All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 1, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:38
December 1, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back, El Rushbo, meeting and surpassing and redefining a lot of things.
Greatness, success, hip, while meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day here on the one and only EIB network.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882, the email address El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
Look, the truth is, folks, most of us Most of us know that the two parties are not the same.
We're hearing a lot from the same people or thinking that surrounded the Ross Perot effort or the Reform Party effort more generally.
It seems that some people are trying to tap into this group and then claim it represents most conservatives, libertarians, Republicans, when in fact it doesn't.
We've always had populist movements in this country on the left and the right.
But we are not populists.
We're constitutionalists.
We are conservatives.
And when a majority of us are in control of the Republican Party, the Republican Party wins.
But it's not going to win if there's a third party.
Loneliness is like a disease, says Rob Stein from the Washington Post.
One of his editors here is a woman.
Well, you know, the chickification of the news, loneliness is like a disease, and what's worse, it's contagious.
Now, here again, you know, I run into problems here because I don't feel things.
I think them.
I mean, I have feelings, but I don't arrive at intellectual conclusions by virtue of thoughts.
So, I have a very well-developed sense of logic, which threatens many people, and of common sense, which also threatens people.
And I just don't understand how what is loneliness.
Would somebody tell me on my staff?
Give me your one word.
Loneliness is you feel alone.
You want people around you.
But when you're lonely, being lonely requires you to be by yourself, right?
So I don't know how you can spread anything when you're by yourself.
Unless maybe you can make your dog lonely, but I've never seen it happen.
Or your cat lonely, but I've never seen it happen.
So the whole story seems to be a false premise.
But somebody went out there and studied it.
Although it may sound counterintuitive, loneliness can spread from one person to another, according to research being released today that underscores the power of one's emotions to affect friends, family, and neighbors.
A federally funded analysis of data collected from more than 4,000 people over 10 years found that lonely people increase the chances that someone they know will start to feel alone and that the solitary feeling can spread one more degree of separation, causing a friend of a friend or even the sibling of a friend to feel desolate.
Loneliness can be transmitted, said John Cachapo, a University of Chicago shrink psychologist who led the study being published in the December issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Loneliness is not just the property of an individual.
It can be transmitted across people, even people you don't have direct contact with.
It's not just counterintuitive.
It's senseless.
It is illogical.
71% are angry at the federal government, according to Rasmussen, up five points since September.
71% of voters nationwide say they are at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government.
And that figure includes 46% who are very angry.
Yeah, makes sense, doesn't it?
We all be mad.
Everybody should be angry about what's happening.
The surprising thing to me in this poll is that there are 10% of the people who are totally happy.
Actually, it's not surprising.
It's actually good.
It tells you what the percentage of liberals is and leftist radicals.
10%.
Audio soundbites.
Back to Enria Mitchell, NBC News in Washington.
She interviewed National Security Council Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough, works for Obama.
He's out there setting the stage for Obama's West Point speech tonight by trashing Bush and Cheney.
She said, Jack Murtha is just back from Afghanistan, and he says, I'm still very nervous about this whole thing.
If you had 10 years, it might work.
If you had five years, you could make a difference.
But you don't have that long.
He also mentioned to Politico, how do we define victory?
How can you make it work?
And how do you define victory at the White House?
The bottom line is how we define good enough here is to make sure that there's not a safe haven for Al-Qaeda to go back to and use to plot against our interests, our allies, and even against the homeland here in the United States.
So we're very focused on exactly that.
What kind of leaders won't define victory?
We're kind of focused, aren't we?
Design good enough here to make sure that there's not a safe haven for Al-Qaeda to go to.
That's what's good enough.
There's a story I have here, the Wall Street Journal combined with another story.
The number of private sector people who are in the Obama cabinet is lower than any administration in decades.
It's just striking.
And this guy's obviously one of these eggheads from the Ivy.
Here it is.
Here it is.
And the Wall Street Journal has a companion story to it here.
White House business leaders split on how to create jobs.
By the way, the big jobs summit is coming up on Thursday.
The Obama administration, U.S. business leaders, will meet at the White House this week.
Now, remember, Obama said this is not about job creation.
The jobs summit is not about job creation.
Afghanistan is not about victory.
Anyway, business leaders, the Obama administration are going to meet at the White House this week to ponder ways to boost employment.
Their ideas, though, don't overlap very much.
Businesses of all sizes are brimming with proposals they say would spur economic growth.
The most commonly voiced are tax cuts and boosting access to credit.
The White House wants to discuss job growth in the clean tech sector and shifting some stimulus spending to infrastructure projects, which it was, I thought that was the original purpose.
Infrastructure project.
I thought that's what it was all about.
See, the stimulus is just a slush fund, which I'm going to put in perspective here in just a second for you.
TARP is just a slush fund, and this is how they intend to get past any poll problems on Election Day for Democrats.
So we got a 10.2% unemployment rate, the worst since 1982.
It's emerging as the administration's biggest domestic challenge, a threat to the weak economic recovery, and Democrats hold on Congress.
But many of the nostrums floated by business would increase spending or reduce tax receipts, unpalatable moves for the White House as the nation's huge deficit becomes a political liability.
One way you could close the deficit or reduce it is to lower taxes.
That happens to work every time it's tried.
At any rate, there's a chart here from J.P. Morgan Research examines the private, private, private, prior, private sector experience of cabinet officials since 1900 that one might expect a president to turn to in seeking advice about helping the economy.
It includes secretaries of state, commerce, treasury, agriculture, interior, labor, transportation, energy, housing, urban development, and excludes Postmaster General, Navy, War, Health, Education, Welfare, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security.
432 cabinet members in all.
The percentage of cabinet appointments in the Obama administration who have private sector experience is 8%.
Under George W. Bush, it was 55%.
Under Clinton, about 37%.
Under George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, rather, 43, it was 58%.
Under George H.W. Bush, about 52%.
Under Reagan, 58%.
Eisenhower, 59%.
Kennedy, about 30%.
LBJ, about 46%.
Nixon, 53%.
Carter, about 30%.
Obama, 8%.
When you consider that public sector employment has ranged since the 1950s at between 15% and 19% of the population, that make up of the current cabinet, over 90% of its prior experience in the public sector, is remarkable.
Only 8% of the 432 cabinet members in the Obama administration have any kind of private sector experience.
So this is what I meant earlier when I said the Democrat Party has found its way and they're using it.
They're on their way.
This is a bunch of people who have had disdain for the private sector.
They blame it for all of the ills and the immorality and the discrimination and the inequality and the unfairness.
And they look at themselves as the only people who can bring fairness, equality, non-discrimination, and all of that because they know better.
They're smart people.
They're the good people.
They know much better than we do.
And we're seeing what happens when you have people who have no respect for, no love for, and no experience in the private sector.
We'll be right back.
I have been looking for a way, ladies and gentlemen.
By the way, just watching the MSNBC, Tiger Woods, is he going to have problems with his endorsements here because of this episode.
Then they ran a graphic that said he's the first athlete to earn $1 billion.
And I said, he's only got about $400 million of it.
I mean, the rest of it went to taxes and so forth.
Not that big a deal.
If I have earned a billion dollars, I would be $600 billion in cumulative taxes he's going to pay on that billion dollars if in fact he's earned it.
At any rate, I've been looking for a way, ladies and gentlemen.
Did he really say it's only got $400 million?
Yeah, I said that.
Okay, looking for ways here to illustrate and dramatize the porculus, just how much money $800 billion really is.
And of course, we're told we've got a couple hundred billion in TARP money that hasn't been spent.
So we've got basically a trillion dollar slush fund for the executive branch Obama to use.
Now, even the liberals in Congress and even some in the state-controlled media were shocked when they learned that Mary Landrew was bribed with $300 million for her yes vote on Obamacare.
But even that is chump change.
The liberals. have much, much street money to buy votes now.
And that more than anything threatens our democracy.
Look at it this way.
The stimulus that did not stimulate has enough money in it to give $1 billion, billion with a B, to every Democrat senator, every Democrat member of the House, every governor, $1 billion each and not spend half the stimulus money.
If you add tarp into it, maybe just a little over half.
Now, we hear so much about the dangers of money in politics.
I have news for you.
It's not the $5 or $10 million a lobbyist tosses around.
It's the hundreds of billions the liberals use to buy votes, to buy influence, buying Congress, buying the auto industry, buying the banking industry, and soon the healthcare industry.
The liberals are looting Fort Knox and hardly anybody seems to care.
Well, I do.
And I know you do too.
A lot of people on the left doesn't care, but the polling daily indicates that Americans are getting fed up with this.
71% are very angry.
Yeah, that was $300 million to Landrew, but she could have gotten a billion.
And there are ways for Obama to give that money to these people.
There are ways for that money to get to them under supposedly and in supposedly official ways that can be used for re-election campaigns.
This is their ace in the hole against plummeting poll numbers.
All right, to the audio soundbites.
So PBS Charlie Rose show.
Some interesting soundbites from last night.
First up, interviewed John Podesta, the former Clinton chief of staff, who now runs some liberal far-left radical think tank.
And Charlie Rose said, some say the president cannot afford to lose on this one, health care reform.
Politically, the stakes are enormous for the president.
And I think if he does lose, you know, if the Senate cannot complete action, I think there'll be tremendous disappointment, particularly amongst Democrats in his own base.
We saw that without question when President Clinton tried to get health care passed and was unable to do so.
And then the result was a disastrous election, midterm election in 1994.
And I guess I wouldn't predict exactly the same thing, but I think there'll be enormous disappointment if he can't succeed in getting health care reform done.
You know, these guys purposely misread the 94 results.
It was because Clinton tried.
It was because Clinton tried and Hillary, who was not likable, it's because they tried to take over one-sixth of the economy that they lost the election, plus some brilliant strategic rising on the Republican side in nationalizing house races.
Plus, the public finally got fed up with 40 years of scandal and corruption with the Democrats running the place.
The House banked, the House Post Office, and then, of course, there was the Rush Limbaugh factor.
So there were a lot of factors here.
But it wasn't that they didn't get it passed.
It's that they tried for it.
If they do get this passed, they are going to pay a price like they can't believe.
Now, this is funny.
These people are still trying to figure out who exactly they put in the White House.
They should stop reading and quoting each other and look at what he does.
Charlie rose last night a montage of Charlie, Jeff Zelany of the New York Times, Jake Tapper talking about President Obama.
Maureen Dow said he seemed static.
Tom Friedman has said there is no narrative that has been articulated well.
What's the overall impression?
There's a sense of weariness.
John Harris wrote in Politico, he thinks he's playing with monopoly money.
There's no question that spending is the biggest issue.
Too much Leonard Nimoy.
His intellectuality has contributed to a growing critique that decisions are detached from rock-bottom principles.
There is something to that.
President Obama lives very much in his head.
He's a pushover.
He is a patsy with foreign governments.
Is he a patsy?
Perhaps some people here might say that.
At the end of this week, we will know what about this president.
We will know if his persuasive abilities that we saw on the campaign, does his powers of persuasion still exist to bring people along?
What does he have to do to get that?
Do you believe this?
Persuasive powers?
Have you looked at the polls?
Have you guys looked at your own polls?
Persuasive powers using the military, the cadets at the West Point Military Academy as props.
What has he got to do?
These guys are wringing their hands over what each other are writing and saying.
Maureen Dowd says this.
Tom Friedman says that.
What do you think of that?
Politico says, what do you think of that?
Why don't you watch him instead of reading all your buddies here?
This reminds me of Charlie Rose and Brakaw back in 2008, October 29th.
I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.
No, I don't know how he really sees where China is.
We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy.
I don't really know.
And do we know anything about the people who are advising them?
You know, it's an interesting question.
He is principally known through his autobiography and through very aspirational speeches.
I don't know what books he's read.
What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?
There's a lot about him we don't know.
Remember that?
We just crack.
I love that.
I crack up every time.
And now they're starting to go through it again.
Well, who is this guy?
Does he still have his persuasive power?
Yeah, he lives a lot in his head.
Yeah, well, they don't wring their hands over what Maureen Dowd says or what Thomas Friedman said.
That's why they are behind the curve.
Okay, folks, lifelock time.
You're networking.
You're posting resumes at job search websites.
You're filling out countless applications.
And the more exposure you get, the better your chances of landing a job.
But more exposure means more personal information is out there, possibly increasing the risk of identity theft.
And authorities are now telling us that crooks can skim driver's license and social security numbers from the paper and digital trail left behind after the first paycheck is cashed.
The damage caused by identity theft in 2008 was $48 million.
On average, $300 to $600 is lost in a typical incident.
Nobody's going to be able to permanently stop it.
But when I see stories like this, and I keep track of them, it's not a snurdley when he sees them.
He gives me his lifelock exclamation point.
And he says he can't believe that people still don't have lifelock when he reads the stories.
Why would you risk taking chances with your money, with your time, your reputation?
You can have Life Lock for just $10 a month.
Actually, it's going to be less than $10 a month because when you mention my name, you will save an additional 10%.
800-440-4833.
And the promo code is Rush.
Whenever you see a promo code for anything, just use Rush.
I guarantee you, magic will happen.
But for Life Lock, it's 800-440-4833.
And the offer code, the promo code, is rush.
Howard Dean, the argument between capitalism and socialism is over, he says.
Breaking news from the State Control Associated Press.
Britain's University of East Anglia says the director of its prestigious climatic research unit is stepping down.
Pending an investigation into allegations, he overstated the case for man-made climate change.
The university says that Phil Jones will relinquish his position until the completion of an independent review into allegations that he worked to alter the way in which global temperature data were presented.
And he did.
It is, I mean, you read these emails and it's clear that, oh my gosh, if this gets out, we're screwed.
That's what all of these emails mean.
The allegations have been made after, of course, these emails got out.
And also, Michael Mann at Penn State University is being investigated by Penn State University.
Lord Moncton, who's been making speeches and urging people to get their minds right on global warming, says, prosecute these people.
He's a former Thatcher advisor.
Prosecute ClimateGate.
He's issued a devastating new paper, Christopher Monckton, revealing the sheer scale and scope of the scientific fraud behind the compilation of the world's temperature data.
Climategate caught green-handed is the title of the report.
All right, a couple of soundbites here, then we'll get to your phone calls.
Howard Dean, April the 5th, 2009, has just surfaced.
He was in Paris and said this.
Capitalism is always going to be with us because capitalism represents part of human nature.
But the other part of human nature is communitarianism.
The debate for the new generations instead of capitalism or socialism is we're going to have both and then which proportion of each should we have in order to make this all work?
So he's essentially saying here that the argument between capitalism and socialism is over.
This is what the Democrats really believe and they're content with saying this across the pond.
Can you imagine if the Democrats had said this at all during the 2008 presidential campaign?
Capitalism, it's seen its last day.
Socialism is where we're headed.
Communitarianism.
The universe of lies.
But when they think they are with friends, like Western socialist democracies like Paris or France, then they firmly believe they're with friends and they can utter what they truly believe.
What's the angst in there, Sturdle?
Communitarianism, well, you know what a commune is?
Okay, think of the original story of Thanksgiving.
It's like communism, commune, communitarianism.
It is a word.
Communitarian is somebody who believes in a commune.
And so communitarianism is the belief in a commune or communism and means organizers.
A communitarian is what Obama is.
Organizers, community organizers.
Community, commune, communism.
Mao, Marx.
It's all in there.
Now, you will remember I was in Los Angeles in, that is past summer.
I forget when it was.
But I did many, many things on that trip out there.
I was four days.
I did, oh, Family Guy did the Family Guy.
And I also taped a two-hour interview, what turned out to be two hours, with William Shatner for a show he has on the biography channel called Shatner's Raw Nerve.
It is going to be the premiere episode, the debut episode of the season in January.
A personal conversation with me.
And I think the show is a half hour.
I don't know how they're going to edit this down, but they have put out a promo.
And here is the audio from the promo that they are running.
Here's my premise, and you agree with it or not, that if you have money, you're going to get health care.
If you don't have money, it's more difficult.
If you have money, you're going to get a house on the beach.
If you don't have money, you're going to live in a bungalow somewhere.
That's right, but we're talking about health care.
What's the difference?
The difference is we're talking about health care.
No.
Not a house in a bungalow.
You're assuming that there's some morally superior aspect to health care than there is to a house in the bank.
It's not moral at all.
I want to keep the subject for the moment on the health care thing.
All right.
All right.
So now it's the health care.
I'm talking about health care.
Okay.
So talk about health care.
So isn't the premise, isn't this valid that the health care system today is breaking the country?
No, it's not.
I don't believe it is.
And if it were told that it is.
Of course we're told that, because that's a way to get us to act like sheep and go along with this.
But how do you know that?
You know, the subtotal of what I want to ask you clinically is how do you know?
It's my job.
It's my life.
It's my career.
It's my passion.
I've studied this stuff.
I want the best country we can have.
And this is not the way to get it.
We're going backwards.
That's the promo they are running from the interview with William Shatner and his show, Shatner's Raw Nerve, on the biography channel.
I enjoyed it.
Had a lot of fun.
I've been out to his house for Monday Night Football since when I've been in Los Angeles.
All right, Dan in Buffalo, New York.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Oh, Rush, how are you?
Good.
20 years.
I hope I don't drop the ball.
20-year listener with a few gaps here and there.
The topic I was talking about was, you know, there are times when you seem to really understand the left, and then there are times when there's a usage that drives me crazy.
Progressivism and liberalism are not the same thing.
Progressivism is where the really hardline lefties are.
And they use liberals.
They hide behind liberals.
The distinction has blurred over the years, but there's still way different cores of mindsets and people and outlooks and all this kind of thing.
And I've spent, I've been around the American left for 40 years, pretty steady, and I've spent a good chunk of that as part of it.
Now, as a leftist, you mean?
Yeah, you know, I mean, from like 17, it was a weird thing.
I was a good, responsible Humphrey liberal.
I got sort of bent when I heard Smyrna.
Well, I'm glad you said that.
Because in today's definitions, Hubert Humphrey would be a conservative on the state.
Oh, sure, yeah.
I tell people this stuff all the time.
But here's the thing.
You know, I was involved in a few cause types of events in the 60s.
I was in high school.
And after I heard Symington blowing off about Vietnamese being behind the Viet Cong, and this was when the Viet Cong were already no longer on a political map.
I mean, the North had taken over the war in the South.
But Stuart Symington caused, you know, gave me a really hard turn.
And then I got recruited by the SDS kids at the UB.
SDS.
Well, that's who's running the country now, essentially.
Well, I've been horrified to watch these people climbing the ladder.
There's been a process.
By the way, hang on.
For those of you in Rio Linda, SDS is the students for a Democrat society.
And just think of Abby Hoffman, Tom Hayden, the Chicago Seven, Barack Obama.
They're all from the 60s, anti-war, free speech, so-called movement.
Sorry to interrupt you there.
No, sorry.
I was hanging out with a handful of kids who are organizing rallies of tens of thousands in the street.
And the people in the street were liberals.
They didn't know the hardline politics that were going on up at the top where I was sitting.
And this is the thing.
I know what you're saying.
And you are saying that there is a distinction between the engine and the people in charge of the movement and the followers.
Yeah, well, the liberals, especially at that time, did not have the hostility to their own culture in society that the hardliners did.
And although a lot of that has been disseminated down into the liberals, there's still a different set of outlooks and a different core of people.
I will acknowledge that there are different variables involved, and there are several liberal people that call themselves Democrats too, that really are duped.
And it's a minority of leftists that despise the country.
I don't believe the whole Democrat Party despises the country.
But here's my point in saying that progressives and liberals are no different.
I'm into simplification here.
I'm not running a nuanced college course on definitions.
I'm not a George Lackoff rhymes with.
Right now, based on existing reality, we are at greater risk than we have ever been internally.
Anybody who is voting for anybody else in the Democrat Party is a liberal or a progressive.
The progressives call themselves that because liberal in politics is a dirty word.
It's a harmful term.
They come up with all other kinds of labels for themselves to hide who they really are.
But who they really are in the modern parlance, modern lexicon is liberal.
If they are in the Democrat Party and voting for Democrats, if they don't know what they're doing or if they do know what they're doing, doesn't matter.
They're causing the problem.
They are facilitating the problem.
They are all leftists.
Some may be further left than the liberals, you say, are not as far left as the progressives, but they're all voting Obama.
They're all voting for Harry Reid.
They have empowered Nancy Pelosi.
They made Howard, Harry Reid.
They empowered Howard Deed and become chairman of the Democrat Party.
And he's out there saying that capitalism is dead.
Socialism is the order of the day and so forth.
So in my attempt to communicate to people who think they're independent or who are moderate, who are not as ideological as I am, who I wish would become as ideological as I am.
The whole point of global warming debate is to say these people who have been caught engaging in fraud are the same people that are running the United States of America, proposing health care.
I don't want to get into distinctions here because it doesn't matter.
We have an ideological chasm in this country.
And the left, the far left, the Kuk Fringe, whatever, the combination of the American left is the greatest threat that we have right now.
And the only way that that threat's going to be understood is through a simple, understandable explanation of who those people are.
So that's why I say progressives, just trying to cover up the fact, they're leftists.
They're socialists.
They're Maoists.
They're Marxists.
They're all liberals, as far as I'm concerned.
They're all leftists.
I'm just trying to communicate that.
We'll be back.
Okay, Snurdley.
Look up.
Look at me.
From the Oxford English Dictionary, Communitarian, a member of a community formed to put into practice communistic or socialistic theories.
He didn't make up a word.
Howard Dean did not make up a word.
He intended to say communitarian.
It's another way of saying socialism.
Another way of saying communism.
And by the way, he's a leftist.
Now, this is hilarious.
This is from Yahoo News.
Palin book goes platinum.
Going Rogue has gone platinum.
Harper Collins said that just two weeks after publication, her memoir has sold 1 million copies.
And then get this.
Going Rogue joins a select club of millions selling political memoirs that include Barack Obama's The Audacity of Hope, Hillary Rodman Clinton's Living History, and Bill Clinton's My Lie.
Funny, it's only liberal Democrats have sold 1 million books besides Sarah Palin.
Now here we were thinking conservative books are so popular that the HuffPaul wants the New York Times to have a segregated conservative book list.
I'll guarantee you that Obama's book or Hillary Rodin's book did not sell a million books in two weeks.
Mark Levin's book has sold 1.1 million.
I got the numbers today.
Yahoo News couldn't be there.
Joins a select group of books that sold a million books.
And of course my two sold 2.5 million each.
But that was a long time ago.
People have forgotten that.
I got an email the other day from a guy who said he used Zycam and it worked.
And he didn't use it for six hours after he first detected symptoms.
I've always thought you got to use Zycam sooner than that.
But he said, he said that he went to eBay.
The outlawed gel swabs, they're going for like a price.
I can't remember what it is, but the price that they're going for at eBay is through the roof.
And I'm not an eBay kind of culture.
I thought about eBay auctioned off the Harry Reid letter, but I don't spend a lot of time at eBay looking for what's, looking at what's for sale there.
But anyway, Zycam does stop the common cold.
Well, it will arrest the severity and it will shorten the duration.
A lot of people say that it happens in 24 hours.
I'm not going to make that claim, but I will tell you if you catch it early enough and use Zycam, you should always have it with you.
There's a whole bunch of different forms, formulations, and flavors.
Just look for big orange box at any store, any kind of CVS or drugstore, it's all over the place.
And the moment that you think you're coming down with a cold, a scratchy throat or whatever, start taking Zycam.
Follow the instructions, and you see if it doesn't reduce the severity of your cold.
Let's see.
Now I've got a dilemma.
We are going to run this.
Audio soundbite number eight.
Last Wednesday, CNN the Situation Room, Suzanne Malvo talking to James Carville, ClimateGate.
Obviously, it's a political issue.
This is up to Congress.
What can President Obama do on this issue?
Well, unfortunately, I hope I'm wrong, but not very much.
And I hope that talk radio in the pollution lobby are right that global warming is not a problem and 940 peer-reviewed scientific articles are wrong.
That's about all we can hope for because right now, I have to tell you that the pollution lobby and talk radio is winning this battle.
And the will in the United States to do something about this is not what I think it should be.
But that's the reality of the political situation as I see it right now.
The pollution lobby is winning.
They've spent hundreds of millions of dollars, and they're winning.
The pollution lobby.
The pollution lobby.
James, join us in reality once in a while.
The whole thing's a fraud and a hoax, and even you have to know it now.
By the way, folks, I was wrong about something.
It's not an opinion that I was wrong about.
It's a fact, so it will not detract from my opinion on it.
But the William Shatner Show is this Sunday.
I thought it premiered in January, but it's this Sunday night, December the 6th at 10 p.m. on the biography channel.
And it's called Raw Nerve with William Shatner.
And I might actually watch it.
I don't usually watch myself on TV, but I might watch this to see how they took two hours of great TV and got rid of 90 minutes of it.
Not being critical.
Don't misunderstand.
▲
Export Selection