All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 11, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:47
February 11, 2010, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Views expressed by the host on this program make more sense than anything anybody else out there happens to be saying because the views expressed by the host of this program are a relentless, the result of a relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth, which we find and which we own.
And if you can't handle it, you are advised not to listen because you will go nuts.
I am personally honored and proud to know that I have driven thousands of liberals literally batty, maybe more than thousands over the course of the 20-plus years of this program.
Rush Limbaugh, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It's great to have you here.
And the telephone number is 800-282-2882.
Michael Barone, with absolute power, Team Obama grows stupid.
How could such smart people do so many stupid things?
That question of variations on it is being asked in Washington and around the country about the Obama administration, the same people who directed the campaign that defeated Hillary Clinton and routed John McCain, a campaign that raised far more money.
Oh, before I go, folks, I will not lose my place here talking about raising more money.
This is from thehill.com.
Chuck U. Schumer and Representative Chris Van Holland, a Democrat of Maryland, today unveiled the Democrat Party's legislative response to the Citizens United case, which they and other Democrats have sharply criticized as one that will open the floodgates to corporate financing of federal elections.
The Democrats are trying to rush this through, stopping the people they are ruining one business at a time from speaking out.
They are rushing here to curb corporate election spending before the November vote.
Now, why would they do that?
They obviously know what they're doing.
They know they are attacking corporate America, large and small.
They know that corporate America knows they're in the crosshairs.
They fear, and rightly so, that corporate money would go big time to Republicans this year, well, 2010 and 2012.
And so they're working on legislation to get around the recent Supreme Court decision, which, I mean, they have every right to do it.
Don't misunderstand.
But you need to know why they're doing it.
They know their toast.
They know their toast, and they know their toast because they know that the people they're trying to destroy one sector at a time know they're trying to destroy them.
We'll keep a sharp eye.
Same people that raised far more money, attracted far more volunteers than any before it have within a year come up with a legislative program that's crashing in ruins.
And that the judge from recent polls has left the Democrat Party weaker than Mike Marone has seen it in almost 50 years.
A truly wise Washington analyst, National Journal's Jonathan Roche, says the problem is one-party government.
Presidents lead better, he argues, when they are constrained by the need to get bipartisan support.
I frankly think that's inside the Beltway mumbo jumbo.
That's not why they're having trouble here.
It's not because they have majorities in both houses or had.
It's because their agenda is so radical.
The American people have stopped it.
The American people do not want it, any shred of it.
The fact that Democrats from last July until last week had a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to go along with Pelosi's strong majority in the House seems to have tempted Team Obama to go the all-Democrat route on health care, cap and trade, and fiscal policy.
But even strong temptations should sometimes be resisted.
I think the problem is more basic and helps to explain why the people who put together a successful campaign have not provided successful governance.
Obama campaigned as somebody who would rise above partisan divisions.
He first attracted national attention in 04 when our politics was kind of a culture war by stressing what red state America, blue state America had in common.
He campaigned in a similar vein in 2007 and 08.
But when he came to office in 09, the cultural issues that had occupied so much of the political landscape for 12 years or so had been eclipsed by the financial crisis and the deepening recession.
So Obama was faced with a fundamental choice.
He could either chart a bipartisan course in response to the economic emergency, or he could try to expand government to Western Europe magnitude, as Democratic congressional leaders had long wished to do.
Well, that's what they did.
That was their agenda, to hell with the current economic or political climate.
That's what they were going to do.
And Barone points it out, the former community organizer, Chicago Thug, that's my word, not his, chose the latter course.
And to the surprise of many who watched previous presidents present specific administration policies, he allowed Democrat leaders to design the stimulus package that they rushed into law in six weeks.
One-third of the money went to state and local governments.
And by the way, I have somewhere here in this stack, and I called this, ladies and gentlemen, it's I don't want to interrupt myself here to find it, but it's all about some state, city, somewhere threatening a bunch of teachers of being let go because of the stimulus money.
L.A. Unified School District plans to fire more non-tenured teachers than usual.
Those targeted represent nearly 6% of all probationary instructors in the nation's second largest district.
A Times report last year found that fewer than 2% of such teachers were let go, just as we predicted.
Based on performance, the L.A. Unified School District plans to cut teachers.
This is the scare tactic that they use, and it's happening.
Don't doubt me, folks.
Please don't doubt me.
I know what these leftists, liberals, are going to do before they even do it.
One-third of the money went to state and local governments, an obvious payoff to public unions.
Much of it went to permanently increase the baseline spending of discretionary programs.
Federal spending was raised from 20 to 24 percent of GDP.
Team Obama overestimated the stimulative effect of the stimulus package and underestimated the strength of the spontaneous Tea Party movement that flared up in protest of this expansion of government.
Now, this is where it gets interesting.
Barone says the Obama team underestimated as well the opposition to expanding government control over health care and through the cap and trade bill to the energy sector and the disgust over conspicuous vote buying on health care, the Louisiana purchase, the Cornhusker kickback, the labor loophole.
Team Obama failed to realize that they were no longer running in Chicago or in the Democrat primaries or facing an electorate fed up with Republicans.
And more important, they failed to realize that vastly expanding government goes deeply against the American grain and against the basic appeal of their successful campaign.
Now, I think there's some truth to this.
I don't think that they're this stupid.
I do think that they did allow themselves to believe the country hated Republicans.
I do believe they had conjured up so much hatred for Bush and so much hatred for Republicans, and they think they got elected because of that, that they had a free reign to just go on a tear and do the opposite of what Republicans would do.
And again, they misread the American public.
Now, none of this matters to them.
They're going to ram this health care bill still.
They've got a plan.
They've got a trick.
We talked about it yesterday.
I'm going to remind you of it here in a minute.
And cap and trade, they're going to go for that.
They don't care what you think.
They're obviously totally comfortable and totally willing to govern against the will of you, of us, the American people.
From the Huffing and Puffington Post, core Chicago team sinking Obama presidency.
This is a theme that's popping up all week.
It's Obama's Chicago advisors that are ruining him.
And they forget that he is a Chicago thug.
You can't separate him from Axel Rod.
You can't separate him from any of these other guys they brought in, Ram Emanuel.
They're all one and the same.
But the effort here is to portray Obama as a mild-mannered, young, naive young president trying his devil best, being sabotaged by these people that don't get it.
He's right in there leading this effort.
Don't be mistaken otherwise.
Here's the story.
White House moves swiftly to stem Fallout of Obama interview with Bloomberg published tomorrow in which he comes out in favor of big bank bonuses to J.P. Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs.
It's got the left in a tizzy because they hate corporations.
They hate bailed out banks.
They hate Obama snuggling up to them.
They feel sold out.
We mentioned this to you yesterday, and I want to run it by you again because this has a bearing on whether or not the Republicans go up to Washington, the White House, on February 25th to join this so-called televised confab on healthcare.
Pelosi aid says healthcare summit a fraud.
Democrats already decided on ramming the bill through.
Nancy Pelosi's top health care aide is a guy named Wendell Primus, and he admitted that top Democrats have already decided on the strategy to pass the Senate's pro-abortion government-run health care bill.
In fact, he says Obama's latest friendly gesture is all a trick.
The bipartisan health care summit is simply a charade, says Primus.
Pelosi's top health care aide is out letting the cat out of the bag.
According to Life News, Primus explained that the Senate will use the controversial reconciliation strategy that'll have the House approve the Senate bill, and then both the House and Senate okaying changes to the bill that the Senate will sign off on by preventing Republicans from filibustering.
The trick.
The trick in all of this is that the president would have to sign the Senate bill first and then the reconciliation bill second.
And the reconciliation bill would trump the Senate bill.
Primus said this, by the way, at the National Health Policy Conference hosted by Academy Health and Health Affairs.
Some have questioned whether rules would allow Congress to pass changes to a bill that's not yet law.
House members have insisted both chambers approve the changes, which likely will go through the reconciliation process to require 51 votes instead of 60.
Primus also mentioned that bill drafters would need to use certain language to ensure the plan works, although he didn't elaborate.
He said there's a certain skill, there's a trick, but I think we'll get it done.
So changes to a law that's not even there yet.
So the Democrats, once again, governing against the will of the people, using trickery to do so, admitting it.
Republicans, you're just a sideshow if you go up to this thing.
I wonder if they know this.
I wonder if the Republicans know that this has been said.
Anyway, I got to take a break here.
We'll do that.
We'll be back.
We'll continue your phone calls and the jobs bill and a lot of other stuff coming up, plus global warming.
It's amazing how on the run the global warming people are because of these snowstorms now claiming, even with the New York Times, that all it means is that global warming is even worse than we thought.
Emitting vocal vibrations coast to coast.
Rush Limbaugh persuading tens of thousands each and every day.
Now back to the phones.
We're going to go to Vancouver, Washington.
This is Tony.
Welcome.
It's great to have you here on the program.
Oh, thank you, Rush.
You know, I am just so excited to be able to have my voice heard on your powerful program.
I can imagine.
I can imagine what that's like.
Yeah, it is.
Because let me tell you, I am, I think I'm a middle-class American.
By today's standards, I may be a little, you know, in a lower class and middle.
My husband and I this year had a combined income of just over $70,000.
It was down about $20,000 this year.
We live in a two, our mortgage is $240,000 on a house that's now worth about $189,000 on today's market.
And, you know, I'm not a politician.
I'm not a college professor.
I'm not a tax accountant.
So I don't have anything probably real profound to say to you other than to speak my voice for the voice of other millions of people in my position in this country.
I listen to you every day.
I have a delivery route.
Very wise.
Very loud.
Very, very wise.
Thank you.
I go home at night.
My husband and I watch Fox News.
So we try to keep ourselves informed.
And I have to tell you, I have never in my adult lives, and I have lived through as many presidents in my adult life as you have because we're the same age.
And I have never been so sickened by one in my life.
Join.
As I am, as I am this one.
Join the club.
I mean, you're not alone out there.
Don't ever think you're alone.
Oh, I know I'm not, Rush.
And I thank you for stirring up the dust and getting so much of us mad because America is pissed off right now.
And he's going to hear our little tiny voices when it comes to election time.
You know, I wish, wouldn't this have been a great scene to have a president come into office at a time when this country has been so economically devastated and tighten his belt and maybe not bored Air Force One to take his wife to a Broadway play and maybe not gone off to Copenhagen twice for nothing and spent the taxpayers' dollars?
Or how about just leaving the White House like it was and not spending our taxpayers' dollars to tweak it to how he wants it?
What about saying to America, you know what?
Because of how things are right now, I'm going to tighten my belt and I'm going to do this for you guys because you're having to tighten your belt, you know?
Well, this is interesting.
I'm going to tell you something.
I want to tell you something.
You credited me with rousing people up.
I didn't really do much.
You're roused up on your own.
I have never suggested that Obama cut back his lifestyle to show other people that he feels their pain.
I have never mentioned that.
You came up with that all on your own.
I have laughed about the fact he flies off to Copenhagen and has it slapped down his throat that they're going to get the Olympics.
And I've laughed about him getting the Nobel Peace Prize that I now rightfully should have won in 2007, not Gore and not the IPCC.
And I've laughed about him taking his wife out to dinner in New York and so forth.
But I've not suggested that he do anything in terms of his own austerity.
I have laughed at him serving Kobe Beef.
You came up with that all on your own.
And what my point in telling you this is, is that millions of people are doing the very same thing you are.
They don't need to be riled up.
They already are.
They don't need to be agitated.
They already are.
We're just, the service I provide is validating what you think and giving you information before you know that it comes down the pike.
I'm flattered by your compliment, but don't sell yourself short in this.
You and multiple millions of others have had it for whatever reason.
If it bugs you that he's not being austere in his own life while everybody else has tighten their belts, fine and dandy.
What bugs me more is this guy is single-handedly, along with his Democrat buddies up on Capitol Hill, making it worse on purpose.
That's what frosts me, making it worse on purpose while living the high life himself.
Guy has no compassion.
He has no emotional connection to people.
You know, basically, Axelrod and these guys are salesmen.
That's what Axelrod's been his whole life.
He's been a salesman, political salesman.
These guys have no experience in a real world governing, and we're seeing it now.
They're trying to do what they did in a campaign, trying to sell things.
They're trying to continually sell things.
They're not accomplishing anything.
They're destroying.
It really is a devastating thing to sit here and watch.
Frustrating as well.
And people are peed off, as you said.
John in Indianapolis, have you guys gotten over it yet, by the way?
This is Thursday.
Excuse me?
Have you gotten over the Super Bowl yet?
No.
Yeah, I didn't think so.
That's got to be tough.
It was very, very painful.
It ruined my Sunday.
And on top of that, it ruined my weekend.
But regardless, I just got connected to a true, true patriot, and God love you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
My question to you is, why don't you use the term progressive instead of liberal?
I mean, if you research how many times Obama has used the term, and in the last two weeks, you have Hillary Clinton saying she's on board with being a progressive.
And as of late, within the last maybe 36, 24 hours, you have McCain's daughter saying she's a progressive Republican.
I mean, come on.
I mean, what's your understanding of the history of the progressive movement, and does it scare you?
A bunch of liberals and communists, and they do scare me.
And the reason I don't call them progressives is because the word liberal creams them.
You pull liberal versus conservative.
Look at voter identification.
40% of the American people call themselves conservative.
20% of the American people call themselves liberals.
Progressive is their way of disguising who they are.
Progressive and liberal.
What does progressive mean?
Forward, advanced, looking forward.
We're smarter than you.
We're more advanced.
We're ahead of the game.
They're not progressives.
These people are the furthest thing from progressives.
I'm not going to let them get away with redefining their own terms.
That's all they're trying to do.
They're not progressives.
They've gone anywhere from progressives.
They never use the word liberal to describe themselves.
Never, ever, because it's death.
It's death at the ballot box.
That's why I'm mystified the Republican Party doesn't use it more often.
McCain finally got around to doing so late in the campaign.
But don't, don't, don't, don't quote Megan McCain to me.
I mean, progressive Republican.
Megan, It's not fair to Megan McCain.
I mean, well, I mean, what is the just an airhead?
I don't know what else to say.
But she's classic.
If they want to call themselves progressives, then they're engaged in tomfoolery and trickery.
And I'm just not going to let them get away with it.
They are liberals, Marxists, socialists, and communists.
It just keeps getting better and better and better.
Somehow, a reporter asked this idiot press secretary, Robert Gibbs, this afternoon at the press briefing, the vice president said last night that Iraq could be one of the president's greatest achievements.
Given that the vice president was in favor of a partial partition of the country and the president opposed the surge that helped stabilize it, how is that one of the president's great achievements?
Getting our troops home, which we intend to do in August of this year.
The agreement to bring troops home was signed before the president took office.
We will long debate Iraq.
We will long debate whether at a very important moment in our efforts to root out terrorism, particularly in Afghanistan and on that border region with Pakistan, whether we took our eye off the ball.
Historians will debate that long after we're gone.
The vice president's been deeply involved in fixing the political process there so that elections can be held and our troops can come home as scheduled this summer.
Biden fixed Iraq.
Folks, you just heard the soundbites.
Biden didn't do anything but try to secure defeat.
This is seriously, psychologically problematic.
This is not just lying and trying to recast history.
This is dangerous to have people like this in positions of power.
I mean, people around the world listen to this stuff, and they know, we're just dealing with idiots in the White House.
It's just, they've got to be out there laughing themselves silly at the two people running this country.
Okay, the jobs bill.
Democrats have unveiled their jobs bill.
Jobs bill.
Reuters reports this breathlessly.
Senate Democrats released a long-awaited jobs bill on Thursday that relies on business tax breaks and construction projects to bring down the unemployment rate.
The bill also extends a number of other programs from unemployment insurance to Medicare payment rates that have either expired or will expire soon.
Just as we foretold, ladies and gentlemen, much of the money that we don't have will go to unemployment insurance.
Now, leaving aside the merits of extending unemployment benefits or Medicare payments, what do either of these have to do with creating jobs?
Not a damn thing, but it sounds better to call it a jobs bill rather than an unemployment compensation extension bill.
And from a breathless politico, we get more details on what's in the unveiled Senate jobs bill and how it's designed to give the Democrats cover.
The headline's all you need to hear, but you'll hear more from me.
Baucus Grassley cut deal on jobs.
The Senate Finance Committee today announced a breakthrough on an $85 million jobs bill that includes a series of small business tax breaks and other tax provisions designed to draw Republican support.
The emphasis there on small.
The joint announcement by Max Baucus, Democrat, Chuck Grassley, Republican, Iowa, aimed at giving the proposals some bipartisan heft in the Senate chamber mired in partisan gridlock on just about every other major issue.
In fact, the release announcing the bill used the word bipartisan seven times in just a few paragraphs.
What a mistake.
The Democrats need to own all of this.
They don't need to be able to say Republicans participated in this.
Baucus and Grassley said their package was a first step, I'm sure, urged Senate leadership to allow at least three days for lawmakers to review the bill.
Finance Committee did not attach a price tag bill, but Reuters breathlessly calling it an $85 billion bill.
It's especially important that all members and the public have sufficient time, 72 hours, to review and comment on the package before the Senate begins voting on the bill, two senators wrote in a statement.
Now, we assume it goes without saying here that it'll not be posted on the internet.
Why should a tax-paying public be allowed to see how their money is being spent?
Dingy Harry wanted to pass a jobs bill before Congress left for recess on Friday, but two punishing blizzards made it difficult to schedule votes for this week.
The Finance Committee agreement, however, may be the breakthrough that Dingy Harry needs if he wants a vote after next week's President's Day recess.
Now, everything I've said and heard called this bill incredibly urgent.
Incredibly urgent.
Why, we've got to do this now.
But apparently, folks, it's not urgent enough for the Senate to give up its President's Day week-long recess after having been off all this week.
So it's not urgent enough to get it signed in two weeks, but it's urgent enough to have to get it done.
Now, the bill includes an infusion of funds into the Highway Trust Fund.
This is a jobs bill.
The so-called doctor fix for Medicare reimbursements in a jobs bill.
And an extension of unemployment insurance and other benefits for out-of-work people in a jobs bill.
I haven't read one thing yet about the creation of jobs.
Oh, it also includes several provisions outside the panel's jurisdiction, like a reauthorization of the Patriot Act, the National Flood Insurance Program, and $1.5 billion in agriculture disaster assistance in a jobs bill.
It's called a jobs bill.
Grassley and Baucus also fired a warning shot aimed at partisans on both sides.
Any effort to needlessly delay Senate completion of consideration of this through partisan means will undermine our goal of timely action in the current economic climate, they wrote.
Again, this bill is so urgent, they won't give up one of their endless recesses for it.
So you're saying, well, what the hell is in there about jobs?
What's in there about jobs?
Here it is.
What's in there about jobs is this.
It would exempt businesses from paying a 6.2% Social Security tax on the wages of their employees as long as the workers have been unemployed at least 60 days.
The tax break would run through the end of the year.
A company could save a minimum of $6,621 if it hired an unemployed worker after the bill is enacted and paid that worker at least $106,000, the maximum amount of wages subject to Social Security taxes.
The company could get an additional $1,000 on its 2011 tax return if it kept the new worker for at least a full year.
I don't have to tell you what this is going to do.
Guys are going to lay off people for two months, hire them back, escape Social Security taxes.
Let's just consider the incentives built into this plan.
It forces people, forces businesses to hire people who got laid off earlier in the process, which, I mean, in general would indicate that they may have been more dispensable to their previous employers.
These people that got laid off first are generally the ones that were the least necessary.
So in order, in order to take advantage of the tax break, the business would have to keep them employed all year long, regardless of their performance, for a full-time worker and have to pay them the max, $106,000.
In order to escape $6,000 of taxes, who's going to do that?
Nobody's going to do this.
Pay somebody $106,000 in this climate, all for a $6,000 tax break, and plus somebody's been out of work for longer than two months?
This, let me put it directly, this subsidizes nothing more than the normal business decisions made by growing companies.
This is not going to incentivize anybody in their right mind to start a hiring spree.
Now, over at Bloomberg.com, small business has some news for big government.
This is Caroline Baum.
And let me just summarize the story for you.
The first line here is, Washington doesn't get it.
And there are numerous small business people quoted in the story.
Dear Washington, we need sales, not new employee tax credits.
That's Economics 101.
You hire somebody if that worker generates revenues to cover his salary.
For that, you need sales.
We're not interested in tax breaks.
We're interested in the growth of our business.
We are not here to fulfill Obama's promise to put people back to work.
That's not why we're in business.
That's the message from the small business.
This is such, it is an absolute, and that's all that's in there about jobs.
The rest of this is nothing more than another slush fund spending bill.
And I gave you all the details.
Back after this, my friends, sit tight.
Back to the phones we go.
This is Nancy Wayne, Ohio.
You're on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Just a quick note.
Al Gore is correct about global warming.
He's only off by six planets.
According to photos from the Hubble, Pluto is warming up.
Yeah, that's because of the blizzards here in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York.
According to noted global warming scientists here in America and at the IPCC, these massive snowstorms are not only causing global warming and are an indication of it here, but they're having a dramatic impact on the surface temperatures of what was a planet, no longer is Pluto.
You're getting bright red out there.
I mean, we humans, if you think we're destroying just the Earth, you are wrong.
We are destroying our solar system.
And it's all because of you.
Your SUVs, your smokestacks, and all the rest of this gunk and garbage that you're putting into the atmosphere.
You think it just stays here?
You seen Mars lately?
You seen the storms on Jupiter?
They found another eye up there, Saturn.
Folks, let's go to the audio tape.
Dylan Radigan, yesterday afternoon, MS, NBC.
Rush Limbaugh taking me on by name today, even though I actually don't subscribe to either of the theories, liberal or conservative.
I was simply reporting a scientific fact that some scientists say that higher air temperatures, when the air mass is warmer, it can retain more moisture.
And as a result, these scientists believe that the warmer air mass, which retains more moisture, may subsequently offer more precipitation, something that would fall from the sky.
These exact types of storms may reflect that.
I honestly have no idea.
I was simply reporting that that is part of the science.
So to argue that the snow is evidence that there's not global warming borders on moronic.
Well, not quite, Dylan.
And at least I'm glad you admit that you have no idea.
But when you say you're only reporting, that's part of the science, it's not part of it.
There's no settled science on this.
Are you people not aware of the hoax this has all become at East Anglia University at the IPCC, the Himalayan glaciers?
I'm going to tell you something, Dylan.
What's happening with these snowstorms is exactly, according to my climate scientists, I've got some too.
And it's settled as far as I'm concerned, Dylan.
If these things continue, that's exactly what we're going to get with global cooling, which shows you where we are.
This equals global warming.
Here is Morton Kondracki on Fox yesterday afternoon.
This has become theological.
You know, those people who believe in global warming believe it as though it was a statement from God and vice versa.
Rush Limbaugh is convinced that it's human arrogance that even conceives that mankind could be creating global warming.
Well, he's right about that, but the other side does not believe it's a statement from God.
They don't believe there is God.
Global warming liberalism is their religion, not progressivism.
You know, you folks, I'm getting pounded here by a couple people on this.
Don't be fooled by this.
This term progressive, I know the history of it.
It's nothing more than a mask.
George Lackoff rhymes with the liberals come up with all kinds of lingo designed to disguise who they really are.
They know the terms that hurt them.
Progressive doesn't hurt them.
With the average ordinary American, you go out and do a poll.
Okay, are you progressive, conservative, or liberal?
Progressive will end up higher than liberal.
More people because they think that sounds good.
I'm progressive.
I'm forward-thinking.
I'm an imaginary guy, or imaginative guy.
Howard Feynman, MSNBC countdown with the whoever.
Question, life on earth going to be threatened because the people who recognized and warned about climate change didn't just go with that phrase climate change, instead chose global warming, opening the opportunity for Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin to kill us all.
Well, I do think that labels matter, and in retrospect, simply focusing on warming was a mistake, just in terms of the politics and the salesmanship of what is undoubtedly a really, really big problem.
But it's also now gotten all wrapped up in Obama and Gore and the whole big government idea.
Let me ask, Howard, how in the world is something science political?
The very fact this is political ought to tell every one of you it's not science.
Gee whiz.
Yeah, they goofed up.
They called it global warming.
And I don't know how I'm going to kill us all, but politics, the salesmanship of what is undoubtedly a really big, it's a hoax.
I got an email.
Rush, I took your advice.
I ordered my wife the 100 blooms of love from Pro Flowers for Valentine's.
And all I'm going to say is the 100 blooms equaled 100 booms last night.
Thank you, Rush, in all caps.
The 100 blooms of love.
It's just one of the many Valentine's arrangements that you can choose to send to the person or people that matter most to you this Valentine's.
I had 100 blooms of love, 100 booms.
I mean, that's boom with an M, snurdly with an M. 100 blooms of love, 100 booms.
Man, Valentine's Day is Sunday.
Don't distract me in here with your juvenile thought process.
Dawn wants to know what a boom is.
Oh, geez.
Here, I continue to be distracted.
I don't have much time here.
Valentine's Day is Sunday.
Proflowers.com.
Go to rushproflowers.com.
Just do that.
Rushproflowers.com.
Assorted roses, one dozen red, two dozen assorted, $29.99 free glass vase, free truffles, 30 bucks in savings.
These things last for seven days.
And you can get them delivered Sunday.
They have a special deal with FedEx to deliver these things on Valentine's Day.
You can call them 800PRO Flowers.
Mention you heard it here.
Even better, go to rushproflowers.com.
That's rushproflowers.com.
Find anything there you want for Valentine's Day.
Get it out.
And maybe you too can experience a dozen, two dozen, maybe even a hundred booms the day they arrive.
Black leaders braved the blizzard and went to the Oval Office yesterday.
That would be the Reverend Sharpton, Benjamin Jealous.
Suspiciously missing was the Reverend Docs.
And they said their focus was not jobs for African Americans, but the poor in general.
That's just one group not happy with Obama.
Big labor is not happy.
Big Hispanic is not happy with Obama.
Big gay rights not happy with Obama.
There's a whole bunch of the base not happy with Obama.
We will chronicle it in our morning update coming up here.
Well, we're going to record it in mere moments.
You'll hear it tomorrow on video in a few minutes.
▲
Export Selection