All Episodes
Previous Next
April 21, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:31
April 21, 2010, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Yesterday on this program, ladies and gentlemen.
Yesterday on this program.
Well, I didn't on this program say it.
I mentioned in a commercial break to the staff.
A thought.
And they all hit the ceiling.
Don't say that.
You're finished, and that means we're finished.
Don't say that.
Well, turns out I don't have to say it.
Somebody else has.
In the New York Post.
Hi.
How are you, ladies and gentlemen?
Rush Limbaugh here, and it's already Wednesday.
The fastest week in media.
I, of course, the uh always uh on top of my game, L Rush Bowl.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program today, 800 282-2882, the email address, L Rushball at EIB net.com yesterday, as you uh just heard.
I was just kidding around here and describing what I think uh Obama's trip to New York might accomplish.
Honest Olb going to the Cooper Union tomorrow to pitch this financial regulatory reform legislation.
Staff begged me not to say to you what I had said to them.
Not out of any fear what would happen to me, uh the fear would be what would happen to them if something happened to me.
Well, Michael Goodwin today in the New York Post.
Welcome Obama to the city you want to ruin.
Welcome to New York, Mr. President.
Now go home and leave us alone, please.
When Obama brings his war against Wall Street here tomorrow, Obama isn't coming to praise Gotham.
He is coming to bury us.
We're not dead yet, but no thanks to him and his policies.
His assaults on New York ought to be counted in the NYPD crime statistics.
They're doing more damage than a year's worth of stick-ups, and still the hits keep coming.
Under Obama's initial plan.
Cops in the feds already would be locking down the Foley Square Courthouse area to give the precious colleague Sheikh Mohammed his constitutional rights.
Nary a New Yorker wants that trial here, but the Attorney General insists the city is not off the table.
Think about that.
Would you buy an apartment or open a business anywhere near the courthouse if you thought the area would be turned into an armed camp, possibly for years.
For this.
How dare Obama and Holder continue to even consider bringing the horror show here after the police commissioner Ray Kelly said it would make New York more of a target for Islamic radicals.
Oops.
White House doesn't say Islamic radicals anymore, or jihad or war on terror.
See, 19 humans carried out the man-cause disaster on 9-11.
Speaking of man-cause disasters, the health care monstrosity certainly qualifies.
New Yorkers will pay in additional six and a half billion dollars a year in federal tax increases once the law is fully implemented.
A mayor is putting that number out, which will deprive the city of money that could be spent on housing, entertainment, and hiring other New Yorkers.
Instead, the cash will go to Washington to subsidize the federal bureaucracy and other cities and states.
It's worth repeating that Obama could not have pulled off this heist without inside help.
Only one of the thirteen members of the House who allegedly represent the city voted against the health measure.
All thirteen are Democrats, as are the state's two senators, but only Mike McMahon of Staten Island voted no.
For his courage, he got berated by the White House and threats from labor groups that politically he's a dead man.
Now it's Wall Street's turn in the crosshairs.
With Democrats moving their sweeping package of financial restrictions on the Senate floor, it takes a fool to believe the timing of the SEC charge of fraud against Goldman Sachs was a coincidence.
Senate Majority Leader Dingy Harry Reed added to the suspicions with his initial reaction.
I am pleased, he said, that the Obama administration is using all of the tools in its arsenal to bring accountability to Wall Street.
On Monday, when Obama announced he was coming to Cooper Union, Dingy Harry again railed against Wall Street, getting so carried away he went after excess greed.
Guess that's worse Than ordinary greed.
Biden jumped in the fray as well.
But greed comes in many guises.
A president who rakes in millions of dollars in contributions from New York banks then goes after them, like they are witches in Salem, has no respect for decency or capitalism.
Then again, those masters of the universe deserve what they get.
Executives from Goldman, Morgan Stanley, City, J.P. Morgan Chase, and UBS didn't just back Obama, who now aims to turn them into political pinatas for the midterm elections.
Their contributions bought the rope he's using for their hanging.
Maybe they're not so smart after all.
So you have here a columnist, Michael Goodwin, formerly of the Daily News, now of the New York Post, basically saying Obama is heading into New York this week to finish it off.
To complete the work others started but failed to accomplish.
So he said it.
It's out there.
There's also an interesting piece on this whole Goldman Sachs thing.
It's...
And I put it down in the stack because I was going to go to some other things when the program started, just to have a little variety here, but I saw the Michael Goodwin piece and I had to go I had to start with it.
So here it is.
This is from uh William Jacobson.
And his blog is Legal Insurrection.
He is a professor of law, clinical professor of law at Cornell.
Now they're coming for Goldman Sachs.
It would be easy to cheer as the Obama administration seeks to take down Goldman Sachs after all Goldman's become a proxy for Wall Street since so many of the old icons no longer exist or have been consumed as a result of the 2008 credit crunch.
But don't cheer too quickly this time.
As even the New York Times now is admitting the actual civil charges against Goldman are far from clear-cut, which we pointed out yesterday.
NCNBC is on that case today.
Civil charges by the government can bring down an entire organization for reasons having nothing to do with the charges.
As we speak, there is a clamor in Britain for the government to cease doing business with Goldman Sachs as a result of the charges.
Expect the same thing to happen here as Democrats ratchet up the crisis atmosphere to get a quick vote on financial regulations, which would give the government vast powers over the financial services industry.
As I documented yesterday, writes Mr. Jacobson, the Goldman Sachs charges are being politicized for the administration's purposes.
Well, I mean, not to get into it, he said she said, but I pointed this out Friday.
Anyway, Goldman is not the first they came for it.
This administration already has emasculated the entire private health insurance industry.
They have brought the health of hundreds of millions of people under its regulatory control through Obamacare.
They have demonized as racists and extremists, law-abiding patriotic Americans who spoke out for individual freedom and constitutional federalism.
The pharmaceutical industry was evil until it cut a deal and bought advertising in support of Obamacare, and doctors were greedy as they performed unnecessary surgeries so they could build more until the AMA joined the Obama chorus.
One center of power after another fell in line in the year-long push for Obamacare.
If the administration gets its way on cap and trade, the government will control through regulation.
Virtually all industry, through industry's lifeblood, the consumption of carbon-based energy.
State autonomy also is dwindling, and those who point out the federal government is limited to enumerated powers are derided as tenthers.
Tenth Amendment, people.
There are few remaining entities which can stand up to the overweening encroachment of the federal government.
Taking down the leading, and in many ways last remaining, Wall Street powerhouse, will remove yet another center of private industry power.
The serial removal of centers of power outside the federal government in Washington is a worrisome trend, which becomes more difficult to reverse as the dominoes fall.
Don't wish too hard for the demise of Goldman Sachs, because Goldman Sachs is not the endgame.
Now, this is a different take than mine, which is why I'm sharing it with you.
Again, this is legal insurrection, a blog, a rising up against established authority.
It's by William Jacobson, associate clinical professor of law at Cornell.
Now, my theory has been that Goldman's in on this.
That they'd gladly pay the fine, if there is one that results from this, in order to be in bed with the Obama administration because there are already so many former Goldman people at high levels of government, from treasury, many of them have been Treasury Secretary.
Michelle Balkan has a great piece today, in fact, documenting all of them and where they are and what they're doing in the Obama administration.
Now Mr. Jacobson clearly thinks that the uh administration is out to destroy Goldman Sachs and take over the entire financial services industry via regulation.
And that's how you can do it.
You don't have to go out and buy these outfits.
You don't have to go out and take them over.
You can just regulate them into non-existence.
Which is what he fears is happening.
So this is a new take on this.
I have audio sound bites seven through seventeen on my roster today, are exclusively about either Goldman and this charge or the financial regulatory reform bill, and they come from people across the spectrum.
So we'll have those.
Other exciting things in the stack of stuff as well, such as this.
New Jersey voters took a stand yesterday on screw spending and property taxes.
They rejected 260 out of 479 screw budgets across 19 counties, according to unofficial results in statewide school elections.
In other words, and this is from the New Jersey Star Ledger.
New Jersey voters have rejected school budgets.
They have sided with the governor.
Chris Christie, the teachers this week were posting things on Facebook, making fun of Christy about being fat, saying he ought to die, and this sort of thing.
And so here you have uh the uh the freeloaders in one sense, uh demanding not to be cut, not to have to share in any of the pain that's uh that's coming down the pike.
Also, from the gateway pundit, Acorn CEO Bertha Lewis.
Now, this is not going to surprise anybody.
Well, it might surprise some people on Fox.
It might surprise some people in SNBC.
Acorn CEO Bertha Lewis praises socialism, bashes conservatives at a socialist youth conference.
Over a hundred and fifty youths and student activists gathered at Norman Thomas High School in New York City, March 5 through 7 this year.
The young Democrat Socialists, YDS, activist progressive youth, converged to discuss how to amplify left-wing pressure on the establishment.
These young radicals came from Texas, Indiana, Kansas, Florida, Rhode Island, Oregon, and more.
Bertha Lewis.
Acorn, head honcho, spoke at the winter conference of the young democratic socialists in March, praising socialism and attacking conservatism in her talk.
I only mention this because we have some people holding out, even on our side of the media.
Now you're not a socialist.
You're not a socialist.
It's it's out, it's right out in front of everybody's eyes.
It's happening right in front of everybody's eyes.
They're not even bothering to hide it.
So whenever they bally who themselves in this way, we pointed out.
This is maddening.
A U.S. sailor, not a sailor, a SEAL.
I'm sorry, U.S. sailor did testify Wednesday he saw a Navy SEAL punch an Iraqi prisoner suspected of masterminding the killings of 204 of our private security contractors as the court-martial of another member of the SEALs opened at a military base outside Baghdad.
A Navy SEAL capturing people who had killed Americans, happened to punch one of them in the face, and is being court-martialed for the mis in Baghdad.
In Iraq, the scene of the crime.
Meanwhile, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gets a trial in the U.S., our own soldiers do not.
What on earth are we trying to prove here, except that we're fools?
Who will happily turn on even our bravest men when they're carrying out their most dangerous duties?
All for what?
To show that we're not the mean, rotten SOB nation?
Obama thinks we have been.
All told here one has to say that this prosecution best represents all that is wrong with the Obama administration's prosecution of the war on terror.
After all the outrageous things they've done, this is really saying something.
To put a U.S. Navy SEAL on trial for roughing up a terrorist who killed Americans.
And to do so in Baghdad, there's a story out there, the uh automobile salesman at General Motors, automobile salesman at AP.
An excited headline, breathlessly so, GM pays back government loans from U.S. Canada.
No, they didn't.
The story makes sure here, listen to lead.
General Motors has repaid the $8.1 billion in loans it got from the U.S. and Canadian governments.
A move its CEO says is a sign that the automaker is on the road to recovery.
Now, if you only read the headline and the lead paragraph, you'd get the distinct impression that what?
They paid it all back, right?
You get the distinct impression that GM has fully repaid all the money they've gotten from the U.S. and Canadian governments.
Why would the AP want to mislead its readers like this?
In fact, the General Motors outfit got uh total of $61.5 billion from the U.S. and Canada, but now it shouted from the rooftop when they paid back a mere $8 billion.
That's what they've paid back.
They have paid back a total of 13% of the government loan.
And here the car salesman from the Associated Press report that they fully paid it back.
Which they have not.
And one thing that they don't point out here very stridently, of course, leaving it to me who can read the stitches on the fastball.
They had the money to do this.
Where'd they get some of the $8 billion to pay back?
They did it by jettising 65,000 jobs.
And the pensions that go with them.
So they fired 650, 65,000 people, got rid of their pensions, and they said that they are paying it back.
They haven't earned it.
They're cutting.
And it's only because Obama owns the car companies along with the UAW, that you can fire 65,000 Union people.
Quick timeout.
Back after this.
Don't go anywhere.
I am Rush Limbaugh, America's truth detector, and a doctor of democracy.
And I might add America's real anchor man.
Here on the EIB network direct to you from the Limbaugh Institute.
Now, this piece, William Jacobson from Cornell.
He used the term I haven't heard yet, tenthers.
Now, by calling people who want to uphold the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution tenthers, are people using that term, I assume it's the state control media?
Are they trying to compare the tenthers to the berthers?
Are they saying it's preposterous that somehow the Tenth Amendment's a conspiracy theory?
That somebody actually wants to uphold the Tenth Amendment is a tenther?
As though they wear tinfoil hats and are kooks.
And have you heard, by the way, that Mikhail Segeevich Gorbachev has suggested that Obama is the new Gorbachev?
Well, to understand this, what did Mr. Gorbachev do?
According to him, and the slavish American drive-by media, Mr. Gorbachev single-handedly, all by himself, dissolved the evil rotten Soviet Union and did away with their communist system.
Reagan had nothing to do with it.
Thatcher had nothing to do with it.
Star Wars had nothing to do with it.
No, no, no.
Mikhail Segevich Gorbachev, who created and caused many, many Gorbasms out there, single-handedly, dissolved the Soviet Union, did away with their communist system.
So why is he calling himself?
Why is he calling Obama the new Gorbachev?
Well, it fits.
By the way, Gorbachev did this without firing a shot, right?
So do we.
What's Obama doing to our capitalist system?
Is he not totally dismantling it?
Is he not in the process of dissolving it?
All without firing a shot.
If you look at it that way, Gorbachev sees himself in Obama.
Makes perfect sense.
By the way, no more Hitler discovered videos on YouTube.
This is a shocking crime back in a second.
There are no limits on the excellence in broadcasting network.
How many of you have ever watched a YouTube Hitler Discovers X video?
Hitler find out finds out the iPad does not have a phone.
Hitler finds out Rush Limbaugh won the dance contest at the Miss America pageant, isn't it?
The uh it's about a four-minute clip that people have been using under the pretense uh, well, no pretense, under the uh uh guise of fair usage.
They thought it's from a movie called Downfall.
I had never heard of the movie.
It stars Bruno Gans, he's the uh guy who plays Hitler, and it's subtitled in English.
I never heard of the movie until I saw these videos.
So I went I bought the movie.
I don't rent movies, as you people well know.
I I buy them.
And I put it in my colleague escape system, and it is a fantastically good movie.
It's like 2002 or 2004.
Anyway, the uh copyright owner, which is Konstantin Film, has decided to take down all the Hitler videos off of YouTube based on copyright infringement, no more Hitler parodies.
And I'm thinking, what a what a mistake this is for the because if it weren't for these parodies, I would have never discovered their movie.
I would have never bought the movie.
I would have never heard of the movie Downfall is not a U.S. production.
I would have never heard of it were it not for.
I really hope Constantine film reconsiders this.
Uh, because they're just and they did this to add insult to injury.
They did this yesterday on Hitler's birthday.
And so there's now a parody video with no video.
Just a black screen transcribed Hitler upset that he's been banned from the video.
And from the internet.
He's he's just learned that uh that he's been banned.
It's it's it's it's just a shame.
Arizona House.
Arizona House of Representatives on Monday voted for a provision that would require President Obama to show his birth certificate if he hopes to be on the state's ballot when he runs for reelection.
Now, this works for me.
The states hold the key, getting us out of the mess that we're in here.
The Arizona House voted 31 to 22 to add the provision to a separate bill.
The measure still faces a formal vote.
It would require U.S. presidential candidates who want to appear on the ballot in Arizona to submit documents proving they meet the constitutional requirements to be president.
Like a uh a birth certificate, certification of live birth, uh, maybe a passport.
Phoenix Democrat representative Kirsten Sonema said the bill is one of several measures that are making Arizona the laughing stock of the nation.
Mesa Republican Representative Cecil Ash said he had no reason to doubt Obama's citizenship, but supports the measure because it could help end the doubt that other people have.
Arizona has also passed a very stringent anti-illegal immigration law, and it's it's so it's it's so good that the Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles, the diocese, has compared them to Nazis and totalitarians.
Yeah, his diocese is a lot of Hispanic and Latino people, so he feels the need uh to defend them.
Washington Post today is the SEC versus Goldman case is, you know, Who's really at fault here?
And as you read the story, you become convinced here that this is really a weak case that has to have been brought forward to help Obama cover up a second Madoff type case that the SEC let go on for seven years after they knew about it.
This is the guy in Texas.
And he was running a Madoff type Ponzi scheme, and the SEC knew about it.
And one of the theories about the timing of this announcement charges against Goldman Sachs is that it hides and covers up and buries the news that the SEC is finally going after this guy, Sanford was his name, or is his name to cover up their lack of oversight and regulatory uh uh decency with this case.
Unless the SEC is sitting on more evidence than it's laid out so far, writes the Washington Post.
The charge sheet looks pretty flimsy.
If Goldman Sachs has become a poster child for excessive power on Wall Street, the SEC might become a poster child for government power run amok.
It's amazing that the Washington Post just can't see the connection here.
Oh, they can see an SEC as a government agency running amok, but they do not see the ties to the Obama regime.
They cannot connect those dots for some reason.
It's a 22-page SEC complaint.
States that Goldman sold fancy mortgage securities without disclosing that a hedge fund manager, John Paulson, was betting that those same securities would go bad, which is a non-scandal.
When you get right down to it, this is the way the free market works.
Okay, so this guy.
Paulson maybe was allowed to pick some of the mortgages to go in the pool.
These were bad mortgages.
He bet that they were not going to be a good investment because there was no solidity behind them.
But at the same time, there were other people betting that they were.
And the people involved in this, these are sophisticated investors.
And they know the risks of the game.
I mean, Goldman even bet that these would be a winning investment.
They lost money on their bet.
The hedge fund guy made money, made a billion dollars when the uh mortgage-backed securities fell apart.
So that's the Washington Post version of the case.
Finally, the FEC asserts that Goldman, and specifically its young mortgage whiz, Fab Touré, tricked the ACA into believing that Paulson meant to bet on the mortgage's soundness, not the other way around, which is the nub of the case.
And if there's proof that Goldman or Touré was dishonest, the SEC could yet emerge with its reputation intact, but none of the email fragments quoted in the complaint comes close to being a smoking gun.
And then we have this from uh CNBC.
The government has testimony from a Paulson and company official that could contradict its own claims against Goldman Sachs, according to CNBC.
Paolo Pellegrini told the government that he informed ACA management that Paulson intended to bet against or to go short a portfolio of mortgages that ACA was assembling.
If true, the testimony would go directly against government claims that ACA did not know Paulson was hoping that the CDOs, the collateralized debt org obligations would fail and subvert charges that Goldman breached his duty by not informing ACA of Paulson's position.
So if you look at this story, say, well, this is not even a lawsuit, it's a prop.
It's a phony, hollow and flimsy prop, as phony and hollow and flimsy as the Greek columns Obama used at his acceptance speech outdoors in Denver.
The SEC charges against Goldman Sachs are part of a deceitful and probably illegal plan to pass a bill putting the regime's hands around the necks of every significant CEO in the financial sector.
Let's go to the audio soundbite.
David Boies.
You remember him, represented Al Gore in the Florida recount in 2000.
He's a partisan Democrat and has the reputation being a brilliant legal mind.
And he was on with Charlie Rose last night.
Charlie Rose said, David, what do you think of this complaint?
You read the complaint, and you don't really understand what was illegal about what was going on.
What's illegal is misrepresenting.
It's a deception.
And you read the complaint and you see a lot of conclusions, but you don't see much hard evidence.
I happen to think it's no coincidence that it happens to come out just at the time that the administration is going after the financial regulatory reform in Congress.
It's not a coincidence.
David Boy's a partisan Democrat, not a coincidence.
It comes out just at the time the administration's going after the financial regulatory reform in Congress.
Charlie Rose is aghast.
He said, Wait, wait, you think the administration had some influence with the SEC in terms of bringing this complaint now?
I think that there is a climate in Washington that is wants to show aggression in terms of uh regulation.
But I think you've got to be careful that when you bring an SEC complaint as opposed to bringing a bill to change procedures or to add new regulations, this may be a good or bad lawsuit, but it's great politics.
It's moved the administration's re financial reform agenda way ahead.
And I think that sometimes that ends up being a good thing for the society as a whole.
But it raises troublesome issues if you're a lawyer and you believe that cases ought to be brought for what the law says.
It's the kind of thing that makes you want to know more about what's really behind this.
Yeah, I sit here, and knowing what I know about this, I wonder if Charlie Rose is aware that the administration, the regime, went out and bought the search terms, Goldman Sachs S. E.C. at Google.
And when anybody enters Goldman Sachs SEC at Google, they are taken to the regime's website.
A website that is urging people to support the regime's takeover, i.e., reform of the financial industry.
Charlie Rose is aghast that somebody is uh as uh highly reputed as David Boyce thinks that there's not a coincidence here.
Can Charlie Rose not read something other than the New York Times?
I mean, in fact, even the Times, by the way, is um making it clear that the evidence here is extremely flimsy.
The evidence to support the charge.
Don't forget Mr. Jacobson from Cornell.
You don't really need evidence to destroy anybody.
You have a cr you have a complaint like this from the SEC, and you can go a long way toward destroying a firm's reputation without ever getting a conviction or a guilty plea.
That's why Mr. Jacobson from Cornell thinks that this is a play to destroy Goldman Sachs.
Anyway, I got to take a break here because of the constraints of time and the programming format.
Be right back, my folks.
Don't go away.
It's the Rush Limbaugh program, the most listened to radio talk show in the country for many, many, many moons.
Little Indian lingo there.
And yeah, we're gonna get to your phone calls all quick, oh, but more sound by Steve Leisman.
CNBC's Squawkbox Senior Economic Reporter reported this this morning on CNBC about the SEC complaint against Goldman Sachs.
CNBC has learned that the government has testimony from a former top Paulson official that appears to contradict a part of its own case.
Specifically, CNBC has reviewed documents that question the government's contention in its case against Goldman Sachs at the Wall Street firm misled the financial insurance company ACA about Paulson and Company's intentions to short the deal.
Right.
That's what I just reported to you, and uh there's the actual soundbite from CNBC, which is why I say, folks, this is not this is not a lawsuit.
This is a prop.
Don't doubt me on this.
Every aspect of this has been coordinated and organized from the White House.
How can anybody doubt it?
It is what President Obama has always been, an organizer, an agitator.
This is how you do things in this regime.
He's got a nobody at the SEC is gonna pipe up and say the White House made us do it.
The people at the SEC are on the team.
Now, the the the Democrat that runs the show over there is Mary Shapiro.
And it's uh it's sort of like the FCC.
There are three Democrats in the SEC, and there are two Republicans.
Now, Shapiro goes way, way back.
I I think.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this.
I was told yesterday that she was a Reagan appointee, but she's a Democrat, and everybody's held on to her.
So, but she is a Democrat.
She serves here.
Even I don't care what Rama Manuel says, I don't care what Gibbs says, independent agency.
Uh, we found about a New York Times is like you did, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
This administration gets websites in advance, buys keywords, search terms so that their website pops up first on Google and who knows wherever else.
It's just the health care reducts, everything's just being done according to the same playbook.
You create a panic, you create a crisis, you demonize somebody.
You demonize doctors, you demonize the uh the entire medical profession, you demonize insurance companies, demonize big oil, whatever you need to demonized.
The thing that really frustrates me is that the government never gets demonized, and whenever anybody speaks out about these practices in the government, and I point it out, let a CEO try anything Obama has tried in the private sector, and they are in jail.
They are brought up on charges immediately.
Fraud and deceit.
Where is it written that you can't have any distrust of the government?
Where is it written that you cannot question the competence of people in government?
Who are these people in government?
Somebody tell me just the hell who is Barack Obama to run the entire health care business.
Who is Barack Obama to run the American automobile business?
Who is Barack Obama to now take over and regulate the American financial services industry?
Who is he?
Why does nobody question his experience, competence, authority?
Why is it just because he's from the government?
People think, yeah, they're out to protect us, and these guys in the private sector are out to screw us.
It's the other way around.
The people that are being manhandled, screwed, cheated, lied to, defrauded in this country are the victims of government behavior.
I mean, the it is just mind-boggling to me.
We have people who have countless years of experience education in many fields of endeavor in the private sector and to listen to this regime.
They're all crooks.
And they're all out to shaft everybody.
And to enrich themselves, and at the same time, these people are all in bed with the regime.
They all donated to the regime.
They all loved Obama.
They gave Goldman Sachs gave Obama a million dollars.
Harry Reid's out there, you know, demanding all kinds of Republicans return their donations to Goldman Sachs, but where's Obama turning his back?
Returning his.
These guys got what they voted for.
I don't know if they knew what was coming.
I don't know if they're in on the game, if they're going to be protected at the end of all this or not.
Crony capitalism, whatever this is, whatever you want to call it.
I find it simply fascinating that nobody ever questions the competition.
It's not that nobody does.
It's if you do, then you are engaging in sedition.
Sedition?
Sedition?
It's like I said yesterday and Monday.
There's a big difference between people on our side and the people on the regime's side.
It is Obama and his people who have been their whole lives whining and moaning and complaining about government.
Charging government with all kinds of illegal activities.
Their people blow up the Pentagon.
Their people engage in violent protests.
Obama's crowd joins the North Vietnamese in the Vietnam War.
We are oriented toward the love of our country.
We love what this country was.
We understand American exceptionalism and we want to hold on to it.
We want to preserve it for our kids and grandkids and everybody else that comes down the line.
And we're called seditious?
They claim we're engaging in sedition while this country is being dismantled and overthrown from within.
By people who have never liked it.
Everything's 180 degrees out of phase here.
I have to take a break.
What a sterling first hour.
It's just a shame that we ran out of time in the first hour.
first hour.
We always do, though, run out of time when the first hour ends.
However, there's another hour right around the corner, and we will get to it.
And we got some great phone calls lined up as well.
And we barely scratched the surface of the audio sound bites, and I'm just now getting worked up, so there's a lot to hang in for, folks.
Be right back.
▲
Export Selection