All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 21, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
October 21, 2009, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.3 percent of the time it's great to have you here.
Here's the telephone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, the email address lrushbo at eibnet.com.
Right.
Spent a lot of time in the last hour of the politico story talking about how Obama has succeeded in marginalizing me in Fox News, the Chamber of Commerce, the insurance industry.
We're marginalized.
Obama's just roaring through the he is in trouble.
His party is in trouble.
His agenda is in trouble.
Half the American people don't like his policies.
Half the country disagree with his policies.
He's floundering in Afghanistan.
He refuses to act like commander-in-chief.
More and more people are starting to see that he's not at all what they thought they elected.
And there is a general disquiet that is settling across the country.
There is a general despondency that's setting out and spreading across the country as people begin to realize that they're not going to get a roaring economy anytime soon.
The Obama administration itself is out there saying so.
That 10% unemployment is the new norm.
The American people are being told, you're going to do with less and you're going to like it because we have been stealing from the rest of the world and it's about time we pay our dues.
That's what the American people are starting to figure out.
In the midst of all this, the brainiacs at the Republican Party selected a candidate in a special election in the 23rd district in New York State, and they picked a woman whose name is Didi Scazafava, who essentially should be a Democrat.
Even the Wall Street Journal weighs in.
Democrats want to portray this race as a familiar moderate conservative Republican splint, but the real issue is why Didi Scazafaba is a Republican at all.
She has voted for so many tax increases that her Democrat opponent is attacking her as a tax raiser.
She supported the Obama stimulus.
She favors card check to make union organizing easier, or at least she did until a recent flip-flop.
She has run more than once on the line of the Working Families Party, which is aligned with Acorn.
Her voting record in Albany puts her to the left of nearly half the Democrats in the Assembly.
She also favors gay marriage, which is to the left of Mr. Obama, and she's a Republican, and this is who the Republican Party is asking people to donate to and who they are supporting.
The GOP will continue to wander in the wilderness if it continues to put up candidates like this.
And it's mystifying.
Now, the guy that everybody's watching in this race is a guy by the name of Mike Hoffman.
And they're wondering, because he's on the conservative party ticket.
And it's now being reported that Didi Scazafava is now polling in third place in this district race, which may explain, this is Eric Erickson at RedState.com, may explain why Scazafaba, though her husband, or through her husband, also happens to be the head of the AFL-CIO.
It really is a legitimate question.
Why is this woman a Republican?
Scazafaba called the cops to chase away reporters daring to ask inconvenient questions a couple of days ago.
But Chris Eliza says, can Hoffman win?
Well, Scaza Faza is imploding.
Her voters are obviously going to look elsewhere.
Hoffman's in second place.
And voters most likely backing Scazafava because of the R next to her name.
The voters will go to the real Republican in the race, Hoffman.
Hoffman's the strongest challenger to the Democrat and gives the only real contrast to the Democrat.
Hoffman can win this race.
Everybody's asking, can he win this?
Yes, of course he can.
That's just mystifying because the Republican Party has a chance here, not just with this race, but in Washington as well, to contrast itself with the sheer radicalism of the Obama agenda.
And instead, they're nominating candidates that are close to it.
A black woman who's racially charged, this is the Associated Press, by the way, a black woman who's racially charged allegations of horrific abuse helped put several people in prison now says she lied when she alleged she was kidnapped, sexually assaulted and tortured in a ramshackle West Virginia trailer.
West Virginia authorities said in 2007 that Megan Williams, now of Columbus Ohio, had been stabbed, beaten with sticks, sexually assaulted, doused with hot water, forced to eat animal feces and taunted with racial slurs by seven white men and women.
She later said hot wax was poured on her and that two of her captors had forced uh her to drink their urine.
Now, uh.
An unsigned statement released wednesday by the office of her Columbus lawyer said simply, Megan Williams is now recanting her story.
Brian Abraham, the former Logan County prosecutor who pursued the cases, expressed skepticism that the story was a lie.
If she's going to say she made it all up, that's absurd.
This looks like another attempt to generate more publicity anyway.
Two conflicting stories here on the swine flu virus.
First from FOX NEWS, H1n1 flu virus is running rampant throughout the?
U.s and the country will have received only 25 percent of the vaccine.
That was expected by the end of october, said senator Joe Lieberman.
Senate Committee hearing yesterday or today.
Actually, the grim news was the focus of a special hearing of the Senate Homeland Security AND Governmental Affairs Committee at which three cabinet secretaries were called to address the panel, Health AND Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius, homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano and Education secretary Arnie Duncan.
As of last week, there are more than 5,000 cases of flu reported, compared to seven cases in October of last Year.
More than 800 people have died from H1N1, including 86 children, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
CDC officials said there should be widespread availability of the vaccine by mid-November, but by that time it will have peaked.
According to the experts, Kathleen Sebelius blamed the vaccine shortage on lower than predicted yields from vaccine manufacturers and on some manufacturing glitches that have occurred since May.
She said the yields are now more in line with original predictions.
Any glitches have been corrected.
We anticipate a robust production line moving forward.
All right, so it's the fault of the manufacturers, the fault of the private sector.
Didn't get enough yield, a high enough yield, and some manufacturing glitches for the fault of that.
But then from CBS News, story by Cheryl Atkisson.
Swine flu cases overestimated.
CBS News exclusive study of state results finds H1N1 not as prevalent as feared.
If you've been diagnosed probable or presumed in recent months with the H1N1 virus, you may be surprised to know this.
Odds are you didn't have H1N1 flu.
In fact, you probably didn't have flu at all.
That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
Now, the ramifications of this finding are important.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Britain's National Health Service, once you have H1N1 flu, you are immune from future outbreaks of the same virus.
So those who think they've had it, but haven't, might mistakenly presume they're immune.
As a result, they might skip taking a vaccine that could help them and expose themselves to others with H1N1 flu under the mistaken belief that they won't catch it.
Parents might not keep sick children home from school.
Why the uncertainty about who has and who hasn't had the flu?
Because the government's in charge of tabulating all these kinds of statistics.
Swine flu cases overestimate.
Now, why would that be?
Why would swine flu cases be overestimated?
There are no coincidences in politics.
But rush, but rush.
This is a disease.
What do you mean politics?
It's political.
The whole thing is political.
It's being used as a tool to persuade people to support Obama's health care reform initiative.
It is a tool whereby government officials get to tell citizens what they must do.
And now we find out that they've overestimated the number of swine flu cases out there.
And that's on the heels of a story that's, oh my God, the vaccine, we don't have enough vaccine.
Oh, we're all going to die.
What are we going to do?
What are we going to do?
It's incredible to watch this.
By the way, what do you mean, rush Obama tanking out there?
Well, I've got some Rasmussen numbers here.
Now, at the time I got this, which was late last night, the article had not been written that Rasmussen always writes with his poll results.
But, I mean, if you go to these numbers from the Rasmussen Reports graph, I mean, Democrats are tanking.
In one month, they've lost between two and eight points on the issues.
So here's the chart.
October 2009, September 2009.
Issue healthcare.
The Democrats, the overall shift is Democrats, 40% versus 44 support it.
That's a difference of six points.
Obama, the Democrats have lost six points on health care.
The Democrat Party has.
Education, they've lost five points.
Social Security, they've lost eight points.
This is a poll that asks people who's better at handling things.
Abortion, they've lost 12 points.
Economy, they've lost 14 points.
I mean, it's, and the shifts are even more incredible.
I mean, wherever you go, and CNN's got its own poll that says half the country is opposed to Obama's policies.
So while they think they're winning everything out there, they want everybody to think they're winning by marginalizing their opponents and targeting them from the White House.
Remember Nixon did that?
Nixon had his enemies list and how outraged the media was?
Remember how outraged that this could possibly be happening?
And now Obama's doing it and they're gleeful and they're happy.
And they're saying, yeah, there are Obama enemies out there.
We're going to help Obama spread the word on who they are.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back.
Much more straight ahead in just a second here.
Speaking of polls, there was an ABC Washington Post poll yesterday.
The Washington Post published about healthcare and specifically the public option.
I had it.
I had it right here in the stack, and it just made me so mad because I knew it was fraudulently reported and fraudulently probably compiled.
I didn't even bother messing with it.
It said that the public overwhelmingly now massively supports a public option in healthcare, which is just not true.
I'll explain the fraudulent way in which they did the poll in just a second.
But imagine yourself in this position.
You're managing the Washington Post.
You run the shop.
And you see Obama smash mouth Fox News.
You see Obama and his allies denouncing Fox News, all but boycotting Fox News.
And you're running the Washington Post, you say, hmm, what can I do here to kiss ass with the teacher?
What kind of brown-nosing can I do?
How can I make sure I don't get the Obama treatment that he's giving Fox?
How can I show Obama that I love him?
How can I show Obama that I am a loyal apparatchik?
Well, very simple.
How do you earn the approval of Obama?
How do you please him enough to get access?
Well, you do a poll.
You do a poll on his favorite issue, healthcare, and you jimmy up the results and you make it appear that the American people love the public option of your health care plan.
And all it took to bring that off was a rebalanced sample.
More Democrats, less Republicans.
Maybe we ought to start putting stickers on journalists' foreheads, something like USDA approved or strictly kosher, or how about Obama approved journalist?
How about at the end of every story, I'm Barack Obama, and I dictated this story.
Because that's what's happening in American journalism today.
I mean, the White House is pretty much admitting it.
They want media to not investigate them.
They want media to just accept what they say.
And they're going after Fox and everybody else, which have been doing it the whole time.
The sampling, the sampling of this poll comprises 33% Democrats, 20% Republicans.
That's a 13-point spread is two points larger than their September polling at 32% to 21%.
And more tellingly, it's significantly larger than their Election Day sample, which included 35% Democrats, 26% Republicans, for a gap of nine points.
So if you're going to do a poll and you're going to sample 33% Democrats versus 20% Republicans, 13% more Democrats, you can get the result you want.
And then if you get into racial weighting of the polling sample, then you can get even more results that you want.
And then you can say to President Obama, see, see, we're on your side.
See, don't fox us.
We're helping you, Mr. President.
We're on your side.
It's a totally fraudulent poll.
Lamar Alexander's Senate floor this morning warning Obama he's going down the Nixonian path with his enemies list business.
Based upon that experience and my 40 years since then, in and out of public life, I want to make what I hope will be a friendly suggestion to President Obama in his White House.
Don't create an enemies list.
It's a mistake for the President of the United States and for the White House staff.
If the President and his top aides treat people with different views as enemies instead of listening to what they have to say, they're likely to end up with a narrow view and a feeling that the whole world is out to get them.
And as those of us who served in the Nixon administration know, that can get you into a lot of trouble.
I have to wonder about this.
I mean, I've seen the obligatory stories from the mainstream press criticizing this.
You shouldn't focus on Fox.
All you're doing is elevating them.
We, as members of the media, are not comfortable with singling out other news organizations.
We, as members of the media, we don't remember this ever happening before, a single news agency being targeted by an administration.
We really don't think this is.
And so here goes Senator Alexander saying, it's a dangerous road, President Obama, Nixonian path.
You likely end up with a narrow view if you don't listen to what your opponents have to say, crying out.
I know what he's doing.
I know he's not this naive.
Can I explain?
What do you want me to explain, Snurton?
What, Lamar Alexander?
Well, he's just getting it on the record here on the Senate floor that the president's conducting, and his age are conducting an enemies list.
He's getting it out there in the official record and so forth, and actually having the weight of an elected Republican senator say it.
But this is not going to, the Obama people go, oh my God, I'm not on an enemy's list.
Lamar Alexander said are we getting into like Nixon?
We better stop it.
That ain't going to happen.
And these guys in the Obama administration, look, folks, Alinsky, rules for radicals.
When faced with an opponent, get rid of the opponent.
You don't debate the opponent.
You don't consider the opponent's ideas.
You say, I won, screw you, get out of the way.
And whatever I have to do to get you out of the way, it's right.
It's happening right before our very eyes.
Here's more from Lamar Alexander from his Senate floor speech this morning.
As any veteran of the Nixon White House can attest, we've been down this road before, and it won't end well.
An enemy's list only denigrates the presidency and the Republic itself.
It's already happening.
These are unusually difficult times.
Yeah.
With plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree.
Yeah.
Let's not start calling people out and compiling an enemy's list.
Let's push the street brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues.
Creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.
This is like telling the KGB to stop spying on people.
It's like telling Castro to stop torturing dissidents.
It's like telling Kim Jong-il, hey, you better not launch that missile.
It's like telling Mahmoud Ahmadinezad, you better not, you better not, or we're going to really get into some diplomacy.
What?
Tell these guys to stop their enemies list?
Don't make me laugh, although I can't help but laugh.
Anyway, I know he knows these words are not going to have any impact.
He just wants to get the words on the record.
But this is how these people operate.
There won't be an opposition by the time they get through.
That would be the most dangerous, marginalized man in America.
By the way, I heard a few minutes ago, I had verbal dyslexia.
It is Doug Hoffman, not Mike Hoffman, I call him Mike Hoffman.
It's Doug Hoffman, who is seeking election in New York 23 against Didi Scazafaba.
It's amazing I got that name right and screwed up Doug versus Mike.
So it's Doug Hoffman.
Sorry about the misspeak.
Joe Biden said we were depressed and in a depression.
He's right.
23 states report higher unemployment in September.
The economy struggled to create jobs in the early stages of the recovery.
The Associated President's unbeliever, Christopher Ruegeber, is the stenographer here on this story.
Unemployment rose in 23 states last month as the economy struggled to create jobs in the early stages of the recovery.
While layoffs have slowed, companies remain reluctant to hire.
43 states reported job losses in September, while only seven gained jobs.
Some of the states that lost jobs still saw their unemployment rates decline as discouraged workers gave up looking for work.
People who are out of work but no longer looking for jobs aren't counted as officially unemployed.
So why point out that the unemployment rate went down when the whole situation is actually getting worse?
All right, to the phones.
People have been patiently waiting.
Plymouth, Nebraska.
Chuck, you're next.
It's great to have you with us on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
Good to talk with you today.
Thank you.
Say, the reason I was calling, I've just been thinking about the fact that the Democrats, knowing that 2010 is coming around the bend and they could see a possible landslide and the loss of their seats, might become visually or become a turncoat per se, only to the fact that they'll go against the Obama plan.
I can see Pelosi and Obama getting together with these Democrats saying, hey, you guys appear to be going against my plan.
You've all heard the call of the people.
They don't want it.
But then when we gain control in 2010 again, keep our ring, then we'll go back to this thing and run it through.
Well, I don't think that's what Obama wants.
Obama wants this thing now.
He wants it by Thanksgiving.
He doesn't care about the fallout to other Democrats.
I don't think people quite understand that.
Obama couldn't care less.
Proof of this, and this is why there is some friction out there.
Obama, in fact, there's this HBO documentary coming out that we talked about.
Richard Cohen reviewed it.
And this is Mr. Perfect.
This is a man who never does anything wrong.
He never says anything wrong.
He never dresses wrong.
He never watches anything wrong.
He doesn't do anything wrong.
Now, some Democrats in the House are getting a little upset that he hasn't presented a health care plan, that he's making them take the hit.
That's exactly the way he wants it.
If it fails, it's going to be their fault.
It isn't going to be his.
If it succeeds, he's going to take the credit.
Now, as to the 2010 election, I don't think Obama looks at it as, okay, let's say I know the American people losing faith with me and losing faith with my party.
I'm going to go up and talk to Pelosi and I'm going to go talk to Reed.
And I'm going to say, you guys need to get your members here to start changing their tune on this and come out against this version of health.
There is no way it's going to happen.
In the first place, most of this Democrat Party has been radicalized.
Most of them believe all this.
This is not an act.
And most of them, I mean, this is their religion.
This is where their soul is animated.
They're not going to give up on this.
They're not going to fake anything here.
They think they can't lose.
They run the show.
They're going to ram it down our throats or any other orifice that's handy to them.
And, you know, that's why Obama's struggling to get this done now because he sees public opinion is dwindling.
And that's why the big push, and that's why we're waiting on Afghanistan.
Afghanistan's all about health care.
It's about nothing more than that.
Here's Randall in Columbia, South Carolina.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Rush, I appreciate you taking my call.
You know, I look at this and I see where the far left has gained some common sense towards the end of President Bush's term.
But I believe that the common sense they gain and the values that they wanted to instill in America, they're going to gain them back again.
Wait a minute.
I must confess here to being accused, confused.
You said that the far left has gained some common sense toward the end of the Bush term.
What do you mean?
Right.
I mean, far as focusing on the war effort, for example, you know, they wanted to pull out the troops of Iraq as one of their main campaign goals and, you know, focus on Afghanistan, although we've always been at war with Iraq since the first desert storm, desert shield war.
Okay, but they're gaining common sense.
I don't know if they're actually gaining common sense or they're losing common sense because they have 120,000 troops still in Iraq.
And we got health care about ready to be shoved down our throats, which costs over a trillion dollars.
120,000 troops in Iraq, and we're not even focused on al-Qaeda and bin Laden and the people that actually attacked our country.
And our troops are deprived and just spread out, boots on the ground all over the world.
You know, and then again, we can't even take care of our social programs in our own border at home.
Okay.
What is your point?
I don't get your point.
Well, it's just the lack of common sense.
It's just, as far as everything on their agenda, it's like, okay, we're for same-sex marriages and we're for pro-choice, but they value the family.
If everybody in their family exercised pro-choice and same-sex marriages, they wouldn't have a family anymore.
Eventually, they would actually be extinguished or go extinct.
I mean, every policy, if you look at coming from the far left, doesn't have any common sense.
It doesn't have any foundation.
Okay, so that's your point.
You confuse me because you said they had common sense toward the end of the Bush term.
And there's nothing sensible in a normal, logical way about liberalism.
It is counter to everything about the human spirit.
It exists to destroy the human spirit.
Their target here is people who believe in God.
They have got to get belief in God shattered and turn that belief into the state or toward the state.
But talking about liberalism in terms of common sense, of course it has no common sense.
It's as dangerous as it can be.
Anyway, Randall, thanks much.
I appreciate it.
Kevin in Detroit, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Yeah, good afternoon, Rush.
Thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
My comment deals with Obama hiding behind the elections in Afghanistan to make his decision to send more troops.
I haven't read anything about his opponent Abdullah having any sort of different political agenda with regards to the U.S. presence in Afghanistan.
So it seems to me, regardless of who wins, the U.S. mission won't change.
So it's purely political posturing because whoever wins the election, their position on our involvement there isn't going to change.
So Obama's just hiding behind a moot point.
This is not just about Afghanistan.
It's about us.
This is about U.S. national security interests.
And I've never seen it in my life where we wait on military action, which could mean defeat or victory, until after we find out who the post-war leader is going to be.
I mean, you're right.
This is clear, pure politics and posturing and waiting for the right moment to do this so that there is as little damage from the left on health care.
With a dirty little secret here, which the state-controlled media is not going to report with any emphasis, is that Obama's got big trouble on the Democrat side of things.
Even in his fundraiser last night, he urged the Democrats, we must unify.
We can do this.
It's hard.
We're going to do it.
Their big problem is themselves.
Here, let's go to the audio soundbites.
Audio soundbite number 27 this afternoon.
MSNBC Andrea Mitchell talked to Savannah Guthrie, the stenographer at the White House for NBC.
She had a sit-down interview with the one, and she said to the one, can you really announce a new strategy, roll out this new strategy, Afghanistan, before the results of this runoff election are announced?
And that was my first question to President Today.
And listen to his response.
We're still finding out how this whole process in Afghanistan is going to unfold.
It is important to make sure that we understand the landscape and the partner that we're going to be dealing with because our strategy in Afghanistan is not just dependent on military forces.
This is part of a comprehensive strategy.
It always has been.
And our basic attitude is that we are going to take the time to get this right.
We're not going to drag it out.
We are dragging it out.
We are specifically dragging it out.
Take the time to get it right.
What kind of time does it take?
Your commanders say we need 40,000 more troops to support the 60,000 we have.
We have a strategy to win this thing.
And he's dithering around.
And she asked if she says she asked him, can you really announce a new strategy, roll out this new strategy before the results of the runoff election are announced?
I mean, talk about being in the tank.
Mr. Obama, I'm here to interview you.
And I know it's really, really tough for you to announce a strategy before the results are known, right?
Still finding out how the whole process is going to unfold.
As I say, when is the commander-in-chief going to act like one?
Tens of thousands of Americans fighting a war in Afghanistan that Obama himself said is crucial.
And he's out campaigning, attending dinners and throwing ritzy parties at the White House.
Savannah Guthrie then had this exchange, a little exchange with Obama.
Could you envision, however, announcing a strategy before the runoff is determined?
I think it is entirely possible that we have a strategy formulated before a runoff is determined.
We may not announce it.
It doesn't matter.
There are American husbands, daughters, sons, wives who are dying, who are putting their lives on the line, and he's worried about a runoff election.
And well, we may not announce whatever strategy may not announce.
Why not announce it?
He can't even say that we're going to win.
He can't even say we're going to lead these people to victory.
He can't even say that.
And meanwhile, these stenographers sit there and they marvel, oh, at the brilliance of Obama.
Now, I'm a little long here, but you've got to hear this since we're on the roll.
This is Savannah Guthrie.
She asked him how it is reflected in his own household.
How, I don't know, whatever is reflected, but the answer's self-explanatory here.
Yes, six years ago, though, we were having a lot of negotiations because Michelle was trying to figure out: okay, if the kids get sick, why is it that she's the one who has to take time off of her job to go pick them up from school as opposed to me?
What I've tried to do was to learn to be thoughtful enough and introspective enough that I wasn't always having to be told that things were unfair.
And that once in a while I'd actually voluntarily say, you know what, let me relieve this burden on you.
There's no doubt that our family, like a lot of families out there, were ones in which the men are still a little obtuse about this stuff.
Now, I have no idea what the subject is here.
I have no idea what she asked him.
I don't know what they were talking about, but it's pretty self-explanatory.
But did you hear that answer?
He was in negotiations with his wife over who would pick up the kids and take them to the hospital or whatever they got sick, pick them up to school.
And men are very obtuse about this.
No wonder the guy's talking about a mop.
Guys, they chickified.
It's obvious to me.
Coming up in the next hour, I mentioned the House of Representatives has, how to say this, they have reformulated the House version of healthcare and its $871 billion price tag.
And because they realize they need to do something with it, that bill is the focal point of opposition.
And they claim in their revamp version here that the way they've redone the bill will keep costs low.
They will keep costs low.
Now, Ed Morrissey writes about this at Hot Air, the Hot Air blog.
And I want to get into what he says, and we'll do it in the next hour, because there's a profound difference between cost and price.
And these Democrats are trying to make people think that costs of something are the price.
And they're two different things entirely.
And it's this, the last time we did wage and price controls was in the 70s with Nixon.
I remember was in Pittsburgh, and inflation was at 3%.
We had an oil crisis going on.
And of course, management always loves wage and price controls.
Well, I can't give you a raise.
The federal government says I can't give you a raise.
But prices, there's no way to control prices.
Here, I'll just give you one example of how price controls fail.
And all you have to do, if you were alive back then, ask yourself, did the price of things freeze?
And you wanted to report whoever was violating this to some government authority because the price of your wage was frozen, but the prices weren't.
So let's use a butcher as an example.
You go into the grocery store, the butcher counter, and you want to buy a cut of meat, and the price on that particular cut of meat is frozen, so they can't raise it legally.
All they do is create a new cut, like the Cinneribi Red Eye.
Just call it something new.
It's exempt from the price.
Price it whatever they want and make up whatever it is they can't make because the price and the other stuff is frozen.
It's happened all the time.
Prices just constantly skyrocketed during wage and price controls.
But the whole concept that the House now is going to keep costs down, which is fooling everybody into thinking that the price now for health care is going to get cheaper.
The two are unrelated.
One glaring example.
Have you ever heard of a loss leader?
The Larry King show was a loss leader for the then Mutual Network.
The Larry King show was on at midnight to six.
It made no money.
They were willing to lose money on it because they told affiliates at Carrie, you have to carry our newscast during the day and our commercials, which is where they made their money.
So the costs of the Larry King show were sky high compared to the price they were able to sell advertising on it, which was zero.
So that's just, that's one of the, they're loss leaders throughout business where people sell something for a price much less than what the product costs.
And sometimes they have to do that because of market pressure.
Other times they do it to create loss leaders and get business elsewhere in their organization.
Anyway, all that coming up.
Sit tight.
Now look at this.
The American Cancer Society is now saying that the benefits of detecting many cancers, especially breast and prostate cancers, have been overstated.
In other words, early testing, the American Cancer Society says, it's not really worth all that much.
We've kind of overstated it.
▲
Export Selection