All Episodes
Previous Next
April 7, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:38
April 7, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No, Mr. Snurdly, I'm deadly serious.
This wheelchair car was not, contrary to what everybody says, the wheelchair car is not designed to help the disabled.
It was designed to handicap the able-bodied.
What happens when one of these things breaks down?
The new tow truck will be a golf cart.
Jeez.
All right, we're back.
Rush Limbaugh on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
Here's the phone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, the email address lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
Drive-by media is suppressing this news.
Mark Stein, I'm told, talked about it yesterday.
It's a Pew Research survey that shows that the partisan gap in the Obama job approval is the widest in the modern era.
For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades.
The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama's job performance is the result of a combination of high Democrat ratings, 88% job approval among Democrats, and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans, 27%, which I'm surprised Republican approval rating is that high, but still, that's a huge gap.
By comparison, there was a somewhat smaller 51-point partisan gap with George W. Bush in April of 2001, a few months into his first term.
Same thing with Clinton, substantially smaller than what Obama faces.
The growing partisan divide in presidential approval ratings is part of a long-term trend.
Going back in time, partisanship was far less evident in the early job approval ratings for both Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon.
In fact, a majority of Republicans, 56%, approved of Carter's job performance in late March of 77, and a majority of Democrats, 55%, approved of Nixon's performance at a comparable point in his first term.
Now, what is this, what does it tell us?
Well, it tells us the country is polarized.
I have said it.
We are a bipolar nation.
The media, however, is not polarized.
The media is, this is important.
The media is presenting a story of a unified nation enthralled and in near idolatry of Barack Obama and the world, too, when in fact it's not the case.
Now, Barack Obama ran as the great unifier.
Obama ran as the guy who was going to end all of this.
Obama ran as the guy who was going to bring a new politics to Washington.
And a lot of politicians do, and it's all BS.
But people with Obama believed it.
Now, what strikes me interesting about this beyond what's obvious is that we have, you know, on the Republican or the conservative side of the aisle, we have our own internecine wars going on among conservatives for who's a real conservative and what should the conservative movement be and what should the Republican Party be going forward.
We have all of these tea parties out.
These things are massive.
They're being totally ignored by the drive-by media.
The tax day, April 15th, is going to see huge tea parties in major cities across the country.
Some of the local communities are trying to pare them down because they claim it's going to be a dangerous situation with so many people and so forth.
They're going to be big.
It is obvious.
You know, there were, how many people voted against Obama?
Was it 55, 56 million people voted against him?
And I don't think anything has changed to make those 55 or 56 million think, you know, I made a mistake.
This is a great guy.
I mean, I really like what he's doing to our economy.
I really like what he's doing to our country.
I really like how he's over there in Europe apologizing for us every stop he makes.
I really don't think that's happened.
I think it's just the exact opposite.
Yet, the quote-unquote intelligentsia on our side, the elites of the conservative movement, told us that Obama's got a great temperament.
He's very smart.
He reads books, writes books, reads books.
He's really, really, really an intellectual guy.
And he's the kind of candidate the Republicans need to put forward themselves.
Somebody who understands that the American people want an ever-growing government, but they want it growing and used in a smarter way.
Blah, blah.
Well, I look at this Pew Research data as a profound rebuke of people on our side who claim the future of the Republican Party resides in abandoning conservatism.
And make no mistake, it's what they're saying.
Conservatism is what it is.
Conservatism does not get modified.
There aren't three stools to it.
We're told that there are.
We're told, well, we've got the social conservatives.
And we've got the fiscal conservatives.
And we have the libertarian conservatives.
Well, you know, a social conservative is not really a conservative.
Social conservative wants to say he or she is conservative, but they're really not.
Conservatism is what it is.
There's nothing wrong with it.
It doesn't need to be moderated or modified.
It is what it is.
Now, if conservatism needs to be modified, if conservatism needs to be upgraded, updated, if you will, to the current issues of the day, so I believe conservative principles apply no matter what the issues are.
But regardless, it doesn't seem to me that this polarized partisan gap in Obama's approval rating is any indication that the people that want to quote-unquote reform conservatism have any idea what they're talking about.
Because if they were right, this partisan gap wouldn't exist.
Many conservatives wouldn't understand.
Look, we've got a guy using big government.
We've got a guy who makes the world think that he's smart, smarter than anybody else, that the country's changing.
He's out there apologizing for America's excesses, America's bullying of the past generations and so forth.
This is precisely the kind of candidate, erudite, well-spoken, and so forth, use of big government that the conservative intelligentsia on our side has said is the future of the Republican Party.
And yet, 27 was his 73% of Republicans reject that notion.
So it seemed to me that the Republican Party is out of touch with itself.
The Republican Party is out of touch with its voters.
The conservative element of the Republican Party at the leadership level is likewise.
And what these Tea Parties represent all over the world is the fact that there is no leadership, either at the top of the conservative political movement or the Republican Party, that encourages people to get behind.
So they're taking matters into their own hands to illustrate their grievances and their lack of approval of what's being done to them and their country and their kids' future.
So I look at this as all, it's great news, but the fact of the matter is, as far as the rest of the country is concerned, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, we love Obama.
He is larger than life.
He has saved our country's embarrassment, and we are all now proud as we can be as Americans to finally have a smart and brilliant and erudite president who's willing to go around the world and tell the rest of the world we mean them no harm.
And we do not constitute a threat, that we have made our mistakes in the past.
Why, Obama said, even in my own country, it wasn't long ago that most states didn't even let people like me vote, which is an out-and-out lie.
It was a few states that didn't let people like Obama vote, and they were run by Democrats, and they were quickly overrun.
They were beaten back and they were defeated.
And he loves to go around the world saying, and I'm Barack Hussein Obama.
And my country's changed a lot.
They'll elect somebody with a middle name, Hussein.
He doesn't tell them he couldn't use his middle name during the campaign.
And he doesn't tell them that if somebody on the McCain side did, that McCain threw him under the bus.
So the partisan gap in the Obama job approval is at the widest it's been ever in the modern era in the last 40 years, which means there is a lot of dissatisfaction with what Obama is doing, with what his policies are.
It is not being reported.
In fact, it's being misrepresented.
And I've had somebody ask me last night, why, Rush?
I mean, you say that the media is invested in Obama, but why are they going so overboard to present a picture of him that isn't true?
And the answer is because they know the picture they've presented all along isn't true.
It's, you know, their credibility is as much at stake as his is.
So they have to continually pump up who Obama is as a human being, much less a president, in order to keep the truth of his relative averageness and occasional incompetence and mediocrity from surfacing.
And the way they do that, I mean, all this silly reporting on how Michelle Obama captivated Europe with her wardrobe and her sense of style.
Notice that Michelle Obama didn't say diddly squat.
Just like Princess Diana never said much.
The royal family knew, okay, put her out there.
She looks great.
Let her stand next to the poor kids, but don't let her open her mouth or we're cooked.
And the same thing with Michelle.
You know, after the campaign, I never hated my country or loved my country, whatever she said until now.
They don't let her say anything.
But she looks good.
Now we've got a story from advertising age.
Guess what?
All these magazine cover shit, they're not selling.
The Michelle Obama newspaper magazine covers do not sell.
It's all a giant myth.
This universal adoration and love, it's a creation of the new Camelot, which also was a myth.
And this is a myth that has been created for consumption of people in this country and around the world.
The truth is quite something else.
And it will manifest itself at some point.
But I warn you again, do not ever expect the Drive-Buy media to change.
They have to report above and beyond greatness.
They have to report superhuman.
They have to report everybody enthralled and bowled over because that's the image they created way back during the campaign.
And their objective is to see to it that none of the reality of this guy ever sees the light of day in mainstream media or mainstream American thought.
All right, a brief time out.
We've got a plethora of audio soundbites remaining, plus a lot of your phone calls, too.
And we'll get to all of it in just a sec.
Okay, to Houston, Texas next.
This is Paul.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hey, pleasure to talk to you, Rush.
My question for you was: how likely do you think it is that some of our defense cuts that we've made, like the F-22, some of these fast destroyers, are appeadments for the Chinese buying up our debt to sort of empower their well, that would require speculation.
I would rather put the cuts in defense where they belong.
I mean, you can blade the Chikoms all you want, but it's Barack Obama ordering them, right?
Now, who cares why?
If he's cutting, he's cutting the expansion of defense systems.
Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, who is a holdover from the Bush administration, says, yeah, well, we don't really need all these anymore.
We're going to go high-tech.
We're going to get more intel.
We don't need the F-22.
We don't need this.
We don't need that.
We don't need the new Navy destroyers, cruisers, whatever the hell they are.
This is just Obama.
The Democrats do two things.
They raise taxes and cut defense.
Now, if you want to say that the Chikoms are having a role here, I'll tell you where the Chikoms are involved.
Does anybody but me, I mean, this is hilarious.
If it weren't so serious, it'd be hilarious.
There's Barry.
He's over in Europe promising a nuclear-free world at the moment Kim Jong-il launches his test missile.
And Obama says, I know, I know, I'm not naive.
I'm not naive.
Oh, I'm worried.
Oh, I'm worried.
But I'm not naive.
So Kim Jong-il, I'll tell you, if you want Chikom involvement, the Chikoms own us.
They are our banker.
We want more debt.
We got to go to the Chikoms.
The Chikoms' allies are North Korea and Iran.
This is the problem we have.
The ChiComs, they might be telling, hey, Obama, hey, bam, you want to keep us as your banker?
Get rid of these weapon systems that could pose problems for us.
But our nukes do that anyway.
And Obama's talking about getting rid of those too.
To people, this is like last week.
Folks, I got to tell you something.
It's no wonder Obama's so damn popular over there.
Who's he talking to?
He's talking to Putin.
He's talking to Medvedev.
He's talking to the KGB.
He's talking to the Iranians.
And he's talking all you.
We're going to lead the way.
Get rid of our nuclear weapons.
We're the only nation to ever use them.
And that means that we have a moral authority.
Get rid of ours, a moral leadership.
Show the rest of the world how it's done.
And they're going, yay, what a great guy.
And Putin's looking at Medvedev and saying, can you believe this gift?
This local weed's going to get rid of his nukes.
And he thinks we're going to get rid of them too.
We're going to, hell's bells will applaud that.
Damn right.
And when he wants to verify, we'll take him all over Siberia and say, see, there aren't any.
And the malocracy down in Iran, they're doing the same thing.
Of course, he's popular.
He's dearming the United States, disarming the United States.
Now, this business with North Korea launching the nukes, Gates said, there's nothing we can do to stop it.
The Japanese just had to watch it.
And they said, if anything falls in our country, we're going to go after it.
But nothing did.
It made it across Japan and into the Pacific Ocean.
Nobody – do you realize the moral leadership or authority we have surrendered in claiming we can't stop the Iranians and we can't stop – do you realize how much is being repeated?
I'm going to tell you who Obama is in world history.
Neville Chamberlain.
He is the spitting image of Neville Chamberlain.
Neville Chamberlain was as popular as Obama when he got back from visiting Hitler.
In fact, in fact, there is a story in the New York Times recently.
Might be today, might be yesterday.
I forget which.
Hitler's economic policies were not bad for Germany.
The New York Times.
Hitler's economic policies, they weren't bad.
He got a little excessive here when the Holocaust got kicked up.
But Hitler's economic policies were not bad.
Well, now, why would that assertion be made by the drive-bys who are hell-bent on Obama being seen as something other than he is?
See, I'm telling you, if you want to compare Obama to any way, compare him to Neville Chamberlain.
He comes back, he says we're going to have peace in our time, and he's feted, and he's adulated, and he is celebrated, and he is regaled.
And Obama's basically doing the same thing in his world tour.
We're going to have peace in our time.
Get rid of our nuclear weapons.
By the way, the United States is not going to do all the awful things that we've been doing.
Now that I'm in charge, we understand what we're guilty of.
We're sorry.
And we're going to become mediocre like the rest of you.
That way, you won't hate us.
Well, I've been asked the question: do you think anybody believes he's really going to get rid of nukes?
At this stage, with, again, using intelligence guided by experience, Mr. Snerdley, and looking at everything else Obama's getting rid of, you have to keep it open as a possibility.
You have to.
Look at, that's who these people are.
That's who he is.
Don't you understand?
What is the nuclear freeze movement?
The global peace march for nuclear.
There are Americans, people around the world who think the only reason the world is at war is because of us.
We're too big.
We've got to be cut down to size.
It's not fair.
There's only one superpower because we become a superpower, not because of our Constitution, but we've stolen all these resources.
We've stolen the best people.
We've stolen everything.
We use it for ourselves.
We haven't paid it back.
People live in poverty because of us.
Obama believes this garbage, I'm afraid.
And do Medvedev and these guys hope that he think that he means it?
Even if they don't, they're going to try to encourage him to do it.
You've got to take it seriously.
Look, it's a very simple question.
If Obama does not intend to reduce our stockpile of nuclear weapons, why is he saying he does?
Why is he for adulation?
So he's just saying it doesn't mean it.
Just saying it because he wants to get the adulation thought of doing.
Just like he's not really going to get us out of Iraq.
He's just going to say so because he wants the adulation and all that.
Now, you may have a point.
The point is, he won't be able to get rid of them, is the bottom line.
Congress would stop him from doing this at some point.
Yes, Pelosi's and Harry Reids.
Yes, at some point that, you know, sanity will emerge for fleeting moments when it's necessary.
Otherwise, you know, it'll remain hidden behind the rocks.
Anyway, behind the phones, we go next.
We're going to go to Chicago.
This is Charles.
Charles, thank you for waiting and for calling.
Great to have you here.
Hello.
Thanks, Rush.
Rush, listen, I voted the Republican, and I really didn't want to see Obama get in office.
But, you know, Rush, you're one reason to play for this election, for the Republicans losing.
First of all, you kept harping about voting for Hillary.
The second big issue was a torture issue.
I'm a veteran.
We're not supposed to be torturing these people.
This is not Nazi Germany, Red China, or North Korea.
There's other ways of interrogating people.
And you kept harping about it's okay or it's not really torture.
And it was just more than waterboarding.
Some of these prisoners were killed under torture.
And it's just, it was crazy for you to keep going on and on like Levine and Hannity and Hewitt.
It's like you're all brainwashed.
And my last comment is: no matter what Obama does, you will still criticize him because I believe you're brainwashed.
You're just, and I hate to say it, but I think you're a brainwashed Nazi.
Anyone who could believe in torture just has got to be, there's got to be something wrong with them.
I know Bush wanted to keep us safe and all of that, but we're not supposed to be torturing these people.
Charles, if anybody is admitting that they are brainwashed, it would be you.
No, no, no, Rush.
I don't think so.
Charles, Charles, Hewitt, and Levine are all brainwashed.
You know it.
You said at the beginning of your phone call that you didn't want Obama in there, but you voted for him because of me.
I didn't vote for him.
I voted for McCain.
I voted Republican.
Oh, so you're saying I turned people off.
You turned people off with all this vote for Hillary and all this BS.
That was Operation Chaos.
That was to keep the chaos that goes to the Democrat primary.
And now all we have with you, Hennity, Levine, and Hewitt, sour grapes.
That's all we have.
And believe me, I'm not more to the right than I am to the left.
Oh, of course you are.
I am.
Of course you are.
You wouldn't be calling here with all these sour grapes if you.
I'm so tired of listening and go on and on with this.
I don't know of anybody who died from torture.
I do not enforce the torture patience.
They did not see the Newman trials.
Do you remember the Newtonberg trials?
Charles.
Cross Barbie.
Charles, what is it?
Barack Obama.
What's the matter with you?
You never even served in the military.
Barack Obama.
He served in the Marine Corps and the Army.
Charles, Barack Obama is president of the United States today because of stupid, ignorant people who think like you do.
You pose, you and your ignorance are the most expensive commodity this country has.
You think you know everything.
You don't know diddly squat.
You call me a Nazi?
You call me somebody who supports torture?
And you want credibility on this program?
You know, you're just plain embarrassing and ludicrous.
But it doesn't surprise me that you're the kind of Republican that our last candidate attracted.
Because you're no Republican at all based on what the hell you've said here.
Karen in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Welcome to the EIB Network, sir.
Hello.
I'm on the Russian Linbos show.
Yes, you are.
It's your big showbiz break.
She doesn't know she's not.
Karen, hello, testing one, two, three.
Karen, are you there?
Hello, Rush.
I am here.
I was about to offer you a free motorized segue if you showed up here.
I'm sorry.
Hey, Rush, I want to know why no one is talking about the $80 billion increase that's going to occur with the oil business and how it's going to.
What $80 billion increase in the oil business?
According to Obama's stimulus package, there is going to be an $80 billion increase.
And I know this is because my father received a letter from the president of Chevron.
My father worked for Chevron for over 35 years.
And the president wrote him a letter and said, please contact your senator and congressman regarding this $80 billion package.
What is it?
Well, it's a tax that's going to be put on the oil industry on top of their already overtaxed industry.
And I really believe it's because Obama wants to destroy not only the coal industry, but also the oil industry as well.
And it's going to come down to us, the consumers.
It's going to affect our truckers, the cost of food.
Well, you know, the big thing that was going to do all that really was the cap and trade idea.
And it apparently is on its last legs for now.
I mean, it's nothing to prevent them from coming back to try it.
But cap-and-trade is, in fact, this is a political story today here.
And I've noticed, let me find it, all the drive-by analysts have been parroting this.
Yeah, here it is.
Reality hits Obama Express.
Administration officials are most pessimistic about his energy and global warming plan.
Many AIDS doubting he'll win passage of a cap and trade emissions reduction system, which is strongly opposed by business and Republicans.
White House is most optimistic for passage this year of his plans to overhaul the nation's financial regulations.
And aides also agree, say, see a strong chance that a gradual version of his health care overhaul will get through Congress this fall.
The best case scenario, Obama aides admit they don't know yet the answer to one of the big questions of the year.
Can Capitol Hill swallow an agenda of this cost and heft at a time when the country is suffering a catastrophic economic slowdowns?
It looks like now they're putting the story out.
Again, we're hamstrung here by what the hell do we believe, especially coming out of the drive-by media, but bank regulation appears to be the only thing likely to happen in the near term.
And it's true.
He's taken on a lot of things, and Washington traditionally does not do a lot of things real fast, particularly in Congress.
So if cap and trade is, in fact, in trouble, if they're right that he's going to have trouble winning passage on cap and trade, then that's going to save the coal industry.
That's for a while, for the time being.
Cap and trade would put the coal industry out of business as Obama promised.
Now, I think that the reality is that he's got three years remaining, and he can come back for this at any time.
I know that some tax breaks for big oil were eliminated in the stimulus bill, but I guess that's the 80 billion that you're talking about.
There's no question that the Obama administration wants the cost of gasoline back up.
They want the cat.
$4 per gallon is the magic price.
Because at $4, that's when you stop buying SUVs.
That's when you start looking at these miniature little cars that they want everybody in.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back.
We'll continue after this.
Stay with us.
I was asked earlier, ladies and gentlemen, by somebody doubting me: Do you really think Obama intends to get rid of nuclear weapons?
And do you really think all these world leaders think that he means it?
Let me read to you from the Associated Press.
The writer of the story, Ann Gearn.
She says that Obama's no nuclear weapons promise is not so far-fetched.
And this is what suffices as AP analysis: nuclear weapons have become more trouble than they are worth, an expensive luxury for superpowers and a threat for the rest of the world.
Nuclear weapons have become more trouble than they're worth.
Who the hell believes that?
I dare say only the American left believes that.
I'll guarantee you Putin doesn't believe it.
I'll guarantee you the Mullahs and Little Mahmood don't believe it.
And I will guarantee you that Kim Jong-il does not think that they are more trouble than they are worth.
They probably all do agree with the fact that they are a luxury and a threat for the rest of the world.
I'm sure they agree with that.
That's why they want them.
Here's the second bit of analysis from the brilliant Ann Guerin at AP: The size of the U.S. and Russian arsenals inspires nuclear starter states like China to add to their stockpiles and give non-nuclear states a reason to join the club.
That's right out of the belief system Obama, I'm sure, grew up with being taught that the rest of the world is mean because we are.
That the rest of the world has weapons because we have no moral distinction whatsoever.
There's a moral equivalence.
We're bad, therefore they're bad.
We behave in a braggadocious, bullying way.
In their view, it's only natural the world would stand up to us.
It's all our fault.
And this is the AP agreeing with it.
And a lot of the American left does too.
And then this is the piece de résistance.
This is the third analysis point from Ann Guerin of AP.
Getting serious about eliminating nuclear weapons makes the U.S. more credible when it argues that states such as Iran should not be able to build their own arsenals.
So these naive little people believe that if we get serious about eliminating nuclear weapons, we are more credible when we tell the Iranians not to.
It's not, Mr. Snirdley, they will think we are fools.
They do.
They think we're fools for electing Obama already.
I guarantee you that the mullahs and Putin and Medvedev and Hu Jinto in China celebrated the day Obama got elected because they know what liberals in this country believe.
They believe all of the Soviet communist propaganda that was put out for 40 years.
It's the U.S.'s fault.
That's why he's going to be applauded.
That's why I told you he is applauded.
He's applauded over there.
These people hope he means it.
They're going to try to hold him to it.
They're going to make him try to do this because they're going to lie to him and tell him they're interested in the same thing, except the Iranians.
The Iranians will not because they'll claim that they need to wipe Israel off the map.
To which people will yawn, you know, no big deal.
Who's next?
This is Kyle, Kyle in Pittsburgh.
Great to have you, sir, on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
I just wanted to say that I agree with you that these cars are the new features are not to help the disabled, but to handicap the able-bodied.
Absolutely.
Because there's already these tons of features that are in new cars that are like the smart features.
And there's a whole bunch of them.
And they basically, anytime a car has a smart feature, it assumes that the driver is getting dumber.
Give me an example of the kind of smart features in cars you're talking about here.
Like, my car, for example, has an automatic sensor where the lights come on as soon as the sun starts to go down.
Right.
So no matter anytime I'm in my car at night, I cannot turn the lights off, even if it's just idling or for whatever reason.
Well, you need to get a better car because my car has that too, but I can turn them off anytime I want.
Okay.
Well, I guess I need to get a better car, but there's a whole bunch of features.
Yeah, have you got the nav system that talks to you?
No, no nav system.
You don't have a nav system?
Oh, you ought to try one of those.
I'm waiting for Obama to give me one.
Well, it'll be there.
It's going to be there in the little wheelchair with a motor.
And it's brilliant because it's going to keep you from ever running into a pedestrian and pedestrian from running into you.
Spare tire is a walker.
And if that breaks down, there's a cane.
And both of them have GPS in them.
So you can walk across the street.
Nobody will hit you because it's got a GPS unit in the cane or in the walker.
It's a brilliant device.
Golf cards.
I've got to be fun.
Golf cart to new tow truck for these things.
Now, I've been checking my email.
And this is predictable.
It's identical, in fact, to what happened when I first started getting on the Sierra Club in 1995 when they started making noises about getting rid of and banning the SUV.
I spent a lot of time on that, and I tried to warn people.
They said, come on, Rush, there's serious things happening out there.
You're boring me to death.
Would you get off of this and get onto the issues?
And lo and behold, I've had some emails today.
You think you're funny talking about this stupid little wheelchair with a motor, but it's not funny.
This is the first time I've ever turned you off in 20 years, and I don't know that I'm ever going to turn the radio back on.
I've never been more bored.
Same thing that happened 12 years ago, 14 years ago, when I warned you people about the SUV.
And all I've said about this is, this is something nobody wants.
This is not being, in fact, what happened to the first segue?
Where the hell is the first one?
This is the two-wheeler that you stood on.
Where is it?
You see some lazy mall cops rolling around on them at the malls, but aside from that, where do you see one?
Where do you see an average citizen driving around with a Segway?
Maybe you see him at Whole Foods.
I don't know.
I don't go into Whole Foods.
You see him in there?
Where do you see one?
And remember how that was touted?
It was the new it.
It was going to change the world.
Remember all the build-up USA Today for a week before the event?
It didn't change anything.
And now they're going to put a motor on one.
Spare me, folks.
You know, you're going to have to learn to trust me and not doubt me.
Whether you leave a radio on or not, it's for your own good.
Why else am I doing this?
On tap for tomorrow, whatever happens between now and then that's newsworthy, but also this from the BBC.
Sisters make people happy.
Sisters spread happiness while brothers breed distress.
This according to family experts who have quizzed 571 people between 17 and 25 about their lives.
Growing up with sisters means you're more likely to be happy with brothers, mean and miserable.
Details tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection