settlement with inmates' lawyers.
	So the inmates are running the asylum.
	They really are out in California.
	57,000 prisoners let go because of inadequate health care.
	Their rights to health care are being deprived because there's too many prisoners.
	It's overcrowded.
	And of course, three federal judges come right along and say, hell yes.
	Makes perfect sense to us.
	John in Centerville, Maryland.
	You're next on the EIB network, sir.
	Hello.
	Dittos from Centerville, Maryland, the great Mr. Limbaugh.
	How are you today?
	Fine, sir.
	Thanks very much for calling.
	Well, thank you for taking my call.
	Yes.
	I'm a faithful listener.
	I listen as much as I can, and Mr. Stern told me to get right to my point.
	I think the conservatives have to define the issue, and how we define the issue with regard to this porculus package is that we go back to basics and we look at what Ronald Reagan said in his first inaugural address.
	And if you juxtapose what he said in that inaugural with similar economic times, actually, they were worse economic times, we juxtapose that with Obama's scare tactics, it becomes clear what we have to do, and that is we have to inform and put this situation into context.
	Well, who is we?
	We as conservatives.
	Name names.
	Tell me who's not doing that.
	Well, I don't think that the people in our senators are doing it well enough.
	I don't think our congressmen are doing it well enough.
	Amen.
	Amen.
	You just said it.
	The reason that conservatism is perceived to be down and out is that there hasn't been an elected Republican tryarticulating it in 15 years.
	It's amazing.
	If an elected Republican would articulate conservatism, McCain didn't do it.
	George W. Bush was not a conservative.
	He was conservative on certain things, but he was not a conservative.
	We don't have any elected officials who are on a daily basis providing the alternative to voters, be they either a member of the House or the Senate or a presidential candidate.
	It hasn't happened.
	This is why I still remain optimistic.
	If somebody would just come along and do it, you know, it can do it all day in the media.
	But you see what happens.
	You know, I'm now perceived as the leader of what?
	The Obama people are telling people not to listen to me.
	Gallup is polling me.
	Why?
	Because I'm the perceived chief articulator of conservatism.
	What liberals want is McCain-type Republicans.
	They want David Brooks-type Republicans.
	They want the new conservative media-type Republicans who think that the best way to start serving America and winning election is to start looking at people as members of groups.
	Oh, yeah, we got to get the Hispanic vote.
	Then we got to get the female vote.
	Then we got to get the black vote.
	And we got to use government to do it.
	We just have to do it smarter.
	We just have to do it wiser.
	Well, I will guarantee you, the Democrat Party will run against those Republicans any day of the week, and they'll promote them and they'll make them big shots because they will cream them every day of the week.
	Those kind of Republicans are going to lose elections every national elections, presidential elections, those kind of Republicans who do what Democrats do, but try to do it smarter, try to get this group and that group or what have you.
	You talk about using government to help people get benefits, blah, blah, blah.
	No one, the Democrats will love those kinds of Republicans because they can cream them.
	So why they come after me?
	They come after me because I'm perceived to be the leading spokesman of what they fear.
	They know conservatism shellacks them when it's in the mouths of a Gingrich or a Reagan.
	So they're doing everything they can to discredit conservatism by discrediting me.
	So when you say we need to do this, plenty of us are.
	It's the GOP that needs to get back on board.
	Okay, folks, that's at the end of another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence.
	As always, thanks for being with us.
	Can't tell you how much I appreciate it.
	The opportunity to do this and be with you every day.
	And tomorrow's a brand new day.
	We'll start it on time, 21 hours from now.
	Look forward to seeing you then.

▲