All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 24, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:35
February 24, 2011, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Starting a million conversations, Rush Limbaugh emitting vocal vibrations.
Left coast to right coast.
The opinions, the views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right, 99.6% of the time.
Telephone number if you want to appear, 800 28282, the email address.
L Rushball at EIBNet.com.
Oops, 67% of the American people approve.
Uh sorry.
Sixty-seven percent disapprove of legislators fleeing Wisconsin to avoid vote.
This is a Rasmussen poll.
Half of America's voters favoric sector unions for government workers, but they strongly oppose the tactic by Wisconsin state senators to flee their state to prevent a vote that would limit the rights of such unions.
The latest Rasmussen reports survey shows that only 25% of likely U.S. voters approve of this tactic.
Sixty-seven percent disapprove.
State legislators in Indiana have used the same approach to avoid a vote in their state.
Sizable majorities of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party reject such a strategy.
Democrats are fairly evenly divided, blah blah blah.
When I read fair and even, who care what follows?
Democrats, I just toss it away.
Back to the audio sound bites.
Anderson Cooper's turn.
Last week it was Nick Robertson a couple weeks ago, whatever it was that poor old Nick was in Egypt in the belly of the beast, attempting to drum up support for President Obama.
Well, it's Anderson Cooper's turn.
Last night on CNN, Anderson Cooper, 19 spoke with uh unidentified Libyan woman about anti-government violence in Libya.
Government violence against protesters.
She said, Why do you continue to report?
I will tell you something.
The Libyan public are angry from the statement was given by President Obama today.
Everybody was disappointed.
Oh no!
CNN goes over hoping to find a lot of love for Obama in the Arab world, and they didn't find any.
Libyan public are angry from the statement given by Obama today.
Everybody was disappointed.
Cooper says, What?
You think he didn't go far enough?
No.
I was expecting him commenting about the uh black people and the European, Eastern European people recruited to uh contribute in this mascara.
It's nonsense.
I thought that he's gonna um give Ethan threats or warning uh for just to stop.
I expected more to be honest.
I expected to read between the lines from his speech.
I could not see that.
I was very disappointed.
Everybody was disappointed.
I want America to support us.
That's what I just told a guy from Dexter, Missouri.
What's going on over there?
Well, they're looking for our support, they're not finding it.
He didn't even mention Qaddafi's name.
The people protesting in Libya are hoping the United States stands with them.
And even reading between the lines.
What would a hit?
I mean, they're even admitting they might have to read between the lines to hear that support from President Obama, but they didn't even get it there.
And we just we hearken back to the story from last April.
Qaddafi in a speech in London.
Yes, Obama is my friend.
Barack Obama.
Policy's good for the world.
He is my friend.
Hell, folks, even Gaddafi birth certificate.
Let's go back.
Nick Robertson, let's relive this.
This is too good.
This is CNN.
I mean, they are on a roll.
They're all over the Middle East.
Egypt, Libya, bordering nations, if you will, border states.
Desperate to find support for President Obama.
In the midst of people protesting against their own governments for whatever reason.
So it's February 11th, nearly two weeks ago, live in Cairo.
Egyptian President Hazni Mubarak has stepped down from power.
Senior International Correspondent Nick Robertson and a man identified as Ahmed have this exchange about the Egyptian anti-government protests.
And President Obama say that America will support Egypt if it wants help and assistance and hopes that there'll be a good transition for jobs for the young people.
What would your message be for President Obama?
We don't know actually who he's abroad.
And the people seeks for our feed on and democracy.
Any uh country, for the people, not for it, or hey Ahmed, when you say that you don't know actually who he supports, he supports himself.
Looks at everything through that prism.
So okay, there's our old buddy Nick Robertson.
What is your message for President Obama?
That's our message.
So next, Nick Robertson goes out and finds Mustafa and repeats the process.
Ms. Harper's joining me now.
We just heard President Obama say that he wants to extend a support officials to Egypt.
Egyptians want any hopes that there are more jobs for the young people in the future.
What's your message for President Obama?
Well, my message for Britain Alliance just we started this revolution without any outside help.
And we are going to finish it also without any outside help.
Nick Robertson, O for two.
What is your message for President Obama?
These people are fighting for their freedom or what have you.
They're not even thinking about Obama.
CNN wants to know what is your message for President Obama?
Two for two.
But Nick Robertson not giving up here.
Sticking with old Mustafa.
One more time.
Are you pleased that President Obama has come out, however, now and said he supports this change and supports the people and supports the young people and what they've done?
Well, actually, Britain Obama views were kind of conflicting during the last week.
But now he's saying that he's supporting the change.
I love this, folks.
I'm sorry, I could listen to this all day.
I could listen to this all day because it is so informative and instructive.
Okay, so here's Nick Robertson.
He's over two from Ahmed and Mustafa.
So he tries again for Mustafa.
But look, Mustafa, can't you at least say that you're at least pleased with Obama?
He's now come out for jobs of it.
Three for three.
So you've heard it now.
Nick Robertson's 0 for three, getting people to say anything supporting President Obama.
Here is how Nick Robertson wrapped it up with Mustafa.
Very happy to now to hear the President Obama has swung behind the people.
I did not hear that.
I didn't hear any of them swing behind Obama.
I didn't hear any of them happy to hear that Obama swung behind them.
Didn't happen.
And then you've got poor old Anderson Cooper 19 trying with a woman.
Well, no, we didn't hear anything.
But you have to have to CNN's doing everything they can here.
I mean, they're giving it the old college try.
Just not working out.
Last night on CNN's Piers Morgan tonight.
This is the guy that took over for Larry King.
He interviewed Larry King.
Piers Morgan, ratings plummeting.
Went for broke last night.
Well, let's bring the old guy back.
Put him in the guest chair.
They had this discussion.
Quite interesting.
Listen to this.
On the scale of all the dictators you interview, where does he rank, do you think?
Because he has a certain literati in America for obvious reasons.
Law could be another thing.
Well, as a dictator, he's among the worst.
As an interview, he is the worst.
He's not an easy person to talk to, as opposed to, say, Chavez, who is terrific to talk to.
Some people are like Americans.
Chavez would be a successful, in my opinion, American politician.
He has flair, has dynamism, he has exuberance.
He comes into the room, he changes the room.
There you have it.
That's what you need to be a good American for Larry King.
Dynamism.
Come in the room and change the room.
Be a successful American politician.
Larry.
You left something out.
Successful American Democrat politician.
Successful American liberal politician.
But screw Qaddafi.
Hell.
Gaddafi, the dictator is among the worst.
Now, Chavez, there's a great dictator.
Now there's a dictator.
Great to have you with us, my friends, Rush Limbaugh, serving humanity would have my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair to Cincinnati.
Ron, hello, sir.
Glad you called.
Nice to have you with us on the EIB network.
Hi, Rush.
Um, Rush, I've been a loyal supporter and listener of yours since the late 80s, and so is my wife.
Um Rush might what might be interesting is is to know that my wife is a teacher.
Yep.
She's been a teacher for 35 years.
Some of the remarks that you made earlier in the week were disappointing to us both.
And we both care enough about you.
We both love you enough that I wanted to call you today, and and I wanted to to give you an opportunity to say something that I think you believe in as well, but maybe haven't had the chance to do it.
I I know you believe that all professions don't necessarily walk in lockstep to a a political party or a particular point of view.
Um any more than actors are all Democrats and liberals.
Uh some of them are Reaganites and some of them are independents.
But early in the week you referred to a study um where there was uh uh it was a it was a troubling study where you said a certain percentage of students graduate not being able to read or write.
And we both came away with the impression that you were blaming the teachers.
There was a story specifically in Wisconsin that uh over half of Wisconsin eighth graders had subpar reading levels.
Yes.
And but Rush, the education of a person um involves not only a quality teacher, and we all admit to that, but it also involves the the the interest of the individual student and the discipline he gets from his guardians.
Now I would have ordinarily said parents, but nowadays we say guardians.
Moms and dads are something that only exists in half of the households.
Um I just think that this society is dysfunctional enough that we shouldn't be blaming a a particular entire professional group that ninety percent of which are college educated.
Um what does that have to do with anything though?
That may be one of the problems.
The disparity of income between themselves and the other private sectors, Most teachers.
Yeah, well, what my point is what have they learned in college?
What have they been taught?
How have they been indoctrinated?
What can I look at?
I have I have talked to enough parents about some of the drivel that their kids are being taught in school.
It is frightening.
Some of the stuff I've heard about what's going on down here in South Florida, you would not believe.
Well, Rush, for 35 years, I've sat across the table from my wife, and we've talked about certain things that happen, and it is I am absolutely convinced that you have a student body today and a parental or guardian group that simply didn't exist 20 or 30 years ago.
And I think that has to at least be considered when you talk about it.
Wow, what are we going to let the inmates run the asylum?
What what do you mean by what is your let me?
I don't want to lose focus here.
What is your uh no B for complaint?
What what what did I say that bothered you that got you on this?
Well, I think you sort of referred to teachers as being all liberals and democrats.
And again, my wife is she loves you.
She's been listening to you for twenty-some odd years.
So the profession as a group doesn't necessarily fall in that category.
Many teachers are supporters of yours or independents.
Um to speak of them sort of as a group that falls lock and step with their union is not necessarily true.
Uh I I can't tell you what percentage, Rush, but I can tell you they're independent thinkers, they're college graduates, and they should be given credit for not necessarily all falling within that group that you referred to earlier in the week.
Yeah, but all of this is in in in context.
It's because the context here is what's happening in Wisconsin.
It was those teachers being discussed, those who have walked off the job, those who are accepting fraudulent medical excuses from folk fake or fraudulent doctors.
Wrong law.
What do you mean wrong?
All that is wrong, Rush, and those people should be fired.
And and both Jane and you know, we both look for the day when when merit becomes the rule.
I I firmly believe if merit were the rule, my wife would make more money today than she does.
And that bad teachers should not be allowed in the classroom.
And I think we're slowly working our way towards that.
She is not interested in being a duespayer member of a state or national local organization, but Rush, she has to be.
If she isn't a duespayer member of that organization, she loses certain rights that are key to protecting her, particularly in terms of liability.
Precisely.
And that's been the focus of the discussion this week, not so much teacher incompetence, but This has been a discussion this week about the union a stranglehold on education, what its real purpose is, which isn't education, it's empowerment of the Democrat Party.
That's what this whole discussion's been about this week.
Your your wife look, I'm members of my family are teachers.
Cousins, they're they're teachers.
Um it it I you know bad teachers are allowed in the classroom because the unions won't let them be fired.
You're kind of making my point here.
The unions are working against the interests of good teachers.
Look at look at what happened.
Look at what Obama did in Washington.
We had we had this brilliant plan, blue brilliant uh uh uh uh voucher program where kids of inner city parents, depth of poverty, were allowed to go to a great private school, and Obama cut the program.
He cut because it was a threat to the teachers' unions.
He is totally beholden to union.
So m my my point is it's the union which is standing in the way of people like your wife prospering.
Because the union is not about education.
The NEA guy, the retiring outgoing general counsel for the NEA, we read his going away statement yesterday.
He said, We're not here for the children.
What we're we don't have our effectiveness has nothing to do with our our merit, our ability, it's all about the power that we have acquired.
Rush, um the good teachers in school are as upset about the bad teachers as you are.
And they would like to see some way where they can also um uh somehow there be a program or some kind of a a merit system where they would be taking they would be gotten rid of.
Um they are as as disappointed and as upset as anybody.
I think the system is changing.
It's going to eventually go to a merit system, eventually go to a voucher system, and eventually the the um participation in the union is going to be something a teacher can opt out of.
So I appreciate though the things that you're saying and the points that you're bringing up, and as you mentioned, Wisconsin being the um uh battleground.
Ohio is also a battleground for these issues.
Right.
Um, Democrats walking off the job there too.
You got the same thing coming your way.
Yes.
Um but earlier in the week, uh to get back to uh what was disappointing was when you sort of said teachers.
Um and not so much uh footnoting saying, well, a certain segment of the teacher profession, um I just got that impression that you were talking about the entire profession.
And I'm sorry if that was not what you were.
Well, of course I'm not talking about the entire profession.
This did we I'm I'm speaking here of unions, but I will say this to you.
The good teachers need to rise up against the union leaders.
You know, it's it's one thing to be upset with somebody like me when you think I'm lumping everybody together.
Uh but you know, the the the teachers' union, if the teachers union is not representing its membership, then the membership needs to do something about it.
Whose fault is it?
What why don't the teachers take over their union if they know that horrible teachers are still there only because of the union?
The teachers, the good teachers ought to be out on the streets supporting Governor Walker.
Where are they?
The good teachers, such as your wife, the teachers who are upset with what's happening.
Where are they?
We don't hear from them.
They're the ones that make it look like they are in solidarity with the unionized teachers.
The teachers are responsible for their union.
You know, and and and look at I you when you first called, you wanted to you wanted to blame the guardians of the parents.
Well, okay, uh fine and dandy, but where do the teachers come into this equation?
Teachers have to have some responsibility for it.
You can't just say that, well, we got a different makeup here in the student body.
It's different than it was uh twenty years ago.
You can't say that the teachers are immune here from the from the faltering performance of the uh of the students.
You can't say, well, it's the it's the union and it's the uh it's the teacher, it's the uh parents or it's the uh it's it's the guard guardians or whatever.
Uh teachers need to good teachers need to stand up for the profession.
If the profession is being sullied, if the profession is being impugned, uh and there are teachers who are privy to this and see it, where are they?
Where are they standing up for the concept of a decent education and a responsible one?
So you when that doesn't happen, when the media portrays all teachers as being on one side of this, you're gonna have to understand it.
Some people are going to think that all teachers are in unison, anti governor, anti-anything.
They're just totally pro-union, whatever the union wants to do.
So uh the good teachers that you talk about, we never hear from.
They might call here and talk about it, but we don't see them in public.
What it appears to us as is that they're all unified.
They're all standing as one in Wisconsin against the governor.
Anyway, I gotta take a time out.
I'm glad you called.
Um Ron, thanks very much.
Rushville and bought the EIB network and a brief timeout here at the bottom of the hour.
Back with more right after this.
Hammerback, it's Rush Lynn bought this the EIB network.
Wisconsin teachers are now required to teach their students labor union and collective bargaining history.
This is from the Daily Caller today.
Wisconsin's teachers are required to teach children about the history of the labor union movement and collective bargaining in the United States per a law.
Former Democrat governor Jim Doyle signed in December 2009.
The Wisconsin Assembly bill requires the state's teachers to incorporate the history of organized labor in America and the collective bargaining process into their lesson plans.
Describing the new law, Wisconsin's official Department of Public Education website says, Wisconsin has long been a leader in labor rights.
The progressive movement, which had its beginnings in our state, led to laws limiting child labor and safety in the workplace.
Unions such as the AFL CIO and the Teamsters allow us to enjoy an eight-hour work week and vacation time.
In fact, it has been argued by some historians that the history of the United States itself could be a history of labor.
This is they don't teach the other side of it.
Don't make me uh chuckle here.
You get me to start chuckling and I might not stop chuckling.
So with propaganda's indoctrination, snurredly, propaganda, yeah, but it's indoctrination.
Since 2009, Democrat Governor Jim Doyle, Wisconsin's teachers require to teach kids labor union and collective bargaining history.
And of course, it's, I'm sure, shaded in ways.
Who's next?
Uh is there a law about how the country was founded?
I don't know.
I don't know.
Now normally I would say, yeah, that that would be part of every curriculum, but I'm not that confident.
I mean, the founding, the founding of this country could well be taught that we kick the Indians off of the off the land.
That may be how the founding is.
Who knows how it's taught in some of these places.
John Silber, who used to run Boston University, this is uh ten or so years ago now, did a survey of the top five history textbooks used in hash scrolls throughout the country.
He Found the largest, the longest reverence to a reference to Abraham Lincoln was two paragraphs.
In a couple of textbooks, there were chapters devoted to Bill Clinton.
Two paragraphs devoted to Abraham Lincoln.
Look, what this is at the fundamental of this is the left has gotten hold of the entire education institution.
Just as they have gotten hold of the media.
And they use it for indoctrination purposes.
That's what's coming to a head now.
In any number of places.
Thanks, Russ.
Actually, it's Brady, but that's okay.
Brady.
Yeah.
Sorry about that.
There's no why here.
Obviously, uh call screener input error.
No, no, no.
That's fine.
Pleasure to talk with you today, Roger.
You bet.
I wanted to talk about this uh declaration by the administration, the Justice Department saying that the uh defense of marriage act is uh unconstitutional, and I was asking myself, why do it now?
And and I thought about it, and I and I it sounds to me my thought is that the administration might be trying to set up a trap for conservatives.
And it's based on something that you've talked about for years.
And it has to do um with how a lot of the so many of the blue bloods in the Republican Party have always said, if we could just get these conservatives to let go of the social issues, we could win elections.
Right.
But uh and but if you look at conservative leaders both in the i in in the in the house and then at and at the state level, particularly with these governors in the Midwest and the way they've exposed the um you know the the public sector union monopolies and the way they're I mean they're laser focused on on economic and fiscal issues right now.
And I just wonder if the administration is trying to do this to get conservatives off track of what they're doing, what they were elected to do to try to get them focused on social issues again and you and say, you see, they're not focused on the economy.
Do you see where I'm coming from?
Well, there may be some of that, but if they if that if that's their calculation, it's failing because the reaction to it is not the substance.
People's reaction is the lawlessness.
The conservative reaction is this is this is brazenly lawless.
Who cares what he has determined he's not going to defend, it's lawless.
There are any number of ways Obama could have done this.
He could have, for example, assigned the most inept lawyers in the Justice Department to do these cases when they come up and lose every one of them.
He could have done this in a way that nobody would have ever known it.
He just made sure that this act never amounted to anything by making sure he'd always lost.
In other words, throw the game every time they go to court with this case in question.
But no, he he makes a big production out of saying I am the law.
This isn't because I don't like it.
Uh I haven't the you know, I haven't seen a whole bunch of social conservatives get distracted from Wisconsin because that's as much social as it is economic.
It's what their kids are being taught.
So it's uh it's it's an interesting thought, but if that's their strategy, it isn't gonna work.
Because the pe the people who are up in arms about it, such as Mo are not up in arms about it because it's got to do with gay marriage.
It's because it's lawless.
A president does not have this kind of power.
That's why I went through my whole routine.
Imagine President Palin instructing her attorney general to not defend Roe v.
Wade anymore.
She doesn't like it.
Imagine President Palin without a birth certificate.
Imagine President Palin telling her attorney general, these EPA rules don't defend them anymore.
I don't believe in them.
Just go on down the line.
Everything that Obama's done, this DOMA thing is not an isolated instance of lawlessness.
Imagine if imagine if the law of the land.
Well, let's just say the law of the land is no drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and President Palin comes along and tells her attorney general, we're gonna start drilling, we're not gonna defend any of these cases, start drilling.
In defiance of the law.
Imagine they would be, they would be on the case for her impeachment.
And that would be all you would see in the headlines.
So they may be thinking they could distract people from Wisconsin by going after this thinking that the And I don't doubt that you you have a point here, because I think they totally misunderstand the social issues crowd.
I I do think that they believe that if they if they do something like this that Tanamout says we're all for gay marriage, that the social crowd will drop everything and focus on this and dilute what's going on in Wisconsin, Ohio, the budget, and everything else.
Isn't it gonna work?
Is it working?
Hasn't happened.
And uh it won't.
Won't be the case.
But it's still is still good thinking.
Shows you're paying attention out there.
Donna and Frederick, Maryland, you're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
Um, to use one of your favorite quotes, um, and I could hear you saying this.
Do not doubt me when I say what America's witnessing right now is a historic wake-up call, which is a systematic, basic destruction of our country.
And this president and his cronies are using our republic against the will of the people from all fronts.
And um I think he's he's uh underestimated the resolve of the true patriots in our country.
I don't think he's underestimated the resolve of his opposition at all.
I don't think he cares.
He wants dissension.
I think it's pretty obvious.
Well, there's no question.
He wants he loves the disunity.
He loves the chaos.
He he loves he loves all of this because at the end of the day, people are going to be turning to him to fix it all.
You gotta you gotta get involved if you're gonna solve this.
Any any request for more federal involvement, uh he would he would uh of course crave.
And I think he's working with uh groups overseas, um, in tandem with them for the destruction within our country.
Like what groups?
Uh I would say things like the is radical Islamic groups, um, even domestic uh terrorist groups like Code Pink and some of those.
Why do you think that?
Um I think the writing's on the wall.
And uh, you know, the media is doing a good job um avoiding the issues, with the exception of um, you know, right wing radio and talk shows.
Um, you know, they're they're not getting to the truth of the matter.
And that's what's alarming, because I don't think when it's all said and done, uh, several of these groups are not gonna have what they what they thought they would get in the end.
Well, I know that's always been the case, but I don't I I th they're they don't want to get to the truth of the matter.
They're they're part of the whole cabal.
They call themselves journalists or call themselves the media, they're just they're just another group of leftists.
Uh and they are they are all aligned.
Uh I here's the thing.
I I don't think Obama needs to have any alliances with foreign groups to do what he's doing.
Uh I I d that if that's going on, that's news to me.
I just think he's an agitator.
He just loves to agitate.
He's got a chip on his shoulder about this country.
I just I I mean it's evidence is there.
All it takes is guts to come to that conclusion, not brains.
I appreciate the call, Donna.
Thanks very much.
We'll be right back.
We have news from the White House press secretary, the estimable Jay Carney at the White House briefing this afternoon.
The uh ABC senior White House correspondent, Jacob Jake Tapper, said Colonel Qaddafi Gaddafi Gadafi today in a rambling phone interview with Libyan State TV talked about how the uh the protesters had been fed hallucinogens by Osama bin Laden in their Nescafe.
I was wondering if the administration had any response to anything Mr. Qaddafi has said in the last couple of days.
The way the president has approached this is that our position on the unrest in these countries is not about an individual Leader.
It's not about personalities.
And I would simply note that one consistent theme I think you've seen in the way that we have responded to these developments these events in the Middle East in the region has been to make it clear that it's also not about the United States.
It's not about the United States dictating outcomes, picking leaders, telling countries who can run, who can uh be their leader and who can't be.
It isn't this is I mean, Jay.
Were you bowling with uh Biden when uh Obama's out there telling Mabari he had to leave and leave now?
And that now started yesterday.
We don't dictate.
It's not about personalities.
It's not about an individual leader.
It's not about the United States.
What the hell is it about?
So then Chip Reed from CBS says, you said that it's not about an individual leader.
You've been saying it all along, and it was said during the Egyptian situation also, but at the same time, the president was not reluctant or hesitant to use the name Mubarak when he spoke, but he seems reluctant to even mention the name of Gaddafi.
Why not?
I would point you again to the fact that the leader in this country, Colonel Qaddafi, has has tried to suggest that the United States was behind the uprisings of its own people or the demonstrators the demonstrations, uh the peaceful demonstrations in its own country by its own people uh by Libya's own people, and that's clearly not the case.
Well what uh uh uh yeah, I don't know what he said.
Yeah, which means uh which means what I didn't think it was possible to make Gibbs look good.
I realize I did not think that was possible.
Has anybody ever thought maybe if if Kadaki if Qaddafi would just get a promotion, if somebody called him General Qaddafi, maybe he'd settle down.
The guy's been a colonel all of his life, and he runs the country.
Bill in Clemson, South Carolina.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Rush, Army Veteran Ditto's from Clemson, South Carolina.
Thank you very much, sir.
Appreciate that.
I was a Teamster for twelve years in Seattle, and I wanted to call in and put this myth to bed that these union protesters are actually trying to protect the jobs.
Um senior seniority union members are interested in JOB singular.
They do not care about jobs that are below them in the seniority list.
I've sat in votes many times.
Wait just a second.
Wait, wait, well, hold it now.
You're introducing something new, and I want to make sure I understand.
You said you're you're a teamster for twelve years Seattle, and you want to put the myth to bed that the union protesters are trying to protect jobs.
Right.
The only job they're interested in is their own.
I've been in many votes where it meant pennies to senior union members, say a cut in pay, or a little bit more they had to pay for their retirement, or a little bit more they had to pay for health care, or we would lose jobs and without fail, they would pay to keep the money in their pocket rather than save jobs.
This governors told them, look, you're gonna lose 12,000 jobs.
They don't care.
If you're below them on the seniority list, the top 50 percent plus one vote will vote in lockstep every single time and all these younger seniority members under the.
Wait a minute, now somebody has to care because of the dues.
The dues add up.
And well, the does the dues result from having as many members of the union as you can get.
Well, I was I look, I drove for twelve years for the newspaper in Seattle.
I went through a couple of strikes, and each time it meant losing jobs, the vote went, I'm not giving up my money.
And that meant younger guys who had young families lost their jobs, and women every single time.
Now, what was the wait a minute now, but what was the alternative?
It w what what would it have cost you if they kept their jobs?
It would have meant a slightly a slight cut in pay.
If I recall correctly, once it was a five percent cut in pay, no chance.
It meant paying four more a little more for health care?
No way.
Not a chance.
If it meant cutting jobs, but I get to keep my money, I'm keeping my money every single time.
Now, you talk about dues.
I want to know why nobody in the media has asked these union members from Wisconsin, wait a minute.
This president of your union is making four hundred and eighty thousand dollars a year.
Does that not tell you you're paying too much in union peace?
I'd be outraged if I was in a union and I had a union.
Well, I've had that question ever since I was a kid, ever since I first saw a Teamsters convention in Las Vegas with Jimmy Hoffa and the boys reveling in it.
I think who's paying for this?
The union members are.
Well, there's another question there.
All these protesters, these teamsters that bust in from New York and Indiana and Illinois.
These are senior union senior guys with seniority.
They're ostensibly dedicated to their jobs, correct?
Well, they're not working.
And guess who's filling in for 'em?
These lone your lower seniority workers who are gonna get thrown out of the bus.
And these guys don't care.
They're burning out.
Well, I wondered about that too.
All these union guys coming from out of state who's doing their jobs.
Now we know.
Well, I'm glad you called.
Thanks, uh, thanks very much, Bill.
I appreciate it.
We gotta go, folks.
I'm sorry, time's just zipping by here.
Finally, a couple stories documenting what our last caller just said.
The General Motors plant, um stamping plant Indianapolis, shut down a couple months ago because the UAW would not allow a new starting wage of merely fifteen dollars an hour, which is the going rate of everybody else.
So he says, not about the jobs of the underlings.
Not about new jobs, not about more jobs, not about jobs for the underclass in the union.
And I found a couple of others to substantiate what he was saying.
We'll get to those.
▲
Export Selection