Rush Limbaugh Program - May 6, 2010, Thursday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 6, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program

37:38

May 6, 2010, Thursday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's a false alarm out there at JFK, the Emirates no-fly scare.
	JFK, a false alarm, an apparent case of mistaken identity.
	The plane has been cleared for departure, which tells me that there were no white males in their 40s aboard who could be brought in and co-conspirators with the...
	Why is it I can't remember this guy's name?
	I'm fixing.
	It's Faisal Shaddaz.
	For some reason, I'm focusing on that no Sair guy.
	At any rate, isn't it funny?
	I say smirkingly, isn't it funny?
	We keep hearing all of these bogus reports, all of these bogus warnings about the rise of right-wing extremist hate groups, but nothing about the amazingly rapid growth of Islam in the United States since 9-11.
	And in fact, when we do hear about incidents like this Saturday night near disaster at Times Square, immediately the news media gets in gear to excuse it or to justify it or explain it in some way.
	Is the Obama administration going to start asking us for our papers and we get on an airplane now?
	Well, I'm sorry, they already do ask for papers.
	We get on an airplane.
	Never mind.
	That's fundamentally against what America is all about, though.
	Because in Arizona, it's fundamentally what Obama is.
	It's fundamentally against what America is all about.
	They ask for papers.
	New York Times.
	Folks, I have to tell you something.
	I am amazed.
	And I don't read the New York Times much.
	I really don't.
	But I can't escape it in coverage of the terror plot that went awry through sheer dumb luck Saturday in Times Square.
	What is with all this Shahzad coverage in the New York Times?
	I mean, it is everywhere, every day, multiple stories.
	They are flooding the zone with Shahzad stories in the New York Times.
	Now, usually, the New York Times gives Islamic terrorist plots very short shrift.
	They don't talk about them much.
	They try to cover them over, paper them over.
	But look at what all the opportunities this story is giving the Times to push their real agendas here.
	There is the heartbreak of foreclosure due to the Bush administration destruction of the housing market.
	There are highly evil drone attacks in Pakistan started by the evil George Bush.
	There's even the opportunity to propagandize for gun control since Mr. Shahzad had bought a low-powered rifle.
	Have you heard about this rifle a guy bought?
	They keep talking about this guy being a rank amateur.
	He went out and bought a very sophisticated rifle that is as close to a huge pistol as you can get without have to have any papers.
	So if, you know, I'm waiting for Shahzad to claim discrimination for being gay, then the New York Times, I mean a whole front section will be devoted to how this guy is being persecuted.
	Frank Rich would move his column from Sunday to the front page every day that week if it were discovered that Shahzad was claiming discrimination because he's gay.
	Because they're going after every angle of this story that pushes their agenda.
	The heartbreak of foreclosure.
	Bush.
	The drone attacks in Pakistan drove the guy crazy.
	That's Bush.
	Even the opportunity to propagandize for gun control.
	And here, here's an example.
	New York Times, money was changed Shahzad, friend says.
	Theirs was an arranged marriage.
	Two well-educated children of prominent Pakistani family set up through a mutual friend.
	He was the quiet one.
	She was the one who laughed at parties.
	At their wedding in Peshwar six years ago, men and women danced separately, but also together, a rarity at that time, recalled one guest.
	It was such a huge gathering that even their family friends from Cater, Qatar, a Qatar, however you wish to pronounce it, showed up.
	When they returned to the United States, his colleagues at the cosmetics maker Elizabeth Arden celebrated with a small office party.
	The husband, Faisal Shahzad, put photographs of his wife Huma on the desk at the Arden office in Stanford, Connecticut.
	They bought a brand new house for $273,000, 35 miles away on Long Hill Avenue in Shelton.
	By the time they moved in, she was pregnant, the neighbors recalled.
	As another day passed, with Mr. Shahzad talking to investigators about the car bomb, he had admitted driving into Times Square on Saturday.
	Details emerged on Wednesday about the couple and their life together, along with speculation about his radicalization.
	People who knew them, both in Connecticut and in Pakistan, said he had changed in the past year or so, becoming more reserved and more religious as he faced what someone who knows the family well called their financial troubles.
	As a newlywed, the wedding guest said of Mr. Shahzad by email, there was no sign of him being extremist or for that matter, he wasn't a bit religious, religious, but then he got married.
	Marriage radicalized the guy, and then getting married caused him to run out of money.
	So money woes and marriage changed Shahzad.
	So I have a pop quiz for all of you because this story is written sympathetically.
	Well, of course now we understand why he wanted to blow up Times Square.
	He got married and he had money problems.
	Who wouldn't do that?
	So here, ladies and gentlemen, is a pop quiz.
	Complete the following sentence.
	I have money woes after getting married.
	I think I will A, drink more, B, go to church and pray more, A, or C, A and B, or D, blow up Times Square.
	If you chose A, drink more, or B, go to church more, or C, drink more and go to church more, then you are most people.
	If you chose D, you are not most people.
	You are Faisal Shahzad.
	Not to be confused with Kaiser Sojet.
	I think it's another reason why I'm going to confuse this guy's name.
	Have you seen the movie The Usual Suspects?
	Kaiser Sojet, one of the great all-time movie names ever.
	So, money woes.
	Money woes.
	We all have money woes.
	We all get, well, not everybody, but people get married.
	How come it is never mentioned?
	Seriously now, how come it is never mentioned that the Faisal Shahzads skipped out on their mortgage and fled to another country?
	Instead, we are made to feel sorry for them for the bank foreclosing on their house, yet they ran away from the mortgage.
	After all, Mr. Shahzad didn't lose his job or fall behind on his mortgage payments for any particular reason, except that he was probably planning to move to Pakistan to begin his jihad.
	He quit his job.
	He wasn't fired or laid off.
	Indeed, the records show that the Shahzads had tried to flip the house for a lot more money than they had originally paid for it.
	And then when the market went down, they simply tried to sell it for what it had cost them.
	And when that didn't work, then they got really mad at Bush.
	Well, that's what the New York Times wants us to believe.
	So when that didn't work out, they skipped.
	They left the house a total mess.
	So where is the sympathy for Chase Manhattan back?
	I don't expect there to be any.
	I'm just, they're the ones that got stiffed here.
	Chase Manhattan got screwed.
	Where is the sympathy for them?
	They're now out more than $200,000 for giving a bad mortgage to a guy with dual citizenship.
	And how, by the way, did he get citizenship so fast after getting married?
	Michelle Malkin had a pretty good piece yesterday on how this is becoming a technique of jihadists.
	They come to the country, they marry here, and it speeds up their citizenship process.
	And that allows them to travel freely and move around the country to do whatever they want to do.
	Now, I'm told that Michelle Malkin is wrong about one thing, that they were married in 2004, not 2008.
	Bottom line is that there's still a lot of information about the Faisal Shahzads.
	It doesn't sound like we're talking about a couple we invite over for a cocktail party, except for the little problem here that they tried to blow up Times Square.
	But we might even want to have them over if we work at the New York Times, because what more can we learn about what's wrong with our stinking country when Bush ran it that we haven't been able to publish in our pages because we haven't ferreted all out from CBS News,
	not to be confused with the New York Times, since Faisal Shahzad's arrest and the fatal Times Square car bombing, authorities have been looking closely at whether the Pakistan Taliban played a role in planning the attack.
	A source told CBS News that it is reasonably plausible the militant group was involved.
	The New York Times first reported the mounting evidence indicating just that.
	CBS News received a report from freelance journalist Beroz Khan on Thursday indicating that the Taliban was now trying to distance itself from Shahzad, probably because he did such a bad job here.
	You know, we went back and forth.
	Maybe it was a suicide bomber that got scared.
	No, it couldn't have been a suicide bomber because he wouldn't have had alarm clocks.
	No suicide bomber goes with an alarm clock.
	Suicide bomber or a getaway car.
	Suicide bomber goes in with a detonator.
	Alzam Tariq, the group's spokesman, denied the link to the suspect while praising his bravery.
	This is a noble job.
	We pray that all the Muslim youths should follow Faisal Shahzad, but he's not part of our network.
	But he might be.
	The Pakistan Taliban now say that this bomb was one of their plots.
	How soon before the left picks this up?
	Assuming the Taliban didn't get the idea from the press in the first place, which is entirely possible.
	Well, Mr. Snirtley, I'm not aware of whether or not Mr. and Mrs. Shahzad, well, Mr. doesn't matter in this case.
	I'm not aware of Mrs. Shahzad having an abortion.
	If she had had an abortion, it might have relieved some of the financial pressure.
	Well, but, well, but there was already enough pressure with being foreclosed on and not having a good enough job and Bush drone attacks in Pakistan and all the rotten things being said about Obama.
	I don't know if he had to pay taxes.
	I don't know.
	We're still learning things.
	New York Times on the case.
	They really are.
	And we'll have more details as they become available.
	Right now, we have to take a, well, she wore a burqa and yet she was the wife of the party, according to the New York Times.
	How many?
	I guess it's all in the eyes.
	But aside from her wearing a burqa, they were just like any other Connecticut couple, having trouble meeting the mortgage, housing bubble caused by Bush.
	Just money woes.
	And like we all do, we wanted to blow up Times Square.
	All right, one more thing here on Faisal Shahzad and the Pakistan Taliban.
	The Taliban's announcement was: this is a noble job, and we pray that all Muslim youths should follow Faisal Shahzad, but he is not part of our network, Tariq said.
	Tariq said that the plot was, quote, hatched by the United States and its allies to trap Muslim and Pakistan youth in terror activities, unquote.
	So the Pakistan Taliban has accused the Obama regime of staging the whole thing to then blame Muslims and Pakistan youth for jihad.
	Will the media pick up on this like they picked up on something I didn't say, that the regime blew up the oil rig?
	Remember that email chain going all over the country the past two or three days that I accused the regime of blowing up the rig, which I never did.
	And now the Taliban's accusing Obama of plotting this whole incident and entrapping this poor guy who all he had was money woes.
	Try this headline from the New York Times.
	CNN and CBS in talks to gather news together.
	CBS and CNN, two suitors with a long history of courtship, have engaged in direct talks in recent weeks about more extensive combinations of their news resources, according to several executives who have been briefed on the discussions.
	So here you have two news organizations literally going down the tubes, now thinking of tying their anchors to each other and punching even further.
	It's amazing.
	All right, to the folks, people have patiently waited.
	We'll start in Cave Creek, Arizona.
	Susie, welcome to the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Thank you, Rush, for taking my call.
	Yes, ma'am.
	As a citizen of Arizona and a citizen of the United States of America, I am outraged that arrogant Al flies into our state, whips a crowd up into a frenzy, marching down the street singing, we are human, we have rights.
	When I doubt very seriously if he has even looked at our immigration bill that was carefully crafted by conscientious legislators to follow the federal law down to the cross T and dotted I.
	I am outraged.
	I wonder if the man went and fed with the widows of policemen who have been killed by illegal aliens.
	I wonder if he went down to the border and talked to the ranchers who have been terrorized for years and their property is trashed and the drug runners that are murdering people in this state.
	And I think it's a compassionate law because every day on the news, the police are going into these houses that they call drop houses, that these coyotes have just left these poor people and they have no food and no water, and there's 50 to 60 people in a home, can't speak English, doesn't know where to go, what to do.
	Trucks are stopped on our highways all the time, crammed filled with illegals, no air conditioning.
	It's almost 100 degrees here in Arizona.
	I am sick and tired of these people who think that Arizona is biased and racist.
	Anybody who knows me can tell you that I don't have a biased racist bone in my body.
	But this bill is necessary.
	Yeah, everything you say is exactly true, except, well, no, except.
	But the point is, Reverend Sharpton doesn't care what the bill says.
	He doesn't care about the circumstances that you just described.
	None of that is relevant to him.
	What you are the victim of is an orchestrated campaign to misrepresent the language in the bill.
	That's right.
	To say that you are profiling Mexican and Hispanic looking people and you're going to just, whenever we're spotted, wherever they're spotted, and you're going to have lookouts, when they're spotted, you're going to descend on them, you're going to sick them up, and you're going to transport them, you're going to do so, put them in jail.
	And it's made to order this perfect misrepresentation of this bill is made to order for someone whose career has been made on dividing people, creating angst and tumult and chaos and keeping his race business alive.
	He wouldn't have anything to do if there weren't a crisis.
	Right.
	But the reason I mention this to you is that the way to fight this is not say, Reverend Sharpton, have you read the bill?
	Reverend Sharpton, do you understand nobody here is racist?
	Reverend Sharpton, do you understand?
	The way to fight this is, Reverend Sharpton, we know what you're trying to do, and you're not going to get away with it.
	You ought to be ashamed of yourself or come up.
	But don't, the merits here are not what is at stake.
	It is for you in the end, but that's not the way to beat this back because you're playing on two different fields.
	But the news media is not going to present it that way, the mainstream news.
	They're going to present it as, I mean, I saw the news last night, and here they show pictures of the Reverend walking by the sun's stadium while the sun, no sons, are in there playing.
	Exactly right.
	Exactly.
	I mean, it's all made to order.
	Oh, I know.
	It's right on the playbook.
	It's infiliating.
	And then all of these companies that are supposedly going to boycott our state, I'm with you.
	I think that we should give them illegals, maps to San Francisco with a list of the agencies that will help them.
	And New York.
	I mean, I think the governor ought to call a press conference.
	We're going to have one-way vouchers, one-way travel vouchers to New York and San Francisco.
	And here is a map of San Francisco where you can go to get this benefit and that benefit.
	Here is where you go in New York to get this benefit and that benefit.
	Because both California, there are a lot of companies starting.
	To show you how I mean cowardice is rearing its ugly head here all over the place.
	You get to the point you say, what can we do for Arizona in this?
	Maybe people need to schedule conventions there, maybe people need to schedule vacations there.
	The problem is, if the residents don't feel safe and that's really at the crux of this be right back.
	Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have Rush Limbaugh in total control in charge, doubting myself never, 800-282-2882 on fire and enjoying every flame and smoldering ember.
	Phone numbers 800-282-2882, email address, lrushbo at eibnet.com.
	Do you know, reportedly now, reportedly, 2,000 people a year are killed by illegal aliens.
	That's two-thirds of the number killed at 9-11.
	Now, they're not all killed at once, and we don't see it happen.
	But nevertheless, 2,000 Americans are killed every year by illegal aliens.
	Where's the outrage?
	There is no outrage.
	Instead, the regime and the regime watchdog media are so unconcerned that they don't even keep track of the number.
	They're so unconcerned they're outraged at any action people at risk take to try to protect themselves.
	Look at, look at the number of people being killed every year by illegals in Arizona, the people of Arizona taking action to protect themselves.
	And what is the focus?
	What is the outrage?
	The outrage is on the people trying to take steps to protect themselves.
	Besides the people killed, how about those who are simply assaulted and raped?
	But don't die.
	You know what one of the reasons for the American Revolution was?
	One of the reasons for the American Revolution was the so-called intolerable acts, was the quartering, the housing of British troops in American houses.
	That was one of the many contributing factors to the American Revolution.
	Now, what is this invasion but forcing us to let illegal aliens into people's homes?
	We've heard the stories people have called here.
	People are afraid to leave their houses for very long because they're afraid when they come back, they're going to be occupied by armed gangs.
	A couple of interesting stories here from the politico.
	Hispanics unhappy with Democrat shift.
	To get an idea of how far Democrats have moved to the right on the issue of immigration reform, consider this.
	The Obama regime's enforcement efforts in 2009 led to the deportation of 387,790 illegal immigrants, a 5% jump increase over the Bush administration's record in 2008.
	And this, a liberal Democrat senator from New York, is a co-sponsor of a measure that includes what civil libertarians fear could become the first national ID card.
	And this, a PowerPoint presentation offering guidance for Democrats in the coming Senate debate, concludes that the most persuasive argument to voters for supporting reform is actually a classic Republican pitch because it will force illegal immigrants to pay their fair share of taxes.
	The Democrats' tough love approach to immigration aims both to foster Republican support for a bill and to avoid claims that Democrats are soft on crime and security issues.
	But for some advocates of amnesty, the Democrats' accommodating right turn has gone so far that it is becoming a liability in the long fight to pass amnesty.
	After all, why should the enforcement first crowd come to the table when they don't have to?
	So this story goes on and on and on here about how Hispanics are unhappy with the Democrats supposedly becoming soft, going soft on this in order to get the bill passed.
	Then I just saw this one up on MessNBC, so I had to go get it.
	Here's the headline, Rove, G-O-P, plot, vast network to reclaim power.
	The Republican Party's best-connected political operatives have quietly built a massive fundraising, organizing, and advertising machine based on the model assembled by Democrats early in the decade with the same ambitious goal to recapture Congress in the White House.
	Who knew?
	Who knew?
	Well, yeah, since I am Republican leader Rush Limbo, I must have known about this.
	Well, we were hoping to keep the fact that we want to reclaim power secret.
	I don't know how it leaked.
	Can you imagine?
	We did everything we could to keep the fact that we want to try to win back the House and the White.
	We didn't want anybody to know that.
	And somehow it's leaked out and now the whole plan's blown to Smithereens because they know that's what we want to do.
	The Politico, they're really on the Politico's discovered it.
	I don't know who's leaking.
	It might have been Rove.
	It could have been Gillespie.
	I don't know who the world was leaking this.
	Doesn't everybody know that the only way that you can get the White House back is to make sure nobody knows that's what you're trying to do?
	Doesn't everybody know the only way we can win the House back is to make sure that nobody has any idea that that's our objective?
	But somebody in our group is talking.
	Well, I will deal with them harshly when I find out who it is.
	I mean, imagine, folks.
	I mean, we've been working on this, I'm myself for 20 years.
	I've been working for 20 years on amassing power at the highest levels of the government, and somebody has blown the scheme now by saying this is what we want to do.
	Let's see what else this story says.
	What else am I going to have to deal with here?
	These new groups could give Republicans and their allies a powerful campaign apparatus separate from the Republican National Committee.
	Carl Rove, political architect of the Bush presidency, and Ed Gillespie, former Republican Party chairman, are the most prominent forces behind what is in effect a network of five overlapping groups, three of which were started in the past few months.
	The operating assumptions of Rove and Gillespie and the other organizers is that despite the historical dominance of Republican fundraising and organizing, the GOP has been outmaneuvered by Democrats and their allies in recent years, and it's time to strike back.
	Gillespie, who's talking?
	Tisk Tisk.
	Gillespie said where they have a chess piece on the board, we need a chess piece on the board.
	Where they have a queen, we shouldn't have three pawns.
	The network, which doesn't have a name yet, attempts to replicate the Democracy Alliance, an umbrella group founded in 2005 and funded by Soros and other billionaires, and to borrow tactics from liberal groups established to help Democrats regain power after eight years of the Bush administration.
	Rove, currently on a book tour to disguise his movements, has provided a laying on of hands for the groups, as one organizer put it, by encouraging major Republican donors to support him as part of the Republican path to revival.
	Carl has always said people call us a vast right-wing conspiracy, but we're really a half-baked right-wing conspiracy.
	Now he wants to get more serious.
	Well, I've read the whole story and my name has not surfaced, nor has the time of our next meeting, nor has the location of our next meeting been leaked or if it's been leaked.
	The Politico didn't publish that.
	Man, I don't know, folks.
	I told you this day started off strange, that everything that everybody else thought was interesting was boring to me, and I didn't quite understand what irrelevance was.
	And now my wife's work, defeating Democrats, has leaked.
	For 20 years, I've managed to keep that a secret.
	For 20 years, my plot to regain political power has been a secret that nobody knew.
	But now somebody in our group is talking.
	And right here it is in the headline.
	Rove, GOP, plot vast network to reclaim power.
	We wanted them to think we were happy, you know, being chump change.
	And now they know that what we want to do is win elections.
	I don't know how this happened, but I'm going to have to really, I'm going to have to go back to the drawing board on this because when that kind of stuff leaks out, when somebody as powerful as the Politico realizes that our objective here is to win elections, we got a problem.
	You know, it's a shame that the producers, the owners of the rights of the movie Downfall, where Hitler discovers that it's all falling apart on him.
	What a great Hitler downfall tape this would be.
	The discovery by the Politico of a sinister plan hatched by me and Rov and Gillespie to win elections.
	Can you imagine Hitler going berserk when his aides tell him that instead of just sitting idly by and accepting defeat, we were actually going to try to win an election or two and Hitler blowing up.
	Oh, yes, my friends, it was a sinister plot that we had concocted.
	We kept it secret here for a number of years.
	But those intrepid reporters at the Politico have uncovered our master plan, our secret plot.
	By the way, you remember the movie Airport?
	Follow me on this now.
	The plot of the movie Airport revolved around a guy with money woes.
	He built a bomb.
	He intended to blow it up on the plane and die.
	He was a domestic American suicide bomber so that his wife could get his life insurance proceeds.
	Remember?
	Now, I think the jihadis, be they the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, missing a golden business opportunity here, go out and just recruit people.
	The New York Times is providing the blueprint.
	The Taliban al-Qaeda simply recruit people who lost their house because of Bush's economy.
	Give them money to pay the premium for a million-dollar life insurance policy, then go steal a car, preferably an SUV, pack it with explosives, have these poor people drive the car to Times Square, make sure that there is a white guy in his 40s nearby when you'll be caught on video when you park the car, and then light the bomb and stand next to it.
	And then the Burqa babe, the wife, a terrorist back home, would get the insurance company payout.
	So it'd be a double whammy on America.
	You could blow up Times Square, any other target, plus get insurance company, evil American insurance companies, to pay the jihad.
	And the New York Times has provided the blueprint for this in their exhaustive, extensive coverage here on Kaiser Sojet.
	What is this?
	No, you don't pay the mortgage.
	You run out of the mortgage.
	That's all.
	No, you run out on the mortgage because you can't pay any more because Bush has screwed you over.
	No, the million-dollar payoff goes over to the training camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan.
	No, no, no, no.
	The payoff goes to finance jihad training.
	That's the opportunity they're missing here.
	You can kill two or three birds.
	I do expect a call from the Secret Service on this or maybe the Department of Justice.
	But I'm just going to direct them to the New York Times.
	It's a twofer.
	You fund more terrorism.
	You get rid of terrorists that are willing to die.
	And you get even with evil American insurance companies.
	I mean, it's actually threesome here.
	And as I said, the New York Times has got the blueprint for how it ought to be done.
	Maybe it is in the process of being done.
	And we're just catching up on it right now.
	According to one credit source, 5,000 to 10,000 credit card numbers are stolen every day.
	I'm working with a woman on a huge project in mid-July.
	She had her purse stolen Monday or sometime over the weekend.
	And in the purse, all the credit cards, BlackBerry, whatever she was using.
	It was Panic City.
	She had Life Luck.
	So the credit cards were rendered null and void.
	Some people, identity information is stolen in cyberspace, but in tough economic times, crooks are getting personal information the old way.
	They're even dumpster diving.
	In addition, for food, they're going in there for your old mail.
	Thieves can get your name, your address, your account information, even your mother's maiden name from certain pieces of mail.
	Now, LifeLock's out there, and it's waiting for you to access it.
	Nobody's going to thoroughly, positively, all the time stop identity theft, but Life Lock comes closer to it than anybody else, and they've got a great track record.
	Why would you go to anybody but Life Lock?
	They are the industry leader.
	They protect your information and they will never sell it like some other companies do.
	800-440-4833 is the phone number, 10% off a ridiculously low price anyway, each year for Life Lock, just by mentioning the offer code Rush.
	That's 1-800-440-4833.
	Offer code Rush for Life Lock, Whippany, New Jersey.
	As we return to the phones, Rich, thank you for calling, sir.
	Great to have you here.
	Longtime listener.
	Thanks for having me.
	You bet.
	You got me ranting before in a rant I've given friends at work and relatives who are unlucky to hear me, but the idea that government is inherently almost fraudulent in that it never delivers what it says it's going to deliver.
	You look at the systems we have in place to prevent terror.
	You look at the systems in place to prevent financial ruin.
	You look at our State Department.
	It just, by default, takes your money up front and doesn't deliver on what it says it's going to give you ever.
	And Clinton and Obama seem to just don't get that point.
	Even when the government's good, it doesn't deliver what it says it's going to deliver.
	It just delivers it in a good enough fashion.
	You look at the failed experiments of welfare.
	The list just goes on and on.
	I could go on for a half hour about how it never does what it says it's going to do.
	And even when it does an okay job, it's still not delivering what it says it's going to deliver.
	As I've noted on previous occasions, you're looking at the wrong thing.
	We're supposed to examine their good intentions, not the results.
	Never examine the results.
	You're racist if you examine the results.
	Only their good intentions matter.
	Obama said it yesterday.
	The good works necessary in life, private individuals and private companies are just not going to do.
	Government has to do it.
	Can't take it.
	Well, I know.
	Look, it is maddening to me.
	It is frustrating.
	I agree with you 100%.
	Why?
	Who?
	What kind of mushbrain does it require on the part of any American to think that of all the people out of the 300 million people who live here, that Barack Hussein Obama is singularly qualified to run the American health care system?
	Where does this come from?
	Where is, who believes, why do we believe that a bunch of blowhards in the United States Senate know more about the financial business, the financial industry in this country than the people who do it?
	Why do we think that elected representatives know more about everything than the people who are experts in those fields?
	And why do so many people put their unlimited faith in an institution which, as the caller says, demonstrates daily its inability and its incompetence to do anything it claims to do other than win wars?
	And even that now, given the regime and their objective here, is something we sometimes question.
	I was just watching Fox News and a guy I met once at a restaurant in New York, a good guy, a country crooner, John Rich, talking about the flooding in Nashville.
	And has Obama made a public announcement expressing his concern for the people being hit by the flooding in Tennessee?
	31 people now, that's the death toll.
	Has he made any public expression of condolences yet?
	There's nothing on the government website about the flooding in tenants.
	It's not 12 days yet.

▲