All Episodes
Previous Next
March 25, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:58
March 25, 2009, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, and conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
Time once again for the award-winning Thrill Pact, ever-exciting, increasingly popular, and really growing by leaps and bounds.
Rush Limbaugh program here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Great to have you here.
We get back to phones.
The telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
We welcome to the EIB network Mark Levin, who is full disclosure here, a good friend, one of my best, and the author of the just released and already bestseller, Liberty and Tyranny, a conservative manifesto.
Hello, sir, and welcome to our big and vast network.
You're not kidding.
How are you, brother?
I'm pretty good.
Never better.
I'm in a foul mood the last couple of days with nothing to do with you.
Cheer up.
Cheer up.
I'm trying.
I'm trying.
Look, I don't want to overdo this, but as I said yesterday, people throughout my whole career have said, what can I read to learn what you know?
And where can I go to find the intellectual truths of conservatism?
And I've always had a book list that I give them, and I've always had a magazine list and so forth.
Your book is now one-stop shop.
Your book is, this is the book, not only to read for someone to read themselves, but to give to people.
While it is, I don't think it's not too technical, and it's got its intellectual parts, but it is readable, understandable, inspiring.
It's a page turner, which is difficult for a book like this to be.
Well, you know, as I was writing it, we talked frequently.
You know, on the weekends I was there, and you'd send me an instant message.
Hey, Flea, what are you doing?
I'm writing.
Or what are you doing?
It's two in the morning.
I'm writing.
Because, you know, I have full-time jobs, and this is the only time I can do it.
And that's part of the reason it took so long.
No, you weren't just writing.
Well, I was wrong.
There's a notes section.
You were researching.
You know, you could have written a book that just regurgitates what's in your heart and what's in your mind, but you have backed it up here with the thoughts of the founders with empirical evidence and proof of what's in your heart and what's in your mind.
And that's the work.
I mean, anybody can tell anybody what they think.
To go out and get backup for us, for it is what took the time.
And full disclosure, as I said yesterday, I mean, you were working on this for a year and a half, and there were times I know that it was arduous, but all the hard work has paid off, believe me.
Here's how I want to start with you on this.
Yes, sir.
Even now at age 58, I still consider myself naive.
Because throughout my childhood and my adult life, I just accepted that everybody living in America loved our country and appreciated the whole concept of America and understood it.
Freedom, liberty, American exceptionalism.
And my opinion of this, it wasn't due to nationalism.
It wasn't because I put a pin on my lapel or as I was born here or any of that.
It was rooted in the way that I was raised.
And then in the things that I learned, my appreciation for this country and what it is, how unique and rare it is in the whole history of human civilization.
So I still have lots of difficulty today intellectually understanding.
I get it emotionally, but I have difficulty intellectually understanding people natively born in this country who hate it, who want to destroy it, who want to remake it in an image that will cause it to not be what it has always been, which is the single greatest outpost and location for prosperity and security the world has ever seen.
Can you help me to understand why there are people who hate this country and want to tear it down?
The key is to understand that there are people who are of that mindset.
And if we don't understand it, and we just think this is an academic debate, or they're just slightly liberal or what have you, we're going to be devoured by it.
We need to understand that these people do not share our view of liberty and individuality.
They reject the Declaration of Independence, which talks about unalienable rights.
Who are these people?
These people are what I call the statists.
They are not liberals because liberal in the classical sense is the opposite of authoritarian.
And I refuse to allow them to steal the language and use the language to attack us.
You even hear Obama talking about investments.
These aren't investments.
It's nationalizing private sector.
It's massively increasing taxes to confiscatory levels.
We have to deny them the distortion of the language and speak the truth.
And look, here's the problem.
They have abandoned the principles of the founding.
Conservatism represents the founding principles.
That's who we are.
We embrace the Declaration of Independence.
We revere the Constitution of the United States.
They try to evade the Constitution and undermine it and construct something that's expedient, that advances their political agenda, which we cringe at.
We need to understand who these people are.
But frankly, I started writing this book because we need to understand who we are, that we need to have confidence, because we have some people preaching the abandonment of conservatism or trying to rewrite conservatism or trying to create some weird hybrid.
And I just assume stick with Edmund Burke and Hamilton and Jefferson and Madison because I happen to think they're smarter than these people.
Well, I'm going to get into the internosine conflicts in the Republican Party or the conservative movement in due course in our discussion here.
I gather from what you're saying is the motivations of these people really aren't necessary.
All we have to do and understand is that we've got to beat them.
Well, we need to understand that their motivations are not good, that they're destructive.
I talk about the civil society, as have others in the past.
The civil society is what we call organized liberty or the social compact.
And there are various elements to it.
And this is the heart of conservatism.
You know, that man has a spirit, that each man and woman is unique.
That we have a duty to promote our unalienable rights and to protect them.
That we have a duty to our families and ourselves to take care of ourselves, to contribute to charity.
That we have a duty to support a just and righteous law that is stable and predictable.
And I go into some of these things.
And what the statist does is they believe in human experimentation.
I'm not talking about Mengele here.
I'm talking about taking society and turning it on its head.
And this is why Edmund Burke was so crucial.
He explained the difference between change is reform, which is what we conservatives believe in, reform that promotes and preserves the civil society.
And change is radical innovation that destroys the civil society, that destroys the culture.
And this is what we are fighting off.
And so when people say we always say no, you're damn right we say no to destroying this society.
Well, we have a lot of yeses to say too about liberty and free enterprise and all the other things that are one link to the other.
And if I might make a footnote, too, I keep hearing, well, there's the social conservatives, the free market conservatives, and the national security conservatives.
No, they're not.
In a civil society, you must have a moral order.
Right versus wrong, good versus evil, just versus unjust, and means versus ends.
They're not the same thing.
And when we talk about moral order, you must have a moral order to have a rule of law, for the free market to work, to advance national security.
There are not three branches to conservatism.
There is conservatism.
And it doesn't need to be refined or reformed.
It doesn't need to be remade or rebuilt.
Well, why would we surrender our core principles that have served this nation so well, that have served humanity so well?
I mean, Americans have contributed so enormously to mankind.
Why would we surrender those principles to these politicians who are only in office in a temporary basis, who are advancing their own political careers and their fairly radical agendas?
Why would we make peace with such people, make peace with such a philosophy?
Why wouldn't we take our case, be confident in our case, and take it to the American people?
We can link it to current events.
We can promote policies through it, but we can't promote policies that are not based on sound philosophy.
You mention a lot about the founding, and you quote John Adams frequently in the book.
One of the quotes that I like from John Adams, and I'm paraphrasing this, but he said that the founders had written a constitution for a religious and a moral people, that the document wouldn't work for people outside those realms.
So is it safe to say that those who oppose the Constitution are afraid of it?
They don't like the concept of morality.
They don't like the concept of a natural order of things, natural law, this kind of thing.
This is a great point.
First of all, let's go to the Declaration first.
The Founding Fathers created a society, and that's what they created in the Declaration of Independence, founded on natural law.
Divine providence, God-given natural law, unalienable rights.
The only thing that makes life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness unalienable is the belief in a creator, not the belief in man or some government.
Man and government can't, in the end, confer these rights or legitimately deny them.
This is a huge difference we have with the status, whether the modern status or past status.
They believe rights are something to be rationed.
If you agree with them, they give you rights.
If you don't agree with them, they take rights away.
They believe that they're all-powerful.
We don't.
We believe they're earthly.
This is a huge difference between us and the status.
When you watch Obama during his press conferences or Pelos, these people sound like they're God.
I mean, they think they're God.
We're going to do this.
And they also exploit something.
Man is imperfect.
Every religion will tell you that man is imperfect.
So man's institutions aren't perfect.
And what the statist does is he exploits that.
He tries to create this phony notion of a utopian state where if you'll surrender your will, surrender your liberty, surrender your property, more and more of it over time, to them, they will make the impossible possible, the unequal equal, and what they really will do is destroy your humanity because they're not about humanity.
They're about government.
And that's why we need to call them statists.
Now, okay, let's talk about the status and their voters.
I've always thought they're two different people.
You've got the Obamas and the Pelosi's, the Marnie Franks, the Washington statist elite, if you will, and the state house, you know, the statist elites.
But let's look at their voters.
How many of their voters, how many of the people who are fully enraged and angry on their fringe blogs, how many of them are actually of the same belief that the leaders of this statism are in belief of it?
Or how many of them are just sheep?
And therefore, if they're sheep, if they're not as committed, they don't understand really what they're voting for and what it leads to, are they salvageable?
You know, many of them are what I call malcontents.
They're victims.
They think they are.
They always have a grievance.
They don't look inside.
They don't analyze their own lives.
I write about this, too.
They don't take responsibility for their own situations.
They don't know how because they refuse to look beyond their own situations.
They don't know how to prosper in the freest, most generous, most benevolent society ever established on the face of the earth.
And so they feel the rest of us shouldn't survive or can't survive in a similar society.
They're the malcontents.
They're what I call the drones, what the Tocqueville referred to as, my phrase, is these drone-like characteristics, where more and more of them surrender their independence, their human sensibilities to the state.
And they want to be told what to do.
And then there's the elitist side of this.
And it's academia where you have professors and teachers who get a sinecure from the government.
And what are they doing?
Well, not everyone.
I'm talking about the rule, not the exception.
They are promoting this quiet counter-revolution in the classroom against the civil society, against our country.
Same thing with Hollywood.
Here you have people who luxuriate in the most magnificent society on the face of earth.
They have fame.
They have fortune.
Nobody bothers them.
They can do whatever they want, say whatever they want, and yet they act as if they're revolutionaries, when in fact they're not.
And they have enormous influence in the political process because of their wealth and their ability to contribute and affect the media.
Are they salvageable?
Well, we won't know if we don't try our way.
If we keep doing these half measures and create clutter and doubting ourselves rather than have confidence and articulate our positions and do it with our friends and neighbors and in our neighborhoods, well, we'll never know if we can reach these people.
So it makes no sense to you in a political sense.
Let's say the Republican Party is the home of conservatism, just theoretically or hypothetically for a moment.
It makes no sense to you to accept publicly some of their premises so as to attract them and then when we get them start to work on them to change their minds.
No, what we need to do is challenge the language and the content of what the status does.
And the status is extremely manipulative and they will deceive.
You can see they're politicians.
They deceive and they want to buy votes and they'll change their positions on the dime because really they march at a relatively standard pace.
Right now they're marching faster than in the past, but they're incremental and persistent and they have their goals in mind.
And too often we conservatives are fighting with each other over, well, should we do this?
Should we do that?
In other words, we're tweaking on the edges.
We're debating over nonsense.
We're allowing people who claim to be conservative to demoralize conservatives.
We have nothing to be demoralized about.
Let me tell you something.
You've said it 100,000 times.
This is the greatest nation on the face of the earth, and we cheerlead for it, and they attack it.
We love this society.
We love the Declaration.
We love the Constitution.
We love what it's brought forth.
We love the capitalist system with its imperfections.
Of course it has imperfections.
And the capitalist system itself deals with that.
The other side wakes up in the morning under the attack.
They reject the Constitution and evade it day in and day out.
They reject the founding principles and evade them day in and day out.
They want to recreate our society, and that is what we're up against.
Mark Levin, the author of Liberty and Tyranny, is our guest here.
And we will continue our discussion right after this obscene profit timeout here on the EIB network.
We are back with Mark Levin, who, by the way, is the host, as many of you know, of his own radio talk show, Syndicated Nationally.
We have the same flagship station, WABC AM77 in New York.
Mark, you're going to kick out of this.
I checked my email during the break, and I just found this note.
Subject line interview awesome.
I was stopped at a stoplight when it began, and I saw a friend who I know to be conservative.
I rolled down the window, and I yelled at her.
I said, turn on the radio.
She said, I already am.
I just ordered four copies of Levin's book.
Oh, wow, that's terrific.
Well, this is a bestseller.
A lot of people are going to credit the wrong things for the success of this book, such as its publicity.
I mean, you can't get where you're going to get without publicity here.
But it's the book itself.
There is a hunger for this in a concise.
Folks, this is not a large book.
It's 256 pages, but it's not large.
It's a book, but it's jam-packed.
This has the answer for everything you've asked yourself about yourself and why you believe what you believe.
And it also has at the end, we'll talk about this as we get closer to it, the modicum of steps that people can take.
Now, Mark, serious about this question, I happened to just coincidentally run across Barry Goldwater's book, A Conscience of a Conservative.
I read it, parts of it, and of course everything in it.
I went, yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, I know, I know, I know.
And then I recall that we had Ronald Reagan for two terms, landslide majorities.
And I recall that we elected the House of Representatives, Republican control, 1994, largely on a conservative contract with America.
Here's Goldwater's book.
Here's your book.
Here's all of these real-life experiences.
Reagan, why do we have to keep reteaching this?
Why is it that people who read this stuff 30 years ago, 40 years ago, vote for it 20 years ago, can be so easily turned against it?
Because tyranny is persistent.
Tyranny has existed since the beginning of man.
Liberty takes people to be resolute.
It takes some thinking.
It takes some proper education and understanding, and it takes confidence.
Tyranny takes brute force and emotion and propaganda.
And so it is we who have to be resolute.
If freedom is the natural yearning of the human spirit as endowed by our creator, as you said earlier, why does it take work?
Because tyranny is something, you know, not everybody wants to promote liberty for everybody.
I want to read to the back, and this will answer to Abraham Lincoln's quote on the back of the cover of the book.
Can you do it in one minute?
I can do it in one minute.
I found this right after I started the book.
We all declare for liberty, but in using the same word, we do not all mean the same thing.
With some, the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself and the product of his labor.
While with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men and the product of other men's labor.
Here are two not only different but incompatible things called by the same name, liberty.
And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names, liberty and tyranny.
The slave owner thought he was promoting liberty, theoretically, but he wasn't.
He was a tyrant.
And let me tell you something.
Those people who want to enslave us today by small steps in a thousand different regulations and taxes, they're following the root of a soft tyranny.
That's what de Tocqueville called it, and de Tocqueville was right.
Mark Levin is with us, and we've got to take another EIB obscene profit timeout here in mere seconds.
But again, the title of the book is Liberty and Tyranny.
And we've got much more to discuss here.
We'll do it after this brief timeout.
Sit tight.
Back before you know it.
We're back with our remaining moments with Mark Levin, the author of Liberty and Tyranny.
And if the bookstore is sold out, fear not.
There are more being printed.
The book is exceeding all expectations except mine.
Quick question here.
You were just talking, you were just quoting Lincoln on the word liberty and how it can be defined in a bunch of different ways.
Let's relate this to something happening right before our very eyes at this very moment.
Liberals today, the Obama administration on down, are easily successfully confusing liberty with greed and greediness.
Liberals think that men exchanging goods and services freely for agreed-on market prices is greed.
And it is not.
It is liberty.
In fact, it is the liberals, the left, the statists, as you call them, who are practicing greed today, printing their own money, bankrupting the country, spending other people's money for their causes.
So how do we arrive at this moment where the exercise of market economic liberty is considered greed?
Well, first of all, people need to understand that the greed comes from government.
The government wants to take 60, 70% of what you earn at all levels of government, and it hasn't earned a thing.
So here's the way we need to understand it, labor.
Labor is the time you spend working, whether it's an intellectual pursuit or a hands-on type pursuit.
And you have an infinite amount of time on this earth.
So this is precious time.
This is your liberty, your time that you're spending to earn this income.
So when somebody says that you've earned too much after working as you have, using all your abilities to do what you do, to create a comfortable living for yourself, and somebody in the government tells you, well, that's not good enough, and they want to take your money not for the legitimate purposes of government, as stated in the Constitution, but to redistribute wealth or some other outrageous Marxist-type theory, socialist-type theory.
They are stealing literally time out of your life, your liberty that you spend earning this money, earning this private property legitimately.
And we need to explain that the free market is the most transformative of economic systems, and it fosters creativity and inventiveness.
It produces all these industries and products and services that the statist wants to control and tax.
The status creates nothing.
The food Obama has was created by capitalism.
The suit that he wears when he does these press conferences, he can thank capitalism, not a single bureaucrat.
The car that he drives or that is driven for him, the helicopter, the jet he takes, the teleprompter.
All of it is a creation of capitalism.
No government bureaucrat and no politician.
People need to look around because liberty's permeance.
It's so broad, it's so wide that when you're born into it, a lot of times you don't recognize it.
And you think it's going to be here forever.
Well, aspects of it will, but it's going to be severely curtailed if those who do not respect liberty and do not respect private property rights and do not respect the labor that somebody applies to a skill or whatever and earns his own money, that liberty is going to be severely diminished.
Liberty is precious, and that is what we want to defend.
Couple more things before our time perspires.
The internecine battles in the conservative movement now for primacy, supremacy, leadership, and so forth, as I look at this, I see it as a problem we first have to deal with before we even take on the statists, because we've got several on our side who are siding with the statists, at least on the basis of accepting some of their premises and then affecting them on the margins, on the corner.
And all of these people love to call themselves moderates.
Now, Mark, the one thing about, you'll never find, as I've said, books in the library of great moderates in American history.
And one of the reasons is they're not passionate.
They are not passionate in beliefs, and they do not advance ideas.
The only time these moderate so-called conservatives, and we don't need to mention names here because it's not, everybody knows who they are, the most passionate they get is when attacking the traditional conservatives that you have described today and in your book.
Where's this going?
The truth is, the truth is, they're largely irrelevant.
Most of the people don't know who they are.
They write in liberal publications.
They write to themselves.
They speak to themselves.
They have not had an impact.
But they're not only abandoning the only principles by which our society can exist as free and secure and prosperous, but they're urging others to abandon them too.
So to the extent that people listen to them or, frankly, that we bring them up, they are demoralizing and petty at a time when we must understand and embrace conservatism.
And what I try to do in this book, when I took under the task of writing it, is I don't want a superficial talking point book.
I started from the beginning.
I went back to some of the great classics and philosophers, and I questioned myself.
Why am I a conservative?
Why do I believe these things?
Who are we?
Why does the statist not believe what we believe?
Why is he so cynical and destructive of our society?
And what can we do about it?
So I find these folks that want to surrender or abandon our principles and come up with some weird hybrids and so forth, I find them to be clutter for the most part and relatively, and frankly, irrelevant to the grassroots.
All right, the last chapter is a, this is entitled, the epilogue is a conservative manifesto.
I'm going to ask you what I always get when explaining these things to people.
Okay, what can I do, average citizen?
What can I do?
I mean, beyond vote, what can I do?
Well, the first thing you can do, the question I always get is, what can we do?
And the first thing you can do is stop saying we and say I.
And what you can do is a hell of a lot.
If you're a grandparent, then talk to your grandchildren.
If you're a parent, then talk to your children.
You need to educate them and inform them.
The fact that most of your kids, and mine, go to these government schools doesn't mean you don't have a role in their lives.
You have the most prominent and important role of anybody.
Teach them these principles.
Understand them.
Be confident.
And teach them the confidence.
And you should have the confidence to talk to your neighbors or at a social event or a grocery store.
You have these kids when they go to sleep, when they wake up, when they're eating dinner, when you're taking them to the mall or to a movie or to see a friend.
We are a bigger army of advocates than Acorn can ever be.
We are a bigger army of advocates than any other army out there.
If each of us were to use our intelligence and use our ability to articulate these principles, which I hope I will help to promote here, they cannot stop us.
Mark, congratulations.
It's a fine book.
It's a great effort, and it's timely, and it fills a need and a void that so many people are hungering for now.
And I want to tell this little story when, if you don't mind, if I detail how this book actually came about.
Go right ahead.
Mark wanted to write his book, Rescuing Sprite, about his dog that he adopted that died and everything itinerant to that and what it meant to him.
And in order to get that book written, he had to promise the publisher to write this book.
But your genuine real passion was the Sprite book.
And so when this book began, it was, okay, I got to do this now.
And as you started it and got into it, And as you complete it, what's happened here is that you've ended up, because of how serious you took this, you've come up with two excellent, brilliant books that are as unique from one another as any two things could be.
Even though this was the afterthought, this is the one now that fits.
Mark was worried that the timing was all wrong.
This book should have come out before the election.
It should have come out a year ago.
Nope.
Timing of this is perfect.
People are wandering in the woods looking for some guidance beyond what they get everywhere else.
This is something they can carry with them and give to people to help spread the word.
So congratulations and thanks.
It's a great effort.
Well, Rush, first of all, let me just say real fast, because I know you need to go here.
You are the dearest of personal friends, and I wish people could know and see just how you are in that respect.
I do too.
And I think they know when they listen to you what a big heart you have.
And number two, you've taken so much crap on behalf of we conservatives day in and day out.
And it upsets me to no, excuse me, to no end.
But I'm sure I can say on behalf of your millions and millions of listeners, we appreciate you.
We're proud of you.
And keep giving them a hell.
We're behind you.
Thanks much.
I know that, and I appreciate it more than you know.
All the best, and keep us apprised of how well this is doing.
Don't be bashful about that.
God bless.
Thank you, sir.
All right, Mark Levin, Liberty and Tyranny is the book.
If your bookstore doesn't have it, I just got a note, for example.
Somebody went to a Barnes and Noble somewhere out in California, Southern California, asked for the book.
Oh, no, we're sold out, but we have one more coming.
We have one more coming.
It's at all of the online places, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, wherever.
And it'll be in your bookstore soon.
They've had to reprint gobs of these after just one day out on the market.
Be back after this with much more.
Stay with us.
We are back on the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network and El Rushbox.
And the headline at the Huffington Post website says it all.
Bobby Jindal goes to bat for Rush Limbaugh.
While President Obama was delivering a typically boring and professorial press conference last night, Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, was addressing the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee dinner in Washington, D.C.
The suggestion behind this question, do you want the president to fail, is this.
If you don't answer that question with a loud no immediately, if you don't express instant obedience to the question, then they're trying to suggest you're not really a patriot.
They're essentially saying that you're trying to undermine America.
Make no mistake.
Anything other than an immediate, a compliant, why, no, sir, I don't want the president to fail is treated as some act of treason, civil disobedience, or political obstructionism.
Let's be clear.
The very Democratic leaders who are now asking this phony question are the ones who for so long wanted to see the last president fail, regardless of the issue, regardless of whether he was right or wrong.
Bobby Jindal.
They're applauding the people at the Republican congressional campaign dinner in Washington were actually applauding this.
You see, this is something Republicans could learn.
He's right.
Do you agree with Limbaugh?
You want the president to fail?
Oh, no, no, no.
I want him to fail that question.
Jindal goes up.
Come on, can we get real?
The question's a setup.
They want to call you a traitor if you say you don't want the president to succeed.
And what he goes on to say is, let's not forget who wanted Bush to fail and in the middle of a war, and they wanted the military to fail.
And he continued.
I'll not be browbeaten on this.
I won't cow tie to their political correctness.
We will be the loyal opposition.
So my answer to this question is very simple.
When they ask, do you want the president to fail?
It depends on what he is trying to do.
There is something far more important to us than whether the president or any politician fails.
Far more importantly, we don't want America to fail.
When the president wants to spend our country into debt, interminable debt, putting not only this generation but future generations into a position where the only way out will be massive tax increases.
We oppose that policy not because we want the president to fail, but because we want Americans to succeed.
Exactly what I said at CPAC1, everybody.
But we do want him to fail in this.
And there are ways, there are instruments to make him fail.
You know, failure is, look at this.
It's no different than defeat.
You know, I use the example of the Super Bowl.
I'm a Steelers fan.
I wanted the Cardinals to fail.
I wanted Kurt Warner to fail.
I wanted the Cardinals to lose.
I wanted the Steelers to beat him.
This is politics.
I want Obama to be defeated.
I want his plans to be defeated.
Bobby Jendal is saying the same thing.
I think it's gutsy to take this on.
You know why?
Because this is a dead issue now.
They've moved on from it.
They had moved on from it.
They'd gotten what they thought was all the mileage they could get out of it.
They had attacked me for a week or two on this.
And he's reviving it now because I guess he's tired of getting the question.
So it's time for him to answer it.
Here's one final soundbite from Governor Jendal from last night at a Republican congressional campaign dinner in Washington.
But he pursues policies that are akin to those of European socialism.
Policies that take him too far could cause America to fail.
We will oppose.
We will stand up and be counted.
We will do so proudly.
Not because we want the president to fail, but because we want America to succeed.
It's the same thing.
And by the way, I make no apologies for any of these positions, and neither should you.
The right question to ask is not we want the president to fail or succeed, but rather we want America to succeed.
Thank you for your time tonight.
Thank you for what you do for America.
May God bless you all.
May the loyal opposition continue to speak out and stand up on principle.
Thank you, and good night.
Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, as the Huffington Post headlined, going to bat for Rush Limbaugh.
And this is a gutsy movement.
This is why I like the guy.
He's being guided by principle there.
And he's the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee.
This is the outfit that raises money to elect Republicans to the House of Representatives.
And he's up there telling them what to do.
He's giving them advice, strong advice, giving them leadership and giving them some cover if they want to take it.
Eva, somewhere in New Jersey, she's not comfortable identifying her exact location.
No, no, not at all.
Hello?
Well, we'll soon find out why she doesn't want you to know where she lives.
Hi.
No, no, I live in New Jersey.
I live in Glenwich, New Jersey.
And the reason I'm coming is because actually the article in the New York Times that I didn't read, but I heard about, it kind of made me so upset that it broke the straw on that camel that I was, you know, I felt like a camel.
But the bottom line is, just to make a long story short, my husband works for AIG.
And he has worked for IG, I don't know, I don't know, 15, 20 years, something like that.
He works, and I'm pretty much going to repeat to the same extent the story that I heard from, you know, it was quoted to me over the phone from New York Times.
He works incredibly long hours.
We have four kids.
He barely sees them.
His assignments are from state to state.
Sometimes he spends their weeks or sometimes really years from one location to another.
And he did receive a bonus, one of those AIG bonuses.
It is a very small bonus comparing to all those bonuses that I hear about.
And I'm not sure, and that hurts me a lot, that I'm not sure to what extent public is really aware of what most of those bonuses are about.
No, they're based on the commons.
The country has been led by a tyrannical mob.
The country has been worked into a frothing frenzy by a tyrannical mob.
And they don't care what the bonuses are about.
All they know is that the bonuses are their money and that this money is going to people who botched and destroyed the company.
That's what the Obama is.
That's not exactly what I'm saying.
I know it's totally untrue, but this is what the administration is putting out.
You've got the president of the United States lined up against your family.
That's what you have to realize.
The president of the United States has seen to it that busloads of protesters, if they find out where your husband and you live, will show up on a bus tour to protest you.
That's exactly, you know what, I wanted to finish it up and say that...
Well, hang on, because I got to tell you, I...
I've got to take a break.
This is one of these things in broadcasting called a heartbreak.
It doesn't move.
Don't go away.
By the way, folks, could we dispense with this silly assertion that Obama went without his teleprompter last night?
The drive-bys are trying to tell us he went without his teleprompter last night.
It's an out-and-out lie.
▲
Export Selection