All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 19, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:44
November 19, 2010, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, America's Anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman sitting in, no supporting paperwork whatsoever, entirely unlicensed by any federal, state or local authority.
We had Velita here a couple of minutes ago talking about who was going to pat down President Obama when he showed up at the airport.
And HR did make the very good point that at least that way we would get a definitive answer to the interesting question that James Carville posed as to exactly the degree to which his junk is filling out the nether regions down there.
This interesting, I wouldn't normally talk about this, but this is a highly respected Democratic Party figure in James Carville who has raised this question.
And at least that way, if President Obama was to be patted down when he went through security, we would get the definitive answer to that one.
We might get a twofer if he's got his birth certificate down there.
All kinds of, who knows what he's keeping down there.
So President Obama, Valita, Valita at Windsor, Ontario, thinking it would be interesting to see what it would be like if the president went through the metal detector.
It is great to be with you.
She's in Windsor, Ontario.
am i i'm uh uh i'm in vancouver on uh i think i'm speaking in vancouver on Sunday which isn't in the isn't in the country uh no i i'm speaking i'm speaking not to the no i'm think i'm speaking uh yeah in downtown vancouver But we've got no affiliate in Vancouver, have we?
Because it would be illegal up there if we did have an affiliate.
It would be a hate crime under Canadian law.
So it's probably just as well we don't.
But I spoke, I did an event, I think it was the day after the election with Fred Thompson and Howard Dean up in Calgary.
And they were talking about the election results.
But at the end, just for a wind-up, I made a reference to Howard Dean's famous I Have a Scream speech, you know, where he said, and we're going onto Iowa, and we're going on to South Carolina, and we're going on to Guam.
Yee-haw!
And I said, I just threw it out to him.
I said, hey, hey, Governor Dean, can you do a Canadianized version of that speech?
And we'll give you bonus points, not just for the provinces, but if you get all three territories correct.
And he just launched into it, and he goes, and we're going on to Newfoundland, and we're going on to Manitoba, and we're going on to Saskatchewan, and we're going on to the Yukon and the Northwest Territories.
Yee-haw!
And say what you like about, say it's out there.
You can find it out there on the internet.
It's got to be on YouTube or something like that.
But say what you like about Governor Deed, but I actually thought that was rather sporting of the old...
I think he...
I would like to see if he could do that with, say, all member nations of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, because it could be a great opening act for him if he ever plays Riyadh.
So I was impressed by this.
Say what you like about Governor Dean.
But if the governor is a kind of neighbor of mine, because I'm on the New Hampshire side of the Connecticut River, and I can only get a Vermont TV station through my many years of the Dean governorship.
So I had no idea what was going on in my own state, but I lived with exclusive interviews with Howard Dean, like six nights a week, because there's basically three people.
There were three people for Channel 3 to interview.
There was like Ben and Jerry and Howard.
And like Ben and Jerry are semi-reclusive.
So Howard was like the only guy, the only guy around available for interview.
And he, so I got the, it was the nearest I ever hoped to come to experiencing the immense variety of North Korean television because it was like just watching the Kim Jong-il show every night.
They'd say, coming up tonight, an exclusive interview with Governor Dean.
If you miss it, there'll be another exclusive interview along in 20 minutes' time.
And so for all that, I thought it was very sporting of him to just launch into impromptu, unrehearsed, this Canadianized version of the famous I Have a Scream speech.
I thought it was actually quite interesting.
A lady said to me afterwards that she thought it indicated, if nothing else, that he was kind of at ease with himself, because this was the speech that totaled his presidential dreams.
Imagine if Obama out of nowhere had suddenly launched into, and we're going on to Guam and we're going on to the U.S. Virgin Islands and we're going on to, you know, imagine if he'd done that and everything had come crashing down.
I don't think Barack Obama would be sufficiently relaxed about it to be doing it a shtick in Calgary a couple of years later.
So I thought that was kind of cute for Governor Dean.
Mark's signing for Rush.
Rush returns Monday, but in the meantime, it's the end of the week, and that means...
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's Open Line Friday!
And Open Line Friday means that we abandon all standards entirely on this show.
Nothing, none of the immense amount of regulatory control that the government imposes on this show Monday to Thursday applies today.
The onerous regulatory regime whereby only qualified broadcast specialists with many government licenses can determine the content of the show, we throw all those away.
If you are walking through the streets of Manhattan today and you feel confetti showering on you, it's not some bridal shower for Prince William's lovely new bride.
It is all the broadcast licenses that we are tearing up while we abandon standards and say, yes, you the listener, you the untrained listener, unlicensed listener, as unlicensed to determine the content of radio shows as Joe the Plumber was supposedly unlicensed to practice plumbing in whatever Ohio county that was.
You as unlicensed as he to determine the content of this show nevertheless are free to decide what we talk about on this show today.
So give me a call, whatever you want to talk about, it's good by me.
It's not good by me.
It's good for me.
It works for me.
It will be good by me, but not for whatever it is, best part of an hour or something.
You see this, the IPCC official.
This is the International Panel on Climate Change.
You know, these are the guys who make up all this stuff about a third of the world's population, they're going to be without water because all the glaciers are going to melt by 2025 and all this nonsense.
An IPCC official, Ottmar Edenhofer, gave an interview to New Zurka Zeitung.
And he was talking, he's talking about really the massive redistributive element in climate policy.
Because climate policy is supposedly a way to transfer wealth from first world countries all the way to other countries.
Now, he's actually come clean.
He says, this is how he puts it.
First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community.
Did you even know that was possible?
This is 21st century colonialism.
We don't take the land anymore.
We take the air above the land.
So one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy.
Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this.
One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.
This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole, unquote.
So this is IPCC official Otmar Edenhofe giving the game away by saying that so-called environmental policy is nothing to do with saving the environment anymore.
That was a useful, forget about stuff like deforestation, the ozone hole, the carbon levels and all the rest of it.
It's not about that.
It's about taking money from the part of the world that functions and giving it to everybody else.
So in other words, it's a redistributive racket.
The environment is an amazing thing.
It's the most ingenious pretext for big government ever devised.
And not on a state level and not on a national level, but on the global level.
Because everything's in the environment.
What isn't in the environment?
You know, government transport policy is about transport and government agriculture policy is about agriculture.
But government environmental policy is about everything because everything's part of the environment.
Your town, your county, your planet, and of course you.
Which is why, as we've discussed on this show before, we have things like Cheryl Crowe demanding limits on how many sheets of toilet paper you can use and the guys who want to ban Tuply toilet paper, which would devastate the Canadian economy because, of course, the Canadians are the house of sound of Tuply toilet paper.
And this would be totally devastating to the Canadian economy.
But they're getting less and less coy about telling us what's really behind it.
Do you know Thomas Friedman, the great big thinker at the New York Times?
He writes these love letters to China every week or two.
And he pines, he bemoans the fact that the United States is not like China.
It cannot just get the job done.
It cannot just decide what we need to do and do it because we suffer from the defect of being a republic with elected legislators who are accountable to the people.
And you'd have no idea how messy that awful, horrible democratic republic stuff can be when you urgently need to get the stuff done.
So Thomas Friedman writes these objectively disgusting and totalitarian love letters in the New York Times every couple of weeks, where he, to use his phrase, he says, why can't we be China for a day?
In other words, why can't for one day a year the United States be governed by a totalitarian Politburo that could just pass all the environmental laws we need and get the job done in a day?
And I think you're going to see a lot more of that as they're panicking.
They've had the worst year in their lives, the environmental movement, since the leak of the East Anglian emails and all the rest of it.
And the Copenhagen conference turned out, which was actually an embryo world government they wanted to set up there.
And we should be very grateful that it was the Brazilians, the Indians and the Chinese who saved the Western world from basically driving itself off a cliff.
They're becoming less and less shy about the essentially anti-democratic totalitarian thinking behind the environmental movement.
So because everything's in the environment, the environment is basically the biggest pretext for big government ever devised in the world.
And this guy from the IPCC comes out and says, it's not about the environment.
You know, quote, one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.
This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, unquote.
It's just about big government for its own sake.
You know, at their annual, at their annual Monday night poker game in hell, I would bet Stalin, Hitler, and Mao are kicking themselves.
You know, oh, it's about leaving a better planet to our children.
Why didn't we think of that?
No jack boots, no goose steps, just a soft and easy, incremental, fluffy totalitarianism all the way.
It's about big government on a scale never yet seen, and every so often the mask drops.
When the chips are down, says Mayor Hillman, senior fellow at the Policy Studies Institute in London, quote, I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it.
This has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not, unquote.
Who needs Mussolini?
Who needs Stalin when you can justify anti-democratic, this has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not.
You say this stuff and the co-eds, the co-eds of the colleges, they go, oh, it's so nice.
He wants to save the planet by taking away democracy and all our rights and imposing on people something they don't want.
This is the truth about the environmental movement and they're getting less and less effective at hiding it.
Not the earth is your mother, the earth is your Fuhrer, basically would be the Thomas Friedman bumper sticker.
Why can't we be China for a day?
1-800-282-2882.
Open line Friday on the Rush Limbull Show.
Breaking news, the Maxine Waters trial apparently has been cancelled.
She also got into a Charlie Wrangell kind of problem, but seems to have worked out pretty well for her.
They've cancelled the trial.
They've cancelled the trial.
But they didn't cancel Wesley Snipes' trial.
He's going to jail for three years for tax evasion.
I wanted to find that Thomas Friedman New York Times quote.
This is the way Thomas Friedman in environmental policy says this, quote about China.
Quote, one party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks, but when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages.
That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century, unquote.
Yeah, okay, forward to where?
You know, I love the way guys like Thomas Friedman, he's what passes for a great thinker at the New York Times.
And his point is that, look, all me and my pals, when we sit around the dinner table, we all agree on what needs to be done.
So why does this awful democratic thing, these Tea Party guys, they go out, they go to town hall meetings, they nominate their candidates, they get their candidates elected in the general election.
Why should the enlightened views of great thinkers like Thomas Friedman be derailed by people like that?
It doesn't happen in China.
China is a one-party autocracy.
But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, it can have great advantages.
That's the New York Times today.
That's the New York Times in 2010.
He writes these pieces every couple of weeks, Thomas Friedman, channeling, Friedman channeling his inner Walter Duranti, basically saying, wow, you know, totalitarian societies are kind of a turn-on.
I love the smack of firm government.
And these guys really know how to deliver it.
And they're getting more and more open about coming clean by saying that that is actually the end game.
So he says they can decide.
They can decide on the politically difficult.
Now, what does that mean?
Again, this is basically politically difficult.
What does that mean?
It means that nobody would vote for it if they had a free vote on it.
So by politically difficult, he means an elite like him deciding what is best in your interest, what is best in your interest.
The politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.
Forward to where?
Forward to where?
Forward into darkness.
We should be very worried when a guy can write a column like this for the New York Times and, in fact, write it every couple of weeks praising a totalitarian society.
And nobody among his editors thinks, whoa, Tom, wait a minute, this is the United States of America.
We've been a free republic for a quarter millennium now.
And you're saying we should have the government structure of China?
Whoa, what's the deal with that?
Nobody ever says that.
Nobody ever says that to him.
And now, as we see, and we don't need to, in fact, because the Chinese are just going the great guns all on their own, as came up in the last hour, 18% of this fabulously, allegedly fabulously successful IPO for General Motors yesterday, 18% of it got bought up by the Chinese government.
So as I was saying, you know, the next environmentally friendly vehicle that will be rolling off the production line in Detroit after the Chevy Vault, it'll be the Chevy Rickshaw.
That's the history.
That's the history of Detroit.
From Dinosha, see the USA and your Chevrolet from Dinosha to Rickshaw.
From an American icon to a company that the Chinese are buying up simply because they've got nothing else to do with their money because they own all the U.S. Treasuries they want to own and they're getting rich off American debt and they can buy anything they buy anything they want.
Environmental policy.
By the way, these two subjects are connected.
One reason why everything is getting outsourced to countries like China is because people like Thomas Friedman talk up the regular.
Now he's married to some heiress or whatever.
You look at his carbon footprint.
It's up there with Al Gore's.
Environmentalism is really about returning us to the divine right of kings.
And it literally so in when you take an environmentalist like the Prince of Wales who's always attacking consumerism because it enables the peasants to move out of their hovels and get a nice little detached house in a subdivision somewhere.
But metaphorically, divine right of kings, when you listen to all these grandees like Thomas Friedman and Al Gore lecturing us from their huge carbon footprints on how they need those carbon footprints because they know best, but we don't need to live that way at all.
Open Line Friday on the EIB network, 1-800-282-2882.
Let us go to Nancy in Williamsport, Pennsylvania.
Nancy, it's great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Well, thank you, Mark.
How are you today?
I'm doing good.
How are you?
I'm pretty good.
Although I'm quite bothered by all the opinions that the opinionators are saying on the radios and the TVs concerning the TSA screeners.
Right.
Why are you bothered by that?
My husband happens to be one.
Oh, so wait, so you get enhanced pat downs at night, too.
He brings his work home with him, does he?
Well, we'll talk about that later.
Okay.
No, I think the listeners have to realize that the employees that have been doing this since 9-11 and all the different changes and all the threats that have come down and how much they have to check for and how they actually do, if you think about it, put their life on the line every day.
They search a bag, whether it's a small airport, whether it's a bigger airport, and now they have to do this evasive pat-down.
And they had to go through the training themselves.
Well, wait a minute.
You say that.
You say that.
But let's take your husband or any other TSA employee.
But you're married to a TSA guy.
So you know this.
Now, when they introduced, which came up after the Panty Bomber tried to blow his underwear up over Detroit.
So then I assume what happened then, in the fullness of time, a few weeks, a couple of months later, they say we are now going to be performing enhanced pat downs.
So for example, if a bag goes through the scanner and something goofy shows up on the screen, you then have to give an enhanced pat down, and this is what it involves.
And you say they had to go through the training yourself.
So when your husband was going through the training about how to slide his hand round the upper thigh of one of his fellow Americans, didn't he say, hey, wait a minute, what the hell is going on here?
Well, I'm sure he did, but you kind of have to, it's such a gray line.
It is.
It isn't if you're on the receiving end of it.
You know when it's been crossed.
You also have to think of the guys that have to do this in the screen.
Do you think they really want to do that?
Do you really think that they want to have to do that?
Now, my husband is a screener.
He's been a screener for eight or nine years and has gone through some different, you know, well, different head of Department of Homeland Security.
And I just want the listeners to think of the people that are on the front line that are being trained and asked to do this.
And yes, I know it's invasive.
I understand that.
But Nancy, let's just go back to what you were saying.
He's been doing it for eight or nine years.
So in other words, you're saying he was really one of the first TSA employees.
Now, it's gone in the last few years, it's gone from 16,000 employees up to about 67,000, 68,000 employees.
Well, I don't know the numbers because we're basically at a small regional airport.
Right, right.
But I've seen, as I said, on yesterday's show, I flew down from Burlington, Vermont, which is also a small airport.
And I look at the numbers.
When you're at the check-in desk, for example, the guys standing at that airport, the guys standing behind the USAID and United check-in counters are TSA guys who inspect, they've got the suitcases open and they're going through them right now.
Right in the checkpoint, not in the specific checkpoint.
Yeah, these ones do it, actually.
They go through the checked baggage at the airline desk.
Then you go through to the so-called sterile area and you're going and I look at the numbers.
Like yesterday I added whatever it was at Burlington, Vermont.
There's nobody flying out of there.
But yet there was like seven or eight TSA guys for, as you say, a small rural airport of no particular significance.
There has been a huge, I mean, your husband has got, you say he's got eight or nine years of experience.
He must be working with a lot of people who do not have anything like that experience, who are just part of this general explosion in manpower they've had.
Well, I don't know.
A few of the people that he's worked with have been there just about the same time.
And how do they feel then about the feeling business?
Well, I haven't been able to talk to really anyone, any of the other screeners.
I just haven't had a chance.
I'm kind of just coming through it, you know, from if you look at the employee, you know, he's not being paid thousands, you know, a whole great big federal salary.
He doesn't have some of the federal benefits that the other federal employees do have, even though some people, you know, tout that he's getting paid tremendous amount of money.
He's not.
And it just kind of distresses me that these guys are working hard to try and do their job and to try and get an LSN and trying to keep people safe on the airplanes.
And that's it.
That's all they're trying to do, and they're getting all kinds of hassle for it.
And it's unfortunate because it's coming down from higher up.
And, you know, what are they supposed to do?
But Nancy, you know the way people didn't like, what do they used to call them back in the day?
Meter maids.
The Beatles sang a song about it.
They didn't like, because these people were people in uniform who stroll down the sidewalk and put a ticket under your wiper.
Well, haven't you ever seen the parking wars?
Yeah, no, exactly.
I'm saying all these people do is like stick a $10 fine under your wiper and say, because you parked in the wrong spot.
And they're loathed.
And they're loath.
The people who hand out the parking tickets are generally loath.
Just for that.
It's not a big deal, is it?
You know, you park 20 minutes longer.
These guys, it's not for parking 20 minutes.
It's for like putting their hands in your underwear.
And this is why it's not difficult to understand.
Did you see those pictures in the Denver Post, Nancy?
Well, no, I have not seen the pictures, but I want to also say a lot of the TV have been using old footage.
If you see old footage with a white shirt, that was all the way to the corner.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
I know, I know.
I know they've changed their shirts.
And that's a whole other issue, by the way.
I don't even know.
Oh, it is okay, because it went from white to blue.
Yeah, what was the cost of that?
So you like had 60.
Originally, the TSA had 16,000 guys in white shirts, and now they've got 68,000 guys in blue shirts.
Oh, my.
You know what?
Whatever.
Look, I don't quite agree with all the brouhaha that's going on.
I understand it.
And I'm trying to, you know, help my husband work through this because he has to deal with it.
Right.
You know, it was one thing when they had to take off their shoes.
I understand it.
I don't always agree with it.
But then his opinion is, okay, well, if you don't want to deal with it, you don't want to be safe.
And I know it's invasive, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
At least we're not using the X-ray machines.
They don't have those at our small airport.
Just think of the people that are doing it.
Do you really think they want to do that, but they want to keep it?
If you don't want to do it, don't fuck.
No, but this isn't...
When a guy's got his hand in my pants, I'm not really interested in how he's feeling.
I'm interested in how I'm feeling.
And I understand.
But ask your husband that when he comes home this evening.
A 14-hour day.
After a 14-hour day, so he's, like, too exhausted to give you an enhanced pat-down, I take it, when he comes home and he's just giving you, like, the light kind of little, like the old wanding thing.
You are bad.
He's not in the mood for an enhanced pat down, but he's prepared to just like wand you lightly.
And ask him seriously, though, whether he thinks he thinks of all the people he's given this pat down to.
You look at these people.
Because we're talking mainly about internal flights in the United States.
We're not talking...
The guy at Yemen, the guy who boards the plane in Yemen, he's not getting the enhanced pat-down.
The guy who boards the airplane in Islamabad, he's not getting an enhanced patent.
Well, that's actually a problem because it's a whole other subject.
Exactly.
But you're saying that in Williamsport, Pennsylvania and Burlington, Vermont, that just every other little airport in between.
Yeah, everybody's getting the enhanced pat down.
Now, you ask your guy.
I'd be interested to know, and he can get back to us, because Rush would be interested to hear this too, whether he feels that that is seriously whether 99.99% of the underwear that he's had his latexed fingers on, whether that made any contribution to American security.
I know he's just like, he's just doing his job and all the rest of it, Nancy.
But I'm sure it's not great for you that you don't like to think when he comes home from night after a hard day's work what he's actually been doing all day.
Because I would imagine the first thing you want him to do is go to the bathroom and wash his hands.
But, you know, I understand your point, but this is not necessary.
And this is not necessary to American safety or American security.
And if he thought about that, if he thought about all the people he's patted down, he knows that.
He knows that.
So you ask him about that and have him get back to us because Rush would like to hear that too.
Great to take you, a call, Nancy.
That was Nancy, whose husband is TSA.
So she was being enhancedly patted down before being enhancedly patted down was cool.
That's Nancy calling from Williamsford, Pennsylvania.
Markstein, Infor Rush, lots more to come.
Open Line Friday on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Let's go to John in San Diego.
John, you're live on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Hey, Mark, how are you doing?
I just wanted to kind of share something.
I'm not sure that a lot of your viewers or a lot of your listeners are really aware of.
You know what the number one greenhouse gas is in the atmosphere?
The number one greenhouse gas vapor.
Right, right.
And it's responsible for over 90% of what's classified as a greenhouse gas.
But how do you demonize water vapor?
I mean, clouds.
How do you monetize, we've got to get rid of those clouds?
You know, I mean, it just doesn't have that ring of, oh, we've got to get rid of the carbon in the atmosphere.
And the reality is, and anybody can go to the web, look up on Wikipedia, you know, water vapor is like 92, 94%.
CO2 is actually a big player in the whole thing.
It's at 300 parts per million or thereabouts, which is like 0.0003% of the atmosphere.
If we were to eliminate all the CO2 that came from mankind that's generated, you know, we would still have over 90% of it is generated naturally.
I mean, from volcanic action and other things like this.
So it's really hard to understand why we focused on, let's just assume for one second that global warming is actually happening.
Let's just assume for one second that, you know, that we want to do something about it.
Why would we even be focusing on carbon dioxide as being this big demon and the one in the area of attacking it?
Because even if we eliminated 100% of what came from manned generation, we'd still have well over 90% of that left.
The real contributor is water vapor.
But you know, John, your state is doing a grand job of waging war on water because you have all there's this guy.
Have you seen this American Express commercial where there's this kind of metrosexual guy who's saying, I'm proud to be a dam buster.
And what he means by that is he goes around getting dams decommissioned throughout the United States.
Things like the environmentalists, what's that dam in Ventura County in California, that the environmentalists are targeting?
I don't remember, but I do, I have seen those commercials and I know what you're talking about.
And they call themselves the Dam Busters.
You know, for guys like me, Dam Busters was the great British war movie about scientists coming up with the bouncing bomb that destroyed the German dams that crippled industrial production for Germany in the Second World War.
It had a terrific great marching music theme.
Bam, bum, bum, bum, the dam busters, terrific.
Now we don't bust the enemy's dams.
We're busting our own.
Because the environmentalists, and the rationale behind this, is that water doesn't count as renewable energy.
This is where all the eco-mumbo-jumbo gets completely out of control.
Water does not count as a renewable energy source.
So they say, oh, you know, we have to don't damn the torpedoes, torpedo the dams, because hydropower doesn't count as renewable energy.
So and that's the way they think in your own great state.
If you went up the coast of California and you went to Sacramento and you said to them, hey, why don't we build a new Hoover Dam?
People would look at you as if you were insane.
Whatever you feel about big government types 80 years ago, they were happy to build the Hoover Dam.
Now they're waging a war on dams and they're waging a war on hydropower and saying that the water power is devastating the atmosphere.
So they're only one step away from demonizing clouds, John.
Well, I just find it very interesting when you keep hearing all this focus on the carbon dioxide, when the reality is it's a bit player in the whole global warming scenario of what they're proposing here.
And that if you really, really wanted to get to the heart of what is supposedly causing global warming, I would think you would be focusing on what is the main cause, which is water vapor.
But when's the last time you ever heard anybody saying we needed to do anything about the water vapor in the atmosphere?
Never.
It's always CO2, and it appears to be the bit player in the whole process.
Right.
So basically, the CO2 are the equivalent of the 80-year-old nuns being patted down at the airport, while the clouds of water vapor are the equivalent of the Islamic terrorists.
And we're not actually waging, concentrating our energies.
The environmental movement isn't concentrating its energies on the main source of the problem here.
Exactly.
If their main purpose, their stated goal is that global warming is happening.
We've got to do something about it.
And the focus is always on these carbon credits or CO2, totally ignoring what is better than 90% of what causes purported global warming, which is water vapor.
So I just think that was a very interesting insight that I don't really hear a lot of people talking about.
You've got a good point there, John.
And I'm going to challenge Al Gore now, because he's been quiet.
He's been quiet lately.
I'm going to challenge Al Gore to have the guts to make an awareness-raising single.
He should do a cover version of I've Looked at Clouds from Both Sides Now, because they're up there, as you said, they're 95% of the problem, and we're not addressing them.
The environmental movement, if it's serious, has got to propose a serious cloud reduction program, no matter how much money it takes.
We need to get serious about having fewer clouds in the sky if we are going to save this planet.
Mark signing for Rushmore to come.
The world makes a lot of sense.
Clouds are responsible for 95% of the climate change out there.
The Chinese are buying General Motors, and the government has the right to stick its hands on any American genitalia it cares to.
We have suddenly learned a lot in the last three hours, and I've had a ball.
Rush will be back on Monday to take you through to Thanksgiving.
But now, oh, I see the TSA agent is just waiting outside the door, come to give me my tertiary pat down.
I do wonder what this involves.
But oh, oh, look at that.
They're putting on the extra sensitive latex gloves.
I can't wait for this.
It's been great fun.
Mark Stein sitting in on the EIB network.
▲
Export Selection