Rush Limbaugh Program - August 31, 2009, Monday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 31, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program

35:54

August 31, 2009, Monday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Many thanks to you, Johnny, to Rush, for letting me hang out for a couple of days and all of you conversationalists across the fruited plain for hanging in on a week filled with very, very grateful fillion guys.
	Today and tomorrow, me, Mark Stein, Wednesday and Thursday, and Dr. Walter Williams on Friday, all leading to Russia's triumphant return one week from today.
	All right, everybody, let's get back to your calls and a few other things.
	1-800-282-2882.
	1-800-282-2882.
	Couple of things from the world of newspapers.
	One involves a newspaper that ran a story over the weekend that has fast become one of the most talked about stories of the weekend.
	And then a story about a newspaper calling a senator to task for a moment that no one would know about unless the publisher of the newspaper had not called out the political figure in question.
	The political figure is Harry Reid.
	The newspaper is the Las Vegas Review Journal, and we'll just share that here in a minute.
	Let's go first to the Washington Post.
	If you hear that The Washington Post ran an article over the weekend about enhanced interrogation techniques, you'd be forgiven for thinking that it was probably an article derisive of such things, but you would in fact be wrong.
	Peter Finn, Joby Warwick, and Julie Tate, Washington Post staff writers all, collaborated on something headlined, How a Detainee Became an Asset.
	I'm not going to share the whole thing, just a couple of paragraphs.
	You may drive off the road in disbelief, and the reaction to this article has been very interesting to note.
	We'll do that.
	I'll share a couple of things, and we're right back on the phones with you at 1-800-282-2882.
	Peter Finn, Joby Warwick, and Julie Tate, How a Detainee Became an Asset.
	They write, After enduring the CIA's harshest interrogation methods and spending more than a year in the agency's secret prisons, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed stood before U.S. intelligence officers in a makeshift lecture hall, leading what they called terrorist tutorials.
	Speaking in English, Mohammed seemed to relish the opportunity, sometimes for hours on end, to discuss the inner workings of al-Qaeda, their plans, their ideology, their operatives, said one of two sources who described the sessions, speaking on the condition of anonymity, because much information about detainee confinement remains classified.
	This source said he'd even use a chalkboard at times.
	These scenes provide previously unpublicized details about the transformation of the man known to U.S. officials as KSM from an avowed and truculent enemy of the United States into what the CIA called its preeminent source on al-Qaeda.
	This reversal occurred after Mohammed was subjected to simulated drowning and prolonged sleep deprivation, among other harsh interrogation techniques.
	I know, I know.
	This is in the Washington Post?
	Yes, it is.
	And the reactions have been very, very interesting.
	And again, not because it helps Republicans or helps bullshit or blah, blah, blah, because it helped keep America safe.
	For crying out loud, folks, can we achieve some clarity on this?
	We're coming up on the 8th anniversary of 9-11 without attacks.
	Do you think that's by lucky happenstance?
	We have stopped various other attacks in their tracks.
	We have found all kinds of al-Qaeda operatives.
	We have disrupted al-Qaeda to its core.
	I mean, have we obliterated it?
	Not yet.
	Is it vanquished?
	Not yet.
	We're working on that.
	And working on that is a little tougher when you don't have people running the United States who are on board for what has worked before.
	But so reaction number one is to look at the Washington Post and say, guys, thanks.
	I mean, wow.
	You know, you've been kicking the war effort squarely in the teeth for most of its seven years.
	So to have an article in the Post that essentially sounds like Dick Cheney could have written it is refreshing.
	Dick Cheney himself was very refreshing on Fox News Sunday.
	I was going to say he's holding nothing back.
	He might be holding a couple of things back because he is, of course, writing a book.
	What's going to come out first, the Bush book or the Cheney book?
	It'll be interesting, interesting both.
	So anyway, that's so reaction number one was maybe from disbelieving conservatives looking at this.
	And not even just conservatives, people who believe in the war effort, people who believe that we're doing the right thing here, people who believe that what you do to a high-value detainee, it's not willy-nilly.
	We didn't wander through the halls of Guantanamo and say, hey, it's waterboarding day.
	Line them up.
	Let's see what we get.
	Things like this were done with the utmost of precision.
	We knew who we had.
	There was information inside that head, and we got it.
	What in God's name else do you need?
	So, anyway.
	The other reaction, though, is, and I would say it's from the left, except not even that's true, because if you go to Andrew Sullivan, always an interesting guy, a blogger, one of the first bloggers, actually, over at the Atlantic, is his rant that the Washington Post is now fully in bed with neocons on the far right.
	Dude, tap the brakes.
	I mean, the Andrew Sullivan writing and punditry record is filled with moments of libertarian conservatism at times.
	But boy, on the whole so-called torture thing, and I say so-called for obvious reasons.
	Some people think waterboarding is torture, some don't.
	Apparently, some people think it's also torture to threaten somebody with a drill.
	Oh my God, I've just tortured the audience.
	The sounds of torture.
	Come on.
	I mean, excuse me, but the things that still make me mad are my countrymen leaping from the windows of the World Trade Center, my countrymen bouncing like ragdolls on a field in Pennsylvania when United 93 hit the earth.
	That's what rattles my sensibilities.
	If what gets you worked up is the notion of threatening detainees with a power drill, can I usher you to a mirror to look hard at yourself and check your moral compass?
	Oh my.
	Anyway, so Andrew Sullivan's freaked out, as I'm guessing many of the folks who believe that we are the devil incarnate for actually getting tough with terror detainees.
	They're probably quite deflated by the Washington Post article, but it's a rare occasion where I want to give them some props, so I will.
	Here's another newspaper that's done something intriguing over the weekend.
	Sherman Frederick is the publisher, the publisher, mind you, of the Las Vegas Review Journal.
	They have had their differences with Senator Harry Reid.
	And there may be a price for that.
	And they have chosen to make a little something public that occurred at a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon on Wednesday of this past week.
	In fact, they handed over a little bit of the columnist reins to Mr. Frederick.
	Now, as I get into this, keep something in mind.
	I don't know what all of you think of the newspaper industry.
	It is, oh, take the degree to which you think it's struggling and multiply it by a big integer.
	It's just so tough.
	I mean, look what I'm doing.
	I mean, when's the last time you saw somebody under 30 actually pick up an actual hands-on newspaper and open it wide and read it on a bus or something like that?
	It's iPhones and internet.
	And how in the world are we getting people to pay for stuff they can get for free?
	The newspaper industry, as we've known it, we've seen all kinds of newspaper just flat go under.
	And how you feel about that, I know.
	You might be thinking, you know, depending on anybody's politics, there's some newspapers you'd like to see survive and some others maybe not.
	But just across the industry, I lament this.
	I'm 51 and I love newspapers.
	I mean, I judge them by their content, but the whole notion of losing the history of a big newspaper hitting your porch and there's the stains of ink on the hands of people who honorably go about that profession.
	And maybe there's not enough who honorably go about it, but there are some.
	And I'm going to be forever nostalgic about that.
	And I think it's a kind of a different world.
	It's a different exercise to web surfing through DallasNews.com, the Dallas Morning News, that is kind enough to allow me to write a column for them every week.
	It's just very different.
	Web surfing, going from this to that, to that, to that, versus throwing open the pages of a newspaper and seeing a story over there.
	And then maybe there's one over there.
	It sort of came to you as opposed to the web where you go to it.
	It's just a very different thing.
	And I don't think there's any putting this horse back in the barn.
	The buggy whips ain't coming back.
	And the newspaper, as we know it, probably not long for this world.
	Anyway, with that in mind, with that in mind, Sherman Frederick.
	Shall I do this?
	You know what I'm going to do?
	Master of the Ts. Harry Reid was at a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon and said something to the advertising director of the newspaper.
	What he said and the newspaper's reaction to it is interesting.
	After this buildup, it had better be.
	So let's see how that all works out for everybody.
	And a bunch of your calls coming as well on the other side.
	1-800-282-2882.
	1-800-282-2882.
	Mark Davis in for Rush on the EIB network.
	You're listening to the EIB Network.
	It is the Rush Limbaugh Show for Monday, August 31st, 2009.
	I'm Mark Davis filling in today and tomorrow.
	Much appreciate you hanging out.
	The phone number is 1-800-282-2882.
	Okay, what could Senator Harry Reid have said at a Chamber of Commerce luncheon that would so inflame the publisher of the Las Vegas Review Journal?
	Now, there's a bit of context you're going to need.
	I'm guessing everybody at the News Radio 840KXNT can help us out with this because they know it well.
	But for everybody else, the Las Vegas Review Journal is the paper.
	The Las Vegas Sun was an afternoon paper from 1990 to 2005 and then has now been subsumed up in it.
	It is essentially a section now of the Las Vegas Review Journal.
	But the Las Vegas Sun kind of operates differently.
	And the editor and president of the Sun is Brian Greenspun, who is a personal friend of former President Bill Clinton.
	So that maybe that's why Harry Reid would like the sun and maybe not like the review journal.
	So here we go.
	The publisher of the review journal, Sherman Frederick, writes as follows: Enough's enough, Harry.
	Stop the childish bullying, and the content is.
	This newspaper traces its roots to before Las Vegas was Las Vegas.
	We've seen cattle ranches give way to railroads.
	We chronicled the construction of Hoover Dam.
	We reported on the first day of legalized gambling, the first hospital, the first school, the first church.
	We survived the mob, Howard Hughes, the Great Depression, several recessions, two world wars, dozens of news competitors, and any number of two-bit politicians who couldn't stand scrutiny, much less criticism.
	We're still here doing what we do for the people of Las Vegas and Nevada.
	So let me assure you: if we weathered all that, we can damn sure outlast the bully threats of Senator Harry Reid.
	On Wednesday, before he addressed a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon, Reed joined the chamber's board members for a meet-and-greet and a photo.
	One of the last in line was the Review Journal's director of advertising, Bob Brown, a hardworking Nevadin who toils every day on behalf of advertisers.
	He has nothing to do with news coverage or the opinion pages of the Review Journal.
	Yet, as Bob shook hands with our senior U.S. Senator in what should have been nothing but a gracious business setting, Reed said, I hope you go out of business.
	Later, in his public speech, Reed said he wanted to let everyone know that he wants the Review Journal to continue selling advertising because the Las Vegas Sun is delivered inside the Review Journal.
	Such behavior cannot go unchallenged.
	You could call Reed's remark ugly and be right.
	It was certainly boarish, asinine, goes without saying.
	But to fully capture the magnitude of Reed's remark, it must be called what it was, a full-on threat perpetrated by a bully who has forgotten that he was elected to office to protect Nevadans, not sounding like he's shaking them down.
	No citizen should expect this kind of behavior from a U.S. Senator.
	And it is certainly not becoming of a man who is the majority leader in the U.S. Senate.
	And it is absolutely not what anyone would expect from a man who now asks Nevadans to send him back to the Senate for a fifth term.
	If he thinks he can push the state's largest newspaper around by exacting some kind of economic punishment in retaliation for not seeing eye to eye with him on matters of politics, I can only imagine how he pressures businesses and individuals who don't have the wherewithal of the review journal.
	For the sake of all who live and work in Nevada, we can't let this bully behavior pass without calling out Senator Reed.
	If you'll try it with the Review Journal, you can bet that he's tried it with others.
	So today we serve notice on Senator Reed that this creepy tactic will not be tolerated.
	We won't allow you to bully us.
	And if you try it with anyone else, count on going through us first.
	That's a promise, not a threat.
	And it's a promise to our readers not to use Senator Reed.
	Wow.
	Sherman Frederick, publisher of the Las Vegas Review Journal.
	Well, apparently they won't be trifled with.
	Good for them.
	All righty, as we head for your calls, I invoked the humble little column I write for the Dallas Morning News.
	If you want to check into that and find if it's a little more coherent than what I'm doing here, which it may well be, dallasnews.com/slash opinion.
	That's a pretty fascinating op-ed page over there, and I'm proud to be a part of them.
	If you crave even additional connectivity in this world of Facebook and Twitter, you can follow me on the Twitter thing if you want to.
	And that is just my name, Mark Davis, all one word.
	M-A-R-K, Mark Davis, all one word on Twitter.
	Okay, thus ends the self-promotional part of the guest host today.
	And now let's do what I ought to be doing, taking your calls, 1-800-282-2882.
	And we are in for a Kennedy call.
	Where more appropriate than to go to Massachusetts in Northampton, Homer, Mark Davis here on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
	Hello.
	Hey, how you doing?
	Very well.
	Thank you.
	This is Ted Kennedy's legacy to Massachusetts for civil rights and for education at the same time.
	He was one of the major factors of the Boston public school busing system that tore apart his own capital for grinding.
	Yeah, when I was talking about the Kennedy legacy of civil rights in the late 50s, early 60s, who's going to disagree with something like a Civil Rights Act in a country that still had colored water fountains.
	But it only took a decade, just a decade into the early 70s for liberals to become wrong on civil rights.
	And listen, nobody should be banned from going to any school.
	No one should ever be told, you can't go to this school because you're black.
	Not at all.
	But that's not what busing was about.
	Bussing was about uprooting people from the neighborhoods they loved and shipping them across town to a place they probably hated.
	And it was a nightmare for me in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.
	And Lord knows it was a nightmare for you in Ted Kennedy's Boston.
	Well, not for me personally.
	I'm from the western part of the state.
	But look what he did for education in his district.
	He tripled the number of private schools.
	Yeah.
	And after the busing thing, it also proceeded a white flight from the town.
	That it did.
	I don't know if that wouldn't happen anyway.
	I don't know.
	But it created enormous racial tension.
	I believe it did.
	Homer, I think you're completely right.
	I think you have stuff going on in the house there.
	So let's get to that and thank you.
	And I got to scoot here in a minute anyway.
	But yeah, I mean, it was 1972, 73.
	I'm a sophomore in high school in Prince Georgia County, Maryland, right up southeastern portion of where the diamond of D.C. is drawn.
	And a bunch of my classmates were suddenly informed, hey, next year, you ain't going to this school anymore that you walk to.
	You're going up to Central or Largo, up in the central portion of Prince George's County into a school population largely black.
	I don't care if a school population is largely black.
	If the neighborhood's largely black, that's what the school ought to be.
	If the neighborhood's largely white, that's what the school ought to be.
	People ought to go to school close to where they live.
	There are plenty of schools that are enormously racially mixed, and that's great because the neighborhoods are enormously racially mixed.
	And they took all those kids from way up there, brought them on down to the high school to Crossland Senior High, Temple Hills, Maryland, where I was, and everybody was just miserable.
	And we're 16 and we can figure this out.
	And our national leaders couldn't, that it was a social experiment doomed to failure that would create far more racial tension than it ever cured.
	That's part of the Kennedy C. Legacy, Kennedy Legacy, stuff like that, back in a minute.
	And we are in the home stretch here, the final half hour of today's Rush Limbaugh show.
	And we're back together tomorrow, greatly looking forward to that.
	And then Mark Stein on Wednesday and Thursday, and Dr. Walter Williams on Friday.
	Boy, I should have invoked Walter earlier in these midst of these just pernicious and slanderous suggestions that opposition to Obama cares because white folks just don't like black folks.
	If you look at the town hall meetings, a bunch of white conservatives, and what their real problem is is the color of Obama's skin.
	What a damnable lie that is.
	Because I got to tell you, without fear of much contradiction, that you're listening right now.
	And we're having a good time.
	I'm loving life.
	I think you're probably a lot more stoked about Friday than you are about tomorrow.
	With all due respect to me.
	And I like what I do, and I'm thrilled to be here.
	And I love it.
	Just as a listener, the days when Walter Williams fills in are stop-down listening for me.
	I mean, the letters of the Constitution run through his veins.
	He's an incredible hero to me.
	And a black guy.
	I don't care.
	I will tell you, I care to the extent that black conservatism brings with it a certain amount of heroism because those are some difficult paths to walk.
	You know, J.C. Watts will tell you all about it from his, you know, growing up and going from University of Oklahoma quarterback and into politics and all of that.
	Lord knows Clarence Thomas will tell you about it, told you about it in a book.
	To be black and conservative ain't easy.
	But those who are earn the instant respect of those of us who are white and conservative because we're the ones who don't care what color your skin is.
	We care about what's in your head and what's in your heart.
	And what's in Walter Williams' head is the kind of stuff that you need to absolutely avail yourself of on Friday.
	And that's not to give short shref to Brother Stein, who's with you on Wednesday and Thursday.
	Always fun.
	Appreciate that.
	He's just a great guy, great writer.
	And I can't wait to hear his take on what's going on in the news at that time.
	All right, here's a big thing from over the weekend.
	Let's talk more about what's going on in the news today.
	And I'm going to offer this up as a setup.
	Special closed circuit to you, Peter, there in Columbia, Maryland.
	I'm coming to you because you want to talk about the Lockerbie bomber deal.
	From the Sunday Times, right out of the UK, hello, Jason Allardis writes as follows.
	I mean, this is just it, according to him.
	The British government decided it was in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom to make Abdel Bassett Ali Muhammad Al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya.
	According to leaked ministerial letters, Gordon Brown's government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP, British Petroleum, over a multi-million pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties.
	These were resolved soon afterward.
	The letters were sent two years ago by Justice Secretary Jack Straw to his counterpart in Scotland, Kenny McCaskill, who's been widely criticized for taking the formal decision to permit McGrahy's release.
	The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include McGrahy in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.
	Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman, said this is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over Al-McGrahy in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.
	Two letters dated five months apart show that Jack Straw initially intended to exclude McGrahy from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muamar Qaddafi under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.
	In a letter dated July 2007, Jack Straw said he favored an option to leave out McGrahy by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.
	Downing Street had also said McGrahy would not be included under the agreement.
	And one can easily see why, hello, he's the Lockerbie bomber, the one guy serving time for that mass murder in December 1988.
	Jack Straw, Justice Secretary, then switched his position as Libya used its deal with British petroleum, probably petroleum, as a bargaining chip.
	They insisted the Lockerbie bomber would be included.
	The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to 15 billion pounds, was announced in May 2007.
	Six months later, the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.
	December 2007, Straw wrote to McCaskill announcing the U.K. government was abandoning its attempt to exclude McGrahy from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.
	Good Lord.
	Unless Mr. Allardis at the Times is just way off base in some of the conclusions he's reaching, this is just unbelievably damning, isn't it?
	What in the world happens to the Gordon Brown government in the U.K. now, and what in the world happens to what we think of them?
	And now in a graceful segue, we go to Columbia, Maryland, because Peter wants on about that very subject.
	Peter, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
	Mark Davis filling in.
	How are you?
	Hey, Mark, I'm doing great.
	Great to speak with you, and thanks for doing a great job in Russia's absence.
	You're very kind.
	Mark, I was struck this morning when I was listening to the headline news on this particular story as to why I think a very obvious question hasn't been raised yet, and that is, did anybody in Gordon Brown's government check in with anybody in the Obama administration on the last-minute basis here to say, hey, guess what, guys?
	We're going to do this.
	What do you think about it?
	Is it okay to do it?
	Can you give us cover?
	I just can't believe that a decision like this that affects the relationship between our two countries could have been done without some sort of communication between our two governments.
	That may not be so hard to imagine.
	I have the same question you do, and since there's certainly no concrete answer forthcoming in the near term, let's see what might be the case, what seems like fair speculation.
	The reason I don't find it so outlandish that Gordon Brown wouldn't be calling Barack Obama is it seems like this was something that he was trying to get away with largely in secret in his own country to avoid the supposition that it was related to oil.
	So the notion of increasing the likelihood of this getting telegraphed by calling the president and bouncing it off of him, I mean, I don't know.
	It may have happened, but it's not implausible that it did not.
	So with that, let's look at whether we think it did.
	First place to start with that is America's behavior after the American government's behavior afterward.
	The president, what was the term he used?
	Disturbing in the understatement of the year?
	I mean, a dip in the housing market is disturbing.
	This release of Al McGrahy was an unmitigated outrage.
	FBI Director Robert Mueller wrote a very nice and stern letter about this with passion apparently not shared by the president of the United States.
	But again, that would involve criticizing a Muslim country, something that you probably will not hear this president do ever.
	Let me give it back to you.
	What seems likely ⁇ is there any clue that you derive from the events since that make you think the president knew this was coming?
	Well, only that this release does two things that Obama's administration seems to be consistent with, and that is curing favor with the Arabs.
	And I think it was Qaddafi's son who said, hey, what's the big deal?
	This is going to help in your relationship with the Arabs to let everybody know that you guys aren't so bad after all, you guys being just in general of the West.
	And secondly, I also think back to earlier comments from the Obama administration regarding what we've always thought of as the quote-unquote special relationship between our two countries.
	I think early on, if I recall, they took a very different approach in saying, you know what, there's no special relationship between our two countries.
	It's the U.K., so who cares?
	So I just, I'm very suspicious, but I just, I was struck this morning by what I think is an obvious question.
	I was surprised that nobody had the guts to ask it.
	And I'm wondering if sometime during this week, the storyline gets to this point.
	Now that Ted Kennedy is safely interred and the August recess almost over, there may be some oxygen available to ask that at, oh, I don't know, maybe the next presidential news conference.
	Peter, thank you.
	I think the concerns and the suspicion are wholly well-grounded, and thanks for sharing them.
	Now, does that mean we all walk around and go, Obama must have known he had to know?
	Well, no, he didn't have to know.
	But, again, has been over the years quite a special relationship between the U.K. and the U.S. One would like to think that Gordon Brown would have picked up the phone to give the American president a heads up that someone who killed so many of President Obama's countrymen was about to get a hero's welcome back in Libya because they were going to release him.
	But, I mean, just excuse me for a moment.
	The degree to which this president gets upset about the terrorist deaths of his countrymen is something that is in large question.
	And I don't say that to be mean.
	I've been just running over in my head and YouTubing some of the excerpts of Dick Cheney on Fox News Sunday.
	That is what someone sounds like and acts like who is equipped to battle terror in the modern world.
	The panty wastes running one-party rule in Washington now simply are not.
	And so with that, we'll pause and come back and see what happens next.
	On the Monday Rush Limbaugh Show, Mark Davis filling in, and we'll continue in just a moment.
	You're listening to the EIB Network.
	It is the Rush Limbaugh Show on this last day of August when we reconvene tomorrow, and we will.
	September Among Us.
	Very, very cool.
	Football, cooler temperatures, nothing the matter with all of that.
	You and I are together tomorrow, and Mark Stein on Wednesday and Thursday, Dr. Walter Williams on Friday.
	All right, let's see what happens in the remaining minutes that we have together.
	Let's see.
	We're in Port St. Lucie, Florida.
	Bud, Mark Davis, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
	How are you?
	Hi, Mark.
	I heard you commenting on the article in the Washington Times about Holdren and Ehrlichman.
	I read the article, but I read an even better one in the Weekly Standard, where not only are these guys crazy, but their whole theory has blown up in their face because we're not facing a population explosion.
	In fact, just the opposite, especially in Western Europe, their fertility rates are so low, they're not replacing themselves.
	In Italy, fertility rates, 1.4.
	In Russia, it's 1.1.
	They are not replacing themselves.
	It's a fascinating debate to examine the pluses and minuses of population growth.
	If you take a look at various countries that are really doing badly, they're just cranking out kids in shocking numbers that nobody can afford.
	In supposedly enlightened, supposedly better educated, economically blessed environments, people tend to have fewer kids.
	As if those are inextricably tied to each other, that fewer kids must mean better education and better fate economically, and bigger families must mean squalor.
	It's never been true.
	And I've always wanted people in America to not be persuaded or dissuaded toward or away from having kids with any criteria other than how many do they want to have.
	So the notion of this, for those wondering what we're talking about, John Holdren is a co-author of this book from 1977, talking about sterilization.
	And there are a ton of people who absolutely view abortion as a wonderful way to keep that pesky American population down.
	That's just chilling places that no one should ever go.
	I'll be the first, and I got to take my last break here, bud, but thank you because I've always been the first to tell people: don't be having kids you can't afford.
	But if you can afford them and you want to have them, have them.
	And you need not to have fingers wagged at you by people offering up the completely false notion that population density really even has all that much to do with the economy.
	One of the most population-dense parts of the world is Hong Kong.
	Unbelievable economic strength.
	Well, used to, anyway, see how that works out at a Chinese ads.
	You know, Manhattan, you know, and the notion that America, have you flown over America?
	And I know it's not easy to build a big old city and all right, smack dab in the, you know, the middle of Wyoming or something, but the notion that America has too many people in it is preposterous on its face.
	All right, let's see what we can put into this final segment of the Monday Rush Limbaugh Show.
	Mark Davis filling in, back in a moment on the EIB.
	You're listening to the EIB Network.
	And just a couple of minutes left on the Monday Rush Limbaugh Show.
	I'm Mark Davis filling in.
	Be back with you tomorrow.
	So if you have any unfinished business, just bring it to me then.
	I appreciate it.
	Gentlemen, last gentleman, we were talking about population issues and Paul Ehrlich, who, along with Obama's science advisor John Holdren, wrote this chilling book in 1977 filled with the imagery of sterilization and all of this nonsense.
	And it got me to thinking, Paul Ehrlich, what's he up to these days?
	Well, he is about 77.
	And the gentleman, it's kind of funny, the caller mentioned the population bomb.
	And if that sounded familiar, that would have been Paul Ehrlich's book in 1968 by that name.
	The prediction from the population bomb was that hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death because of population.
	In the 1970s and 80s, hundreds of millions would starve to death.
	That, of course, wound up being sheer idiocy.
	So what is this guy doing right now?
	He is currently the president of something called the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford University.
	He remains a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
	What he's currently doing right now is working extensively on the study of natural populations of butterflies.
	So it appears that the only living beings who have anything to fear from him now are in cocoons.
	Because can a massive butterfly abortion book be far behind from this man?
	Paul Ehrlich.
	God, the population bomb 1968.
	It said there's just no way that India could ever sustain.
	Obviously, India's got problems, but please, the hundreds of millions of dead people did not happen.
	Thank heavens.
	Well, today's show did, and I'm thankful.
	Mark Davis filling in for Rush.
	Appreciate you.
	Thanks to Kit and Mike, everybody back at headquarters.
	We will see you tomorrow right here on the EIB Network.
	Have a great day.
	God bless our country and our troops.

▲