All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 2, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:37
September 2, 2009, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes indeed, America's anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman filling in.
Great to be with you and I should say before we go any further, HR asked me to mention that we have been deluged by American road flaggers, members of the flagging community, who thought that I was disparaging flagging.
I was not disparaging flagging.
I'm in favor, in fact, of a flag disparaging amendment to the Constitution, making it illegal to disparage flaggers.
But my point was a simple one, that the idea of investing in flagging school to train more flaggers for unnecessary highway projects.
And if you notice, if you drive around at the moment, more and more of every state is dug up than it's ever been before.
I was disparaging that as a means of stimulating the economy.
You know why?
I drive, it's of no interest unless you happen to be in that part of the world, but I drive a lot from Woodsville, New Hampshire to Littleton, New Hampshire.
And it doesn't take long.
It's 20 miles, normally empty road doesn't take you long.
Around about the time of the stimulus bill, shortly after that, a stimulus project, an entirely unnecessary repair on a minor stretch of road, slowed up traffic there.
What's it doing?
It's preventing economically productive members of society getting from A to B quicker.
The idea that you can use flagging school and thereby an increase in the flagging community and there for an increase in unnecessary highway projects as a way of stimulating the economy is entirely preposterous.
And that's why as you drive around this summer, you'll notice that there were these ridiculous Putting America Back to Work signs just ahead of every little bit of a pathetic bit of scarified pavement all over every state in the land.
This is not going to do anything to stimulate the economy.
And in fact, it is entirely ridiculous that the idea that a national government should be controlling the spending on highway projects on remote bits of rural highway in 50 states across the land.
That's no way to organize it.
You know, people often miss the point when they look at the objections to this vast expansion of statism that's going on at the moment.
There's a story in the LA Times today that says states most likely to win under health care overhaul are home to its biggest foes.
That's the headline.
And they point out right at the beginning that rural states have more uninsured and lower income people who stand to benefit from Obama's healthcare legislation.
And yet it's there where the effort faces the most vocal resistance.
This piece is by James Oliphant.
And it talks about states like Wyoming.
And it says, you know, Wyoming has got a lot of people who are rural, low-income, uninsured.
Why aren't they on board with all the good things that the big Obama nanny state wants to do with them?
This is a classic argument that liberals and Democrats make all the time.
It's the guy who wrote the book, What's the Matter with Kansas?
The matter with Kansas as he sees it is that Kansas, Kans and Hicks are too stupid, too dumb, too rubish and uneducated to understand that big liberal government has their best interests at heart.
Because if only these dumb rural hicks, these rubes, would get on board with the program, they would discover that big government has got all kinds of nice little lollipops and super-duper social programs that'll make everything in their life painless and go away.
They're missing the point.
They're missing the point.
There's large numbers of people, large numbers of people who are not wealthy people, but who understand that it is more important to have the freedom, the liberty to make your own choices on these things.
Basically, what the government is telling you is, look, you're a dumb rural hick and you're going to be a dumb rural hick forever.
But don't worry about it because we will introduce a government program that will ameliorate your crummy, dumb, stupid, worthless government rural hickiness and make life more comfortable for you.
You'll still be a dumb rural hick and so will your kids and so will your kids' kids.
That's just the way it is.
But we will introduce government programs that will make this more comfortable for you.
Sorry, that's not the American way.
That's why people came to America.
People came to America to get away from that kind of thinking.
If you were in Poland and you were a peasant in the 15th century, you'd be a peasant in the 19th century and you were going to be a peasant in the 24th century.
That's just the way it was.
So people came to America and they got off the boat at Ellis Island and they lived in a crummy tenement on the lower east side and then their children spoke better English and got better jobs and moved out to the nice part of town and then their grandchildren were living in the suburbs and having a great life.
That's the American way, self-improvement.
The idea that these rural hicks in Wyoming and other states are too stupid to understand that the great beneficent nanny state is going to do all these great things for them, they're missing the point.
People don't, at a certain level, people understand that there's a price to be paid for that.
There's a price to be paid for saying, look, let the government take care of all the health care decisions.
Let the government take care of various funds for education.
Let the government provide federalized daycare.
And the price for that is the shriveling of liberty and the shriveling and the shrinking of the choices that you're allowed to make in your own lives.
And what every big government person is looking for in the end is a client.
They're looking for a client base.
They're looking for a dependent class who will need them, who need government.
And God bless these rural states where people have been standing up and saying, I don't care what it is.
I value my liberty.
You give me my liberty, and I may be poor, and I may not have all the things I want, but I have my freedom, which is more important to me.
And if I have my freedom and my children have my freedom and my grandchildren have their freedom, then eventually, eventually, we will be able to better ourselves without the intervention of people like Good King Teddy, the Duke of Chappaquiddick, and all the rest of it.
It was very interesting looking at the coverage of the Kennedy of the Kennedy funeral, because the argument made by liberals, often quite explicitly, is that, oh yeah, Teddy ran into a bit of a problem at Chappaquiddig and he wasn't always the most gentlemanly chap around waitresses and other women who happened to catch his passing fancy.
But it doesn't matter because he did so much for poor people.
As if this somehow is like an unusual situation.
It's not.
That's the classic excuse.
The idea of a kind of benign paternalism is the classic excuse for the great prince having his way with all the serving wenches that has gone on in monarchical societies through the ages.
It's the classic trade-off.
Yes, the king may have his way with the lusty serving wench who happens to catch his eye, but it doesn't matter because he cares about all the peasants and he does good things for the peasants.
And there's something actually disgusting and unbecoming to the American Republic to hear people talking about it in those terms.
This is not, you don't need Ted Kennedy to make your life better for you.
If Ted Kennedy would just get out of the way, you can make your life better for yourself.
And that is why people came to America because they had the opportunity here that they didn't have in Europe, where the Duke of Chappaquittic and all the rest of them were all well established.
And it was accepted that, okay, he might have personally disgusting habits of behavior, but he cared about the common folk.
When he went riding among them, showering his largesse on them, that showed how much he really cared and that redeemed him.
That argument is a monarchical argument that is unbecoming to the United States.
And that is why they get it in these rural states and they reject the idea that simply because good King Barak comes among you offering all these supposedly free health care and clean environment and all the other stuff that he's going to impose on you through government regulation, that somehow all that is worth you trading your liberty for.
What was disgusting about the Kennedy coverage was when it got explicit.
For example, there was a lady called Melissa Lafsky at the Huffington Post who mused on what Mary Joe Copechny, quote, would have thought about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history.
Who knows, wrote Melissa Lafsky, maybe she'd feel it was worth it, unquote.
And as Tim Blair, the great Australian wag, put on his down on the Daily Telegraph website in Australia, he put, Mary Joe Copechni died so that the Food Allergen Labelling and Consumer Protection Act could live.
That is the trade-off.
That is the trade-off that has gone on in monarchical societies in medieval Europe all the time.
That the good king, he had his, Henry VIII is the classic example.
Ted Kennedy could have played him in one of those PBS masterpiece theater things.
Yes, he staggers around wenching and indulging, and you're looking for him to pass the Food Allergen Labelling and Consumer Protection Act, and you have to go into the orgy room and try to identify him by whose bottom is poking up in the air from which particular corner of the room.
But it doesn't matter because he cares about the common folk.
And that is where the LA Times, with their story, states most likely to win under health care overhaul are home to its biggest foes.
That's where they're missing the point.
It's not that the rube's are too dumb to understand the big government has their best interests in heart.
It's that the rube's don't look on themselves in that way.
They don't look at themselves as being part of a statistic, as part of being a demographic.
The point about America is that you're an individual.
So you can be a rural hick in the middle of nowhere living in a tar paper shack night right now.
But if government just gets out of your way, anything is possible.
And if big government is in place, then nothing is possible.
If you go to Western Europe, you will notice that generally speaking, people live in smaller homes.
They drive smaller cars.
They do not enjoy the same range of opportunity and the same social mobility that Americans do.
And this idea that simply because the good king in his faraway castle has the best interests of the peasantry at heart, he knows better for you than you know yourself.
That is not the American way.
And it doesn't matter whether it's good King Teddy or good King Barak or any of them.
They are our representatives, not our rulers.
And you don't mortgage your liberty to someone who is meant to be a citizen legislator.
The citizen legislator is there to say that this is America.
And the point about America, unlike the societies everyone came from, is that government is restrained in order to provide you more space to fulfill your potential, whatever that may be.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Stein, sitting in for Rush on the EIB network.
Mark Stein, in for Rush on the EIB network.
Let's go to Alan in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Alan, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Great to have you with us.
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Stein, and it's a great pleasure to speak with you.
Hey, hey, wait a minute a minute.
I detect a touch of the old Australian in there somewhere.
You from down under?
In another loyal mate, in another loyal.
Whereabouts?
Hey, the rest of you can just ignore this.
A little British Commonwealth chit-chat while we're here.
Whereabouts in Australia from?
Just because they won the cricket recently, that doesn't give.
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
This show has tens of millions of listeners, and the word cricket instantly, like 98% of them, just fall off the map now.
They've all gone over.
They're all listening to Bill Moyers on NPR.
The word cricket is just, that's it, it's over.
Don't say googlies.
If you say googlies, the last three listeners will be out of here.
We're going to talk about.
Well, for the next hour, we'll be going to be talking about the ashes.
Okay, enough cricket.
Enough cricket, Joe.
All accent Wednesday on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Alan, do you have a Alan?
Do you have a point you wish to make that might be tangentially related to the last three American listeners tuned in across the fruited plate now?
In my best John Arlett voice, yes, sir.
Okay, and what is that?
You spoke earlier this afternoon about this idiot, David Brooks, this supposed conservative, this right-of-center person.
He's Mr. Moderate at the New York Times.
Yeah, well, he's the resident imposter as far as I'm concerned.
But the point that you made has a that I'd like to speak to, and that is: I'm Catholic by tradition.
What's that got to do with the point that you were making about Brooks?
It's this, that there is a mirror image in reverse for Catholics.
For 1,900 years, we were treated as sheep and told not to think, not to use our own minds, and just to come to church, go to mass, meet our obligations, and everything will be hunky-dory.
Well, it wasn't until John XXIII came along and created Vatican II, where the role responsibilities were completely reversed, and it's taken over 30 years, a generation, for Catholics to come to grips with the fact that each of us have our own responsibility for our own souls.
What Obama is doing is precisely, precisely what the Catholic Church did as a disservice to its members, to its adherents, for nearly two millennia.
And what your audience who are not Catholics should take very, very, very cogent notice of is that what he's doing is invigling them into the same mindset that for nearly two millennia Catholics were sucked into.
And once they were forced to face their own responsibilities, it's taken a long, long time for a lot of people who didn't like to face their own responsibilities for their own souls and translating that into the sociopolitical nonsense that Obama is bringing to the stage.
That's actually a very big point you're making there, because if you were to come up with the model that the Obama approach to government most closely approximates, it is the old school medieval church, which in many parts of Europe was an official church, was the state church.
And now we have a new state church, and the state church is Obama-sized liberalism.
Basically, if you believe in Obama, and that's essentially why he's beaming himself into schoolhouses and promoting himself in every corner.
He's got your government motors and your cash for clunkers.
So there's no part of your life.
You are unable to function in any part of your life without Pope Barak and the big government church there inserting itself into every aspect of your life, setting the parameters for how you conduct yourself in that corner of your life.
And it's actually a very interesting point that liberals believe, secular liberals who are the first to get on their high horses about doctrinaire theocrats, nevertheless are quite happy to sign on to the idea of big government as the all-powerful, universal, liberal church with the doctrine of papal infallibility applied to Pope Barack.
That's actually a very shrewd point, Alan.
Thanks a lot for making it.
In Chattanooga, Tennessee.
By the way, excuse our cricket conversation earlier.
Sure.
Alan doesn't get the opportunity to talk cricket that much in Chattanooga.
I don't know.
I heard rumors in my state, New Hampshire, there was a rumor that there was a cricket team somewhere in New that had formed itself somewhere in southern New Hampshire, but they had no one to play.
That's the trick.
If you're going to form a cricket team in the United States, you need two.
Otherwise, they're undefeated.
They could hold five-day test matches all by themselves.
There's a cricket team somewhere in southern New Hampshire.
If you want to form one in Chattanooga, Tennessee, they'll be happy to play you.
More straight ahead on the Rush Lindborough Show.
Hey, great to be with you.
Rush will be back on Monday.
The great Walter Williams will be here on Friday.
And you know who else is coming back?
I see on the front page of the New York Post today, Elliot Spitzer.
Elliot Spitzer has decided he's going to be making a political comeback.
And I think he's, with the economy the way it is, I think that's the kind of guy we could use at the moment.
There is a guy who knows how to invest in the private sector.
He will be back, take charge, lots of great money for Amtrak, rooms at the Mayflower, and various $300 activities, all courtesy of Elliot Spitzer.
The great thing about America, anybody can come back.
They don't like New York's current governor, David Patterson, who entered, who began his term the way Spitzer went out, because he had, I can't remember the details of this now.
He had some sex scandal with some woman, but it wasn't the Mayflower.
It was like just, it was at the, yeah, it wasn't the whole day in.
I know, it was a days in, I think.
It was basically the Econo Lodge around the back of Newark Airport or something.
He wasn't doing like the full Mayflower thing, but he denied that he ever used state cash to pay for liaisons, which is incredibly implausible.
If true, it's impressive because it means that governor's hookers are about the only thing in the state of New York that isn't being paid for with taxpayers' money.
But anyway, Elliot Spitzer is on his way back, only in America, as the headline on the New York Post says.
Let's go to Jen in San Clemente, California, Nixon country.
Jen, great to have you with us on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Hello, thank you.
How are you, Mr. Sang?
I'm doing great.
How are things in California?
In my part of the woods, they're doing great.
There's no wildfires here, but it's nice and sunny and beautiful.
But I'd like to talk about this.
I'm a mom of three school-aged children, and September 8th is their first day of school.
Right.
I think it's tacky and overreaching, and I cannot believe that Obama is planning his speech on my children's first day of school.
I'm totally skeptical of what he's going to say.
I don't agree with any of his policies, so I don't see how I could support anything he's going to say.
And the guy to teachers asked, what can I do for President Obama?
He says, and are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?
My kids don't even do what I ask them to do half the time, and now the president's going to be able to do it.
Well, wait a minute.
That's because you're not the most gifted orator since Socrates, like President.
No, I'm not.
If you stood there, instead of just speaking to your kids and telling them to tidy their room or whatever, if instead you stood on the chair, you can all do this.
Get it perhaps get a pretend teleprompter.
It doesn't have to be a real one.
I'll do what I need.
I should use my laptop.
Yeah, just turn a broom upside down, glue it to the floor, stick a small pane of glass on the top of the broom.
It'll look like a teleprompter.
Stand on the chair and talk to your kids about hope and change, change and hope, hopey, changey, changey, hopey, and you'll be inspiring them instead of just doing all this mean-spirited Republican type thing like telling them to eat their vegetables and clean their rooms.
You've got to go the Obama route.
But what he's going to do, apparently, is he's going to tell them to write letters to themselves about what they could do to help the president, which I find sort of slightly unhealthy.
I mean, it's all part of the cult of personality.
Obviously, it's not, we're not talking about the cult of personality on the kind of Kim Jong-il Saddam Hussein scale, but I don't see that it's part of American education to get grade school kids to write letters to themselves about things they can do to help the president, particularly if they happen to take the same view of helping the president as Rush did when he said that he hopes Obama will fail.
I mean, even if you think that's a relatively harmless thing, it's nothing to do with education.
And there are enough distractions from education in American grade schools anyway.
How old are your kids, by the way, Jen?
I have twins that will be six in October, and then I have an almost eight-year-old.
Okay, so they should be now getting just to the age where they're skeptical of the president.
My seven-year-old was getting fed up with Obama midway through the inauguration when they were taken in to listen to his speech.
I'm not persuaded, by the way, actually, that forcing kids to listen to Obama speaking at them forever is necessarily going to do him any favors in the long term.
The psychiatrist will have a field day with recovered memory sessions in 20 years' time.
But would you be in favor, say, just to get this on the table, would you be in favor if Bush were in office of Bush beaming himself into classrooms to give speeches to the kids?
No, because I don't think kids should be involved in politics in that way.
For instance, I don't watch, I watch a movie before I let my kids watch it, and since I don't know what the heck he's going to say, I can't go along with it.
I don't know if he's going to tell them to join his little army of, you know, brown shirts or what exactly.
Oh, no, no, no, no, don't.
Don't worry about that.
I thought you were going to say when it about inappropriate.
He was just going to do some of his goofy little Special Olympics jokes that he likes to do when he lets his hair down.
But I don't think you have to worry about him getting out the brown shirts just yet.
Thank you very much for your call, Jen, in San Clemente.
I think we had a little of her kids there in the background.
I don't quite understand that either.
September the 8th is the first thing.
My kids went back to school in New Hampshire about sort of August 26th.
I guess that must be good.
Really?
And HRs went back today, so it's just like in California, you can't get the...
I guess it's the lavishly reimbursed California school teachers are not prepared to return from their beach houses in the Bahamas until September the 8th.
Is that what it is?
don't know anyway i might just be i'm i'm i'm mock i'm mock there i in In New Hampshire, we go back earlier because we get so many snow days in the winter that they have to eat up all the summer to get the mandatory minimum number of days they need by law to teach you about how great Barack Obama is.
You know, you require a certain number of days to do that.
Let's go to Ken in Livonia, Michigan.
Ken, you're on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Yeah, just one of the comment regarding President Obama giving his broadcast to the children on September 8th.
I think parents need to be cautious about it.
I think they need to be concerned about it.
History has shown us time and again that when we look at the different countries that have been controlled by different groups of socialists or that type of ideology, that it's not uncommon to use the school systems, the educational system, to try to influence the children trying to promote support of their ideology, their programs,
trying to get the children to even have influence over the parents.
No, but you make a good point there, Ken.
But the reality is that this goes on every day of the week in American schoolhouses.
And in many ways, it's the only reason that Obama is president.
Because for decades now, essentially the default mode of American education has been liberal.
It's been liberal in its assumptions.
Every parent of a grade schooler knows this.
The kids are enjoined to do stuff about global warming, climate change.
All the assumptions about environmentalism that arise in American schoolhouses are liberal assumptions.
The air you breathe is liberal in the American school system.
And that's why they don't really need Obama beaming himself in on September the 8th, because all that does is make explicit what everybody knows is the case unofficially anyway, that the assumptions of all these school teachers are by and large almost entirely liberal.
In the run-up to the election, I went into my kids' little school, just a small rural school in New Hampshire, no big deal, nothing, just an ordinary New Hampshire public school.
It was very interesting to me.
They were covering the election in a sort of bipartisan way.
So they had some posters and placards and things stuck up on a wall.
All the Obama-Biden placards were real placards.
The only one they can find for McCain or Palin was, in fact, one from a liberal website that was in fact a parody McCain sticker that the teacher had cut the moveon.org logo off the bottom of.
In other words, they're prepared to pay lip service to the idea of a kind of non-partisan approach to education.
But in fact, education is really where you start building the subject of the big government nanny state.
And that's – William Ayers understood that with his ideas on education, that if you borrow your ways – William Ayers wised up.
He was a terrorist.
He liked blowing things up.
And then he figured out that in America, if you start blowing up army bases, all people are going to do is hunt you down and arrest you and toss you in jail.
And that if you want to overthrow the American system, as Ayers did, you don't do that.
You don't blow up an army barracks.
You're never going to do it that way.
You don't blow up the building.
You burrow yourself into the institutions and hollow them out from within.
And that was his approach to American education.
And he's done it very successfully.
All through the Reagan era, Republicans have had great success in the last 30 years in electoral politics and have surrendered turf on almost all the other institutions of society, including obviously things like Hollywood and newspapers and the media, but also the education system.
And you think of the education that most American children receive, and then about the likelihood of them emerging from that and every other November pulling the lever for a conservative candidate in the elections in the United States.
That gets a bit of a long shot when the left has such a death grip on American education as it does at the moment.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Stein sitting in for rush on the Rushlinbaugh Show.
Mark Stein in for Rush on the EIB network.
Great to be with you.
Let's go to Rick in Chicago.
Rick, thanks for waiting.
You are on the Rushlinbaugh Show.
Hey, Mark, how are you today?
I'm doing good.
How are things in Chicago?
Love that city.
Oh, it's a beautiful day out here.
Cappy weather.
Global warming is really working for us up here in Chicago.
You know, I was in Chicago for a long, quite a bit of time a couple of years ago, and I was intrigued to see that President Obama, the only thing we have in common is we have the same favorite restaurant in town.
We went to this place, Spaggia, down on North Michigan, somewhere toward the lake.
And it's like a fancy joint, and Obama sort of tried to downplay it when he said it was a favorite restaurant.
He said it was like a couple of hundred bucks ahead, a couple of hundred bucks for two.
I don't think you can get out of there for like 400.
Never been there.
Never been there.
Well, you should get, well, under the stimulus pad, you'll be getting, You'll be paid to dine there with Nancy Pelosi every night while strumming guitarists play Viacon Dios as you and Nancy canoodle by candlelight.
So don't worry about that.
I'll wait for that invitation with bated breath.
Okay.
Now, Rick, enough of this.
What's your recommendation for restaurants in Chicago?
Oh, no, no, we'll get it.
Well, you know what?
I like to chop out.
Really?
I'm just a meat and potatoes guy.
Yeah.
Yeah, you're not one of these.
You're not in this fancy elitist joint with me.
Yeah, you know, you're not in Arugula Central with me.
And me and Barack and Michelle.
Who else was it?
Michael Kane.
Michael Kane was in there because he was filming the Alfred the Butler thing from Batman.
So Michael, lovely Michael and not lovely Michael, his lovely wife Shakira and Michael came over to say hi to Michael.
It was a great question.
The problem is when you get to a restaurant like that, what fork do you pick up first?
And do you actually stick your pinky out?
Oh, don't worry.
Don't get don't get hung up.
Don't get hung up on that.
Just pick the plate up.
It's all those exquisite dishes.
Every dish is like $170 or something.
And it's tiny.
It's tiny.
It's not like surf and turf night at Bud's Roadhouse.
You get this tiny little postage stamp, beautiful huge plate, and he puts it down, and there's this little tiny thing there that looks like a sort of squished bug in the middle of it.
And that is actually the meal.
So you actually have to go out and you have to eat dinner before you go to eat dinner.
Yeah, yeah.
Or you can stop off, you know, just line your stomach with a couple of Big Macs.
You'll be fine.
What's the reason for your call today, Rick?
The reason for my call, just a statement before I get to my comment.
You know, I lost my job a year and a half ago, and I just went out and created my own job.
Last year, my first full year in business, I employed 12 people.
Now, my business has kind of retracted this year, and I only have three or four guys working for me steadily.
But my point is, is you can only be your brother's keeper for so long.
And when I do subscribe to giving somebody a leg up and giving somebody a hand, this whole nanny state affair is just, it's tragic to what we've become.
And, you know, how long do you have to be your brother's keeper?
And when is enough and enough?
When you can't get a guy to go help himself, why should you help him?
Yeah, and that's an excellent point because it's people like you, guys running businesses that employ 12 people who are having to hold up the system for everybody else.
And, you know, when you use that term about being your brother's keeper, I don't mind people being their brother's keeper.
Barack Obama wants to be his brother's keeper.
His brother lives in Kenya on $12 a year.
Now, meanwhile, Barack Obama is dining at Spadgia for $400.
And why doesn't he cut down a number of times, why didn't he give up one meal at Spaggia and send that $400 to his brother in Kenya and would be increasing it?
Yeah, we'd get him a six-room hutter.
HR says, well, okay, let's not say he doesn't have to give up eating at Spaggia.
Why didn't he just send him $100 and increase the guy's earning tenfold from $12 a year to $112 a year?
The point is, that biblical lesson that we are our brother's keeper is about personal responsibility.
It's not about saying, let the government tax and regulate you, Rick, with your 12-man business into paying for everybody's brothers.
The Bible enjoins us to take personal responsibility for those people, not to outsource it to big government.
Exactly.
Well, here's the main point of my call today.
I hold Barack Obama or any of his ilk responsible, personally responsible for anything that we're going through these days because he told us what he was going to do.
He told us what his agenda was.
He told us what he wanted to do and how he wanted to shape the nation.
Who I hold responsible are all the rhinos out there.
The rhinos in the Senate, the rhinos in the Congress, the Republicans and name only that through their own malfeasance, through their moral corruptness and moral bankruptcy, allowed the system to work against the common people of this nation.
It would be a completely different landscape, and I dare say that I don't, I think there would be a better system of checks and balances starting midterm elections, 06, if we wouldn't have had our party, the Conservative Party, deviate from their core principles.
Thanks, Rick.
We got to run.
We're running late.
We're up against the clock for a profit center here.
I'll address that when we come back with more straight ahead on the Russian Limbaugh Show.
1-800-282-2882.
We'll talk a bit more about what Rick was saying about being our brother's keeper in perpetuity, which is what is being lined up for us, because it's falling on small businessmen like Rick, who are the ones who are going to be taxed and regulated to pay for a lot of this.
Lots more straight ahead on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Mark Stein sitting in for Rush.
I'll be here tomorrow.
Walter Williams will be here on Friday.
▲
Export Selection