All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:40
July 21, 2011, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It looks like it's a day for deals.
The NFL and the owners are close to a deal in the National Football League, and that's been brewing for the last two or three days.
Everybody expected the players to vote on their deal yesterday as the owners have their owners' meeting in Atlanta today.
Now it says that it looks like they'll come to an agreement soon.
Everybody looking at today.
And now the leaks are all over the place about a deal between Boehner and Obama on a grand budget deal to raise the debt ceiling.
The National Journal reports that no significant tax revenue is part of the deal, the deal $3 trillion in budget cuts over 10 years.
And I have to tell you, folks, no 10-year plan is going to be upheld a year from now.
Next year, Congress will do another budget.
This is all, it's the same old thing.
A 10-year deal is not a, you know this.
Welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh behind the golden EIB microphone in Los Angeles today.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882.
Eric Cantor just sent us an email about five minutes before 2 o'clock Eastern Time, and it said, Eric Cantor's not agreed to any deal, not aware of any deal that is close.
That means the phones are melting up there.
And it's clear that the tone of the phone calls being received up there is not hunky-dory and favorable.
And Leader Cantor wants everybody to know he's got no part of this.
Boehner, during the top of the hour break, tweeted again the following message, time for Senator Reed and Senate Democrats to pass cut, cap, and balance.
Now, here's the question, folks.
The Speaker of the House can come out right now and tell the public that he's had no backdoor discussions with Obama at some deal.
He can come out and say that this is all not true.
He can come out and say that the New York Times is wrong and that the National Journal is wrong.
But we're not asking if they've cut a deal yet.
We're asking if they are working on a deal behind the scenes now.
That's the story.
And they're not denying that.
What they're denying is that they have a deal.
But the story is not that there is a deal.
The story is they're working on a deal.
Okay, so you got a leak from the New York Times, backed up by Politico and the National Journal, which says that they're close to a deal, i.e. don't have one.
Everybody's denying there's a deal.
Well, the leak doesn't say there's a deal.
So come out and tell us, are you working on one behind the scenes?
And if so, why are you doing it behind the scenes?
Why all the secrecy?
We had secrecy before the stimulus bill.
We had secrecy before the Obamacare.
In fact, Pelosi, you remember, said, we have to pass this to find out what's in it.
And I guess we're not going to know what's in this until they pay.
All that means is that somebody is really concerned that whatever's in it we won't like or that somebody won't like.
So that's where we stand with all of this now.
And as we continue to get things leaked here and unfold before our very eyes, we'll pass this on to you as we get it.
Mr. Snerdley just asked me in the IFB, don't we trust our leadership?
Snerdley, you're the one getting called some people who are shouting profanity saying, no, I don't want to get on the air.
It's obvious that Republican voters don't.
It's obvious Republican voters don't trust the leadership.
Down this road, everybody has been waiting for the fateful day where the Republicans cave.
Now, again, remember, the one leak with any substance at all in it, and it's not much, says that it's a 10-year deal with $3 trillion in deficit reduction and no significant tax revenue.
So I guess it could read $3 trillion in budget cuts over 10 years with insignificant tax revenue.
What is either significant or insignificant tax revenue?
The bottom line is, if that leak is true, there is tax revenue in this.
And they have to put the word insignificance in there.
Grab audio soundbite number 20, Jay Carney, the daily press briefing at the White House.
Unidentified reporter said, Senator Tom Coburn just said that he bets if the FCCMB were able to pass the Senate, you know, cut pass and balance whatever, were able to pass the Senate and get to the president's desk, he's willing to bet a Porterhouse steak that the president would sign it if, in fact, it did pass the Senate.
Should he go out and get the A1 steak sauce?
I have a feeling we're going to hear this exchange on the radio, but we would take that bet, and I would refrain from heading to the Safeway to buy A1 because the president has very clearly vowed to veto a bill if such a bill were to arrive on his desk, because it is a draconian measure that, in terms of its impact on dramatic cuts in Social Security, Medicare, would make the Ryan budget plan pale by comparison.
Okay, so Jay Carney said that cut cap and balance doesn't have a prayer.
And Carney knew it would appear on this program.
He knew this soundbite would appear.
Well, that's the latest that we have on this, but things are starting to fall in line.
Something's happening.
Oh, again, Boehner's got a meeting tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock with the entire Republican conference.
That means all the members ostensibly, this is from an email from a member of Congress chief of staff, who we know very well, has told us that there's a 9 o'clock meeting tomorrow morning, Boehner, to explain the details of the deal to the conference.
So all of this kind of obviates all the other stock of stuff I have here regarding the deal.
For example, a post here from Robert Costa National Review.
Earlier tonight, House GOP leaders met with Obama, the White House, reportedly discussing a short-term debt ceiling hike that would be coupled with immediate spending cuts of greater magnitude.
And we just had the news yesterday that Obama had changed his mind and probably would sign a short-term deal.
In fact, a lot of people were recommending a short-term deal just to get Obama to sign something and put the onus on him.
So we've gone from Obama caving and willing to sign.
He said he would never sign a short-term deal.
He said 30 days, 60 days, 90 days.
I'm not going to do that because it doesn't help him in his reelection.
So he was apparently willing to do that.
And all of a sudden, that's gone.
And now this grand bargain is out there.
The 10-year granddaddy of all grand bargains.
So that's off the table.
There's a story here from Roll Call.
Vulnerable Democrats display their timidity within days.
Vulnerable Senate Democrats will cast perhaps their toughest vote of their career on politically volatile legislation to raise the debt ceiling.
Such votes have been in remarkably short supply this year for the Democrat class of 2006.
These members point with pride to the risky votes they cast in the last Congress.
Those roll calls led to the enactment of historic health care reform and blah, blah.
But this is a story the Democrats worried about the debt vote.
Now, who knew?
You know, the conventional wisdom is that it's the Republicans are scared to death.
It's the Republicans are quaking in their boots.
And that's been the standardized conventional wisdom since this whole began.
Obama's cleaning up.
He's embarrassing these guys.
That's been the standard operating procedure.
But the truth of the matter is the Democrats are nervous about this.
And if we're not taking advantage of that with whatever is brewing here, it's going to be crying shame.
And it's going to be worse for the Republicans if this is deemed to be unacceptable by people who elected them.
And remember those election results of November.
Losers don't compromise.
Winners don't compromise.
Losers do.
And we were the big winners.
As I said yesterday, everybody's out there demanding the Republicans compromise with who?
The Democrats don't have a plan.
The Democrats haven't put anything forward.
So they're asking us to compromise with ourselves.
So we keep coming up with plans of specificity.
They keep saying no.
Okay, okay, well, how about this?
Oh, we don't like that here.
Do come back.
And they don't have any specific plan whatsoever.
And yet, they demand that we compromise.
But winners do not compromise.
And this is what Republican voters know and understand.
And if it turns out that the winners have ended up compromising here, they're not going to be assuaged by the argument.
Well, you know, it's tough to go up against the president.
The president sets the agenda.
President Bollypulpit President gets what he wants.
Usually that's not going to fly here.
This president has had way too much of what he wants.
And it has meant disaster for millions of Americans at present and for their future.
And they don't want this president to win anymore.
They don't want standard operating procedures of conventional wisdom to triumph here.
That's what sending Republicans to Washington is all about.
Cut, cap, and balance.
Boehner is still tweeting, demanding that Harry Reid put it up for vote and the Democrats pass it.
Now, you know, Obama's out there saying, yeah, it's a serious plan.
We can never go for that since Jay Carney out say the same thing.
But if Obama thought that cut, cap, and balance wasn't a serious plan, or was a waste of time, here's what he would do.
He would take to the microphones and he'd tell the American people exactly what cut, cap, and balance says.
He would read it out loud.
He'd mock it line by line.
If it's such a bad deal, he would go public and explain what it is and tell people why it's ruinous.
But he's not doing that.
He doesn't want you to know what cut, cap, and balance is.
Well, here's what cut, cap, and balance says.
Cut.
We must make discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year.
Number two, cap.
We need statutory, enforceable caps to align federal spending with average revenues at 18% of gross domestic product with automatic spending reductions if the caps are breached.
Balance.
We must send to the states a balanced budget amendment with strong protections against federal tax increases and a spending limitation amendment that aligns spending with average revenues as described above.
Crazy, right?
Or is it simple, rational, and wait for it in writing?
It's in writing.
I just read to you what cut, cap, and balance says.
If it's so bad, Obama can go out, read it to us, and tell us why it is bad.
He doesn't do it.
The president would hold up social security checks over this.
I, frankly, would love to hear his explanation on it.
The plot is thickening from Fox News, a congressional aid on the debt deal.
Quote, I can confirm the details about $3 trillion and no revenues.
Congressional aid on the debt deal.
According to Fox News, I can confirm the details about a $3 trillion cut in spending and no revenues.
Our office just received an email from Speaker Boehner's office.
Hi, we just wanted to check in because we heard Russia's remarks on our special conference.
Contrary to the New York Times story, there is no deal or agreement.
The president has been in discussions with all of the congressional leaders on both sides and looking at various options, but there is no agreement.
We have special conferences all the time, including last Friday, where there were no deals announced.
Just wanted to make you aware.
No deal.
The leak does not say that there is a deal.
Well, Congressional aid is saying, I can't confirm the details about 33.
Nobody's saying a deal is done.
What they're saying is that they're close to one.
All the leaks are saying that they're close to a deal.
But the speaker's office says that there is no deal and no agreement.
It doesn't say that, of course, they're talking.
The president's been in discussion with all the congressional leaders on both sides, looking at various options, but there is no agreement.
We have special conferences all the time.
I just got a note from a chief of staff of a member of Congress.
So the meeting at 9 o'clock usually is when deals are announced.
As I say, the floodgates are open now, and the trickle has become a gully washer.
Now, the House bill cut cap and balance.
Isn't that bill exactly what people voted for last November?
It's almost word for word what the voters demanded in an historic landslide.
We've now just laughed off as meaningless.
And we thought elections were supposed to have consequences.
But this House bill is exactly what the voters who sent those people to Washington to do will come up with.
The Democrats and their buddies in the media keep trying to portray the House bill as some product of the lunatic fringe.
They don't seem to remember that a balanced budget amendment was almost passed by Congress back in 1995.
Failed in the Senate by one vote.
It is not a fringe idea.
All we hear nowadays is how fiscally responsible everybody was back in 1995.
Jay Carney just said that Obama supports a debt default, by the way, in that soundbite that we played.
Cutting spending, capping spending, balanced budget amendment is extreme when you are Obama.
Now, the speaker is tweeting that he wants Reed to pass cut, cap, and balance, but Reed's got to know something's going on behind the scenes.
Reed knows that Colburn and Chambliss and all these Republicans in the gang of six are throwing him a lifeline.
McConnell's come up with a bright idea to give Obama the $2.5 trillion he wants to spend on additional deficits.
So, you know, these specific Republicans and some others are telling Reed and Obama they don't believe in cut, cap, and balance, even though they're telling us they support it.
It's hard to keep track of all this stuff going on out there.
And here's Chris Van Holland.
It says the New York Times story is correct.
This is on Enmin's MSNBC just this afternoon.
I think that that's generally correct, other than the fact that you continue to have a fairly large contingent of House Republicans who think that it would not be so bad if the United States didn't pay its bills and default on its debt.
And that continues to be a wildcard.
I do think that the leaders, both in Congress and, of course, the White House on both political parties are trying to find a solution here.
And the focus remains, Andrea, on trying to get a grand bargain.
Even as talks go on about a plan B, there are still serious discussions about trying to get something big done.
So Chris Van Holland, who's a Democrat leader, says, hey, New York Times story's right.
Exactly right.
We're all ready to make a deal here.
Those fringe lunatic Tea Party Republicans, they're the ones standing in the way.
But the responsible members of the Democrat and Republican leadership and President Obama, of course, want to do a deal.
New York Times deal is right.
Andrea Mitchell says, are you Democrats going to be able to provide enough Democrat votes to help Boehner out as he tries to pull this together, even despite the opposition of those freshmen who are so rigidly against any compromise?
We've made very clear, number one, that America has to pay its bills.
These are bills for things that we've already voted on, Democrats and Republicans alike.
We will support a balanced approach to reducing the deficit.
I knew this guy was slick when I first saw his hairstyle.
But this, we are, we will support a balanced approach to reducing a deficit from the people who have blown it, the spithereens, and now want to act as though they had nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Well, where there's smoke, there's fire.
Something obviously is going on, and it is happening in secret.
And nobody, all we have are leaks, unnamed congressional aid.
Yeah, I can confirm $3 trillion in cuts and no tax revenue.
No name.
We don't know who it is.
Nobody's saying a deal is done.
In fact, they're all denying a deal is done and trying to say therefore the leaks are wrong.
But the leaks are not saying there is a deal.
The leaks are saying there are discussions and that they're close.
And Rebecca Rushmore serving humanity simply by showing up.
We are in Los Angeles.
And remember, my friends, as long as I'm here, it doesn't matter where he is.
Folks, when you think of Obama, you think of balanced approaches, don't you?
I mean, here's Chris Van Holland, Mr. Slick.
Oh, yeah, we favor a balanced approach to reducing indebtedness.
Yeah.
You Democrats, balanced approach.
So when I think of Obama, I think of balanced approaches.
All of this turmoil, all these threats of debt defaults, all of this anxiety over massive deficits and debts.
That's a guy who wants a balanced approach, right?
The guy who's creating this chaos, the guy who has created this living hell that is the U.S. economy.
He drags people kicking and screaming to this point.
He waits to the last minute to try to evade public scrutiny.
Goes out and attacks Tea Party rallies.
His irresponsible spending is being challenged.
Obama wants a balanced approach.
Don't insult me.
This is outrageous.
And of course, Obama is responsible for nothing.
Oh, of course not.
He didn't do anything.
Why, he said just yesterday that everybody knows he inherited this mess.
So he thinks he's going to run against Bush again.
And he thinks people are going to vote on how hard they think he's trying for them, fighting for them, fighting who?
He thinks he's going to run against Bush.
Work the first time?
Why not again?
This guy, I don't care what happens to the Republicans.
You know, they're going to sit in their own stew, depending what happens here.
But this guy, Obama and his advisors are in for a rude awakening because he's not going to escape this either.
Don't think it's only the Republicans are going to pay for this.
If there is a deal here that continues this travesty that has become the U.S. economy, if there is a deal that continues, that raises taxes, that makes it impossible for people to get back on their feet again, everybody in that town is going to pay the price the next election.
Obama's not going to get a pass.
Good intentions notwithstanding, all that garbage.
Well, they're going to realize that I'm out there fighting for him.
He's ain't have a chance.
Bill O'Reilly's out there looking out for us.
Obama can't compete with that.
Everybody knows that.
Who's next on the phone?
Doug in Newborough, North Carolina.
I'm glad you waited.
I really appreciate your patience.
Hello, sir.
Hi.
Thanks for taking my call, Rush.
Yes, sir.
I'm all for cut cap and balance.
And I'm concerned that if Boehner gives on this, you know, in any way on taxes, does that give Obama a free ticket for 2012 election?
Well, depends on what the deal is.
Obama is clearly hoping he looks at Boehner as his lifeline.
I guarantee you.
What Obama's counting on is that the Republicans will cave and that creates so much anger in the Republican Party that it'll splitter, maybe form a third party.
Bunch of Republicans get so fed up they won't even show up and vote in November 2012.
That's what he's counting on.
Right.
And so to that extent, yeah, Boehner's his lifeline.
That's how he's looking at it.
I think anyway.
Well, thank you very much for taking my call, Rush, and I appreciate everything that you do.
Well, Doug, it means more to me than you can possibly know you saying that.
I really appreciate it.
Well, thank you.
Thank you so much.
Okay.
You know, yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, I told you that people asked me why go into the tea business.
It's very simple.
I want to take it over.
I am Mr. T, T E A, in a corner of the market.
Didn't get into it, just like I didn't start radio to end up number five and have a show from midnight to six.
I got into it to be number one.
Pull that off.
So we are going to take over tea.
Hence, two if by tea.
And if you haven't yet gone to the website 2fbytea.com, you should.
We've got a great logo.
We've got a great icon.
I, as Rush Revere, atop my trusty horse, riding in a save the day.
And we've got a tremendous sponsor.
We are sponsoring at 2F by T, the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, which provides college scholarships for the children of Marines killed in action.
That's our official sponsor.
We are sponsoring them.
Now, our price, and folks, we've done the best we can on this.
We've even got free shipping.
We did not start out in retail stores for a host of reasons.
One, there's no way we could get nationwide retail distribution at the time we wanted to launch here.
And we wanted to control the distribution.
And we've never done anything conventionally anyway.
Its radio program defied every convention in reaching its current vaunted position.
So we are at the point, still point this in time, web-based.
So our price for a 12-pack, that's our case, is $23.76.
And the shipping is free.
And it's three days.
Some people get it the next day.
Some people get it in two days, but pretty much three days you can count on it.
We got regular flavored tea diet and raspberry diet and regular, meaning it's not high-fructose corn syrup either.
It's genuine sugar.
And we're running out.
There's still plenty there, but we're going to have to go back and start the bottling process again.
It's been tremendous.
We've got the finest pickers.
We've got the finest processors.
We've got the finest of everything that's putting us together.
Our tea is not cloudy and murky.
There's no gunk in it.
We have got a solid bottle.
It's not flimsy.
It doesn't crinkle when you pick it up.
Suitable for growing flowers in after you finish the tea.
The bottles themselves are collector's items simply because of the class artwork on our label.
I mean, everything about this is first class, including the most important characteristic.
It's the best tea you've ever tasted.
It is.
It's the best-looking tea.
And yes, it does go well with vodka if you're into that.
We've done all that testing.
I can assure you, even gin, if you're into that, it works well.
So our website's 2ifbytea.com.
Or if you want a phone, the number is 866-662-1776.
2ifbytea.com.
Here's Art in Westmont, Illinois.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Rush, I'm honored and humbled to be on your program.
Thank you, sir.
Yeah, I see you're working on a new regional tea, and that's fruity and nutty flavored.
Fruity and nutty, no, but we do have new flavors coming.
Nice try.
Okay.
I got a couple of things for you.
But the first thing is I know your disdain hate for rhino Republicans.
What's your opinion of Fox News channels talking heads who seem to be more and more rhino?
I'm thinking particularly of Chris Wallace, who I almost was screaming at with his interview of Chris Van Holland and Jordan, and he was trying to push the Republican Jordan that say that he would not vote for the depth ceiling crisis.
Chris Greta Van Sustern always seems to have these irrelevant Republicans like Gramnesty and McShame on her program who matter not.
And I was just wondering your opinion of this programming of Rhino talking heads.
Well, I mean, the people who do guest programs, you know, they're into it themselves and they can have the guests on that they want.
I don't know that there is an official position at Fox News that Rhino guests have to take precedence or anything.
I've got my own theories about, you could ask me about any show.
Why does CNN do what it does?
Why does MSNBC do it the way they do it?
Why does Fox News do it the way it does?
And I've got my own theories because I'm a highly trained broadcast specialist and I am well versed in this.
I know more than anybody else about this.
I know why people do things.
I know why formats are done the way they are.
And I know that most people, most people do what they do from a posture of defense or fear.
I don't care if it's a broadcast outlet or if it's you living your life.
The number of people who are take-charge self-starters are few.
That's why there are few leaders and lots of followers.
Nothing wrong with it.
It's just the way it is.
And so if you are in a federally regulated business, to cable really isn't federally regulated, but there are still, you know, the long arm of the government can reach you in any number of ways.
And you've got this kind of regime, then it's quite understandable that if you've got a bottom line you have to make financially, that there are certain things that you might do to keep the baying hounds, the wolfhounds at bay.
That's what I mean by programming in fear or in defense or what have you.
I mean, a lot of people throughout my broadcast career, for example, thought that they could mollify critics by giving the critics 10 or 20% of what they were demanding.
That would be balanced.
It never works that way.
Take a position, be who you are, and deal with the fallout.
Now, that's easy for me to say because I don't have to answer to anybody but me.
But people have to answer to boards and all this, they've got whole different pressures that they operate under.
And it's their business, and they can run it as they wish based on what they think they have to do to stay in business.
And that's, you know, I consider and disagree with, for example, CNN.
You don't get CNN.
Here's a network that is in last place.
Proudly.
They're proudly in last place.
You went, what do you mean, Rush proudly?
There is a badge of honor.
The execs at CNN, not Time Warner, big difference that owns it.
The execs at CNN are held in the highest regard by other liberals for valiantly hanging in there against this fucked government and not caving, even though nobody watches.
It's still courageous.
It's courageous to keep promoting the cause, even if you lose your shirt, as long as some other division in a company can make up for your loss, which is what happens.
CN International does well.
Other elements of AOL do, or Time Warner do well.
So it's a very, very complicated thing.
The idea that a lot of broadcast outlets are in it for the cause is a big mistake a lot of people make.
What?
Everybody's staring at me.
Did I.
I got to take a break.
Nobody will tell me.
Not even that.
I'm not even all that long.
Sit tight.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
And we are at our remaining moments on the broadcast today.
And remember, I'm gone today.
Funeral of Myra Kraft in Boston.
So happy to have with us the Speaker of the House, John Boehner.
I'm glad that we had a chance to talk to you here, Mr. Speaker, because the first line, and people are confused with all of these leaks as to what's going on.
Well, Russia, there is no deal.
No deal publicly, no deal privately.
There is absolutely no deal.
Are you talking about a deal, though?
Pardon me?
Are you talking about a deal in secret?
Our focus right now is getting the Senate to follow us in the House and pass cut cap and balance.
I believe that we've got to act to prevent a default and to prevent a downgrade of our nation's credit rating.
And the best way to do that is to enact cut cap and balance.
But let me be clear.
I believe that is the best course of action.
But I said all the way along that we've got to keep the lines of communication open.
That's why Leader Cantor and I have talked with Mitch McConnell.
We've talked to Nancy Pelosi.
We've talked to the president.
We talked about fallback options if, in fact, cut cap and balance does go down.
And I do think that it's our obligation to have a fallback plan, but it doesn't work.
Well, but that's what everybody's worried about.
What is the fallback plan?
The congressional aid's out there today saying that the deal's been struck.
He's unnamed.
He's unfoxed.
He's saying it's $3 trillion of cuts with no tax revenue.
National Journal says $3 trillion in cuts with insignificant tax revenues.
So people, a lot of people out here are of the opinion that Obama is the one who ought to be caving.
He's the one that doesn't have a plan.
He's forcing you to compromise with yourself.
And he's done great damage to the economy.
People want it to stop.
I understand.
I'm concerned about the nation defaulting on its credit rating.
I'm concerned about us not doing anything about our debt, which will cause our credit rating to fall, and which then would mean everybody's interest rates go up.
I think that's irresponsible.
Frankly, we've looked at a half a dozen fallback plans, none of which are all that appetizing.
That's why we continue to support cut cap and balance.
So you're convinced that a default would make it be unable.
We were to be unable to service our debt if there's a default?
I'm concerned that we're getting into uncharted territory that could wreak great havoc on our nation.
And I don't think it's necessary to get into that unknown zone and take the chance.
I frankly believe that we've got to find a way to cut our budget deficit, cut our debt, and balance our budget.
Why is it not Obama's responsibility to do that?
He's the one that's put us in this position.
It would have been nice if the president would have put a plan on the table months ago, but the president has refused to put any plan on the table.
It's obviously been driving me right up a wall.
Well, he wants you to take the heat for whatever happens.
Yeah, but I think at the end of the day, he knows that he's the commander-in-chief.
He's the president of the United States, and he will take the heat.
Well, a lot of people are concerned that you are his lifeline to reelection and that that's how he sees you.
And that if he can get you to, in any way, act that can be portrayed as a cave, that he wins.
And that's what people are desperately afraid of.
Rush, I'm trying to do what I taught my kids to do, and the same thing my parents taught me to do.
You do the right things for the right reasons, good things will happen.
All right.
Speaker Boehner, thanks much.
I wish we had more time, but we don't.
Thanks very much for the time here.
Got to take a quick time out.
We'll be back.
Wrap it up right after this.
Well, that's it, folks.
That's all the time that we have for today and a busy broadcast.
And again, Mark Stein will be here tomorrow.
Stein going to be on from New Hampshire tomorrow from his little bunker up there.
Okay, cool.
I'm going to miss you.
I really wish I could be here tomorrow, but we have an obligation that we must attend.
And I'm actually very, very sad event here, obviously, a funeral.
But we'll be back on Monday.
And we're in good hands tomorrow with Mark Stein.
Thanks for being with us today, folks.
As always, it's an honor and a pleasure to have this time with you, particularly during moments in our nation's history like this.
So be good.
▲
Export Selection