All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 2, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:43
September 2, 2010, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Great to be with you.
America's Anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman, Mark Stein sitting in.
Mark Davis will be here tomorrow and Rush returns live, live on Tuesday after the Labor Day weekend.
Yesterday I was like, I thought I was talking about really big, big existential questions.
I was talking about how at the rate we're spending, the amount of debt we're piling up, within five or six years, the American taxpayer is going to be entirely funding the cost of China's military.
And I think that, I thought that was like a really big theme, a big thought to plant out there in the world, that the Chinese military is now paid for by the American taxpayer.
And I think about an hour after that, I was saying that I'd been sort of doing some back-of-the-envelope calculations, and I was wondering whether America has basically spent tomorrow today.
The government has outspent, is spending more money than there is in America.
And I suggested that it might even be the case that the government had outspent not just America, but the entire planet.
And I thought that was like another really big thought, a really big thought to put out there.
A big, profound, deep, heavy thought, something to chew over for the rest of the day.
And I found then when I was looking at my emails at the end of the day that the overwhelming, the biggest number of emails were about when I was talking to Maggie and I'd mentioned that a couple of great songs had Maggie in and I got tons of emails from people who were either married to Maggies, dating Maggies, or had daughters of Maggie's, who wanted to know the names of the Maggie songs.
They weren't interested in the fact that America has outspent the entire planet.
They weren't interested in total civilizational collapse.
That's a side issue.
But can you tell me the name of the Maggie song?
So the name of the Maggie song, it was Honeybuss.
It was a group called Honeybuss.
Got to number one in the United Kingdom, 1968.
I can't let Maggie Go.
And the other one was lovely old Irish tenors always used to say.
If you've got a daughter or a wife called Maggie, book an Irish tenor.
They're a dime a dozen.
Ireland's bankrupt.
You can fly in your own Irish tenor.
It won't cost you a tenor.
It'll just be a Fiverr.
That's how much of a bargain they are.
Irish tenor, when you and I were young, Maggie, 1905.
That's what we were listening for.
In a healthy society, we'd be listening to that instead of Cheryl Crowe singing, all we are saying is give one piece a chance.
So we were talking about the environment and the Discovery Channel bomber just before the top of the hour.
What I find interesting about the anti-humanism aspect is where it all gets complicated.
If you say, when these guys, like the guy writing for Psychology Today, all these big shot Westerners say stop having babies, what they mean is that the advanced world should stop having babies.
And if you say to them, well, look, America's got a birth rate of fertility rate of 2.1 and France is about 1.8 and Greece has an upside-down family tree.
You have four grandparents, have two children, have one grandchild.
So these countries are going out of business anyway.
Most European countries have deathbed demography.
Why should they stop having babies when there are people in Somalia, mothers in Somalia and Yemen having eight and nine kids apiece?
And they go, oh, well, that's because the Yemeni children and the Somali children don't damage the planet as much.
And so they have a much lower carbon footprint.
And so the world can handle far more Yemeni and Somali babies than it can American babies.
Now, what is the flaw in this theory?
The flaw in this theory is that if you look at the cover of that A World Without Us book, the one that showed Manhattan crumbling away with jungle vines snaking up the Empire State Building as it fell into the earth and all the rest of it.
is that if we stop having babies, an advanced Western nation is basically like a great brand new factory on the edge of town that closes down and goes out of business.
It's still got terrific plants, so a new company is going to move in there any day.
And that's what's happening in Europe already.
There was an article in the Daily Mail in London about these British women who are tying their tubes for the environment, because they're like the Discovery Channel bomber.
They think we need to make the planet nice for the squirrels, and the best thing we can do so the squirrels aren't interrupted by us is to tie our tubes.
And yet, amazingly enough, Britain's population doesn't go down.
Why?
Because Somali women move in and have their babies, and the nice Somali women and the Yemeni women develop a carbon footprint the size of the stupid English women who tied their tubes to be all friendly to the planet.
And what is fascinating is when you ask an environmentalist, these anti-human environmentalists, who's saying, stop having babies, babies killing the planets, you're saying, oh, so you would be opposed then to immigration, would you?
You object to the Western lifestyle.
So you wouldn't want third world people who are enjoying their bucolic, untainted by consumerism lifestyle out there in the jungle, the villages that Drew Barrymore yearns to live among.
And these nice bucolic villages with the life expectancy of 43, you don't want all these people moving from there to Des Moines and getting a nice house in the suburbs and driving to the mall and all the rest of it.
And then suddenly, the great liberal anti-humanist environmentalist, if you say, well, the logic of your position is that you'd be against third world immigration, then they back off.
Oh, no, I didn't say anything about that.
I'm in favor of immigration.
I like third world people.
It's when liberal article of faith A butts up against liberal article of faith B, it's all too confusing for the poor liberal mind, so they can't address that.
But in fact, those two issues are intimately related.
And you can see it already in many Western countries that if you look at Germany, where the Germans basically have stopped breeding and a new population has moved in, taking advantage of Germany's fantastic, big, advanced world carbon footprint.
So when the Sierra Club types and the other anti-humanist types start telling you to have fewer babies, if they're not talking about immigration, then they're not being serious.
Now, the President of the United States is talking about immigration.
He's taking credit for something.
He has to take credit for that.
He's got taken credit for something, and he's taking credit for the sharp decline in the number of immigrants entering the United States illegally in the past five years.
And this is the first downturn in the number of immigrants, illegal immigrants, crossing the border in two decades.
And in the first half of the decade, we were averaging 850,000 people a year entering the United States without authorization.
Now, I find this very odd, by the way, is if they know how many people are coming into the country illegally, if they can count them, why can't they stop them?
I mean, I don't understand that.
Do you even trust these figures?
But they have estimated it at 850,000 people a year.
Then as the recession began to bite between 2007 and 2009, the number fell to 300,000 people a year entering illegally.
So now President Obama is taking credit for having reduced by over half the number of people entering the country illegally because he has so devastated the economy.
He has been such a fabulously effective jobs killer that even itinerant third world peasantry no longer want to come here.
They'd rather stay, they'd rather they're there in their third world basket case and they say, well, you know, at least we don't have the economic uncertainty they have in the United States, so we prefer to stay there.
The fascinating part of this debate, though, is that the president is taking, I don't understand, by the way, why the president of the United States would be taking credit for something that he thinks is a bad thing.
Because as we see yet again, the United States sued Arizona for attempting to enforce the borders of the United States.
And not only that, Hillary Rodham Clinton then complains about, then cites Arizona in her report to the UN Human Rights Council, which, by the way, is dominated by the stooges of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
So its idea of human rights is, you know, stoning adulterous women and beheading gays and all the rest of it.
I don't even know, Obama signed on to the UN Human Rights Council.
No civilized state should be a member of the UN Human Rights Council, but Obama signed us up for it.
And in his first report to it, Hillary Rodham Clinton takes along this thing saying, oh, yes, well, the United States government has acted against the state of Arizona to prevent human rights abuses in Arizona.
So the United States doesn't act legally.
It doesn't sue sanctuary cities.
It doesn't sue sanctuary cities that are colluding in the corruption of the integrity of U.S. sovereignty.
And this assault, the assault that is going on against the integrity of the nation's borders by the Department of Justice, which is meant to uphold the laws of the United States, is astonishing.
But suddenly that's all been forgotten now.
And Obama is happy to take credit for the reduction in illegal immigration.
By the way, Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, who is a great woman, by the way, she was speaking in her debate with the Democratic contender for governor in Arizona yesterday, I believe it was.
And she was very critical.
She was saying, on the one hand, you know, the United States government clamps down on the state of Arizona when it attempts to do something about the illegal immigration situation.
Yet on the other hand, the United States government has put up signs 30 miles south of Phoenix on federal highways saying proceed further at your own risk.
You know, I was talking yesterday about all these superfluous signs in my state of New Hampshire, all this ridiculous stop sign approaching signs and all the rest of it.
They've got, now, and I'm opposed to signs on the whole, the wasteful signs you've got all along the highway.
But I actually think a sign by the United States government saying proceed further at your own risk because the sovereignty of the United States can no longer be enforced past this point is a pretty damn important sign to have up on the highway.
That's more important than a stop sign approaching sign.
That's a collapse of the United States of America approaching sign.
That's an Imperio Mexicano approaching sign.
That's a sign that ought to be on there.
So how, on the one hand, on the one hand, the United States government is conceding that it can no longer enforce its sovereignty 30 miles south of Phoenix, yet at the same time, it is preventing the government of the state of Arizona doing anything about it.
This is an existential issue for the United States, by the way, because as Ronald Reagan said all those years ago, a nation that doesn't have a border in the end doesn't have a nation.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein, lots more still to come.
Mark Stein, infra rush on the EIB network, talking about the intersection of immigration and the reprimitivization that the environmentalists are working up to for us.
Kate Blanchett, who's an actress I think is rather good.
When she built her new house, she told the plumbers that she wanted the plumbing to be constructed so that they could drink their own wastewater.
And apparently this is what the system that was defined.
She paid their architect thousands of dollars to design a system whereby the bodily waste goes down the toilet, gets whisked by pipeline through the walk-in closet, over the balcony, down the wall, back and through the rec room, up into the wet bar, and directly into the soda siphon.
So it works perfectly.
It works perfectly.
And Kate Blanchett says that she believes leaf blowers sum up everything that is wrong with the human race, unquote.
Leafblowers sum up everything that is wrong with the human race.
Well, that's certainly true if they're blowing any leaves from where Drew Barrymore has been squatting in the jungle.
So I can sympathize with Kate on that.
Let us go to George in Westchester, Ohio.
George, you're live on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Great to have you with us.
Hi, Mark.
Pleasure to talk to you.
Your comments about the environmentally friendly nature of less developed people is very interesting.
I work in a part of Africa called the Sahel, specifically Senegal, Mali, and Burkina Faso.
This is on the southern edge of the Sahara Desert.
These people have massive herds of goats and such that strip all the greenery.
I have seen the Africans up in trees chopping the limbs off to feed the leaves to their cattle.
It's all contributing to desertification.
The Sahara Desert is steadily moving south because of this agricultural process that they engage in.
Yes, you're absolutely right that if you want to see environmental devastation, the primitive life that we in the West hem in Africa, Africa is the place to see it.
As you said, the Sahara Desert is moving south.
What the people do in their villages is they let their goats eat everything.
They chop everything down.
They've got no sustainable land on which to grow crops.
So they all move into this giant coastal megalopolis.
When you fly over West Africa at night, the coast looks like one giant continuous city with this increasingly dark, barren, desertified land behind it.
That's not the natural state.
That is what low-carbon footprint societies did to that land, George.
Absolutely.
Yeah, and what's the solution to that?
For them to get more like us or for us to get more like them?
Well, you've answered your own question.
They need to move in our direction, and they're trying to, but the problem is the government's kind of divert all the money that might go to the people.
Yeah, that's true.
But it's also true that there's problems with those societies, even if they didn't have the president for life putting everything in his Swiss bank account.
When Hillary Clinton used the so-called African proverb, it takes a village to raise a child, I very much doubt that anyone who thinks that book is good has spent 10 minutes in an African village.
Because even Africans don't want to live in African villages anymore.
That's why they can't wait to move to the shanties on the edge of these hideous sprawling cities they live in now.
I mean, those villages that you're talking about in that Senegal, Mali, Gambia, Burkina Faso, that part of West Africa, that is a dying society.
Well, I don't know that it's dying, but I will tell you that, believe it or not, in the Cincinnati area, we actually have a large population of illegal immigrants from West Africa.
Right, right.
That's fascinating.
Now, why?
How did they, presumably, they didn't come over the Rio Grande.
How did they wind up?
How come you have large numbers of illegal West Africans in Cincinnati?
Well, I can't tell you specifically because I only know one and I'm not sure he's an illegal, but he's a student on a student visa.
Right, right.
But I attended a immigration rally, and they were passing out flyers in French, Spanish, and English.
You know, you mentioned this now, George, but now you mention it.
I had a guy across the river from me in Vermont from Togo, Togolese guy from West Africa, who was taken on by a friend of mine who's a farmer, taken on as a farmhand.
He's like the only Togolese guy in Vermont.
He turned out to be an illegal immigrant.
And when he scrammed, he stole her truck and the autographed copy of my book that I've given.
So I hope he's back in Togo, putting some of the ideas from my book back into action in Togo.
But I don't think so.
I think he's still here somewhere in the United States.
George, that was fascinating to me.
I hadn't really thought about it until you mentioned the guy from West Africa in Cincinnati.
And I remember this Togolese guy in Vermont, because the Togolese community in Vermont is not big.
He was it, and he scrammed.
He stole my friend's truck and her autographed copy of America Alone.
Yeah, this is absolutely right, though.
George made a critical point here that we, when people like Cameron Diaz fetishize these primitive societies, they were nasty.
They were violent, by the way.
They were the most brutally violent people.
You know, when they find these frozen corpses of primitive societies and they say they were peace-loving societies, and you say, well, wait a minute, he's got an axe in his skull.
And they say, oh, no, they used axe heads as currency.
And you go, okay, so like the axe head is a $10 bill.
Why is it embedded in his skull?
Was he just saying, was the other guy just saying to him, hey, can you break a 10?
Ah, no, the 10 broke him.
He's got an axe in his skull.
They were nasty.
They were brutish.
They were violent societies.
And it's a way to make the world worse.
Yes, America's Anchorman is away.
Your undocumented anchor man sitting in.
Mark Davis will be here tomorrow.
You know, I love these ads that the Democrat, beleaguered Democrat candidates are running now.
What I find fascinating about the electoral process is that coming election season, it's basically a one-party thing.
The Republicans run as conservatives and the Democrats run as conservatives too.
This guy, Stephanie, woman, South Dakota representative Stephanie Sandlin, she is running an ad Whose message is basically, I am not one of them, I am one of you.
And she's going, in Washington, they call this flyover flyover country.
They look down and they don't care about our agriculture, the Second Amendment, or our fiscally conservative values.
You would have no idea from this ad that this woman is a Democrat.
Unfortunately, she is.
And she must think her voters are really stupid.
Because it's not enough to just disconnect yourself from Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for a one 30-second commercial when you're saying, oh, they're Washington and I'm you.
I'm one of you.
I'm not one of them, them being Obama and Pelosi and Reed.
She voted for all of it.
She voted for health care.
She voted for the big spending, multi-trillion dollar Obama-Pelosi-Reed agenda.
And if South Dakota voters are stupid enough to fall for a 30-second ad pretending that somehow she's sitting on the other side of the aisle from these guys, she's ridiculous.
But it's fascinating to me how Democrats are running suddenly, running effectively against the Obama-Pelosi-Reed agenda.
Let's go to Fred in Maryland.
Fred, you are in the path of Hurricane Earl.
Oh, yes.
Hello, Mark.
A pleasure.
First of all, congratulations on your acquittal.
Are you talking about my Canadian acquittal?
Yeah, yeah, I thought you meant you'd had a late-breaking news item from the New York State Bureau of Compliance.
It just crossed the wire yesterday that I saw it.
Oh.
So congratulations on that.
Oh, but there's always something.
I'm still looking at 30 to life under the New York State Bureau of Compliance charges.
So, you know, I'm not out of the woods yet.
Well, maybe you shouldn't hurry back to Canada.
But the point I wanted to make here today, you were criticizing environmentalists in general for being hypocritical, urging the limitation of family size, and at the same time, favoring unlimited immigration.
That is not always true.
Now, the case here in Maryland, the Maryland Sierra Club, took a strong position against runaway immigration for the same reason that they're in favor of keeping population levels steady.
Did you know that?
No, I didn't know that.
So they actually, the Sierra Club in Maryland, or your part of Maryland anyway, is opposed to immigration.
Yes.
And for perfectly logical reasons.
So we shouldn't be reckless in throwing charges against environmentalists.
I'd like to see, I'm an environmentalist myself and certainly very conservative.
I'd like to see a greater represent between the two groups.
Now, true, the National Sierra Club did not go along with Maryland.
I can tell you why.
And why was that then?
Well, the former president of the National Association simply said, well, yes, your point of view is logical, but we have to agree and work with our allies in Congress.
Yes, exactly.
So in other words, for political purposes, the so-called environmental interests took a back burner to political necessity there.
Yes, but there's growing opposition to that stand at the local level.
I don't know what part of Maryland you're in, Fred, but do you know Southern Maryland?
Well, I was just going to tell you, for instance, do you know a place called Langley Park?
Certainly.
Langley Park is a place that in nothing flat has become more or less two-thirds Latino in the.
Friends of mine used to live there.
It was a nice, quiet, modest suburb, and now it's, I'd say, seven-eighths Latino.
Right, and it's a many ways a dysfunctional place compared to the way it was.
But that's what happens when advanced societies adopt the idea that advanced societies can simply have fewer babies and they will just kind of empty out.
So instead of having 300 million Americans living in a first world society, you'd have just 100 million Americans living in a first world society isn't going to happen because Langley Park is what happens is that a settler population filled up.
Yeah, a settler population moves in and takes over, basically annexes it.
And that is why the idea of environmentalists lecturing Western societies who are already in population decline.
I mean, the Japanese are opening hotels now where men who can't find girlfriends can go and enjoy an illicit weekend with a virtual girlfriend, some kind of manga-type humanoid that you can squire around the hotel and have a virtual girlfriend experience with, because they're running out of young people in Japan.
So the Western world has effectively gone out of business anyway.
But the idea that this will have any benefit for the planet is ridiculous.
All it means is that there will be no one left to man the Sierra Club desk and the fate of the planet will be left to the people who still bother having babies.
Fred.
I'll let you go.
As populations decrease in Europe, remember, the population of Europe now is still much higher than it was, say, in Victorian times.
So as the population of Italy, for example, drops from, say, 60 million, say, to 40 million, then more opportunities open up and the decrease, you know, the birth rate will adjust accordingly.
It's not that it will extrapolate down to zero.
No, no, that's true.
It's not going to go down to zero.
But what you have, in fact, it may not go down at all because I think my point is a basic one.
You can't have first world infrastructure and expect people to leave it empty.
Don't forget, we're talking about welfare societies here, too, which is the United States, too.
And you have family reunification.
So that in Nothing Flat, a little place in the middle of nowhere like Lewiston, Auburn, Maine, suddenly has a huge Somali population because a couple of people moved there in the 90s and they got all their parents and grandparents and uncles and aunts all came and they understood that there's a welfare, there's a welfare system there.
So the idea that first world societies can lower their carbon footprint without doing anything about immigration, I think is a delusion.
And Langley Park, Maryland, which has gone, or Bell, California, Bell, California, where the guy was getting $800,000 a year to be the city manager and a total compensation package of $1.5 million.
That is a town that is 96% Hispanic.
If you went back to that town in the early 1970s, it would have had a mixed population.
Now it's a wholly Hispanic population.
That's why it's ridiculous to talk about this in terms of an immigration issue.
An immigration issue would be if you had 200, there's roughly 200 countries in the world, and if America took them, you know, you have so many Fijians, you have so many Slovenians, you have so many Uzbeks.
That would be one thing.
But when you have them all from an overwhelming source, that is not an immigration issue, that's an annexation issue.
And that's what's happening in Langley Park and Bell, California, and all kinds of other places that are quite a long way from the Mexican border.
Mark Stein in Farash, 1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein in Farash.
I want to go to Bill in Bakersfield, California.
Bill called up, referring to something we were talking about earlier, Imam Raouf, who I said was basically a symbol of everything that's wrong.
Not because he's a Muslim, but just because he's like a freeloader.
We've got to get, you know, if you want to take over the planet and have the new caliphate, don't stick U.S. taxpayers with the bill.
We're funding his book tour.
The State Department's buying his books at public expense.
He has church status from the IRS for the American Sufi Muslim Association, which he said on the IRS.
And church status is great, by the way.
It's not that you're just tax exempt.
You don't have to file returns.
You don't have to reveal the sources of your money or how it's spent.
You don't have to do anything.
The IRS gave him church status.
He said he was holding services at 201 West 85th Street, and that the services attracted 450 to 500 people who showed up to pray five times a day.
There's no way you can do that at 201 West 85th Street.
The only place he had there was his wife's one-bedroom apartment.
And you can't fit 500 people.
People would notice if 500 people were going in to pray five times a day in a one-bedroom apartment.
And that's got to be in non-compliance with the New York State Bureau of Compliance.
500 people praying in a one-bedroom apartment.
Good grief.
Suddenly, that's like party night at Tiger Woods.
You cannot question these things.
Obviously, he said, I'm a Muslim.
The IRS says, fine, we'll give you a church status.
Let's go to Bill in Bakersfield, California, who wants to talk about what's going on with the Ground Zero Mosque.
Great to have you on the show, Bill.
Hi.
Well, my main point is from an article that I read.
I don't know, it was last year or late in 2008 about Bill Clinton Foundation that he has over 200 donors to, and leading among those is Saudi Arabia for what, upwards of 25 million.
And then they have a part of the list here.
They list Brunei, Kuwait, Norway, Oman, Qatar, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Friends of Saudi Arabia, etc.
And my point is that he being the husband of our Secretary of State is creating a huge conflict of interest in that they appear to be representing foreign countries above the United States because they've been paid off.
And this happened, this started before the elections in which the unions, my own particular one, supported Hillary Clinton.
And these, you know, these people were given all this money back then because they were anticipating that she would be the president of the United States.
Right.
Well, since she failed at that, she's now like almost the second most powerful or very powerful person in the Secretary of State who is supposed to be representing United States interests with these countries.
And that does not appear to be the case.
And I look directly back at all this money and this foundation that Bill Clinton has gone and he's collected literally millions of dollars for a payoff.
Yeah, Bill Clinton is basically a wholly owned subsidiary of the House of Saud and various other Gulf monarchies.
And the question is, is when his wife happens to be the principal spokesperson for American foreign policy, is it relevant for her husband to be owned by foreign governments?
And I think that is a relevant question.
It also, I think, reflects the broader environment in which this discussion takes place, is that wealthy Saudis and the Emirates and Qatar and Oman and various other of the wealthier states in the Middle East have pretty much bought up everything they need to buy up now in the United States and the rest of the Western world.
And Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton is a very good example for that.
There is something, by the way, by the way, regardless of whether it should be illegal or not, there's something deeply inappropriate, as he would say.
Wasn't that what he said after Monica?
My behavior was not just wrong, it was inappropriate.
I don't know whether this is wrong, but it's inappropriate for a former president to be collecting quite such boodles of money from layabout Saudi Sheikh's bill.
And you're right to identify that and some of the other ones.
You've got the list there in front of you.
Yeah, I think that, well, I only have a partial list, but was in the newspaper.
And this was just one of those little items that was brought up pretty much the Saudis and their pals have bought up pretty much everything they need to buy up in the Western world.
That's a big part of the problem.
Let's go to NAMI in Charleston, South Carolina.
NAMI, you're not in the path of Hurricane Earl, are you?
It's going to the north of you now, isn't it?
Yeah, I think it's supposed to be North Carolina.
Okay, okay.
But I'm not quite sure.
Oh, my gosh.
It's such an honor to speak with you.
Oh, my gosh.
I listen to you every time you sub for us.
That's very good.
It's not that much of an honor, believe me.
I don't even feel it's an honor to be me, so to talk to me can't really be that much of an honor.
What do you do in Charleston?
I'm a student.
I'm a senior at the College of Charleston.
Really?
And is that one of the bastions of conservative thinking in the decayed United States educational establishment?
Well, I mean, I thought it was going to be more conservative when I came down here, but it definitely is not.
That's sort of what I wanted to talk to you about.
I had sort of a general comment that deals with university as well as an anecdote that I wanted to share.
Okay, give us the anecdote.
Okay, well, it's sort of about one of my friends here.
He's very anti-capitalist, anti-progress, anti-everything, basically, that I believe in.
And one time I was having him introduced to my dad, and they were talking, and then he turns to me and says, oh, where's Catherine, our mutual friend?
And I said, oh, she wanted you to call her.
And he pulls out his iPhone from his pocket.
My dad says, oh, well, for someone who doesn't believe in capitalism.
And he had nothing to say to that, because it's true, and it just sort of...
Yeah, how old is your friend?
He's going to be 22.
Okay, now what other society does he think a 22-year-old gets to loaf around doing what passes for college education and make calls?
Because none of this college education, 90% of it, by the way, isn't needed.
If he was in any society pre-existing in human history, he would have been doing back-breaking work on the farm all his life.
He would be standing behind an ox all day, getting the full camera and Diaz as he's going up and down plowing all day long.
And that's all he would be.
Only one kind of society that enables a 22-year-old to lounge around all day having big thoughts about how evil progress is and iphoning it to his pals, and that is a very narrow, privileged kind of Western society.
Your pal is in some big fluffy cocoon and doesn't even know it.
No, and he, and the best part is he's from south Carolina, so he doesn't have to pay for school.
He gets paid to go here.
Yeah well that's uh, that's.
That's another crazy part of this.
I gotta run, Naomi.
Thank you for.
Thank you for your call great to great to talk to you and keep fighting the good fight.
Uh, down there in south Carolina.
Mark Stein in for rush.
Lots more still to come.
Mark Stein in for Rush on the EIBE Network next hour.
I want to talk everyone.
I was away doing the whole Ground Zero mosque and uh, and everything has been said about it in some ways, but I want to.
I want to talk about an angle of it that I don't think is covered, has been covered properly.
I don't even think we'd be talking about this mosque if we were to concentrate on what is the real outrage in this situation, and that is not the lousy 15 story mosque in the Burlington coat factory building, but the seven story hole uh, a seven billion dollar seven story hole right next to it, you know, taking Breaking down the World Trade Center.
That's what al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden did to us.
The hole, the hole in the ground, the 10-year hole in the ground, is what we did to ourselves, and it is a disgrace.
▲
Export Selection