All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 4, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:45
December 4, 2009, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Don't forget I've got to do that OTV segment.
You'll like it.
The point is going to be good.
I know it doesn't seem like it, but it will be.
When I was doing Russia's program about nine or ten months ago, I think it would have been February, it was right around the time that he was trying to ram through the stimulus bill.
I made a point that I don't think anyone was really making at the time.
And I still don't see a lot of conservatives making it, although there were a couple of pieces in the some of the conservative magazines recently.
My point is this I believe Obama is not competent.
And that he hired staffers who were not ready to run the office of the presidency.
Everyone presumes that because Obama's a smart guy, and he is a smart guy.
I'm not going to play the liberal game of claiming that everybody that you disagree with is stupid.
Obama's not stupid.
He's a smart guy, and he's thought a lot about policy.
So And he's been to all the right schools, and he writes well and he speaks well, and he seems to have a grasp of issues.
Not denying any of that.
But I don't believe he's competent to run a presidential administration because he's never run anything.
And they made matters worse.
And the mishandling of stimulus was an example of this.
If they were going to do a stimulus, they could have done it better, and they could have gotten some positives out of it.
Now I'm not a fan of stimulus to begin with.
I'm not a Keynesian economist.
I think in the end that all you're doing is you're raising taxes in order to spend money.
You can, however, have some good come out of it, even though you're adding to the national debt of the country.
If they had done stimulus, for example, in a way that rewarded private sector corporations who expanded and moved into new areas, if they rewarded corporations that hired employees,
if they put incentives in place to allow companies that do business in the United States to take risks, whether it be telling them that they can have no interest loans guaranteed by the government or major tax breaks for hiring, whatever.
You could have had an upside to that.
Now, again, I'm not advocating that.
What I am saying is that there would have been at least some positive impact in the economy.
Instead, the president just said, well, I got to get stimulus passed, and then allowed Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to spend all the money whatever way they want.
And being liberal hacks, Pelosi and Reed did what you would expect them to do.
They rewarded all of their friends.
They took a look at everybody that they needed to help out, from the unions to the public sector unions to the social service agencies to all the mayors and all the other politicians that backed them, and just gave them a bunch of money.
That was a major mistake by Obama.
Because that $800 to $900 billion that I like to round up to a trillion, is never coming back.
It's a trillion that he can't spend on anything else.
He was not competent enough to understand that Pelosi and Reed only care about getting re-elected.
And for them, getting reelected means rewarding the traditional democratic infrastructure, making sure every version of acorn out there, and there are zillions of acorns.
There's the acorn that's called acorn, and then there's everybody else that does the same thing.
Reward all of them.
That's what they did.
This was a decision that was made because they weren't competent.
The president, given the fact that he has no executive experience and had only been in the federal government as a senator for a couple of years, needed to surround himself with a bunch of Old goats who knew what they were doing.
As despised as Vice President Cheney was, President Bush made a brilliant decision when he chose Cheney to be his vice presidential running mate.
Cheney brought nothing politically to the ticket.
He was from Wyoming.
His other home state is Texas, the same one as Bush.
Cheney's a boring guy.
He's not inspiring.
He's not somebody that go out there and really rally the troops.
He was chosen because of his competence.
Whether you agree with Dick Cheney or not, no one would argue that Dick Cheney didn't know the ins and outs of the federal government.
The cabinet that Bush chose for his first term was the A team of veterans who've been around the block.
Look at Obama's team.
Hillary Clinton's the Secretary of State.
She'd barely been in the Senate longer than him.
She had no experience in foreign policy.
And who's running the White House?
The Chicago gang.
Ram Emanuel, Valerie Jarrett, that crowd.
They're no more capable of running the federal government than I am of winning the Indianapolis 500.
They are in over their heads.
They thought that because they were so smart, all of this would come so easily.
The gate crashers story.
People are looking at this thing the wrong way.
This is not a tabloid couple getting themselves more fame and fortune by busting into the White House.
This is a presidential administration that is totally dysfunal.
No one has ever, I think in my lifetime, said that the Secret Service is incompetent.
You know, I used to be a reporter.
I've covered presidential visits.
Covered President Reagan when I was working in Illinois a couple of times.
The Secret Service is the most impossible analysis you're ever going to find.
You ever see these Secret Service guys?
The stereotype is exactly correct.
They don't move a facial muscle.
Their eyes are moving around, they're talking on the little microphones off to the side.
They are as serious as can be.
To get my press credential, you had to show all of the documentation, you had to sign all the paperwork, and then you had to go and stand in exactly the appropriate place and stand exactly there.
And that was to cover a speech.
The Secret Service didn't all of a sudden become a bunch of idiots.
The idea of somebody getting in to see the President of the United States and his wife that's not on an approved guest list and it's the Secret Service, okay.
Okay, just come on in.
That is not a plausible explanation.
I don't believe that the Secret Service is a bunch of morons.
Now three guys are being thrown under the bus.
Three Secret Service agents have been suspended.
Just happened in the last 24 hours.
They're going to apparently take the fall.
Okay, you're not on the list, but it must be okay because you say it's okay.
I just don't buy that.
I believe there had to be an atmosphere in place that was pretty loosey-goosey when it came to getting into the White House.
The only reason the Secret Service would have done this would be if someone said, let them Or if they had been reamed out in the past for being too restrictive at the door.
I don't know if a few of Barack and Michelle's pals tried to show up earlier times, they weren't on a list, they were stopped, they were objected, and the Secret Service was balled out.
I don't know if somebody went over in this instance and said, let him come in.
What I do know is that the Secret Service of the United States isn't so stupid as to make it easier to get into the White House than it is to get on an airplane.
You try to go to an airport right now.
You can't go to the gate without a boarding pass.
You cannot, and you can't get a boarding, you can't go through the gate without Showing a photo ID.
Unless you have established security clearance because you work inside the gates or you're with one of the airlines, you can't get through.
You have to go back and get your boarding pass, and you have to produce a photo ID.
That's to get in an airplane.
But what?
You can get in to see the president of the United States in the middle of the White House just by saying that you think you're supposed to be able to be there.
I don't buy it.
Here's what I think is going on.
I think you have people in there who've been running this thing so loose when it comes to security that the Secret Service has been forced to compromise its procedures.
Because they don't take this seriously.
This is a question, again, of competence.
I never thought I would say the following words.
But this never would have happened when Hillary Clinton was the first lady.
I mean, she wasn't going to let anybody in there.
Barack and Michelle are acting as though they're still living in Hyde Park in Chicago and having friends over.
Desiree Rogers is the social secretary for the President of the United States.
She's a big deal back in Chicago.
Her ex-husband John Rogers, famous mutual fund guy, they're both big fundraisers for Democratic politicians.
They're part of the Chicago crew that they brought out there.
Desiree Rogers is being asked to testify about the gate crashing at the White House.
The administration isn't allowing her to be questioned.
Why?
Is it because she's the one who gave this couple clearance outside of approval?
Or is it because she'll be asked how many other times did people get in that weren't on the list?
The man involved in this crashing had an Arab-sounding surname.
It is not a stretch to think that he could have been a terrorist.
Al Qaeda, or rather the terrorist movement, has infiltrated the United States Army, a major in the Army, only several weeks earlier committed a massacre at Fort Hood.
Yet anybody could just walk into the White House?
This speaks to me of a question of competence of the people who are running this administration.
What Barack Obama needs to do is get rid of the Chicago gang and bring in some Democratic old goats who have a little bit of experience in running the country.
Because what's happening right now from the amateur hour over stimulus to the incoherent message on Afghanistan to the changing the message on healthcare 97,000 times to the embarrassment of a tabloid TV wannabe couple showing up and shaking the hands of the president of the United States is not a competent administration.
The president is in over his head.
And the people that are closest to him don't know what they're doing.
My name is Mark Belling, and I'm sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
Mark Belling's sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
What is all this stuff in here, by the way?
Is this rush stuff or rush gifts or mail and stuff for this a lot of this looks pretty cool?
Don't suppose the guest host is allowed to have any of it or anything.
No, the guest host isn't.
The guest host can ask all he wants, but the guest host is the guest host.
I'm not Ben Rothlessberger.
I'm Dennis Dixon.
I under I under I understand my okay.
I'll take that.
Well, what is that?
It looks like a coffin.
It's very, very big.
I'm sure it's wonderful.
I shouldn't ask about it.
Don't ask about any of Russia's stuff.
All right, I won't.
Remember, and again, this is just beautiful stuff that we all have memories.
Remember way, way, way, way, way back in August.
All those stories that were out there about death threats to the president being way up since Barack Obama became president.
And the reason, of course, was is that racist America can't tolerate the fact that a black man is president.
I don't want to pick on Rick Sanchez, although if I had to pick on anyone in the media, Rick Sanchez would be in the top 20.
Got a transcript here of Rick Sanchez on CNN.
This is August 28th, quote.
A CNN source with very close CNN source, very close to this U.S. Secret Service confirmed to me today that threats on the life of the President of the United States have now risen by as much as 400% since his inauguration.
400% death threats against Barack Obama, quote, in this environment go far beyond anything the Secret Service has seen with any other president.
Everybody was running with this.
But in the wake of the crashing of the White House story, we're now finding out that that isn't true at all.
The Secret Service is making it very clear that there has not been any increase in threats to the President of the United States.
The director of the Secret Service, Mark Sullivan is quoted in today's New York Times.
I'll read it.
Mr. Sullivan, a career Secret Service agent who was appointed director in 2006, tried unsuccessfully to assuage legislators' concerns, saying Mr. Obama was never in danger the night of the state dinner on November 24th.
And he said Mr. Obama had not received more death threats than any of his recent predecessors.
So the story was just an urban myth.
This stuff gets thrown out there by a totally unquestioning media and is accepted as gospel, and it takes events like the crashing of the White House for us to find out the truth.
All right, I'm gonna do it.
Bleeding cash and deep in debt, OTB files for bankruptcy protection.
I'm into horse racing.
Own race horses.
It's my hobby.
I know about this stuff.
New York City owns all the off-track betting operations in New York City.
They're run by the government.
The government sets up this supposedly private corporation, and they run off-track betting.
If you want to bet on horse races in New York City, you either have to go to the track, and there's only one running at any given time, Aqueduct in the fall and winter, Belmont in the spring and summer, and upstate Saratoga in the middle of summer.
Or you go to an off-track betting parlor.
The racetracks across the United States are all kind of struggling right now, like everybody else.
They have major capital costs.
They have to have a grandstand, they have to have a stables, they've got to run all these races.
They need to have all the officials involved in that.
They need to have stewards and they need to have backstretch checkers and they need to have veterinarians.
Incredible expenses.
And they only get to keep a few cents of each betting dollar to cover those expenses and be their profit.
That's why race packs are in trouble.
OTBs, an off-track betting place, they open the doors, and in New York, a lot of them are just kind of pits.
They open the doors, they have a few tellers behind behind the window, and they take almost the same cut as the racetracks.
They have no real overhead, they have no capital expenses, they're just taking the bets.
And in New York City, the off-track betting operation is now bankrupt.
It is almost impossible to imagine being involved in a business where you don't have to provide the service and you just take a cut of every dollar that's spent, or in this case, bet, and still go broke.
In fact, it's a formula for getting rich.
There's a reason Los Vegas casinos are Las Vegas casinos.
There's a reason that bookies are bookies.
When you're taking a little bit of a skim and you don't have to actually do anything, it's pretty easy to make money.
So why am I bringing this up?
I'm bringing this up because of health care.
If government can't even run an off-track betting operation with no apparent costs at all, how is it going to run the largest single sector of the American economy?
And you could say what you want that somehow off-track betting in New York is different from health care.
It's not.
The city of New York is run by government politicians and by bureaucrats.
And all of the inefficiencies and all of the scandal and all of the inability to control costs and all of the problems that would lead an off-track betting operation run by government to go broke would be in place with regard to health care.
Allowing a bureaucracy to take over American health care is a disaster that this country cannot afford to allow.
We can't allow them to be involved in it any more than they currently are.
People cite examples of other parts of the government that are able to work.
But the bottom line is that when the government is involved in providing a service, and the government is supposed to take money in, it can't do it.
If they can't run off track betting operations without going broke, why in the world would we allow them to run something as important as this?
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
1-800-282-2882 is the telephone number.
Is Rush back Monday?
Rush is back Monday.
You're only putting up with me uh today.
Uh one more point on this OTB thing that I should have made before.
It's not just that they're going broke and that they can't run things.
Because the off-track betting operations take all the bets in New York City.
Those that money doesn't go into the purses that support racetrack operations.
Doesn't go into the purses that pay out for those of us who have racehorses that are running and competing.
So they're skimming money that would be going to the people who own racehorses, train racehorses, ride race race horses, and it's going right into government, and they're still going broke.
So they screw up what exists in the private sector, and they can't even run their own monopoly well enough to avoid bankruptcy.
That's government in action.
Is it as good as I said I was the off-track?
To uh Charleston, South Carolina, Paul Paul, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Hey, Mark.
Um, I wanted to mention I've got uh uh both business and military experience and and uh we've had an amazing number of ex-military callers today.
Almost all of them, actually.
Yeah, and and you know, the military does a great job.
And one of the things, however, um that I wanted to mention is that the the folks in the military and the government uh have no idea the amount of uh the sense of urgency that you have to have in business.
Now, uh the reason I say that is because in uh in the military or government uh um business uh government operations, they operate on a budget.
And the the the greatest sense of urgency they've got to have is to stay within budget, like a base commander or VA hospital.
Once they uh you if they go over that budget and in the military, you they usually get relieved of their command.
But in in business, the object is to make as much money as you can.
And then if you have a profit, then you've got to pay tax on that, and then you save as much of that to buy equipment that you need that's gonna make more income so you can stay in business longer.
Right.
Well, we're being run right now by people who've never done any of that.
And with the moment that you the moment that you say make as much money as you can, the hairs on the back of their necks go up.
I mean, Barack Obama is the guy who talked for years about income redistribution and how we've allowed the people at the top to make too much money, they can't grasp the whole point of business is making as much money as you can, and that's how you create jobs.
They can't fathom that.
And in terms of running in terms of running their own administration, they don't have any of that rapid response that has to occur when you're in business.
Now, people will look back at what happened in 2008 and say, well, the private sector isn't all it's cracked up to be either.
There was a terrible meltdown, Wall Street was screwed up, the banks were screwed up.
I would argue that they were screwed up to the extent the government had its finger involved.
The reason banks were making loans that were extremely risky is they were incentivized to use a liberal term by government to do so with Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae backing all of these mortgages that were aimed at people who would otherwise not be credit worthy.
It gave those banks an incentive to go out and do that.
And nobody ever thought it was going to fall apart because the government was behind the entire racket.
If that safety net had not been established, I don't think we ever would have had the credit meltdown that we did.
The other thing about business is when you fail, you lose money and you're done.
Some are going to be successful and some are going to be unsuccessful.
Government just keeps going on.
Public schools have been failing in urban centers across America forever and ever and ever.
What do we do?
We put more money into it.
The social service infrastructure hasn't done anything to cure poverty.
We just keep putting more money into it.
I mean, this covers almost every topic that we've been discussing on the program today.
The lack of any experience in anything having to do with the real world that's just pervasive in the current presidential administration.
Thanks for the call.
Let's go to uh Cookville, Tennessee.
Dan, it's your turn on EIB.
Uh I like to say that uh you're not the first one to notice the competency problem.
There's a guy named Adrian Goldsworthy over in England, and he wrote a whole book about it.
And he's saying that about Obama.
No, actually he wrote it like the year before Obama was president.
Well, I I I still claim when I talked about Obama and stimulus, that I said that these people were in over their head that I hadn't seen anybody else focus on that, that instead it was all this arrogant stuff and all of that.
I think that a big part of the problem with Obama is the people surrounding him are totally incompetent and are doing a bad job by him.
And it's interesting that even his liberal buddies seem to be okay with this.
I'm waiting for some people on the left to say, you know, the president's being badly served by his advisors.
And he is being badly served here.
I think I know why they put up with it.
According to this guy in England, he's saying that uh there's a trade-off, and you're uh to stay in power, you will get anybody who is loyal.
And there's a pre when there's a preference of loyalty over competency, then the state is in danger.
Well, and uh Yeah, you're right.
And uh the guy wrote the book called How Rome Fell.
Well, and in the case of in the case of Obama, I mean these are all his cronies.
He the reason Hillary Clinton got a job is he wanted her inside the administration so she couldn't be taking pot shots from outside the administration.
It was also a way of controlling Bill Clinton.
I'm really concerned, though, about this inner circle.
Every president is going to bring in people who were close to them.
But whether they were Democrat or Republican, most presidents have brought in people who had long standing experience in both government and business.
Strong people with long records of accomplishment.
This is just the Chicago gang, and none of them have done anything with their lives other than raise money and hustle the Chicago machine for political contracts and favors.
Rama Manuel is just a Chicago elbow sharpener.
That's all the guy is.
Valerie Jarrett, his good buddy from Chicago.
She's a Chicago insider.
Desiree Rogers, she's a well-connected Chicago person.
Well, they took this show to Washington, and I'm sorry, they don't know what they're doing.
Some of these things aren't even liberal versus conservative.
Not having a couple of strangers bust into the White House isn't a liberal or conservative issue.
It's an issue of competence.
Losing control of your message in the way that they have is a question of competence.
Allowing Harry Reed and Nancy Pelosi to steamroll you is a question of competence.
You've got a president here who is inexperienced himself and has surrounded himself with people who aren't very good at what they do, and they're gonna cover for this as long as they possibly can, but it's a real problem that he faces.
Thank you for the call.
Boston and Mike, Mike, it's your turn on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Well, thanks, Mark.
Um, I just want to uh say something.
Back in the nineties, I'm in the insurance business.
And back in the nineties, I was healthcare date, the state tried to force guarantee issue, which means that even if the person has cancer or aid and is going to die very shortly, if they still would have to take them.
Um when that when that law passed that day, 39 out of 40 companies left the state.
They were later coerced to come back, but um the only one that's date was Blue Cross at that time.
And you're a point and you're and the point you're making with regard to that is what?
The point is that government that's what that's what that's what's in the health care package.
Right, I know they're gonna get coverage.
So by saying that, how can they if 39 of 40 companies know they're gonna fail doing it?
How can the government do that?
Because the government just thinks private America private corporations can do anything.
The insur the everybody likes the notion of putting in the national health care legislation, language that says you can't be disqualified from health care because of pre existing condition.
The problem with that is is that a lot of people wait until they get sick in order to sign up and pay for health insurance coverage, and that's the fatal flaw in the whole thing.
But government thinks it's so easy to snap its fingers and tell business you can do that, but then it never holds itself to the same standard.
You know who the worst water polluters in America are?
All the municipalities that have sewage systems, they're routinely discharging raw sewage into lakes and rivers.
They do it in almost every major city in America.
Yet a private corporation can't allow a drop of anything that might potentially be toxic to get into any kind of water supply.
You can't allow anything to run off into any stream, even though the stuff may be diluted, diluted forever.
Ask a farmer about having to control the runoff on their fields.
These rules government establishes for everyone.
But they can't even put any sort of standard on themselves.
Well, in that case, it's just different.
You can't design a sewage system that would handle all the sewage.
Look at this situation right now with regard to the fear of this giant carp getting into the great.
You guys know about this thing?
It's called the Asian big mouth carp.
They weigh a hundred pounds.
You you got to YouTube these things.
They jump out of the river as high as six to eight feet in the air whenever a boat goes by, and they're eating everything up in the Mississippi River ecosystem.
They're within five miles of Lake Michigan.
The fear is when they get into the Great Lakes, they will eat off the entire food supply, and there will be no sport fishing left.
So right now, they're in the Illinois River and the Chicago, the uh Chicago ship canal.
They're having to poison the water in an attempt to kill the fish before they get to Lake Michigan.
This problem's been going on for 20 years, and it isn't until now that they've been able to step up and do something about it, and it probably won't be successful.
That's classic government, and once again, it's what happens when you turn the control of anything over to the people who run the city of Chicago.
Check out those uh videos of the Asian carp, though.
Scary stuff.
I live on the Great Lakes, so they kill off all the fish that are in there.
They're a hundred pounds, they eat everything.
They they you could sport fish them, I suppose, if you want to try to catch a whale, they weigh a hundred pounds, and when the boats come by, they start jumping.
They hit fishermen hard enough to kill them.
You think I'm talking like a crackpot, don't you?
It's today's, I believe the Wall Street Journal has a story on it today.
It's either the Wall Street Journal or the Times.
It's all over the n the internet, and anybody who's in a Great Lake State can vouch for what I'm saying here.
I still sound like a crackpot, I know.
Uh, I've got some unfortunate comments to make about Mike Huckabee, and they'll come up next.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I've got a bias here.
And when I run my own show, I always tell my audience what my biases are.
I'm not pretending any of this stuff is objective.
And I've got some comments here that I know some of you will not agree with.
Nonetheless, they're mine, and I do have an agenda, and my agenda is that I don't like Mike Huckabee.
And I'm very bothered by the fact that he's leading a lot of these polls in terms of being the Republican presidential front runner for 2012.
I don't want to be forced to hold my nose while voting two presidential elections in a row.
I had to do it for McCain and I don't want to do it for Huckabee.
I think Huckabee is not particularly conservative.
He was a taxer when he was down there in Arkansas.
His social policies were all over the map.
The fact that he calls one of the most fiscally conservative organizations we have, the Club for Growth, the Club for Greed, these are all reasons that I don't like them.
So at least you know that when I tell you about make the following comments.
The story about his decision to commute the sentence of Maurice Clemens down in Arkansas, who was sentenced to 100 years in prison.
He was furloughed by Huckabee several years after being incarcerated.
He's the guy who went on to kill the four police officers in Seattle, Washington.
then later shot and killed himself by police.
Aside from whether or not Huckabee should be held to account for this, This is a disaster for the Republican Party, should he be the nominee.
In 1988, a lot of Republicans made a big deal about Michael Dukakis's connection to Willie Horton.
Willie Horton was the guy who was furloughed and went on to commit a terrible crime.
The Democrats screamed that that was unfair and it was race banning in the whole thing.
For the last 20 years, I've been defending the Willie Horton ad.
I've been defending it on the basis that politicians need to be held accountable for the consequences of their actions.
Michael DeCakis believed in furloughs, and there was a tragic consequence of report as as as a result of that.
It is not race baiting to draw attention to what happens when liberals do liberal things.
The Democrats have been bitter about this forever.
Do you think that if Mike Huckabee is the candidate against Barack Obama in 2012, that they won't be running 90,000 ads about Maurice Clemens.
And they know the Republicans won't be able to object because of the Willie Horton ad.
In fact, you may recall, some of you may recall, who the first politician was to tie Michael DeCakis to Willie Horton.
It wasn't a Republican.
In fact, it was Al Gore when he was seeking the Democratic nomination in 1988.
And the fact of the matter is that it's a fair attack.
Mike Huckabee handed out commutations like some politicians hand out government grants.
Huckami Huckabee compute commuted two times more sentences than his three predecessors combined.
And one of them was Bill Clinton.
He had a major policy toward paroling and commuting the sentences of violent criminals because he believed in the power of redemption in the whole thing.
Now I understand in the case of Maurice Clemens, he offended several times after that, and there are numerous other people who had an opportunity to put him back in jail where he deserved to be.
This wasn't a case of Mike Huckabee letting somebody out, and two weeks later he did something.
It was a case of Mike Huckabee letting someone out.
The person re-offended a zillion times and kept getting put back on the street.
I understand all of that.
But for those of us who defended the criticism of Dukakis on Willie Horton to now pretend that Mike Huckabee doesn't have a similar situation, is I think hypocritical.
And from a political standpoint, don't think the Democrats won't go nuts on this because they will.
They'll play this card harder than it was used against them.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Lib Law.
I'm Mark Belling.
We're ending what was a lot of fun for me.
I hope you liked it.
Let's go to Atlanta, Georgia, and Terra.
Tara, it's your turn on the Russian Limbaugh program.
Hey, Mark.
Um, going back to your theory about um incompetence and Obama and all of his, you know, minions.
Um, you know, Russia's signature theory is that they're not incompetent.
They know full well what they're doing, that you know, they're purposefully destroying the economy.
They don't want to help, they don't want to create jobs or do anything like that.
They want to see it fall and collapse so they can rebuild it the way they see fit, the way they think it should be, not the way the country was founded.
So I just wondered, you know, how much do you think that plays in as opposed to just cheer and are you trying in my last sixty seconds of doing the show, trying to get me to disagree with Rush?
Um here's my here's my answer to that.
I understand the point that Russia's making with regard to that.
It's like liberals who control urban areas, they do everything they can to make it miserable for cars, so there's a need for mass transit, which they believe in.
That clearly is the case.
The point that I'm making with regard to competence is they right now don't know how to dig themselves out of the hole that is being created.
First of all, they have to be re-elected.
There's an election in 2010 for the Congress, and Obama himself in 2012.
I think he does want the unemployment rate to go down so that he can take credit for the improvement.
I don't think he wants to be involved in a war in Afghanistan that lasts forever, and I don't think he wants to be blamed for a loss either.
So I think there is a competence issue.
There's also an agenda, and that's what Russia's driving at, and I do agree with that.
I'm Mark Belling.
Hope you enjoyed the show.
▲
Export Selection