All Episodes
Previous Next
April 11, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:51
April 11, 2011, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Last hour I asked what changed.
What changed from the day they promised $100 billion in cuts to Friday, where we agreed to $38 billion.
What changed?
I have the answer for you, by the way.
And CBS News in Chicago is reporting $5 a gallon gasoline by Memorial Day.
Now, certainly that's going to have to be a tipping point.
$5 a gallon gasoline by Memorial Day during a Democrat presidency.
Let's see how that shakes out.
Anyway, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh.
Great to have you.
Telephone number $8282-2882 and the email address L Rushball at EIBNet.com.
Okay, on Wednesday.
Let me tell you what his kabuki dance is leading up to.
At least this is one of the many things I think it's leading up to.
The news media, the Democrat Party, as you know, in unison.
Fox News, everybody.
Friday night all weekend.
What a big win for Boehner.
What a huge, embarrassing defeat for Obama.
Why the man of the hour is John Boehner.
Why?
Why, this there's no question about it.
And if that's the case, you can bet that it's not the case.
We have a little montage here, just to remind you of how the media was reporting all of this.
Many analysts say that the winner was Speaker John Boehner.
John Boehner being a winner.
I think John Banner was a big winner.
That is a big win.
John Boehner was able to get a pretty good deal for them.
John Boehner, everybody is pronouncing him the biggest winner.
This government shutdown deal was a victory for by and large Speaker Boehner.
Yeah, right.
I'm sorry.
I just um they too eager to say it.
All these libs in the media.
Now, where's this going?
Now it's certainly in their interests, the Democrats and the media, to pretend that we have just experienced draconian cuts.
That's what gets me.
They are acting like this $38 billion is the equivalent of one trillion.
They're acting like the federal budget has just been iced.
That's what's wrong with this.
There's no sense of proportion.
They are acting like the bottom's been cut out of this.
They are acting like their aorta has been split open.
And it hasn't.
This isn't even a stub toe, and they're acting like they got stabbed in the heart.
My friends.
So on Wednesday, Obama's gonna have his big speech here.
And you know what he's gonna say?
Among other things, Obama's going to say, okay, we've listened to Republicans, and we've cut spending.
He's gonna talk about how monumental cuts are.
He's even gonna take credit.
He's gonna say I was there.
So now it's time for compromise.
Hello, tax increases.
Now we gotta get serious.
It's campaign issue.
It's time to get the left on board for the 2012.
So acting like they've just been wounded to the heart with these cuts, and then going after tax cuts on the rich, all of this is a ruse designed to reignite the fire under the Democrat base, which is not happy.
They are not energized, but this is the ruse to get them that way.
And that's what this kabuki dance is all about.
We got to keep the government going somehow.
We've done Draconian spending cuts.
But that will not be enough.
Now we have to raise taxes.
Obama will probably go on to say in his best Bill Clinton impersonation that he's worked as hard as he's ever worked on this, but there's no way we can avoid raising taxes now.
Especially with all of these cuts.
You wait, see if I'm right.
On Wednesday night, Obama's gonna talk about these cuts as though they're 30 times as large as they really are.
And Obama warned us, he warned us.
When he had the Bush tax cut extensions forced on him.
He told us at the time he would never stop fighting to raise taxes on the rich, and by rich he means anybody with a job.
Not 250,000.
But anybody with a job.
So whatever he says on Wednesday, it's going to boil down to direct or indirect taxes on the rich as a means of paying for this.
But it's all about reigniting his base.
Now to show you what I mean, I told you I got a bunch of stories here that indicate this is all a ruse.
I mean, they're just beyond the bounds of sensibility.
R.J. Esko or Escow at the Huffing and Puffington Post.
Why progressives keep on losing and the right keeps on winning?
Congratulations, the grand compromise will cut nearly 39 billion dollars in needed government spending, which proves how serious everybody is about reducing the deficit.
The grand compromisers could have canceled the next ten years of tax subsidies for oil companies and cut the deficit by 40 billion, but apparently that's not how serious people do things.
If the Republican Party were singing to its base today, the song would be the theme from Friends, I'll be there for you.
And the Democrats would be singing you always hurt the one you love.
We're being told we should celebrate a compromise in which Democrats gave up 38.5 billion dollars in spending cuts when the original Republican demand was for 32 billion.
Well, what he means by that, it was actually not 32.
I mean the original was a hundred.
But forget that.
What this guy's talking about was that at some point in the recent negotiations, the Republicans said, look, just give us 10 billion, and daily said, no, we'll add 20.
Anyway, that means the Democrats only gave the Republicans 20% more than they originally demanded.
Okay, guys, you get an extra 20%, not a penny more.
Once again, the unpopular views of a minority have been imposed on the majority, but progressives in this country should be asking themselves a serious question.
Why does the Tea Party seem to be so much more effective than the left as a movement?
It's a complicated question that deserves in-depth discussion, but some of the things that may be impeding progressives include excessive party loyalty, the desire for a charismatic leader, and the urge to prematurely celebrate accomplishments that are flawed and incomplete.
Why?
Why did the Tea Partiers win such a major victory?
Money for starters, the Tea Party's generously funded by billionaires like the Koch brothers.
I mean, I'm telling you, the longer I read this, the more ridiculous it's going to get to you.
And this guy is just beside himself at how big the defeat was and how the Tea Party shellacked his side.
And why does it keep happening?
Progressives can't be blamed for helping to elect a president who either misrepresented his positions on a number of issues or reversed himself once he was elected.
A sample, the health excise tax, which he opposed and later actively worked to enact.
The individual mandate for health care coverage, which he opposed and then supported some matters of civil liberties and science policy.
But it's not as if progressives don't have any cards to play.
Their policies are very popular, while those of the Tea Party and the Republicans are equally unpopular.
Really?
Well, what about the elections?
Mr. Escow last November.
More people would like to see more done to end poverty.
That we would.
Your policies have exacerbated Mr. Eskow.
Despite the naysayers, the nation elected a president who presented himself as an unambiguous progressive and gave him both houses of Congress so it can be done.
So what keeps going wrong?
Over and over and over.
These guys ought to be the ones throwing a party.
This guy is unhappy over 38.5 billion dollars in cuts and somehow doesn't realize all that his president has done to destroy The private sector of this country, the engine of capitalism, which people like this hate.
This is what they want.
They're getting what they want, and they are miserable.
If progressives want to identify and work within the Democrat Party, it's a worthwhile endeavor, but their relationship to the party should mirror what Thoreau said about his relationship to the world.
Be in it, but not of it.
Anyway, this thing just keeps going and it descends into more and more.
I know they're in an alternative universe.
Listen to this.
The progressive inclination toward premature exhilaration over flawed Democrat bills is often matched with a flawed sense of what's politically possible and politically popular.
The right likes to call the health bill Obamacare.
A better name would be Baucus Conrad Nelson, Lincoln, Lieberman, and some other senators care.
The left was eagerly applauding a bill before it was finished, despite the fact that it was and is seriously flawed.
A lot of progressives have been waiting for the next Kennedy-esque figure to lead them out of the gloom and rescue a suffering nation.
This charismatic figure has no name, face, race, or gender.
He or she is an ex to be filled in with the dreams and yearning of a movement that longs leadership.
Some thought it might be Hillary Clinton or even John Edwards.
Whatever your feelings about Obama, he ain't XFK.
XFK never existed and he ain't coming.
Say what you will about Representative Ryan's budget proposal.
It's a vision.
May not be a good vision, but it's a vision.
What's the progressive vision for 2021?
We don't have one.
How about this?
Increase Social Security retirement benefits by 15% across the board.
Lift the payroll cap.
Impose a financial transactions tax.
Increase income taxes on a sliding scale goes up to 60% for the highest earners.
Third, add $500 million to stimulus spending over the next two years and keep adding it until unemployment is down to 4%.
I'm serious, this is a guy from the Huff Boe.
He's so ticked off about the $38 million in cuts he's got his own recipe for what ought to be happening in the alternative.
Fourth, immediately add a public option to Obamacare.
Medicare for all that's voluntarily available to Americans of all age brackets.
Dream, then demand your dream.
It's working for the Tea Party, and it can work for you.
So this guy, this is I read this, this has got to be a ruse.
This has to be a ruse about how we're getting the Democrats are getting shellacked here.
How many of you think Obama's losing?
How many of you think the Democrats are getting shellacked at every turn?
Unemployment, still 9%, and it's really higher than that.
Gasoline heading up to five bucks.
Housing market is a disaster.
People can't find work.
The opportunity for prosperity is dwindling.
These guys are getting everything they want.
What their misery is rooted in is a mistaken belief that Obama policies will spread happiness around, make everybody equally happy and content, so it doesn't do that.
It makes everybody miserable.
What these guys are unhappy about is they are looking, I mean, they're staring it straight in the face.
Their policies don't work.
Never in the history of the country has so much abject socialism been foisted on a culture and society at such a rapid rate.
And it isn't working.
And that's what's really royally.
It's hilarious to hear the media tell it you would think Obama has joined the Tea Party.
Obama's he's celebrating the budget cuts.
He's out there at Delincols doing all this.
This is not an accident.
And it's so far from reality that it's a ruse.
Paul Krugman in the New York Times, the president is missing.
Obama is conspicuously failing.
What have they done with President Obama?
What happened to the inspirational figure?
His supporters thought they elected.
Who is this bland, timid guy who doesn't seem to stand for anything in particular?
Paul Krugman.
I realize that the hostile Republicans controlling the House, there's not much Obama can do really get done in the way of concrete policy.
Arguably all he has left is the bully pulpit, but he isn't even using that, or rather he's using it to reinforce his enemies' narrative.
Maybe that terrible deal in which Republicans ended up getting more than their opening bid was the best he could do.
They really believe that $38 billion was more than the opening bid.
They really think Obama added to the original Republican demand.
So, Mr. Krugman, you're just like this poor guy from the Huff Poe.
You are realizing he never was what you thought he was.
You helped create a template of a phony.
You created this messiah.
We've got somebody about whom there are legitimate citizenship questions here.
Serving as president.
That's what the birth control thing means, or the birth birth certificate thing means.
That's what people are really wondering about.
It's a citizenship issue.
You've guys pasted up a uh an illusion.
You created a fictitious character.
In the image that you hold dear, and now reality is showing you that you lied to yourselves and everybody else too.
And now you're asking, where's Obama?
Where's the guy you elect?
Hey, he was in Lincoln Memorial Saturday.
He's gonna be making a speech Wednesday.
He's the guy.
He is who you elected.
You guys created a lie, and you f you fell for your own lie.
Now the country's waking up to it, so you somehow have to gin the left base up here to get their reelection efforts uh back on track.
Because you can't go back to 2008 anymore.
You can't recreate those days.
So the best you can do is to say poor old Obama got rolled.
Boehner's a hero.
Uh the Tea Party is the Tea Party is just ruling this country and getting its way with everything he wants.
It's worse than an alternative universe.
It's worse.
Telling you it's a um it's it's a ruse.
And Boehner knows what's coming, by the way.
Uh he just this minute tweeted tax hikes means more uncertainty, fewer jobs, must cut spending.
DC doesn't have revenue problems, has spending problems.
He knows what's coming.
He just tweeted that.
All right, I gotta take a break here.
We'll get to more of your phone calls and other excitement when we come back, don't go away.
Okay, I asked earlier what changed.
What changed?
Last campaign, Republicans promise 100 billion dollars in cuts if they are elected to run Congress.
Then the hundred billion dollars became sixty-one billion dollars.
And by the way, the hundred billion was, if we're all honest.
In fact, when that was first announced, a hundred billion dollars was first announced, even during the campaign, we all kind of scratched their heads and said, What?
Just a hundred billion dollars?
That's what a hundred billion?
That was the pledge, but it regardless.
Let's stick it to subject for just a second.
That was the pledge, a hundred billion dollars, then it became sixty-one billion prorated, ends up thirty-eight and a half billion.
What changed?
The answer is very simple.
What changed is the DC ruling class uniting in its effort to neuter the Tea Party.
That's what changed.
And I remember we spoke about it on several occasions on this program.
I warned you people many times.
The ruling class of Washington doesn't, doesn't any, including the Republican element of the ruling class, doesn't like the Tea Party, doesn't like something they can't control.
The Tea Party doesn't have a leader.
It's genuine grassroots.
It consists of people who've never prior been active in politics.
But they're so upset and they're so alarmed and they're so concerned.
Do You ever stop to think of this?
Intellectually, you and I know that the Democrat Party and the mainstream media hate John Boehner.
Just as though they would hate any Republican leader.
They hated Reagan.
It's nothing personal with Boehner.
They just hate him.
And now all of a sudden they're praising Boehner the uh the hilt.
Now all of a sudden, and you've heard it all weekend long, Boehner, the big winner.
This doesn't connect intellectually.
You know it, and I know it.
You may not have been able to put your finger on it at first, but you knew it didn't sound right.
You knew it didn't make sense using intelligence guided by experience.
These guys don't like Boehner.
38 and a half billion dollars.
Big win, snookered Obama.
Wait a minute.
No, no, this doesn't add up.
Unless, unless, unless, This is seen as Boehner's victory over not Obama, but the Tea Party.
And isn't it the case that the Democrats and the Rhinos look at 38 and a half billion dollars as a victory over the Tea Party?
Remember, Democrats, media, liberals hate us.
They fear us more than they fear Al Qaeda.
They think we are the biggest enemy they face.
Anything that marginalizes us, they celebrate.
If they think Boehner has marginalized the Tea Party, if they think the Tea Party has been neutered within the Republican caucus, then yeah, makes all the sense in the world to praise Boehner.
Right?
Right?
you you Thank you.
Okay, back to the phones.
We go to Lumberton, Mississippi.
This is Jack.
It's great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
It's an honor to speak to you.
I've been a member since 89.
Thank you, sir, very much.
I am a Tea Partyer, and I am a power of one.
And I have called Speaker Boehner's office today after seeing that disgusting performance on the morning news that he had.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
You mean uh the speaker on Fox this morning?
Yes.
Okay.
And to me, this was a put on.
It was a put on put on by the Rhinos and the Democrats to discourage us to get us ticked off and and But wait, but wait, everybody's portraying this as a big victory for the Tea Party.
No, it's not.
It's a farce.
It is an absolute farce.
A hundred million, when you have a three and a half trillion dollar budget, that's a farce.
That ain't gonna that ain't gonna save our country.
You know, uh when I called Boehner, I said, you know, believe it or not, it two and two is four, and thirty-eight billion is closer to thirty billion than a hundred billion.
Thirty-eight billion is closer to thirty billion than sixty-one billion.
So, you know, you you are trying to play numbers and you're dealing with the wrong people.
We are educated out here.
We are not illiterate.
And you guys are making the biggest mistake in your life.
I encourage Michelle Obama to start talking to her Tea Party people, and I encourage every person out there to call Boehner's and tell him how disgusted you are with this deal, and to encourage your uh Congress people to be able to do that.
But what are you gonna do?
What do you think?
What wait, wait, what are you gonna do if they just if they end up thinking you're just a bunch of kooks?
They do that now.
They do that now.
I call up my senators, I never get a straight answer.
I I get a written document about another subject.
Uh it it's and my senators are both Republicans.
And uh it's disgusting.
It's at they are not you know, uh, it reminds me of the old days, good cop, bad cop, and that's what it appears to me.
George Bush Sr.
New World Order.
That's the first time you ever heard of it.
George Bush.
No, no, no, it's not.
No, it's not.
No, there are a lot of people who are talking about the new world order before Bush 41.
But I yeah, but Bush emphasizes it in his speech that year.
George Bush compassionate conservatism.
That is a farce.
You know, I I I get so upset every time we get into power, we don't have a person up there that has the gravitas to enforce it.
And that's John Boehner.
When you get up there and cry on national television, are you gonna take that guy serious?
Come on now.
He's a wimp.
He is a wimp.
And he caved.
He caved in because he was afraid that the uh closing the government down was going to ruin the Republicans' chances.
Let me tell you what it did.
Kai Taven, he ruined the Republican chances in two thousand twelve.
Because right now, uh speaking as a power one, I see us as a demise party.
We need to separate ourselves from the Republicans.
That's what they want us to do anyhow.
No, no, no, no, no.
They do, but not for the reasons you think.
Oh, I know.
I don't know at all.
Believe me, I don't.
But I draw my own conclusions based on what I see on the news, what I hear, I listen to your show every day.
I have to go out in my truck and turn it on and listen to it, because I live in a remote area.
But I'm telling you, this is a farce.
This this watch what happens when we go to raise the debt limit.
Just watch.
It ain't gonna happen.
Let me ask you this.
Do you think Donald Trump has gravitas?
Yeah, but he's doing it for the wrong reasons, Rush.
Um he's doing it for publicity.
I I don't I don't take him that serious.
I like him, but I really truly do not believe he wants to be uh president.
I really don't you watched Boehner on Fox today, and you're not buying his claim that what they ended up really doing was cutting a hundred billion dollars because you can count forty billion dollars from Obama's budget and add the earlier continuing resolutions, and if you get it all up, you got a hundred billion, you're not you're not buying that.
No.
And now I'll tell you the only thing John Boehner got out of those meetings with the president, arrogance.
That's what he got.
Arrogance.
To sit there on national TV to think that we're so stupid out here, we don't know what's going on.
He is he's so wrong.
He is so wrong.
I have I have I have people that we have meetings and we talk about this, we have two, three hundred people.
Uh wait a minute then, you're not a voice of one.
I am oh yes.
Well, but you get somebody speaks for themselves.
You know, uh they have a right to disagree with me, and sometimes they do.
Uh, but we all talk about it.
But we all are against what's going on in this country.
You know, uh I I sit here and I listen to Mr. Boehner today.
I said, Oh, did he trade in his Amani suit for one of them little communist brown jackets?
Now he is posing too.
Now now wait a second now.
I mean, understand your peak.
Understand your peak out there, Jack, but um you're talking about the wrong guy is wearing the Mao jackets.
Everybody knows that it's uh Hillary that wears the Mao jackets.
And look, you're you're forcing me to step in here.
There were some budget cuts here.
Now I'm it's you're acting like we've added thirty-eight billion dollars, which we have on the debt side, the uh interest and so forth.
Nobody's talking about that.
But um I got your message, and I know that you're not alone.
You say you're a voice of one, but I I know you're not alone.
What w what do you what was his message?
Oh, I don't need to repeat what his message was, Snerdley.
Everybody knows he's not happy with the deal.
He thinks the Republican leadership takes a tea party for example and thinks they're a bunch of rubes who can be spun with all this language here about thirty-eight billion dollars being serious budget cuts.
He's just he's not he's not buying it.
Aaron in Detroit, Michigan, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Thanks, Rosh.
How are you?
Very well, thank you.
Can I give uh uh didddo to my dad listening in Naples, Florida listens every day?
Absolutely.
Hey Rosh, I wanted to just say that I think the deal was really bad, not because the uh of the dollar amount per se.
Uh the dollar amount was gonna be small either way.
The problem that I see is that we didn't shut the government down.
So the one half of one third of the government that we control just showed that we don't have the spine to do what it takes.
And I guess what my point is that we're going to go into a negotiations to raise the debt limit and then look at Ryan's budget after that.
And even Ryan's budget at 6.6 trillion in cuts over 10 years doesn't get us to a balanced budget until sometime ten years or more out.
So we're going to talk about carrying at least a $14 trillion debt, most likely more in perpetuity.
And if they don't say to themselves or if they don't put something in legislation that's, hey, we're going to balance the budget.
And if there's a surplus, we're not going to spend it, we're going to uh go to debt reduction.
We're going to continue to carry this 14 to 15 to whatever trillion dollar debt going forward.
No, no, wait.
Uh Ryan's plan is to eliminate the national debt.
Um not until at least 10 years out.
Yeah, well, no, it's it's longer than that, but there's nobody else with a plan to do that.
But his his plan won't even get the deficits to balance until ten years out.
Well, that's that's not all that out of the realm of possibility.
I mean, these these deficits are huge.
Oh, yeah.
There's going to be some major restructuring necessary because so much of it's entitlement spending, which is supposedly untouchable.
That's but you know, this is this is why you you use the leverage points when you have them.
And we had a leverage point here.
It could have shut the government down so we could put to rest once and for all the fear of that nonsense.
Take away that that that threat from the Democrats for a long time, maybe if you go ahead and shut it down and show the world is not come to an end.
Make your point, get what you need out of it, and then and then retool.
I agree.
We just put that bullet back in the gun form for the next fight.
Yep.
Well, plus we've I don't know, did have we shown we're willing to pull the trigger, though?
I mean, what what good's a bullet being in the chamber if you're not gonna pull the trigger at any point.
Okay, my preliminary read on the situation.
Uh after doing an in-depth study of uh callers today and a voluminous amount of email, uh approaching a record amount of email, is that there is a serious backlash that has begun and it is going to swell.
The entire weekend was uh spent trying to tamp it down.
The entire weekend media coverage was an attempt to eliminate or to tamp down any kind of a backlash, but it doesn't appear that it is working.
It doesn't appear that the rank and file are buying any of the spin that was featured throughout the Washington media over the weekend.
And there's a reason.
You know, you don't go in and promise a hundred billion dollars of cuts, which is not that much money.
It's not that hard to do given those election results.
It's not that hard to do when every spending, every dollar spent originates in the House.
Nothing happens unless it originates in the House of Representatives.
That's constitutional.
Some people may not know that.
Every spending bill must initiate in the House of Representatives, the people's house.
So it's not altogether true to say that, well, we're just one half or one-third of one half of the uh much more control than that.
The latest Rasmussen poll.
Obama has hit a new low in his strongly approved 19%, only 19% strongly approve Obama.
You know, Obama's in a free fall.
It's like I said Friday night, this is the never have we had a greater opportunity to contrast who we are with what they are.
Never have we had a greater opportunity after this election to just make them pound sand.
But you go out and you start promising a hundred billion, and even you reduce it to sixty-one billion to raise these expectations.
And then to try to explain that, well, something's changed and we really couldn't get that.
It was it's not.
It's not flying out there.
And now from the White House AP has a story.
Obama regrets his vote as a senator against raising the debt limit.
The White House says that Obama regrets his vote as a senator in 2006 against raising the debt limit.
The press Secretary, Jay Carney said today that Obama believes his vote was a mistake.
Said Obama now realizes the debt ceiling's too important to be trifled with.
Now, isn't that hilarious?
You remember.
If you don't, I will remind you.
We were told during the campaign that while Obama might not have much real-life work experience, he had great judgment.
He had that great moral compass.
and Is there anything he has not changed his mind on?
We had our boot on the throat of federal spending.
We had our boot on the throat of federal spending, starting with that November election, and we removed the boot from the throat.
We did it on our own.
Nobody forced us.
We did it on our own.
David San Diego, California.
Great to have you, sir on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hello, Rush.
It's uh a pleasure to speak with you.
You bet, sir.
Uh I have a different take than you do about the um thing that has changed since the uh Republicans promised a hundred billion dollars in cuts.
All right.
And I think the thing that has changed since then is the fact that we did not gain control of the Senate.
And um so I believe that given that the deal that was made this weekend was the best deal that we could make under the circumstances.
And I also think that by changing the subject uh from uh how much more to spend to how much less to spend, that in and of itself is enough of a victory uh to take us to the next uh you know to the next discussion.
There's no question we turn the boat around.
I hope it's not temporary.
We've turned the boat around from spending to cutting.
Um and you do have to do that first.
I will acknowledge you do have to turn the boat around.
You have to even start the process.
You just don't go into reverse automatically.
You'd have to turn the boat around.
You know, Rush, if we had managed to swing the Senate to uh Republican control, I think the conversation would have been even that much more uh uh different.
And uh the agenda would have been different.
And uh, you know, in the Senate, uh the controls controls the agenda.
With all due respect, I disagree and I cite Governor Manchin of West Virginia.
A Democrat who is siding with the Republicans every chance he gets.
The Democrats have more vulnerable re-elects up in 2012 than we do, and they are petrified that if they stick with the Obama agenda, they are going to be vulnerable.
They're already vulnerable.
They got 23 seats they have to defend.
We only have uh ten.
And uh I I think since all spending bills originate in the House, we had more power than we were willing to use.
There's no question we had more power than we were willing to use.
Um Obama would have uh vetoed the budget, uh Clinton shuts down the government, Obama would have shut it down too.
The difference is this is not 1995.
We had more ammo than we were willing to use.
Now, whether we weren't confident of it, I don't know.
But there's you know, I we we turned the boat around, but we could have gotten a lot more out of this and pleased a lot more people at the same time.
It's not just what Obama said about the debt limit as a senator, it's what Dingy Harry said about the debt limit back in 2006 from the floor of the Senate.
And I got that coming up too, as well as many more phone calls from you.
▲
Export Selection