All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 6, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:39
November 6, 2009, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, America's anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman living in the shadows but briefly out for three hours.
Three hours sitting in for Rush.
A great honor to be here.
Rush will be back Monday.
It is Open Line Friday.
That means that you get to talk about anything you want to talk about.
Don't be confined by the peculiar obsessions of the host.
Take the show in any direction you want to go in.
1-800-282-2882.
We've been talking about the economy.
We've touched on healthcare and we've been following the latest developments in the shooting at the mass murder at Fort Hood committed by Major Hassan who is still alive.
There's another shooting going on at the moment in Florida.
A man it turns out called Jason Rodriguez who has gone into his office building and been shooting things up in there.
And it is interesting to me the live coverage here.
It's almost as if in relief the media have turned to a genuine lone wacko as it appears without any of the complicating factors that the story of Major Hassan has.
Let me just read a story that I think is typical of the way the Major Hassan thing is covered at Fort Hood.
This is an Associated Press story.
Details emerge about Fort Hood's suspect background.
This is the latest story from the Associated Press.
Washington.
His name appears on radical internet postings.
A fellow officer says he fought his deployment to Iraq and argued with soldiers who supported U.S. wars.
He required counseling as a medical student because of problems with patients.
There are many unknowns about Nidal Malik Hassan, the man authorities say is responsible for the worst mass killing on a U.S. military base.
Most of all, his motive.
Those are the first two paragraphs of the story.
What's missing from that?
His name appears, here's the first sentence.
Let's decode this, because you can't follow the mass media now without knowing the code language they write it in.
Quote, his name appears on radical internet postings.
What word is missing there?
They're not, what do you mean, radical?
Are these like white supremacist websites?
What do you mean radical?
Radical doesn't mean anything in this context.
They were radical Islamic internet postings, but that word doesn't appear anywhere.
A fellow officer says he fought his deployment to Iraq and argued with soldiers who supported U.S. wars.
He argued with soldiers who supported U.S. wars currently going on in Muslim countries, and he supported the right of those Muslims to kill the U.S. aggressor, as he saw it.
So again, Muslim, the word Muslim doesn't appear in the second sentence.
Quote, he required counseling as a medical student because of problems with patients, unquote.
What do they mean by problems with patients?
What they mean is that he had to be disciplined because as a medical student, he was trying to convert patients, his patients, to Islam.
But again, the M-word, Muslim, doesn't appear in any of that in the introduction.
You have to read all the way down in this Associated Press story.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 paragraphs before you get the first mention of the M word.
In an interview with the Washington Post, Hassan's aunt, Noel Hassan of Falls Church, Virginia, said he had been harassed about being a Muslim in the years after the September 11th, 2001 terror attacks.
That's the first mention of the word Muslim in this story.
11 paragraphs in, and it's not to do with any of the motivation for what he did, For the immense body count he managed to rack up at Fort Hood yesterday.
It's brought up only to certify him as a member of a bona fide evictim class who was the victim of American racism or whatever it is.
The media need to ask themselves a question here, whether they're actually destroying the only value they have, which is trust, which is trust.
If it gets too obvious that you're just dissembling and avoiding and tiptoeing around the subject matter, why should anybody waste time reading you?
If you can't use radical Islamic in the first sentence, if you can only say radical, if you can't say that this guy was trying to convert his patients to Islam as a medical student, you can only make vague allusions to problems with patients.
Why should anybody read you?
They're wasting their time.
They're going to have to Google and find out.
The story is like, it's now like reading Pravda in the bad old days.
You have to know what's between the lines.
And in this story, everything is between the lines.
That's a classic story, a classic way this thing's been reported, and is in striking contrast to the relatively straightforward way that the current shootout in Florida is being reported.
Let's go to Larry from Sykesville, Maryland.
Larry, you're live on Open Line Friday, 1-800-282-2882.
You can talk about anything you want to talk about, any subject at all.
Just lay it on me.
You're on the Rush Limbo show.
Hello, Mark.
Big fan.
You had said earlier that you would like to speak to someone who had a comment about the Uyghurs.
Oh, right.
And I actually met four of them.
You've met four Uyghurs?
Four Uyghurs.
My family and I were in Bermuda in June walking down the street, and I had seen a photograph of them in the Wall Street Journal and recognized the four of them standing on the corner.
Are you guys the Uyghurs?
And Abdul, the leader, very happily said yes.
And he looked happy that I'd recognize him.
He says, but we call ourselves Ugers, not Uyghurs.
So you went up and said, are you the Uyghurs?
And he said, no, we the Uyghurs.
Yes, Ugers.
Right.
I saw, that's an Abbott and Costello routine in 1943.
I saw that movie.
Well, anyway, they were four very nice guys.
Only two of them spoke English.
They had been in Guantanamo for four years.
Right.
I'm sorry, for seven years.
Right.
And made a deal.
Obama made a deal to send them to Bermuda.
I'll take that deal, and so would most of us.
Well, the interesting part was the Bermudians don't mind them so much, but they mind the deal because, as it turned out, as you know very well, the Queen's in charge, and she appoints a governor, and then they elect the Premier.
The Premier cut the deal, and the Queen and the Governor didn't know about it until they read about it in the paper.
Yeah, and this is actually, this is a slightly abstruse constitutional point.
But what you mean is that Bermuda is not a sovereign jurisdiction.
It's a crown colony.
So it has no responsibility for external affairs, what they call privileged relations between states, are the responsibility of London.
And essentially what Obama did here is he goes behind the back, and they're all mad about this in London.
He does a deal with the local guy in Bermuda.
This is the equivalent, say, of Hugo Chavez doing a deal with Guam, say, or St. Thomas to dump a lot of unsavory Venezuelans on St. Thomas.
It's not a, but Bermuda should not have been negotiating with Washington over this.
But Obama doesn't care.
He figures Gordon Brown is still too busy trying to get those defective DVDs of great American movies of his to work.
So he was he cared about that.
But were they pleasant, these Uyghurs?
Extremely pleasant.
Had them a picture taken with them.
My grandson was with me.
He wouldn't go over to them.
Evidently, they scared him.
Very nice guys, but the Bermudians are not happy about it.
Wait a minute, these are like Uyghurs from Gitmo, and they're basically now, did they agree to have the...
You didn't have to pay them to take the photograph or anything, did you?
No, sir.
Wow, that's amazing.
Well, how, by the way, Bermuda doesn't exactly have a low standard of living.
How are they getting by out there?
Well, they're living in a very nice beachfront home, and my latest understanding is that they're going to open a restaurant.
No, no, wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
Who do you think has paid for this beachfront home that the Uyghurs from Gitmo are living in?
Well, that's what the Bermudians are wondering because when Obama made the deal with Palau, he sent 13 of them there.
He paid like $2 million apiece.
$2 million a Uyghur.
$2 million a Uyghur.
And there's no mention of money going to Bermuda, so the Bermudians are wondering if Premier Brown got any.
Right.
So effective.
But basically, whoever whoever's got it, whoever's sitting on this money, whether whether it's the colonial government in Bermuda or the imperial government in London, you, you, Larry of Sykesville, Maryland.
and I and every other U.S. taxpayer has essentially put up the money for these Uyghurs to live in Bermuda.
We believe so, but there's one thing that should be mentioned that the Bermudians are afraid of.
It's a very open country, and the Chinese are the reason they're in Bermuda rather than China is because if they get sent back to China, they'll be killed.
The Bermudians seem to be afraid that the Chinese are going to try to take them out, and Bermudians would be in the way.
Oh, that is that gets better than ever.
A Chinese assault on Bermuda.
I can't wait to see the Obama press conference when the powder gang goes up.
This is not the Politburo I knew.
That will be.
Thank you for that Uyghur update, Larry.
From Sykesville, Maryland, he met the four Uyghurs sprung from Gitmo.
They're living in a nice beach property that you are paying for.
I think that's nice.
So when Obama talks about all the jobs that have been saved or created, bear this in mind.
Those Uyghurs might have had to go out and work for a living.
But instead of creating four jobs for them to do every Monday morning, work at eight hours a day, he's instead put them up in a nice beachfront property at your expense.
That's great to know.
Thank you very much for that call, a Uyghur update.
This is part, I suppose, of the Obama worldview.
There's an element of humbug about this, that he decided he's going to close Gitmo.
Can't find a way to close Gitmo.
By the way, another interesting point is that there's some 200 people left at Gitmo, none of whom want to be transferred to the Supermax prison in Colorado.
Because if you're given a choice between living in a beautiful, actually a beautiful setting at Guantanamo Bay, I went down there a couple of years ago.
The cells are very light and airy and cool.
You've got the balmy Caribbean breezes.
And suddenly they say, hey, great news.
The progressive left has taken up your cause.
The Democratic Party and the European media and the whole global community is opposed to what's going on at Gitmo.
So we're taking you out of this beautiful Caribbean setting where you can lull yourself to sleep each night as balmy breezes dance under the light of the Caribbean moon.
You can forget about that.
We're transferring you to the Supermax jail in Colorado.
That's great news, isn't it?
All these Gitmo residents are up in arms about this and don't want to be transferred away from Gitmo and are objecting most strongly.
That's an interesting lesson, by the way, what happens when the left Whig take up your cause.
When liberals take up your cause, it doesn't always end happily.
And if you're as any DTD transferred from Guantanamo Bay to the Superbax prison in Colorado, we'll soon, of course, to reflect.
Mark Stein on Open Line Friday, sitting in for Rush Limbaugh, 1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein, in for Rush on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Open Line Friday, 1-800-282-2882.
You get to talk about anything you want to talk about.
You can take the program in any direction.
If you've got any Uyghur anecdotes like Larry had, if you've met Uyghurs in Bermuda or elsewhere, love to hear from you.
1-800-282-2882.
It's a big news day Friday.
We may be getting this healthcare thing rammed through this weekend in some form or other if Nancy Pelosi thinks she can do it.
We're also following the developments at Fort Hood and the continuing coverage of Major Hassan.
In fact, the media coverage, in fact, is a story.
The media airbrushing is, in fact, a story in itself.
And we've been talking about the new 10.2% unemployment rate.
Do you know, it was very strange to me.
I don't like to do a lot of this, but I did see President Obama's initial reaction to this yesterday.
And there are some things I try to be relatively non-partisan about, and this is one of them.
You look at what Michael Moore did, making the most of the My Pet Goat incident when George W. Bush was in that grade school in Florida and he was informed about the 9-11 thing.
And he nodded, and then he went back and he spent the next two minutes finishing my pet goat for the kids so he didn't disturb them.
And then he left and dealt with what was happening that day.
And Michael Moore and the rest of the left mocked him mercilessly for that.
Osama bin Laden, evidently, they got Michael Moore's film to him.
And Osama bin Laden even made in one of his alleged statements.
I don't know whether it was made by him or whether it was assembled by outtakes after the poor guy expired from his defective kidney.
They don't have a great health service in Waziristan, but we're going for the Waziristani model here.
But he was doing his My Pet Goat jokes out in the caves of Waziristan in whatever, I think it was just before the 2004 election.
He issued this statement advising people that states that voted for John Kerry would have no quarrel with America.
And he did my pet goat jokes in that.
I don't want to do the my pet goat thing here, but there was something extremely odd about Obama coming out and doing two minutes of schmoozing and shout-outs, as he called it.
He called it a shout-out to some guy in the audience at this speech.
It was a Department of the Interior thing, before he then turned to the events at Fort Hood.
It seems strange to me.
And one of the bizarre aspects of President Obama's public conduct for a man who is supposed to be such a great orator is he doesn't seem to have any sense of proportion or sense of the moment when things like this happen.
There was a kind of tinny hollow feel to what the president was doing at that press conference.
It just sort of rang strange.
But when it comes to his priorities, of course, he is highly motivated.
He's not like Bill Clinton.
He's not someone content to enjoy the perks of office and just tilt here and tilt there according to the political winds.
He has a transformative domestic agenda.
And we saw on Tuesday's election results that people are already beginning to get unnerved by that.
And the more that so-called health care reform and climate change reform and all the rest of it are associated with unsustainable, unaffordable government spending, the more you will see election results such as we saw on Tuesday.
So Obama has a choice here.
He can either opt for the Clintonian triangulation deal or he can say, to hell with this, we're going to ram it through.
And he's going to make a, it looks like he's going to make an attempt this weekend to ram this thing through.
Now, people talk about the so-called blue dog Democrats.
They talk about 80 Democrats in the House, maybe 20 Democrats in the Senate who are potentially vulnerable in the 2010 election and beyond that.
But you think about it from his point of view, maybe it's worth leaning on some of those House Dems to go along with this thing anyway.
What's the worst that can happen?
You lose your seat.
Maybe he'll find you an ambassadorship somewhere.
Why wouldn't that be a risk worth taking?
And I think that is the interesting question.
Obama is, to a certain extent, still unknown.
People are still guessing at him.
If you listen to the so-called moderate conservatives, the moderate Republicans like David Brooks in the New York Times, they'll still tell you, oh, he's still this post-partisan centrist figure.
He's just in there somewhere.
He just made the mistake of letting Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid run away with everything.
The reality is that when you look at what his priorities are, the bedrock issues, the bedrock issues, then a leftist transformational domestic president, if he's looking at those election results in the cold light of Wednesday morning, then he's going to have to hurry up and ram this stuff through before the full implications of it have been thought out.
So don't let up your card if you've been at the town halls and the tea parties and all the other things.
You still need to be there.
You still need to let your representatives know that you're not going to, that you're mad as hell about this stuff and you're not going to have your children's and grandchildren's future beggared for what is essentially an experiment in large-scale social engineering that actually even the Europeans have never attempted on the scale of 300 million people before.
So this is not a moment to let down your guard.
You can be heartened by Tuesday's election results and there are certainly good things, good aspects of them that are worth bearing in mind.
But the pressure has to be kept up because as we see, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama and Harry Reid are still determined to ram a lot of this stuff down the throats of the American people, no matter if, according to some polls, 70% of the people say they don't want it.
Nurse Pelosi knows what's good for us and she's going to give it to us whether we want it or not.
1-800-282-2882 Mark Stein in for Rush on Open Line Friday.
More straight ahead.
Yes, Rush will be back Monday.
By the way, if you go to rushlimbaugh.com, you can see all of Rush's interview with Chris Wallace from Fox News Sunday.
It was a ratings bonanza.
It got Fox News Sunday its highest ratings of the year.
And it's posted up there at rushlimbaugh.com if you need your rush fix and can't wait till Monday.
By the way, speaking of Monday, it may be a long weekend for Californians.
On Sunday, Cash Strapped California, this is from the LA Times, Cash Strapped California will dig deeper into the pocketbooks of wage earners, holding back 10% more than it already does in state income taxes, just as the biggest shopping season of the year kicks into gear.
Technically, it's not a tax increase.
Hey, that's great news, isn't it?
They're just taking 10% more of your money than they did the previous week.
But don't worry, it's not a tax increase.
And they say it's more like an interest-free loan.
You'll be repaid any of this extra money they're taking from you in April when your tax return, assuming they've still got it, of course, who knows what could happen by April.
The whole thing might have evaporated into thin air.
Is that even legal?
That suddenly the state can just, you've got your Christmas planning.
You're thinking, well, I'll need so much for the turkey.
I'll need so much for grandma's present.
I've got to put aside this for the tree.
And suddenly you find that the state of California has just declared that it's taking 10% extra out of your paycheck every week.
But don't worry, it's not technically a tax increase.
It's just that you have to give more money to the government, but it's not technically a tax increase.
There are times when it doesn't pay to worry about technicalities.
And when the government is just taking 10% more of your money because it's decided to, then it doesn't matter what they call it.
They can call it naked confiscation, and apparently they can get away with it in California.
Let us go to Eric in Fairfax, Virginia.
Eric, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
It is great to have you with us on Open Line Friday.
Yes, sir.
It's a pleasure, Mark.
I just wanted to discuss about the interview with Fox News and Susan Collins, the senator from Maine.
Ah, yes, one of the lovely ladies from Maine.
And what was she?
She's one of these reach across the aisle types.
What was she being interviewed on Fox about?
Well, I think you'll be impressed.
She tried to get the czars to be accountable, but she was stopped by both Congress and the White House.
Now, these are the czars, these are this legion of people outnumbering, in fact, the original czars in the House of Romatov.
Now, Obama has more czars than Imperial Russia had in its entire history.
And these are these people that he has appointed in various areas that are completely unaccountable to the American people's representatives in Congress.
Yes, and she was saying that she just really felt this was wrong.
And I have to agree with her.
And wouldn't you say that they are usurping the Constitution by not making them accountable?
Yes, and I think that's the idea, that you want to do an end run around accountability.
If you're in Obama's situation, for example, you take Van Jones, who was his green job czar.
Now, if he had appointed Van Jones to a cabinet position, Van Jones would have had to go through Senate confirmation hearings, and you can imagine the kind of things that might have come up.
He was a truther.
He's a 9-11 truther.
That's to say, he believes that the United States government knew that 9-11 was going to happen, but either helped allowed it to happen, or worse, helped facilitate it.
And he's been a 9-11 truther basically since September the 12th, 2001.
That would have come up in normal Senate confirmation hearings.
But if you just make somebody your green job czar, you don't have to go through any of that.
It's a way of doing an end run, not just around the Constitution, but against basic democratic accountability.
Yeah, it just really reveals how this whole administration and Congress are behaving with the health care and everything else.
It's just another But you know, that in a sense, that is what the Democrat, this is why I don't put a lot of stock in the idea of blue dog Democrats defecting here and defecting there and all the rest of it.
Because the Democrats are very disciplined about power because they're agreed on that.
They're agreed on one basic core element, that whatever your particular bag happens to be, whether it's the environment or healthcare or unions or whatever, if you're a Democrat, the best way to advance your agenda is through more government and more government power.
And so they think seriously about power.
They think seriously about how you wield power, about how you get power.
Now, you compare it to the Bush administration.
The Bush administration, in the wake of September 11th, had to make some basic changes to how it did, to how certain things were done.
We had a ton of dysfunctional agencies.
They moved the Immigration Service into Homeland Security and all the rest of it.
they did all that legitimately.
They didn't do, Bush could have appointed all kinds of czars, but on the whole, he didn't.
And And if he had done, the Washington Post and the New York Times would have been screaming at him that he was turning this country into a fascist police state.
They did that anyway.
They did that just over the so-called library books thing, that Bush and Cheney were looking at what library books you were reading.
There's no evidence they ever did that.
If they had looked at what Major Hassan, what he was reading while he was at Walter Reed, it might have actually been hugely beneficial.
But in fact, this whole thing, oh, Bush and Cheney, they're watching what library books you read.
The whole thing was that Bush was running a, had destroyed, shredded the Constitution, run a police state.
Now we have a guy governing by czars, governing by czars, and the media are entirely relaxed about it.
Because these are nice czars.
They're not like those Russian czars.
These are good czars.
These are compassionate.
We've got compassionate czarism.
Yeah, they are.
HR makes a good point.
There are czars.
They're czars on the side of the angels.
And so now we are, as I said earlier, I was here last time, we're dancing with the czars.
Is there no end to this?
In the end, we've got effectively what they call in the British system a shadow cabinet.
There are cabinet officials here, but they don't really mean anything.
They go to conferences like Hillary Clinton.
I don't know, where's Hillary today?
She'll be in the capital of Chad and having a top-level meeting.
She'll be having a top-level meeting with the deputy trade minister of Chad.
Meanwhile, all anything that matters is being done by an Obama czar.
He's got czars for Afghanistan.
He's got czars for the Middle East.
He's got Tsars for all the key foreign policy areas.
And that doesn't leave a lot for Secretary of State Clinton, nominal Secretary of State Clinton to do.
So she's in Chad having a top-level meeting.
And if she's lucky, they'll then take her to a high school where she can terrify some poor kid when he asks if Bill is dating again.
So it's a wonderful life to be Secretary of State.
You think about this poor woman.
This poor woman, up till whatever it was, a little over a year ago, thought she was going to be the president of the United States.
She thought she was going to be going to the A-list banquets with the presidents and the kings and queens and prime ministers.
And now, the poor woman is in Chad meeting with the Deputy Trade Minister.
And don't bother calling up and say, oh, she's not in Chad.
She's in Senegal.
I don't care.
She's not where she wants to be.
She's in Tonga.
Yeah, she's in Tonga Having lunch with the king of Tonga.
Actually, that would be one of the better deals.
If I was a Uyghur, I'd like to be Uyghurs in Tonga, I could go with.
And they're both cricket terms, I think.
Anyway, Australia bowled two Tongans in the first three Uyghurs at Lords yesterday.
Let us go quickly to Robert in, how do you say that, Robert?
Munising, Michigan?
Munising, yes, sir.
Munising.
Munising.
Well, what do you, it sounds like musing.
What munisings do you have to share with us on the show today?
Well, I just worry about this whole cap and trade deal.
It looks to me like it's going to end up costing us money going into the hands of some primitive people in some other country digging with a shovel and planting trees.
The money's coming straight out of our pocket.
It don't look like it.
I don't know.
No, no, no, no, no.
The money isn't going to go to primitive people to plant trees in some third world country.
They're going to be deforesting at their usual rate.
The money will be going to some Al Gore carbon offset construction that will be paying money.
However, it works this way.
You say, Tyke, okay, I'm allowed to fly first class because I'm buying a certain number of offsets.
So a jihadist in a cave in Waziristan has agreed not to use his cell phone.
And that way, that's the way the whole thing works.
No money actually goes to the third world countries in the end.
It will go to a few dictators here or there.
But actually, what it is, is it's a massive transfer.
Certainly, this Copenhagen thing is, is to this embryo world agency that will regulate every aspect of your life.
And by the time they've taken the money they need to run that and have the bureaucrats flying here or there to decide whether your toilet tank is small enough, whether you're using the two-ply toilet paper from Canada, as we discussed a couple of weeks ago on the show.
By the time they've been through all that, there isn't going to be a lot of money left over to help poor little people in third world countries.
So that's not what it's about.
And it's going to cost, obviously, jobs here, Robert.
And certainly in somewhere like Michigan, which is like the prototype scheme for where America's economy is heading, it's not going to do anything to restore industry in Michigan, Robert.
Think of some better way to reduce carbon is my question to you.
We know we got to get, well, they came to church and tell us it has to get back down to 350 parts per million, and it's up at around 400 or something like that.
And if it gets up too high, then the big trouble starts and the ice is melting and all that.
So how do we get the carbon back down?
Well, look, the reality about that is that we do not know what portion of climate change is affected by man's behavior.
If you look at it historically across the millennia, when you go back to the Little Ice Age, when you go back to the medieval warm period, the climate has fluctuated far more dramatically than it has in the last century.
Now, if you take the idea that the one degree increase across the last century, which has basically stopped in the last 10 years, by the way, we're now in a cooling trend.
If you say, is that worth destroying the global economy over?
No, I don't think so.
Because if there is a solution to this and it is something that man can achieve, then it will be done by man's natural innovation.
It will be done by somebody inventing something somewhere in a first world economy.
So you're not going to make anything better by destroying first world economies, especially not when you say that China and India can go on polluting all the hell they want and it doesn't make any difference anyway.
This whole thing, this whole thing is not about climate.
Again, this gets back to what we were saying earlier.
It's about control.
It's about control.
And the environment is the perfect catch-all to enable government to regulate any aspect of your life.
They want to tax bovine flatulence in Europe.
Can you imagine that?
Can you imagine the worst king, the worst medieval king in the first millennium saying, oh, here's a great idea.
We're going to tax bovine flatulence so that the peasant, Jack and the beanstalk, Jack, with his cow, we're going to tell Jack he's got to pay a huge almighty tax on the cow because of the cow's flatulence.
The courtiers would have said, well, I don't think the peasants are going to buy that, Your Majesty.
I don't think the peasants are going to buy that.
But you do it in the name of the environment.
You do it in the name of the environment, and you can get away with it.
And the idea that this will make any difference to the particles of carbon in the atmosphere is preposterous.
So that's not, even if that is a problem, that's not the way to solve it.
Lots more straight ahead.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein in for Rush on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Mark Stein, InforRush on the EIB Network.
Let's quickly take a call from Bob in Greenville, South Carolina.
Bob, thanks for waiting.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
No problem.
Mark, I recently finished rereading a book by Pat Buchanan, The Death of the West.
And he's got chapter four or five in there that talks about four who made a revolution.
And it refers to people like Gramsci and Adorno and a few other names that I can't remember right now.
Essentially, he said that the Marxists, Pat Buchanan said that the Marxists realized that they couldn't beat us with bullets.
We were too powerful.
There was too much inertia that they would have to work against to beat us that way.
So they determined that they would take a long, slow trek through all of our institutions, our schools, our colleges, our teachers.
Right, and when you look at people like William Ayers, they figured it out.
There's no point trying to blow up military bases.
No point trying to, in a country like America, there's no point trying to blow up the buildings.
You get inside the building and hollow it out from within.
Exactly.
And that's what I want to ask you about.
As a retired school principal from New York, now living in South Carolina, I have a bit of perspective.
I've been able to read for 10 years since I've been retired, and I've really looked at a lot of these issues.
What I want to ask you is, since this took a really long time to happen, and we have so many people that have allegiance to the left in our universities, and let's face this, the labor unions are elite left, which makes most teachers a little bit more sensitive to their needs, a lot more sensitive to the needs of the left and so on.
Do you think that we're going to be able to, you know, in a quick way, I don't think it's going to happen.
I don't.
I don't think you can roll this back in a quick way, Bob.
And I think actually if socialist healthcare passes, it becomes all but impossible to roll it back because you fundamentally deform the relationship between the citizen and the state.
And if you look at what has happened in Canada and in Europe, then it becomes extremely difficult.
But the American people are the last great self-reliant citizens in the Western world.
They're not like Europeans, and they will push this back.
More to come, Mark Stein in for Rush.
I gotta run the Border Patrol are breaking down the door.
Have a great weekend.
Watch what happens on healthcare.
If you're in California, enjoy that great extra 10% withholding from the state that kicks in on Sunday.
Bob wanted to know whether we could roll it back.
It would be a lot easier to stop it happening in the first place.
▲
Export Selection