All Episodes
Previous Next
July 10, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:29
July 10, 2009, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And as good as that news is that they try to pay attention to guest host quality around here, and I've enjoyed listening to Mark Belling and Mark Stein, and so glad to be here today.
As great as that is, I feel from you, I can sense it from you, the great relief that fill-in week is one hour from done.
And Rush is back on Monday.
So humbly appreciative of one more hour in your company, 1-800-282-2882.
More of your calls here in just a moment.
I'm Mark Davis at WBAP Dallas, Fort Worth, and looking forward to the weekend and looking forward to the return of Rush on Monday.
And I've been looking forward to this all day.
Enjoyed Congressman Mike Pence last hour.
Let's kick off this hour with another guy.
It's always great to talk to, and that is the founder and CEO of Rasmussen Reports, one of the most oft-quoted polling organizations, and that is Scott Rasmussen.
Hi, Scott.
How are you?
I'm doing great.
It's good to be with you today.
Very, very nice to have you.
Usually, we're within a year, maybe six months of an election before we start to really hang on all these poll numbers, but there is something about the current times that just me in particular, I'm just yearning for some evidence that maybe the country is starting to smell the coffee.
Now, as a pollster, it's your job not to care what the results are, just to deliver them honestly.
So let's analyze, honestly, the presidential index that you guys record today of negative seven, 37% strong disapproval of President Obama with just 30% strongly approving.
What should we take from that, and then let's go from there?
Well, the biggest thing we should take from it is it proves something we've known for a long time.
It's all about the economy.
These numbers, the president had a nice honeymoon phase, and now we're in a transition where people are starting to measure him by his performance.
And by the way, his overall approval numbers are still above 50%.
His numbers are down, but they're far from terrible.
But what we've seen, especially since the jobs report last week, is that the president's numbers will go the same direction as consumer confidence.
And, you know, that's not unusual for this president.
So a year from today, if the economy is humming along and GM is throwing off profits and people are being hired, President Obama will be sky high in the ratings.
If GM is back asking for more bailout money and the economy is struggling and people are losing jobs still, then the president will be struggling and Democrats will have a tougher road in 2010.
Was it true that President Bush's index was largely war-driven?
And what killed him in these same kind of numbers for his last year, year and a half, before the economy tanked?
What killed him was a war-weary country?
Absolutely.
In fact, there's a lot of parallels between President Bush and President Obama.
You know, you have to keep in mind that 9-11 was just a terribly unusual event, and we can be thankful for that.
But the president in 2002, when we're going into those elections, was popular.
He led the nation into Iraq.
And had the Iraqi situation been perceived as popular by the American people, well, then President Bush would have done very well.
But President Bush's numbers were war-driven because of the 9-11 event.
Most presidents aren't.
Right now, Barack Obama is pushing a number of policies.
The stimulus plan.
He's got health care reform going.
He's got the climate change.
And all of those things are going to be set in stone one way or the other.
And then the results of them and the way they impact the economy will determine where Barack Obama's numbers end up.
You do this every day, the daily tracking poll.
And if people go to RasmussenReports.com, as I have now wisely done, we can go all the way back to Inauguration Day and sort of put all this stuff in context.
If right now it's negative seven, if the difference between strongly approve and strongly disapprove is negative seven.
Let us go back to the days following the inauguration, where at one point it was 44-14.
I mean, it was plus 30.
It stayed in the 20s well into February, came down into the modest double digits in February, plus 12, plus 10, plus 11, the kind of things that any president dreams of.
And then we started to hit negative territory, Scott.
I'm just scanning here.
I know you can tell me.
Right about the middle of June.
And then no polling over the 4th of July.
And the last five days have been minus 2, minus 3, minus 5, minus 8, minus 7.
How much flux do you want?
Go ahead and give us a word on that.
We don't want to ask about the fluctuations.
You put that storyline into the context.
The numbers were very high at the inauguration.
People always want to give the president the benefit of the doubt.
The numbers declined a little bit very quickly in February, mainly because of the stimulus fight, and Republicans were no longer going to give the president the benefit of the doubt.
From early February on, a majority of Republicans have strongly disapproved.
The numbers drifting down a little bit after that were just sort of the natural withdrawal of the afterglow.
But these numbers in this last week, what we're seeing is not just a random statistical chance.
We're seeing the same pattern in the president's numbers that we are in consumer confidence.
And again, you go right back to that.
In late May, consumer confidence peaked.
It began drifting down a little bit.
But this jobs report, I think, changed the dynamic.
And it's because no matter what else President Obama has to accomplish, people want him to turn the economy around.
To go all the way back to last September, Lehman Brothers collapsed.
Neither candidate had a ready answer for it.
President, then candidate Obama simply kept his mouth shut.
John McCain didn't.
And John McCain demonstrated that he didn't really understand what was going on or how to solve it.
And right now, as we're moving forward, people are saying to the president, okay, that's your job one.
You mentioned something, and I hear it all the time, that his overall approval remains high, but when you start to ask about policies, this is where it gets dicey.
This has always made me a little crazy.
What is the difference in the question?
When we ask the question that we've talked about, the raw numbers of your do you approve or disapprove of what?
How's the question phrased?
We ask people if they strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the way the president is performing his job.
Perfect.
Excellent phrase of the way the president's performing his job.
That to me is all that matters.
I don't care if he's a swell guy or a total tool.
So what's the other question that gives us three tiers?
There's three tiers of questions.
The other question you could ask is: do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Barack Obama?
And people do have a that number will always be higher than his job approval for this president.
People like him.
Now you get into specific policies and you find a slightly different thing.
You can like the president's overall performance but disagree on a particular policy.
But the trends right now are pretty much lining up the same.
The president, a majority of people have approve of the job.
It's a small majority, but still the majority of Americans approve of the job he's doing.
But the people with strong opinions are more likely to be opposed.
The passion factor is working against the president.
We see that same pattern on health care reform.
We see that same pattern on climate change legislation.
And it is likely to reappear in other issues as the months unfold.
I kind of gave it the back of my hand, but I have always known the value of that likability question because while policies are what's really important, it is likability that often helps you win elections.
If something just seems like a 50-50 election, if you've just got that likability thing going for you, that can make all the difference in the world, which makes the overall approval question still an important one to ask.
Right.
And look, when President Obama is up for reelection in 2012, the most important number to follow will be his job approval numbers.
President Bush, when he was re-elected in 2004, had a job approval total of 51%, and he got 51% of the vote because the election was a referendum on his first term.
Was that a total approval number?
Was that a total approval number?
Total approval number was 51%.
Which is, by the way, exactly what President Obama has today.
Correct.
Wow.
And for those confused, let's spend a second.
I didn't, in fact, maybe sort of wrap this up and get a couple of other things here.
Scott Rasmussen with us.
Rasmussen reports the website.
If people are saying, wait a minute, he just said that approval is, yes, 50.
If you take, I guess there were four ways to answer.
Strongly approve, moderately approve, strongly or somewhat approve, and then somewhat or strongly disapprove.
So the 3730 are from the extremes, not extremes, are from the passion ends of this.
Strongly disapprove and strongly approve.
3,730, strongly approved.
But if you take everybody approving and everybody disapproving, strongly and somewhat, it still comes to 5148 on the approval side.
Which leads me to a good final question, and that is, do the outer edges of this, the strong approvals and strong disapprovals, sometimes tend to be the locomotives that run the train?
There is some evidence that they can be a leading indicator because these are people, if you have a strong opinion, you're more likely to talk about it.
You're more likely to do something about it.
And also, it is easier to shift from, I think he's okay to I think he's not okay.
That's an easier jump than I really dislike or I really like what this guy is doing.
So yes, these people do have an impact.
They can be a leading indicator of where things are going.
But again, at election time, when President Obama is up for reelection, the total approval number will be the important one to watch.
In the meantime, the thing that's going to drive all of this is the economy.
We will talk about issues and we will poll on issues and we will talk about foreign policy and we'll talk about all kinds of other things.
But if the economy is doing well at this time next year, the president's numbers will be doing well.
If the economy is not, the president's numbers will be down below where they are today.
In our final moments, let's talk some methodology.
How many people are polled for the daily tracking poll?
We poll a total of 1,500 people over three nights for every single update of the tracking poll.
And so it's a moving three-day window.
That's correct.
How are they contacted?
We call them with an automated phone system.
That says what?
We simply say we're calling from Rasmus and Reports, and we're going to conduct a brief public opinion survey.
And then we begin to ask them questions.
And by the way, I should point out the opening of this survey every single night is exactly the same, the same series of questions, so that somebody who is answering this tracking poll tonight is hearing exactly the same thing that somebody heard on January 20th.
Very important.
And when they choose to participate, and some choose to participate, some do not.
Right.
And by the way, most of those who do not choose to participate do so because we caught them in a bad time.
We've done experiments.
If we take some people who said, you know, I'm not going to take the call now, and we call them back the next night at a different time, two important things to note.
One is we get pretty much the same response rate.
And secondly, the results are pretty much the same.
So it's not as if the people who don't answer the phone are fundamentally different from those who do.
Is it truth or urban myth that conservatives are a little less likely to participate in polls?
And that deserves to be taken into account.
There's a lot of urban myth in that.
Now, there are lots of things that do happen in polls.
Women answer the phone more than men, and older people are easier to reach than younger people.
And by the way, those moms with young kids are chasing around there very hard to get on the phone.
That's part of the process.
You have to make sure that your final sample as representative includes all segments of the population.
There are far more conservatives in the country than there are liberals.
You know, that polling has been talked about in recent weeks, but that's not really a surprise.
That's been true for a long time.
What is not often noted is there are far more conservatives in America than there are Republicans.
Now, tell me.
And on the flip side of it, on the flip side of it, there's far more Democrats than there are liberals.
And that means there's a different dynamic.
Liberals need to reach out to moderates to control things within the Democratic Party and offer their perspective.
Republicans need to reach out to conservatives to build on their partisan base.
Does this auto-dialing technology reach cell phones as well as home phones?
We do not call cell phones right now, but we have been doing some experimenting with it, and we'll be doing so by the end of this year.
That has simply got to be an issue.
I don't even know what it is, but there are so many households that don't even have a home phone anymore.
2008 was the last year where it really didn't matter.
And the reason it didn't matter so much in 2008 was most young people, mostly it was an issue of young people, and most young people, whether or not they had a landline, were more likely to be supportive of Barack Obama than John McCain.
So it didn't have a particular issue there.
Now, going forward, it is going to be an issue.
And it's not just landlines versus cell phones.
There are text issues.
People are communicating in fundamentally different ways.
And it is going to be a huge challenge for our industry as we try to sort through it.
And, you know, the way you do these things is you experiment.
And some experiments work and some don't.
And you just keep learning.
It is not just about daily tracking at rasmus andreports.com.
You can learn today, for example, that 54% oppose that ridiculous cash-for-clunkers plan to spur the purchase of greener cars.
61% of Illinois voters say they would definitely vote against Roland Burris, which is probably why he's decided not to run.
So it's just a horn of plenty at rasmussonreports.com.
Scott, it's a pleasure to have you, and thank you very much for not just for the nuts and bolts, but some of my nosy questions about inside baseball.
I appreciate it.
I enjoyed it.
Thank you.
Scott Rasmussen, Rasmussen Reports.
All right, anything in there that gives you something you want to hop on the phones about?
Be my guest.
It's the Rush Limbaugh Show.
I'm Mark Davis filling in, and that's 1-800-282-2882.
1-800-282-2882.
And let's gather some folks who've called that number, and let's do it next on the EIB Network.
It is the Friday Rush Limbaugh Show for about another 35 minutes, anyway.
And then all of our weekends begin.
And I hope the weekend holds great things for you.
And I know Monday holds great things because it's the return of Rush and the Sodomayor hearings.
Oh, my, what a gift from the talk show gods that's going to be, I guess, huh?
And lots of topics will be there then.
Right now, let's take a look at some things that are fresh for the day and the week gone by.
Whatever you want to do, 1-800-282-2882.
I'm Mark Davis in for Rush as we head to Youngstown, Ohio on the phones.
And Gene, hi, you're on the Rush Limbaugh show.
I'm Mark Davis.
How are you?
Hey, Mark.
How are you doing?
Thanks for taking my call.
One thing I was hoping to be able to ask Scott was about Ohio and the polling that shows that Ohioans, the sheeple, as I call them in Ohio, look like a lot of them are starting to wake up.
Yeah, Ohio in Rasmussen, and I think Quinnipac also showed Ohio as the first state where he has less than 50% positives.
And if Scott's right, and I think not to be able to channel Scott here, but I think it just harmonizes with his point about the economy.
Makes me think about big states where the economy's in the crapper, like, oh, sorry, Ohio and Michigan and states where Republicans might really be able to make some inroads if we play smart.
Right.
Well, where I live is northeastern Ohio, and I don't know.
It's going to take a while before, I think, before the people wake up here because, you know, they're all glad, I guess, now that General Motors is owned by the government, it's going to be taken care of because that'll protect all the union jobs and everything.
But the only other comment I was going to make is that, you know, I've just been wondering about the polls with the state-run media being taken over by the Michael Jackson stories.
I mean, I noticed that when I turned on my TV, it wasn't whistling at me all the time like, you know, before Michael Jackson, now all I was doing was, you know, going beat it every time I turned it on.
But before I was going to be able to do that, I'm intrigued at what happens with the public attention span.
And for this past week, I've understood how the death of Michael Jackson is an obviously big thing.
But doggone it, I mean, with all the anchors going out there, I mean, Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, for crying out loud.
And now that he's been properly memorialized and even the stamp thing has gone away, even Nancy Pelosi realizes that's a dumb debate to have right now.
Look what happens.
We get the opportunity.
It's like a big breath of fresh air to actually examine some issues that are in our lives.
And as we do that, that might not be such great news for this White House as the stimulus continues to fail, as employment numbers continue to be high.
I wonder what the Sodomayor hearings will do.
I mean, that'll be kind of interesting to see how she fares.
But I always understand why things are a big deal, but I'm really glad that next week we get a little less coverage from Michael Jackson's driveway and a little more from Capitol Hill.
Thank you, man.
Appreciate it.
Let's do this rather than give somebody like 60 seconds.
Let me get to the bottom of the hour and then come back.
Speaking of Supreme Court people, I mentioned that there was a let's do the Prince Charles thing first and then the shocking words from Ruth Bader Ginsburg that you'll read in the Sunday New York Times magazine.
First, Prince Charles.
Good grief.
And again, I don't care what Prince Charles thinks about anything.
But if someone steps forward with ridiculousness, it's always fun to take a look at.
We have 96 months to save the world to avert irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse and all that goes with it.
Charles, play some polo, you know, say hi to Camilla and shut up.
I, however, intend to do nothing of the kind.
Mark Davis, back in a moment on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Well, you can't get out of the week without one Michael Jackson vumper.
It might as well be maybe the best record the guy ever did.
Greatness of Billie Gene, man.
And the visual that accompanies this for me is that Motown 25 show.
It was 83.
I know we've gone through, well, two and a half hours in, and it's the first mention I've made of Michael Jackson.
Probably a good thing because I'm kind of Michaeled out.
But, you know, the reason that's such a hard conversation to have is that it's almost impossible to find objectivity.
In fact, the two big topics of the week have obviously, you know, for the last 10 days, let's say, have been Michael Jackson and Sarah Balin.
Know what they have in common?
It's impossible to discuss them in the following way.
For Governor Palin, she either has to be the next Margaret Thatcher or a dismissable idiot.
Anything in between.
You know, you dare to suggest her strengths to a hater and you will be mocked.
Dare to suggest her weaknesses to a fan and you will be viciously derided.
Objectivity, just almost impossible to find.
I happen to think that she is a very promising figure, but boy, does she need to get sharper than she is now?
You know, oh, you know, I want that for her.
You know, I want her to come back and let's have this newfound freedom that she's going to have, this very self-created pressure of coming out of the governor's office and let's bone up on some things, man.
Let's do some reading.
Keep all the charm, all the spunk, all the attributes that she already has, and add to them by, oh, I don't know, becoming sharp, sharper.
You know, it's silly me.
I want her to add to her positives.
Now, with Michael, it is impossible to dismiss both, to avoid both sides of his coin.
One side of the coin is the musical genius and master entertainer.
He died the most famous person in the world.
I kind of blurted that out a few days ago on the show, and then I kind of stopped myself.
I was like, wait a minute, is that really true?
Probably an exercise I should engage in more.
But it survived the test.
Undeniably the most famous person in the world.
But the other side of the coin is, and I'm not going to go Peter King on you, and I love Congressman King, but boy, when he went off on that thing about he's a pedophile, he's a child molester.
It's like, dude, tap the brakes a little.
It's possible.
I know.
I'm as creeped out by his desire to have nine-year-old boys over for sleepovers as anybody.
But I got to tell you, I always held out the possibility that he never did anything specifically sexually predatory to any kid.
Now, as Peter King went on to say, asked to back up that sort of sex abuse narrative that he'd laid down.
He said, look, even if he didn't do any one of a number of things, it's inherently sick to have a grown man sleeping with nine-year-old boys.
True.
True.
But the whole notion of was he, I mean, did he actually have sex with any pre-adolescents?
I don't know.
And I believe there's a strong possibility that he didn't.
I mean, when he was always asked about all this stuff, he was genuinely offended and not so much offended as taken aback.
Like, how can you think I would do such a thing?
He is a nine-year-old boy, is the thought that I've always had.
Permanently stunted and just mentally smothered by whatever demons and neuroses and trappings of his sick upbringing with that piece of cake father of his.
Piece of work, piece of something.
So I don't know.
And that doesn't make, oh, please, it doesn't make it all right.
But don't construe this really as a strong defense because there is perversity here that will just give me the willies for a lifetime.
I think we all just found it too easy to presume, well, if he's surrounded by nine-year-old boys, that must be why.
Well, maybe not, because this guy was so whacked out and so blind to external expectations.
And by that, I mean, you know, the world thinks it's gross for a grown man to be sleeping with nine-year-old boys.
He was blind and deaf to that.
And God knows no one in that sycophant entourage of his was ever going to try to set him straight on it.
Or maybe they did and failed.
But either way, that's kind of antithetical to the usual pedophile, you know, child molester mindset.
They're kind of proud of it.
They'll kind of talk to you about it.
You know, I will never forget my first talk show ever, Jacksonville, Florida.
And I got a chance in 1982, I guess, 82, 83, go down to the Florida State Prison in Stark.
Great town name for a prison, Stark, Florida, just southwest of Jacksonville, to the good people at the Florida State Prison who gave me the chance to interview a couple of days before his very deserved execution, a gentleman named, I use the term loosely, Arthur Good.
He had raped and killed, I believe, a number of young boys.
I think the charge that got him was just one particular case.
And what he would do, the way I stumbled across Arthur is he would write me letters.
He was apparently a big, strong P1 down there from the Florida State prison.
He was a listener to my show.
And what a great honor that was.
And he wrote me so much.
In fact, he wrote me and he said, Mr. Davis, they're trying to take away my mail privileges.
And so I just thought, whatever.
I thought, is there a talk show topic in here?
So I wrote to Richard Duggar, the superintendent of the prison, and said, what's the deal?
This guy says his mail privileges are being taken away, blah, blah, blah.
And Superintendent Duggar did me the favor of sending me some copies of some of Arthur's other letters.
Arthur's other letters tended to be detailed, graphic descriptions of the sex and death that he visited on the sons of the parents he wrote to.
So every once in a while, a grieving parent could get something in Arthur's crayon familiar scroll that said, hey, Mr. or Mrs. Whatever, here's what I did to Billy.
So that's why they kind of curtailed Arthur's mail privileges.
So a couple of days before his execution, I went down and interviewed him.
It's weird because I hate the attention given to these folks.
By and large, I do.
But what was I?
1983.
I'm 26.
I got the same goofy, morbid fascination as everybody else, and that I probably still have.
And I didn't go down there.
Please not to glorify this dude.
In fact, all I did was go down and tell the guy that you're one of the sickest creatures around.
Why don't you get it?
How do you not get that what you did was wrong?
I guess it was my own weird fascination that drove me more than anything else.
And I got an ear full of it.
The guy was, he was all about, and just pardon me for this detail, but it just, all he wanted to do, I swear to God, marry Ricky Schroeder.
I know.
Because this was, you know, pre-NYPD blue, more silver spoons.
And he said, why shouldn't I be able to do that?
In fact, if an 11 or 12, and I talked to him, I said, it's so funny.
One point said, are you insane?
And there was almost an odd, ironic comedy to that.
I'm on death row interviewing this guy.
Are you crazy?
God, I wish I still had the tape of this.
That'd be not for airplay here.
Unless you really wanted.
No, it was just so odd.
And he said that if a 10-year-old or 11-year-old boy could pass some psychological exam showing that he was mature enough to be in a relationship with a grown man, it ought to be okay.
And I just left there kind of wanting to vomit.
But the point was that, and I guess I've run across or read about the mindset of these folks.
The whole Nambl, oh boy, the Nambla thing don't get me started.
They're mouthy about this.
They're all about the we ought to be able to do this.
This is something we ought to be able to do.
So I don't know.
But to return to the whole thing about Michael Jackson, the two sides of the coin, if you look at just the musical genius and not the perversity, it's an incomplete story.
If you dwell only on the perversity and not the incredible entertainer that he was, it's an incomplete story.
And nobody wants to do that.
All the people who think he's a freak, and he pretty well was, just don't want to be bothered with how great Thriller was.
And all the people who just love him for his contributions to our popular culture, they don't want to be brought down by the buzzkill of his, I mean, let's face it, profound mental illness.
So, you know, just once again, objectivity largely impossible there.
But what a week.
What a week.
All righty.
Well, let's go ahead and take the pause here so we can come back and have a good fat segment filled with happy calls or unhappy calls.
I don't know.
I don't know until I take them.
I hope they're, whether they're pleased or displeased with me, I hope they're glad to be on the show because Lord knows I am.
Mark Davis filling in for Rush.
Rush is back on Monday, and that really makes me happy.
And I know it does you too.
1-800-282-2882.
We will continue.
The Friday Rush Limbaugh Show.
Mark Davis filling in.
Let's take care of some people.
I know time is short, so brevity will serve us both.
And it's usually a greater challenge for me.
So let us hop to Westchester, New York, first Dan, Mark Davis on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Hi, how are you?
Hi, Mark.
Thanks for taking my call.
I originally called to discuss the Rasmussen poll, but then you threw out some chum on Sarah Palin.
If I can just make one quick comment.
Sure.
It really isn't a question of boning up.
It's a question of habit of mind.
I mean, if a person can create, you know, a syllogism that says, I live next door to Russia, therefore, I know foreign policy.
It isn't a question of how much foreign policy she could cram in the books that she reads.
It's a question of how could she possibly construct that thought.
But that's not why I'm not sure.
I bet there are politicians that you like who have engaged, who have made similarly or even more, an even longer stretch than that, and you let it go because you liked them.
So I think you're just – That's probably true.
Okay, well, then you know what?
Bless you for clarity on that.
Appreciate it.
Part of human nature.
Go to the second thing you wanted to cover.
Okay.
The second thing had to do with the Cox, the Rasmussen poll.
I thought you were looking for a narrative that was not there.
And the narrative is you started by, you introduced the segment by saying, well, I hope that the country is beginning to smell the coffee as if at least I inferred from that that you were suggesting that the country was now becoming disaffected from Obama in general.
Rasmussen.
But Rasmussen did not give that.
What he said was there was a direct correlation between the performance rating and the economy.
As the economy continued to falter, the performance rating would go down.
You then expressed, as I think it was logical, well, then why are his approval ratings holding up more or less?
And there is no contradiction in that because I think the approval ratings have more to do with like, have a lot more to do than just likability, as you suggested.
Correct.
I don't disagree.
In fact, and maybe it was just, yeah, I mean, 51.48 overall, if you take all the approval, all the disapproval, it's still 51.48 approved.
In the 3732, strongly disapproved versus strongly approved, yes, that is me hoping that people are becoming dissatisfied with the guy's policies.
You really, if this is what you mean, you're totally right.
Any president's going to take it on the chin when the economy goes bad.
Correct.
All right.
Let me scoot.
Thank you so much.
Get me back anytime I'm here.
Get me back.
Let's roll two.
We are.
You know where I want to go?
Let's go to the fine capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia in Richmond.
John, Mark Davis, in for Rush Limbaugh.
How are you?
Oh, I'm doing great.
How are you?
Good, thanks.
Good.
I've been listening to Rush since about the fall of 89, and I really enjoy when you and the other marks fill in for him.
So I call not so much to disagree with you, but just to take a little issue with this idea.
I think as conservatives, we really are kind of stepping in it if we're going to seriously debate whether Mr. Jackson actually did things to these kids or if he merely slept with them overnight.
You know, we want to be fair, certainly, but what's wrong is wrong.
Oh, no doubt about it.
But wouldn't you agree that there's a difference?
I mean, and pardon the short time, but because you're A, you're totally right about that.
But if we're really going to see what we ought to think about someone, wouldn't you think there's a difference between someone who is mixed up enough to think that it's okay to sleep with little boys and someone who actually has sex with them?
Silly me.
I think that one's a lot worse than the other.
Both are wrong, but one's really wrong.
Well, I don't disagree at all.
It's just that, you know, in either case, I don't think any of us with an ounce of sense would have trusted our nine-year-old kid with him.
Completely right.
And that was sort of Peter King's point: is that anybody who's seeking to say, well, he might not have had actual sex with him.
Anyone seeking to say that in that case, nothing really bad happened there, or with Al Sharpton up there saying to the kids, wasn't nothing strange about your daddy?
Well, you know, first of all, I have nothing to say about that because that's just Al being nice to the kids.
But those words on a piece of paper, guess what?
There was plenty strange about their daddy.
Okay, nothing strange about the clock.
It says got to take a final break.
Come back, take a final call or two.
So let's do so.
Mark Davis in for Rush on Friday on the EIB Network.
Friday, Rush Limbaugh Show.
Couple of minutes.
Let's use them well.
If anybody ever asks you, what's about two-thirds up the highway from Chicago up I-94 to Wisconsin?
Answer is Mundaline, Illinois, the WLS listening area, where right after Rush, you get my buddy Roe Kahn.
And hopefully a listener to both shows.
John is with us in Illinois.
How are you doing, sir?
Hey, I'm good.
Thanks for taking my call.
All week I've been hearing the assertion made that part of the reason Sarah Palin resigned is because she feels badly treated by the media.
And I just wanted to real quickly ask about a comparison between Mrs. Palin and probably America's most other prominent female political figure, Hillary Clinton.
On the program that you're currently hosting and throughout conservative broadcasting, Mrs. Clinton Clinton for years has been portrayed as an anti-American socialist, no family values, doesn't support the troops, maybe a lesbian who probably had foster, who probably had Lynn's foster money.
Let's cover it.
Your major point.
We've got a minute.
Let's cover it because it's a totally fair question.
Here's my fair answer, and then I'll even give you the last word.
No doubt, more anti-Hillary words have been spoken on talk radio than maybe anti-Sarah Palin words ever will, but that's just from the amount of material.
In terms of fairness, unfairness, I don't know.
I mean, you're apparently a Hillary fan.
Do you think that of the things that have been said about her that are negative, that so many of them are horribly, horribly undeserved?
Well, I think that I don't think that anybody ever called Mrs. Palin a lesbian murderer.
I guess that's my point.
I don't think Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton didn't feel compelled to.
There's a short reason for that.
As time expires, as time expires, there's a short reason for that.
If Sarah Palin ever gets as close to the presidency as Hillary did, then let's examine that, and then we'll have apples and apples.
But it's a fair question.
I appreciate it.
Thanks for all the questions and answers.
God bless you, Ed and Kit and everybody.
Thank you, Rush, for letting me fill in.
Rush is Back Monday.
I'm Mark Davis.
Have a great weekend.
▲
Export Selection