All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 27, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:38
January 27, 2011, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.6% of the time.
I'm Rush Limbaugh.
This is the EIB Network, and we are coming to you today from Los Angeles.
But remember, my friends, as long as I'm here, it doesn't really matter where here is.
Same thing with the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It is wherever I happen to be.
Of course, it doesn't matter.
Here is here, and we've got a program to do.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
Email address, El Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
To the audio soundbite, Sarah Palin last night was on with Greta Van Sustrin on Fox.
Van Susteren said, a lot of Americans aren't doing well.
I am okay, but a lot of Americans need jobs.
What are we going to do about jobs?
You have an idea that's any different from what the president said last night because we're all looking for options.
That was a tough speech to have to sit through and try to stomach because the president is so off base in his ideas on how it is that he believes government is going to create jobs.
Obviously, government growth won't create any jobs.
It's the private sector that can create the jobs.
His theme last night in the State of the Union was the WTF, you know, winning the future.
And I thought, okay, that acronym, spot on.
There are a lot of WTF moments throughout that speech.
Sarah Palin, a lot of WTF moments in the speech.
So Van Susteren said, well, you mentioned the Tea Party.
So I have to ask you about last night.
The Republican response from Paul Ryan was good in Wisconsin.
Then Michelle Bachman had the Tea Party response and a lot of grumbling behind the scenes at the Capitol last night about her giving the Tea Party response.
What's your thought?
Was she trying to steal the thunder from the party?
Is she a spoiler?
Is she going rogue?
Or is she doing something important?
I love it when anybody goes rogue for the right reasons.
And no, I appreciated that her message complemented Representative Ryan's message, and that was fine.
Both of their messages, too, those conservative common sense messages that they had on how to get the economy back on the right track were really good and they were sound.
They were sound because they were in opposition to President Obama's message, which basically was, hey, the era of big government, it's here as long as I am, and I'm going to find a way to make you pay for big government.
That was the president's message.
Exactly right.
The era of big government is back and you're going to pay for it.
All the while, the president was trying to sound Reagan-esque.
And of course, he's got assistance.
State control media right in there trying to draw comparisons between Ronaldus Magnus and Barack Obama.
On MSNBC this morning, Morning Joe, they talked to the managing editor at Time magazine, Richard Stingle, because the latest cover of Time is a photoshopped Reagan with his arm around Obama.
And Stingle was asked to explain this.
The cover is Why Obama Loves Reagan.
That's a Photoshop image of the two men together.
They never actually met, but I like to think they'd have a good time if they were sitting down at the White House together.
And it's basically how Obama from even the 1980s started looking at Reagan as a transformational politician.
Oh, man.
Not in terms of substance, but in terms of style with someone he would model himself after, and that has happened over the last 20 years.
I'm not going to read it to you again, but we've read countless times from Obama's book about how he hated Reagan and his minions.
And in fact, one of Obama's stated reasons for wanting power was to do away with what Reagan had accomplished.
All of this is lies.
Patented lies.
What is this?
I'd like to think.
They would have a good time if they were sitting down at the White House.
Well, let's, I mean, okay, the Time magazine, big whoop.
Time magazine used to be something.
Now it's Time Magazine's not anywhere near as influential or powerful or present as it used to be in this era of new media.
Maybe 20 years ago, 30 years ago, being editor of Time was something special.
Like, there was a time where if you had a gig on ABC, CBS, or NBC, it was special because there were only three of them.
If you had a sports gig, if you had a political commentator gig, if you were the anchor of one of the three nightly newscasts, you were huge because there were only three of you out of the entire world population.
Now they're a dime a dozen.
And it's the same thing with editors at print publications, be they magazines, blogs, newspapers, or what have you.
They're all over the place.
So 30 years ago, 25 years ago, it might have mattered when the editor of Time said, yeah, I'd like to think they'd have a good time.
They were sitting down in the White House together.
But now it's, who cares what you think?
And why do you even think it?
Why would they have a good time?
Reagan has nothing in common with Obama.
You know, play these games if JFK were alive today, if Martin Luther King were alive today, if Reagan were alive today watching all this or crying out loud, folks.
He wished he'd had Alzheimer's.
They wouldn't be aware of what's going on.
See what's been done to his legacy and the great work that he did as president.
So now we've got how do you leftists feel about this?
I know that you all hate Reagan.
You have despised Reagan for the last, ever since 19, well, even during the Reagan administration, the number one objective of the left has been to revise Reagan history.
I mean, all this talk about Reagan cutting taxes for the rich.
Didn't care about the poor.
It didn't care about AIDS.
It didn't care about the homeless.
Reagan was a cold-hearted, mean-spirited extremist.
And these are the people of the ones that have been saying it all these years.
And then all of a sudden, when their little guy gets in trouble, when Obama can't get any traction whatsoever, when he's lost the love, when he's lost all of this messianic stuff that attached itself to him, where do they go?
Do they go to JFK and try to draw analysis and comparison?
Nope.
They go to LBJ?
Nope.
They go to Jimmy Carter?
Nope.
They probably love to go to Marx.
They don't dare.
They go to Gorbachev?
No.
They go to Mao Tze Tong only in private.
Who are they going to go to?
Reagan?
All to draw this illusion that their boy, their president, a young guy, this man child moving to the center?
In the next breath, though, listen to this.
This is Richard Stingell.
Scarborough said, well, we've been saying for some time, even in bad times for Obama, it was 2010 for Reagan.
It was 1982, even as the numbers go down, still personally very popular.
A lot of parallels.
Reagan obviously lost both houses in that midterm election.
His popularity went down to 35%.
But the economy, in Reagan's case, came back that next year, it came back at 7% GDP growth.
If Obama gets half of that, he's lucky.
But the other difference is, I mean, there are a lot of similarities, but one difference is you always knew where Ronald Reagan stood.
I mean, for 25 years, he was talking about government as the problem, not the solution.
And Obama doesn't quite have that same clear through line that Reagan has.
And he's trying to get that.
You can't say the opposite of that, that government is the solution, not the problem.
And in the story, he talks about how there needed to be a correction to the Reagan correction.
And that's what he's trying to do.
Okay, so these people despise Reagan.
Now, they're trying to make Obama the next Reagan.
And in the next breath, Stingell admits Obama wants to reverse Reagan.
Truth comes out.
But you know Obama is never going to say, as Reagan did in his inaugural address, that government is the problem, not the solution.
You know Obama's nugget is.
I don't care however long Obama lives.
We live to 110 years old.
He's never going to say that.
Let's listen to a little bit of Reagan, shall we?
And then you draw the side-by-side A-B comparisons.
January 11th, 1989, the Rinaldus Magnus farewell address to the nation warned us of people like Obama.
Are we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world?
Those of us who are over 35 or so years of age grew up in a different America.
We were taught very directly what it means to be an American.
And we absorbed almost in the air a love of country and an appreciation of its institutions.
If you didn't get these things from your family, you got them from the neighborhood, from the father down the street who fought in Korea, or the family who lost someone at Anzio.
Or you could get a sense of patriotism from school.
And if all else failed, you could get a sense of patriotism from the popular culture.
The movies celebrated democratic values and implicitly reinforced the idea that America was special.
TV was like that, too, through the mid-60s.
Well, you can clearly see this is 1989.
Reagan could see back then we're losing our sense of history and American exceptionalism and essentially warning us about the emergence of people like Obama and the things that he believes.
Patriotism is mocked today.
Patriotism is laughed at and made fun of.
It's considered camp.
True enlightenment is to think your country is guilty.
True enlightenment today, pop culture wherever you want to go, Democrat Party, true enlightenment is America's guilty.
True enlightenment is America has transgressed.
America must make amends.
America must apologize.
We have a leader who does apologize for the country.
These people have a big task.
They try to convince this country that Barack Hussein Obama equals Ronald Reagan.
Now, there may have been a day that they could get away with it some years ago, but not now.
From the same speech, the farewell address, January 11th, 1989.
Now we're about to enter the 90s, and some things have changed.
Younger parents aren't sure that an unambivalent appreciation of America is the right thing to teach martyr children.
And as for those who create the popular culture, well-grounded patriotism is no longer the style.
Our spirit is back, but we haven't reinstitutionalized it.
We've got to do a better job of getting across that America is freedom.
Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of enterprise.
And freedom is special and rare.
It's fragile.
It needs production.
Damn right.
And I don't think too many people on the left would high-five any of this.
Spirit's back.
We don't want our spirit to be back.
The left wants us to be down and out, down in the dumps.
Mad.
How unfair.
How unequal.
How sad things are in this guilty country.
And Reagan called it 89, for those who create the popular culture, well-grounded patriotism is no longer in style.
Certainly isn't.
One more bite from that farewell address again, January 11th, 1989.
We've got to teach history based not on what's in fashion, but what's important.
Why the pilgrims came here, who Jimmy Doolittle was, and what those 30 seconds over Tokyo meant.
You know, four years ago on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, I read a letter from a young woman writing to her late father, who had fought on Omaha Beach.
Her name was Lisa Zanata Henn.
And she said, we will always remember.
We will never forget what the boys of Normandy did.
Well, let's help her keep her word.
If we forget what we did, we won't know who we are.
I'm warning of an eradication of the American memory that could result ultimately in an erosion of the American spirit.
It's underway.
He warned us.
1989, Reagan was warning us of exactly what we've got.
And not just in Obama, but the Democrat Party at large.
And yet, here comes Time magazine and the rest of the drive-by media trying to tell us.
And Obama himself trying to tell us.
And he's Reagan.
And of all the presidents, he prepared for this latest State of the Union debacle.
Of all the presidents, it was Reagan that he studied.
Well, we know what he really thinks about Reagan.
He's told us in his books.
Resentment, dislike.
They think Reagan destroyed America.
They think Reagan set up this situation here where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
The widening gap between rich and poor, the unfairness, the inequality.
Reagan was the epitome of heartlessness.
He had no compassion or whatever.
But this just goes to show that when Democrats need to look back to history, when this regime, when the media, the American left needs to look back to history to try to connect with the majority of people in this country, they have to go to one of the greatest Republican presidents of all time and try to pull it off.
I know, I know, just getting something out of the printer, which is about 25 yards away from me here as opposed to right next door when we are at the EIB Southern Committee.
I'm not complaining.
I'm just explaining.
Folks, I don't know if you've heard about, there's no reason you had because you don't read Gawker.
I kind of like the Gawker guys now and then.
I wouldn't advise you go there to their website.
And if you do, don't tell anybody, I told you.
But the Gawker guys and I, you know, they've made fun of my New York apartment, and they've been, they're pretty snarky.
But there's some reason I like the gawker guys.
They have a story.
This is just a picture.
That I don't believe.
Barry Diller is a prime media mogul.
Used to run News Corp for Rupert Murdock.
One of the ABC protege way, way back in the glory days of the three networks.
Just a brilliant media guy.
He has a Maserati.
He was driving his Maserati in New York in the snow this morning in Central Park.
It got stuck.
I guess he's got OnStar in there or something because he pushed a button.
You know who showed up?
I'm not kidding to push him out of the ditch.
Katie Couric.
And there is a picture of Katie Couric.
She's pushing the front of the car at the hood while Diller is standing there watching.
But the problem is, Katie is pushing the car in the wrong direction.
It's rear-wheel drive.
She's pushing the car.
She's looking back at the camera.
Diller is standing there outside the car with his hand on the driver's side door.
There's a line of traffic behind him.
So here you have two wealthy liberals.
How does Katie Couric end up in Central Park?
Who drives a Maserati in a snowstorm in New York?
Well, of course.
Why isn't she the one inside steering?
Maybe he knows something that we don't.
And he's pushing.
Oh, don't give me that.
Women can't drive in snow.
She's pushing.
Barry's not even inside the car.
Obviously, the photo here is staged for the gawker guys, but I can't help but accept it as though it really happened.
I live in Littoralville.
So I assume that the gawker guys went out there and got something as it happened rather than something posed.
Katie did help push it out in the wrong direction.
Maybe.
Yeah, it's like reality TV.
Things that don't happen, things that don't really happen, end up happening on reality TV.
Well, like I've told you, the only difference between regular TV and reality TV is that the reality TV writers are non-union.
Don't get me started on reality TV.
I'll end up saying things I don't want to say.
Give me three or four weeks.
But I'm sorry.
No comment.
I look at this and I just maybe Diller was, maybe Katie was in the car with Diller.
Who knows?
Otherwise, we're left to assume here that Diller drives his Maserati in a snowstorm in New York, gets stuck, and out of nowhere shows up Katie Couric, and she's the one who ends up trying to push the car in the wrong direction with a line of traffic behind him.
Have you ever wondered what the P in PhD stands for?
My friends, I can honestly tell you that I have never really known.
I know what JD stands for behind a lawyer's name, jurisdiction or whatever.
And I know what MD means.
But I've never really been sure what a PA, but now I do.
A California university professor has been charged with peeing on a colleague's campus office door.
Prosecutors charged 43-year-old Tahomer Petrov, a math professor at Cal State Northridge, with two misdemeanor counts of urinating in a public place.
Arraignment scheduled today in LA County Superior Court San Fernando.
Investigators say a dispute between Petrov and another math professor was the motive.
The LA Times says that Petrov was captured on videotape urinating on the door of another professor's office on campus.
Scrooge officials had rigged the camera after discovering puddles of what they thought was urine at the professor's door.
Well, now I know what P stands for in PhD.
See, if you're just patient, folks, if you just hang in there and be tough, you will eventually learn everything.
A quick phone call.
Gail in Seattle.
I'm so glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Yeah.
No, no, no.
Thank you.
Thanks.
Thanks.
No, no, no, no, no.
Mm-hmm.
Oh, I've just been told she's not there.
It took the staff 20 seconds to tell me she wasn't there.
And rather than 20 seconds of dead air, I thought I would fake a conversation.
Gail, are you there?
Testing 1, 2, 3 here.
Hi.
I'm here.
Hi, Gresh.
Welcome to the program.
Yes.
Hi.
How are you?
I'm great.
Thank you.
But I'm confused.
I got to tell you, I'm confused about this whole chef thing in California with the chicken and waffles.
Because chicken and waffles is classic soul food.
And I don't know what they would expect that chef to make other than soul food or southern cuisine if they're trying to celebrate Martin Luther King Day.
You might have known that.
The chef obviously didn't know that fried chicken and waffles is soul food.
And apparently, not very many people do either because the University of Irvine is in a heap big doo-doo over this.
Got to take a quick timeout, folks.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Did a quick Wikipedia search during the obscene profit timeout.
And indeed, according to Wikipedia, to the extent you can believe that, fried chicken and waffles is indeed a soul food dish.
We looked it up.
Now, I have to tell you, I'm stunned.
I mean, I didn't know that, but apparently nobody at UC Irvine knows it either, including the Black Student Union doesn't know it.
Let's go back.
Let us review this.
UC Irvine says fried chicken and waffle dinner on Martin Luther King Jr. Day was insensitive.
The menu and a sign in the dining hall read MLK holiday special, chicken and waffles.
Pulled together at the last minute by a chef and other cafeteria staff, said the UC Irvine spokeswoman, Kathy Lawn.
The culinary choices are made without any university oversight, she said.
The Irvine student, Ricardo Sparks, 20-year-old co-chairman, University's Black Student Union, lodged a formal complaint with the administration.
So the 20-year-old chairman of the Black Student Union does not know that fried chicken and waffles is an accredited soul food dish.
Yet our caller from Seattle knew that.
So I just wanted to say we double-checked at Wikipedia, found it to be the case.
Guys, Valentine's Day is coming up.
Now, don't tune me out.
Listen to me on this.
I've tried it every way you can think of.
I've had women tell me, I don't want anything on Valentine's Day because I know you don't really mean it.
I mean, it's on a perfunctory holiday.
You're just going out in there and getting me something because everybody else is.
So I was, okay, fine.
And I caught hell for it.
Don't believe any woman that tells you they don't want anything on their birthday for Christmas or Valentine's Day.
Don't believe them.
You're supposed to know that she means the opposite of what she's saying.
Number two, do not fall for the notion that she won't like flowers because everybody gives flowers on Valentine's Day and you're going to come up with something new.
Don't fall for that either.
Flowers work just like abstinence every time they're tried, any day of the year, but especially Valentine's Day.
Expectations are expectations, particularly if you're going to have the gift delivered at work where other people are going to see it.
Trust me on it.
Do not doubt me.
I have learned the hard way and I now know the easy way.
And the easy way is proflowers.com and get this.
Today, one dozen red roses and a free ruby vase, $29.99 plus shipping.
Now, during Valentine's Week, you can call today and order and lock in this price because price of roses will skyrocket during Valentine's week.
And ProFlowers is great.
They guarantee delivery on Valentine's Day, which is a Monday.
They're guaranteeing it.
They have everybody working on that weekend.
By the way, those flowers are going to be, they're not going to be sitting in a warehouse over the weekend.
They're going to be shipped on Sunday and they're going to get to you on Monday.
I scoped all this out.
You can get this deal today while you're thinking about it, and then you've done it.
You have to worry about it.
Just sit around and wait for the big score.
The only way to get these, well, by score, the only way to get these red roses with a free Ruby vase is to call 800PRO flowers and mention Rush.
Or go to the website they set up specially for you.
It's rushproflowers.com.
Then you don't have to remember offer code Rush.
You have to remember Rush if you call 800 ProFlowers.
The easiest way is the website, rushproflowers.com.
So don't doubt me on this.
Who's next?
Where are we going on the phones?
Kate.
Oh, look at this.
One of my old callers from way, way back over 23, 24 years ago in Sacramento, Kate in Fairfield.
How are you, Kate?
I'm very well, Rush.
Actually, 25 years ago.
25 years ago.
1986.
And I wanted to wish you a happy belated birthday.
I remember when you turned 40, and you were so excited to turn 40 because you felt like 40 made you legitimate.
Here you are.
That's because all of the people in power that I had known all my life said, nobody's going to let you make any money.
That's what they said, the exact phrase.
Nobody's going to let you make any money until you're 40.
Now, this is before Facebook, My Butt, MySpace, all that.
In MBA.
I think you proved them wrong, Rush.
No, no, they were exactly right in my case.
It was after 50, actually, for me.
91, you were doing pretty well.
Anyway, I'm calling, I guess I'm the liberals' worst nightmare because I've got eight kids and now five, eight Rush babies and now five Rush grandbabies.
So you.
It's the Liberals' worst nightmare.
I'm calling because of the AP story front page headline in the Fairfield Daily Republic.
And it said it was talking about the $1.5 trillion deficit and how bad it was.
And I thought to myself, being schooled by you for 25 years, it's going to be some kind of slam on the Republicans.
And sure enough, in the first paragraph, it talks about the Congressional Budget Office blaming this on the, quote, tax cuts of late last year.
And I said to myself, there were no tax cuts.
There were no tax cuts.
We continued the tax policy, but they had to figure out a way to blame the Republicans and blame the tax policy.
In fact, I have that very story here in my stack.
And you are exactly right.
All it was was a continuation of tax rates.
So whatever budget impact was caused by those tax cuts way back in the early 2000s, it's already been felt and over with.
Whether there was increased revenue, which we know there was or not, there was no change in revenue generation because the rates stayed the same.
And yet there's AP and the nonpartisan CBO.
Nonpartisan CBO trying to say that the deficit's going to be higher this year because the Bush tax rates were extended.
You're exactly right.
I'm surprised that the Fairfield paper is still publishing.
Oh, yes, it's still around.
The Fairfield Daily Republic is still publishing and fairly successful.
Well, good.
Yeah.
Good for you.
Anyway, it's good to talk to you, Rush.
Same here, Kate.
Thanks very much.
25 years.
You know, sometimes I think I was in Sacramento for three and a half years, and it was the first, I moved away from home when I was 20 to Pittsburgh.
And that's why I'm a Steelers fan, because when I was there in the early 70s was when the dynasty there was forming and they just, I mean, it captivated the town.
You got caught up in it.
From there to Kansas City, I was in Pittsburgh for four and a half years, maybe close to five.
Kansas City for 10.
Sacramento for three and a half.
And in all three of those places, Sacramento, see, those three and a half years seemed like, in a good way, 10 to 15 years.
And I, Because it was the first time, you know, broadcasting is a vagabond business.
In the old days, the way you progressed was to move to bigger cities.
That's not the case now.
All you have to do is get a show, put it on a satellite, have two people listening.
They say you're nationally syndicated.
But that wasn't the case.
You had to move from larger city to larger city to larger city.
And in the process, you really don't make any roots anywhere.
You try, but at the moment's notice, you're going to either get canned or move somewhere else.
And Sacramento was the first place I actually planted roots, civic, citizen-type roots in a place I had lived.
And those three and a half years, they seemed like they were just yesterday.
In fact, I was watching a movie.
Catherine and I watched a movie the other night.
Have you seen The Ugly Truth with Catherine Heigel, whatever her name is, and Bernard?
But that is, now it's a chick flick, and I don't want to do any damage to my image here, but it was hilarious.
Parts of it, parts of it were just hilarious.
But parts of it was filmed in Sacramento.
It took place in Sacramento, and they've got the opening of the film, they've got flyovers, and I didn't know it was in Sacramento when I started watching it.
I knew nothing about the movie.
And I'm looking, I said, oh, that's Sacramento.
I used to live there.
And I started pointing various there.
Look at this.
There's a sort of pointing out the bridge and a number of other things.
And Kate from Fairfield would call once a week.
Back then, she had special dispensations, which she never wasted time on the phones.
And every time I come out to California, she finds a way to get through.
Fairfield's up not far from Sacramento.
Who's next?
Mike in Kansas City.
Great to have you, sir.
Welcome.
Hey, Rush.
It's great to be on.
Thank you, sir.
I'm going to call and tell you I'm a dentist out here in Kansas City, and I wanted to comment on the Kucinich story.
Yeah, he's suing over an olive pit or something, right?
Correct.
And it's kind of funny because he's suing for $150,000.
I'm not familiar with the details out there, Mike.
What damage to the oral cavity of Kucinich did the olive pit do?
Well, that's a good question.
And they don't tell you in the story.
The story just says it's serious and permanent.
Oh, serious and permanent damage from an olive pit.
It's funny because, you know, a cavity is permanent if you don't get it fixed.
So it doesn't really tell us exactly what happened.
Yeah, okay.
So why sue the dentist or any dentist?
Why not sue whoever grew the olive?
Well, no, he is.
He's suing the cafeteria, the congressional cafeteria, for $150,000.
Oh, I thought he was suing the dentist.
Okay.
No, but what's interesting is, you know, I have malpractice insurance, and they tell me that the average dental claim is $50,000.
So it's funny that Kucinich is going for three times that amount.
What does that tell you?
It tells you that he's an elitist.
And I think it's funny because I've had people come in, and I think the most I've ever charged someone, and I mean doing a full mouth reconstruction, is $22,000.
$22,000 for a full mouth reconstruction?
Yeah, and that's roughly, you know, roughly $1,000 a crown.
You do 20 crowns.
You need to move to New York.
Even Palm Bay, you get $22,000 a tooth.
Well, yeah, I know.
I need to be your dentist.
Move down there.
Oh, no.
Have you ever...
I'm trying to figure out why you sue the cafeteria.
It must have been that the olive was sold to him as pitted.
Oh, no.
I mean, obviously they put something dangerous in his food.
Well, but the correct, maybe I've got the wrong story.
Isn't the Kucinich lawsuit over an olive pit?
You're right.
You're right.
It's over an olive pit.
So he's suing the cafeteria over an olive pit, which means he obviously thought he was chowing down on a pitted olive.
Yeah, he said that it contained a dangerous substance.
Oh, he had a sandwich, and that's why he's suing.
Dangerous substance.
Well, it's funny that he claims.
All I know is, ladies and gentlemen, I was nowhere near there when it happened.
Folks, I just got an email from the renowned author Zev Chaffetz, who informs me that at Amy Ruth's restaurant in Harlem, fried chicken and waffles is called the Al Sharpton on the menu.
At Amy Ruth's restaurant in Harlem, fried chicken and waffles is called the Al Sharpton.
Look what you learn on this program.
Here are details, by the way, on the Dennis Kucinich story.
He's filed a legal complaint in D.C. Superior Court spelling out the case in chilling detail.
Chilling detail.
He ate one of those wraps.
He said the wrap was unwholesome and unfit for human consumption in that it was represented to contain pitted olives, yet unknown to plaintiff contained an unpitted olive.
I knew it.
So he chomped down into what he thought was a.
I bet you Kucinich thinks that the pimento in the olive is grown there.
What do you think?
Audio sound by time.
The Reverend Dax.
Last Saturday in Pittsburgh, this is the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit.
Monochrome Coalition President Reverend Dax.
The first thing that asked us to have a diet is to sustain our lives.
Though it is a takeoff, it's a good takeover.
So some things should be taken over.
So good health care.
Transportation should be taken over.
Legal jobs should be taken over.
The need for peace should be taken over.
Right on, Rod El Rado.
Now, that was a cheap microphone there.
Let me, you probably were not able to hear all of what the Reverend Zach had to say.
I fortunately have the transcript here.
He said, the first lady asked, this is in Pittsburgh last Saturday.
The first lady asked us to have a diet that can sustain our lives.
Though it is a takeover, it's a good takeover.
See, some things should be taken over.
See, good health care should be taken over.
Good education should be taken over.
Transportation should be taken over.
The need for jobs should be taken over.
The need for peace should be taken over.
Reverend Jackson, all that has been taken over.
And some of us are trying to get the country back.
All right, who's next?
Why not?
Why, why?
Oh, oh, oh, you're saying that the Reverend Dax cannot order the Al Sharpton anymore because it's not healthy.
Right, fried chicken and waffles.
Yeah, that would make sense.
You didn't think Michelle Obama would approve that?
As healthy eating?
Doubtful, given what we know about her stance on the issue.
Norm in Minden, Nevada.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hive.
Hey, good morning, Rush.
Meggie Dittos from Minden, Nevada.
Thank you.
I, too, have been listening to you since 86.
I was actually at a, I think it was a 2030 club organization meeting.
You were there right after you started with the Sacramento affiliate.
Wow, 1986, that would be right.
Yeah.
So anyway, I'm over in Nevada now and listen to you daily, and it's an honor to speak with you.
And as a honor.
Listening to the health care exemption for businesses, I have yet to find that form anywhere that I could apply for to get exemption for my small construction company.
I don't think there's a form.
Now, I don't know.
I don't know that there's a, well, hell, it's a government.
There probably is.
But you have to go through the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
That's where you have.
You should, if you're really serious about this, call up HHS and you tell them that you were listening to this program and that you heard about all of the waivers that are being granted to the unions and to McDonald's and that you have a small business and you want to know if you can apply for a waiver and get it in order to continue to provide your employees health care despite Obamacare.
Let's see what happens.
I'd like to know.
Yeah, well, I was thinking with your talented staff, you might be able to locate that form.
But I think if every small business got together and applied for the exemption from health care, it might help it get repealed.
Well, we here at EIB Network and our talented staff, somewhat overrated on occasion, no doubt could come up with the form, but what good would that do you?
Well, we could get it online and everybody would have instant access to it.
Oh, oh, I see, I see.
So not to be impolite, but you want the EIB network to do your work for you.
Well, that would help, yeah.
Yeah, all right.
We'll be back after this.
Don't go away.
Right here, I've got it.
I've got a copy of Amy Ruth's menu in Harlem, the Reverend Al Sharpton Chicken and Waffles Fried or Smothered.
And right here in Los Angeles at Roscoe's House of Chicken and Waffles on West Sunset Boulevard.
So apparently, unbeknownst to the black student union leader at UC Irvine, it is accepted accredited soul food.
▲
Export Selection