All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 11, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:49
October 11, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
And greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plain.
Great to be back.
Hope you all had a nice Columbus Day yesterday.
Looking forward to chatting with you.
Telephone.
Oop, hang on just a second.
All right.
Here we go.
Telephone number.
If you want to be on the program 800 282-2882, the email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
Part of me wishes it could be Columbus Day all weekend long.
Did you notice the um the Wall Street all year round, actually, the the Wall Street protesters so dedicated to their work?
They didn't take the day off.
And they're being paid.
They're being paid a lot.
They didn't take the day off.
Umbe the Democrat, uh the Obama campaign of unions of Democrat front groups.
Of course, I'm repeating myself there.
Paid in time and a half.
It's a holiday.
It's Columbus Day for working on a holiday, but you have to admire their dedication.
I mean, for most of these kids, occupying Wall Street's the closest they've ever come to having any kind of occupation at all, and they don't want to blow it.
And I've looking at some of the signs that these uh these kids, these people are carrying around, and here are a couple.
And when you uh now these are somewhat typical, the they're not the radical signs.
And there's a there's a huge mix and conglomeration of people at the Occupy Wall Street protests, but here's one.
These people are posting pictures of themselves holding up signs that basically are messages that are their life story or their current complaint or gripe.
I'm a 26-year-old female with a dual BA.
I make 52,000 a year.
Thank God every day I have a job that pays well.
But the sad truth is it could all be over in one fleeting moment.
35% of my salary goes to taxes.
My take home pay, $3,200 a month, and then she breaks it down what her taxes are, what her expenses are, her car and insurance, and it ends up that she has two hundred and forty-five dollars a month left over to spend on discretionary things.
Well, the the well, it's not that it's why is she complaining is not the question.
Why is she with that group?
She's with a bunch of people who want higher taxes on people like her.
This this woman doesn't know it, but she ought to be one of us.
Now, obviously, a lot of people, these protests, you know what's happened on the Mayor Boomberg has in basically invited everybody to show up and stay for as long as they want.
No matter what.
And they're rolling cigarettes, they're smoking tobacco, including other things.
And Mayor Doomberg's not saying anything about it.
They're eating trans fat.
They are destroying restrooms in nearby uh fast food joints and other establishments.
And Doomberg says, no, as long as you come and obey the law, you are more than welcome.
Just sit tight, do whatever you want.
It's it's absolutely uh uh stunning.
This is all springing from the jealousy that the Democrats have about the Tea Party.
They are so excited these people are showing up that they don't care what they do.
They don't care what they say, they don't care who they are.
They're just happy to have the appearance that there are some people who are supposedly spontaneously support them and support Obama and support the uh and support the Democrats.
But some of these messages these kids are holding up, you have to ask yourself.
Well, you don't have to ask yourself, you know how ill-educated they have uh they have been.
I know.
Uh picture of one of these occupiers going to the bathroom in a cop car.
Oh, I mean, we've seen that um all over the place, and there's there's no reporting on it.
There's no condemnation of it, and none of that has ever happened, of course, with the Tea Party, and yet they've been accused of it.
The Tea Party's been accused of spitting on members of Congress.
Pelosi ratcheted that back up.
There's no evidence.
Andrew Breitbart offered a $100,000 reward for anybody who could show video or evidence that the Tea Party spat upon members of Congress as they were taking that trek to sign the health care bill outside the Capitol building.
Uh you just have typically a lot of trust fund kids, a lot of uh bored kids from uh wealthy parents are down there, flashing wads of cash.
Uh it's it's a it's a mix of people.
It's a sort of a Woodstock kind of thing in many ways.
Uh but you look at some of the signs these people are carrying, and you wonder why they're with that group.
They ought to be us.
Here's another one.
I'm a 50-year-old local owner of a local moving company.
My business has dropped 75% since 2008.
I have sole custody, my 11-year-old daughter.
I declared bankruptcy in February 2011.
I've skin cancer, but no health insurance.
I can't afford surgery.
I've lost my house to foreclosure, and now I can barely afford rent.
I started my business in 1991.
I had savings, investment property, retirement fund.
All is lost.
I am the 99%.
All is lost since since 2008, all is lost, and this guy's down there protesting Wall Street.
He's down there protesting big money.
It's uh cockeyed.
It just once again, it just shows the rank ignorance and stupidity.
But we have to deal with it, nevertheless.
Okay, the President's jobs bill.
Get this from the Associated Press.
President Obama's jobs bill facing a critical test in the Senate.
It appears likely to die at the hands of Republicans.
It was never meant to live, you people at the AP.
But see, this is exactly.
I hate being right sometimes.
This is exactly what I told you the purpose of the whole jobs bill was.
It is the Democrats who can't pass this bill.
It's the Democrats that don't have the votes.
It was Mitch McConnell's idea to push for a quick vote on this.
He wanted to illustrate the fact that Obama does not have Democrat votes.
And right on cue, here comes the AP blaming Republicans for blocking the president's tax bill.
1.9 million jobs hang in the balance, 427 billion dollar jobs bill, and if it were passed, 1.9 million jobs immediately created, which is flat out absurd.
It's not possible.
There's no way, and yet Obama's jobs bill appears likely to die at the hands of Republicans.
There's a vote around 6 o'clock tonight in the uh in the Senate.
Democrat unanimity is not assured.
If you read almost to the end of this, you find this.
Democrat unanimity is not assured.
Moderates like Senators Ben Nelson and Joe Manchin, both up for re-election next year in the state's Obama figures to lose, may abandon the party even as oil state Democrats have been assuaged by a decision to get rid of an Obama proposal to have oil companies give up tax breaks.
This thing doesn't stand a prayer because of Democrat votes.
It never did stand a prayer.
It's not supposed to pass.
So the Republican leadership thought that by forcing a quick vote on this, they could once again embarrass Obama and have it illustrated to the country that it is the Democrats.
Responsible for this bill not ever seeing the light of day.
And yet, again, opening paragraph, President Obama's jobs bill appears likely to die at the hands of Republicans opposed to stimulus spending and a tax surcharge on millionaires.
From the Hill.com.
Democrats scramble to save face on Obama's jobs bill.
Democrat leaders in the Senate scrambling to avoid defections on Obama's jobs package, which appears headed for defeat today.
A lack of Democrat unity, at least they get it right, the upper tier of the story.
A lack of Democrat unity on the President's bill would be embarrassing for the White House, which has been scolding House Republicans for refusing to vote on the measure.
Obama's been touring the country, aiming to put pressure on the Republicans to act.
But Senate Democrats have indicated they're feeling some heat.
Last week, Democrat leaders revised Obama's bill, scrapping his proposed offsets.
Instead of raising taxes on families making more than 250,000 annually, Senate Democrats lifted the figure to one million despite the changes.
The legislation still does not enjoy the support of all 53 senators who caucus with the Democrats.
A handful of Democrats are undecided or leaning no on the bill.
Republican and Democrat analysts say it'll be politically difficult for Obama to blame the Republicans for blocking the bill if more than a few conservative Democrats break ranks.
Why would it be hard?
Not going to be hard.
The media has just shown how it's done.
All you do is blame the Republicans.
Have it as the lead in an AP story that gets picked up all the dunderheads in the local TV stations.
And local newspapers all over the country.
That's how AP does it.
How many clients they have?
Over 4,000?
4,000 news outlets get a story where the opening line is Republicans responsible for president's jobs bill failing.
That's the game plan here.
And it would be whether there was a vote on it or not.
That's the game plan.
That's what this was supposed to be about in the first place.
Republicans want to make sure the rich hold onto all their money.
Republicans want to make sure that the middle class continues to lose their jobs.
The Republicans want to make sure that people don't get work.
The Republicans basically want people to die.
Get sick and die.
And this is the message.
And now you have the rabble rousers on Wall Street helping to convey that particular message.
Got to take a quick time out.
We'll do it.
We'll come back and resume with all the rest of the program right after this.
The headline that the media wants is the headline they're going to get.
And it's going to be used regardless what happens.
Regarding the President's Jobs Bill, the headline marked my words after the vote tonight is going to be Republicans Kill Jobs Bill.
That's what it's going to be.
No matter how many Democrats don't vote for it, no matter how many Democrats defect, Republicans kill jobs bill.
Folks, you might be, I don't know if you'd be surprised or not.
You might be amazed to hear that there are groups paying protesters at the Occupy Wall Street protests.
Essentially, what you have are groups paying demonstrators to protest capitalism.
In order to get these numbers of people showing up to protest capitalism, they're having to pay them.
And one of the groups paying the demonstrators is something called Working Families Party.
Now, the Working Families Party is the same bunch of people that organized the terrorizing of the AIG executives in their front yards during the big bonus controversy of 2009, March of 2009, Now the working families party is a spin-off of Acorn.
And they are advertising on Craigslist and on their own website for protesters.
And they are offering up to $350 to $650 a week.
Now, $350 a week is a little over $15,000, $16,000 a year to come down if it's paid for that long, but that's the rate.
$650 a week would be close to $27,000.
They're coming down.
That's what they're offering these people to come down and pay.
Now I don't think there's any health care, retirement, or pension involved here.
But who knows?
The unions are involved.
So who knows what's being included in all of this?
I'm not even sure this is just a report.
This is what's being advertised.
I'm not even sure in truth they're paying minimum wage.
But you can probably earn a little extra money by setting fire to a cop car, throwing a rock through a rich person's house, $350 a week, $650 a week.
Sure.
Show on.
Come on down.
Protest capitalism.
They have to be paid to do it.
CBS News, this is Cheryl Atkison.
She's got a story CBS News and a tweet.
CBS News has learned a congressional subpoena directed to the Attorney General Eric Holder could go out as early as today, ordering him to turn over documents to lawmakers about when he was aware of the Fast and Furious program.
CBS News investigative correspondent Cheryl Atkison reporting.
The subpoena will come from the House Oversight Committee, led by Daryl Issa, who will ask for communications among senior Justice Department officials related to Fast and Furious.
And gun walking.
The subpoena will list those officials, says Atkison, more than a dozen of them by name.
So another random act of journalism committed here by Cheryl Atkison.
This is the reporter the White House has been screaming at, shouting at her, demanding that she explain why she's reporting on this to them.
I don't know.
I don't know what happens if Holder doesn't respond to this.
But with this regime and their authoritarian nature, I wouldn't be surprised if he ignores it.
But a congressional subpoena directed to Eric Holder could go out as early as today, and it will mention names.
Now on to the Republican primary.
South Carolina primary, Herman Cain, 26%.
Romney, 25%, Perry at 15%.
In Virginia, Cain and Romney are tied.
Now why is it a shock poll?
Why is it a shock poll?
Here we have an articulate, principled non-establishment conservative, Herman Cain leading in a poll before a Republican primary.
The media are shocked.
Herman Cain is taking it to, for example, the Wall Street protesters.
Every credible Republican presidential candidate ought to be doing the same thing.
Every credible Republican presidential candidate ought to be talking about this protest business and the truth and relating it back to Obama and how he operates and how it's artificial, how it's not genuine, how it's not spontaneous, how it's being bought and paid for.
The makeup, Herman Cain is doing this.
Herman Cain doesn't have a whole lot of baggage.
Romney has Romney care.
Rick Perry has immigration as a problem.
Herman Cain's problem is he's not a politician.
He's not an establishment Republican.
Now these uh these polls don't record the preferences of establishment Republicans.
They reflect the thinking of individual Republicans leading their individual lives.
Might be interested in knowing, uh, ladies and gentlemen, Mitt Romney and Obama never met to discuss the federal health care law, but Romney's advisors did.
New records, reviewed by Michael Isakoff, who's now at NBC, left uh left newsweek, point out White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health care advisors and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in Massachusetts in 2006.
One meeting, according to Isakoff, was in the oval orifice and presided over by Obama.
John Gruber, one of the advisors who attended the Obama meeting, said that the White House really wanted to know how we can take that same approach that was used in Massachusetts and turn that into a national model.
Okay, so obviously now, somebody is leaking this.
And it's curious to me because I'm convinced the White House wants to run against Romney for this very reason.
They hope to be able to discredit and destroy Romney by simply tying him to Obamacare.
But leaking this story is going to give some problems to Romney and secure.
Now, let's let's put this in perspective.
If you want the straight scoop, here you go and listen up.
Romney is going to get this nomination if nothing changes as of today.
This chaos in the streets is distracting from the Republican nomination battle.
That's another thing I think that's by design here.
All this, all this chaos, all these phony protests is taking focus away from the Republican nomination fight.
Now, what's happening, I think.
Romney's out there talking up Herman Cain.
Romney's up there saying, look at if you can't vote for me, vote for Herman Cain.
And he's doing that to defeat Perry.
No question about it.
As Romney's decided he'll have an easier time against Cain.
I'm I'm I'm convinced that he believed that.
I don't necessarily agree with that, but but that's not the point.
The establishment now is firmly behind Romney.
And every other conservative that's in this race is under attack.
Perry, Kane, Bachman, you name it.
The establishment is now, they're trying to get this wrapped up next week.
They want to move the primaries up.
They want this done and over.
The Republican establishment trying to take full advantage of the chaos of these protests to just nail this down and end it.
They want Romney to be the nominee, and that's that.
I don't care who the conservative is.
We got a debate.
It's tonight, right?
In New Hampshire.
You watch.
Who's Who's hosting this debate?
I've been out of it for the last three days, folks.
I hate to tell you, but who's hosting this debate tonight?
Do we is it who's who's broadcasting it?
Let me ask that.
Do we do we know who's broadcast?
None of my Charlie Rose is hosting the so it but but okay.
Uh regardless, here's here's here's my point.
You watch tonight how the conservatives from Rick Perry to Bachman to Santorum, you name it, uh, are going to be targeted in this debate tonight because the the objective here is to wipe them out.
The objective here is to just take them out, elevate Romney by default.
They're trying to pick off the conservatives one by one.
Kane has emerged now as a major challenger to Romney.
Romney planning to swamp him with money and organization in the early states in New Hampshire and Florida and Nevada.
That's how he's going to get rid of Kane, but he wants to talk Kane up as a means of marginalizing getting rid of Perry.
That's what I think is going on with all this right now.
Back in just a second.
Back we are, Rush Lindbaugh and the excellence in broadcasting network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
All right, here's the scoop on this debate.
It is on Bloomberg TV.
It's Bloomberg TV's first debate.
It is uh totally well, Bloomberg and the Washington Post, and it's going to focus solely on the candidates' economic and job creation plans.
It's hosted by Charlie Rose and Karen Tumulty.
Now you couldn't get two more classically liberal mainstream media people than these two.
You just you watch what's going to happen.
The uh being advertised here as uh a non-traditional debate format.
Candidates will ditch the podium and debate while seated at a table next to their fellow candidates surrounded by audience members.
The debate moderators, including famed TV host and round table connoisseur, Charlie Host, Bloomberg TV's Juliana Goldman, and Karen Tumulty will join the candidates at the table.
It's at Dartmouth College in uh New Hampshire.
Dartmouth, the official host.
Uh fairly decent-sized conservative student population.
Yeah, yeah.
Dartmouth has a, yeah, you know, the Dartmouth Review is uh where a lot of conservatives, Dinesh D'Souza got started there, Laura Ingram.
Yeah, that's where uh a lot of today's well-known uh conservative writers got their starts at the Dartmouth Review.
Anyway, um Dartmouth hosted one of the Democrat candidate debates in 2007.
So it's a round table debate on the economy and jobs.
And with this story here that Romney's advisors met with Obama to uh discuss the implementation of Obamacare the same way that Romney had done it in Massachusetts.
Uh this this is from the uh Atlantic Wire, by the way, Mitt Romney.
You're looking at me like you haven't heard this.
Nitt Romney and Obama never met personally to discuss the federal health care law, but Romney's advisors did.
New records revealed by Michael Isakoff point out That White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three Romney health care advisors and experts who helped shape the law that Romney signed in 2006.
One meeting was in the Oval Office and presided over by Obama.
John Gruber, one of the advisors who attended the Obama meeting, said that the White House really wanted to know how we can take the same approach that was used in Massachusetts, turn it into a national model.
Now, this is ripe tonight for Perry and K and all the others to use.
I don't care whether this debate's not about health care, but the economy or whatever.
This is about the economy.
Now, obviously, this is the White House leaking to uh to Isakoff, who's no longer at Newsweek, he is at NBC.
Now it's obvious that the regime wants to run against Romney.
And I mentioned this last week.
They think Romney would be the easier candidate, the easiest candidate of these three to beat because he's least conservative.
Now don't doubt me on this.
There's no question they want to run against Romney.
However, leaking this right now on the uh to come out so close to this uh debate tonight is is a is a rather curious thing.
Because again, just just to uh make this point again, folks, I I think what's happening, the Republican establishment is trying to get this wrapped up for Romney now.
They are doing everything they can to smear, marginalize, take out people like Santorum, Bachman, Herman Cain, you name it, any other conservative that is competing for the uh for the nomination.
Uh Romney, for his part, is now outing Herman Cain, or pushing Herman Cain.
He said, if you can't vote for me, vote for Herman Cain.
I like Herman Cain.
And the reason he's doing this is to get rid of Perry.
He wants Perry out of the equation.
Because he's decided he'll have a much easier time against Herman Cain because Herman Cain doesn't have any money.
Herman Cain has the least amount of money, although that's changing a little bit, but he still doesn't have the money that Perry has, and he's nowhere near the money that Romney has.
So what what is happening here?
Romney wants to swamp Cain or Perry, wherever, with money and organization in the early states, New Hampshire, Florida, and Nevada.
And uh that is where he expects to be crowned the inevitable Republican nominee by the Lib Media.
Our guys are still out.
The Republican establishment is still totally interested and focused on what the mainstream media says about them.
It's one of the big problems that we face.
The Republican establishment still craves the uh approval of the relationship that they have with the mainstream media.
The Republican leadership in the House and Senate both still use the mainstream media as their primary means of disseminating information.
They think that the mainstream media is still the power broker, still the power maker, and they're going to go through them.
Romney is uh is also signaling that he will consider Cain for vice president.
So he's he's he's building Herman Cain up because he figures he can take Cain out.
If Cain can supplant Romney and become number two, then Romney figures it's over.
Cain doesn't have much of an organization, he doesn't have nearly as much money.
He'd get this thing wrapped up next week, figuratively speaking, which is the objective.
That is uh that's what's taking place.
Just I'm my humble opinion.
Now, there's something interesting too about the uh the protest.
We've we've talked to you before last week, week before that, I think, about this group, this magazine called AdBusters.
You know, AdBusters is also very much involved in the Occupy Wall Street Now movement.
And David Brooks, you know, a clock is right twice a day.
David Brooks has a column in the New York Times today with uh an interesting implication.
He writes that the impetus for Occupy Wall Street was sparked by Ed Buster's magazine.
Now, Ed Buster's magazine is known for you may not have heard of them, but within certain circles, Ed Buster's magazine is known for quite a lot.
And one of the things that they did that stands out was an essay in 2004 entitled, Why Won't They Say They Are Jewish.
David Brooks says that that 2004 essay in Adbusters outed influential Jews as a tiny elite with a nefarious grip on America.
The old Jewish power brokers, the movies, the bankers, that stereotype, that conspiracy theorem.
Well, not just the neocons.
This was an attack on neocons included in it, but this was an attack on all Jews.
This is an anti-Semitic bunch.
And some people, some people, no doubt are gonna think that Brooks is onto something here.
The 1% line of these people that run around saying, I'm the 99%.
These signs I just shared with you in the first half hour of these people writing, I am the 99% is how each of them ends.
That's the last line in each of these signs or messages that these people are writing, but they are touting themselves as the 99%.
Now, some people think the 99% is also the 99 weeks of unemployment compensation, because that group also calls themselves the 99ers.
But the 99% versus the 1% is another angle that the uh group is talking about here.
And Wall Street and bankers, those two terms have been anti-Semitic code for Jews in this country for a long time.
Occupy, occupy Wall Street now.
I mean, that's I've often said, I just said last week, he who controls the definition of words, the meaning of words controls the debate.
He who controls the language controls the debate.
There's a lot of interesting stuff here.
Occupy Wall Street now.
99%.
That leaves 1%, roughly the percentage of Jews in the population, too.
And Wall Street and bankers have been anti-Semitic code for Jews in this country going back quite a while.
Now, what's happening here is that the Democrats, this is where Brooks may be onto something.
It's too early to tell.
But the Democrats are embracing this group of people.
They are embracing them big time.
The Democrats, Jan Chikowski and Illinois, members of Congress cannot help themselves.
They are they are embracing this group and encouraging this group.
Celebrities are showing up now.
Kanye West shows up with ruffle thimmons, and he was wearing his big gold chains, and he and he hung around for a while.
He did a little uh did a perp walk, signed some autographs, had to get out of there because he was mobbed by these people.
But this AdBusters munch has a history of anti-Semitism, proud anti-Semitism.
The article about Jewish neocons was just one of their pieces, snurtly, that you you mentioned here along those lines.
And a lot of people, a lot of people like to think that Wall Street's all made up of Jewish people, and I, you know, I we we're the ones that mentioned this last week.
We're the first to tell you that AdBusters was deeply involved in this.
I wouldn't be surprised if Brooks got the idea from this program.
I'm gonna we're gonna do, I'm gonna do a content search.
And I'm gonna go back and I'm gonna get the exact thing I I said about AdBusters last week or the week before, whenever it was, because now people are starting to pick up on this.
So here's the point.
If this group is being organized and paid for by a bunch of anti-Semites, and the Democrat Party goes overboard in embracing this group of people, then this could be problem for the Democrat coalition.
Uh, not to mention the fact that they could unleash a bunch of anti Jewish racism down there if they're not careful with this.
Because there's there's much more going on here than you just see at the surface.
This is not this is not just the union showing up or Craigslist or other people.
This is this is this is adbusters offering to pay these people to show up.
350 to $650 away.
Well, that's working families party doing that.
Working families, which is an offshoot of uh of Acorn.
So there's look at you have a protest manufactured, no doubt orchestrated out of the White House.
This is what the left does for a living.
So you have all kinds of people now folding themselves into this, trying to take credit for it, uh, be instrumental in its movement and its direction and its purpose.
And it is not gonna be hard for this thing to get out of hand.
I and I'm talking about politically for the Democrats.
This is gonna end up tiger by the tail, they're not gonna be able to control if they're if they're not careful.
I'm not predicting it.
What's the exit strategy?
When they get tired, either exit straight when they get tired, you know, when the free drugs run out, uh when the free tobacco runs out, when the free sex runs out, when they get bored, they'll move on to something else.
Or or or you know, when the organizers say, okay, enough, and the and the word gets spread.
But right now there's that's not gonna end anytime soon.
I mean, this is just now getting energized, and the media reporting on this is just now getting up to speed uh in a in a way that the organizers hoped that it would be.
So it's it's it's gonna be going on for a while.
And Bloomberg has said, hey, as long as you don't break the law, you're welcome to stay here as long as you want.
Of course, they're breaking the law, and nobody's enforcing it.
You let a tea party or defecate on the hood of a cop car, and you see if you can go three minutes without hearing about it.
Gotta take a break, though, a little long.
Sit tight, we'll be right back.
Don't go away.
How are you?
Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, right?
Here's what?
Here's what I said on this program October 5th.
So it's basically six days ago.
Now, the idea of a Wall Street protest, this bunch, the idea for doing the Occupy Wall Street protest was started by Canadians.
It's the brainchild of a Canadian anti-consumerist magazine called Adbusters, which uh registered the domain name Occupy Wall Street.org back in June.
Now, among other things, this bunch, AdBusters, the anti-consumerist magazine, has a long histoire of anti-Semitism.
So in their corrupt and perverted minds, Jewish money traders, Jewish bankers on Wall Street, it's a natural target.
So you have a group in Canada, largely steeped in anti-Semitism, providing the idea for this.
Who was it that arranged for protesters to go to the homes on the front lawns of AIG executives to protest their bonuses?
Who is it that has websites that organize all of this?
And now we know it's the same exact people, the so-called working families party, are one of the groups paying these protesters.
Same people organize the terrorizing of those AIG execs in their homes.
So that's what's going on there.
This is nothing spontaneous about this at all.
It's purely political, and it's being run by a bunch of anti-Semites.
And you've got you've got Democrats totally oblivious to that, running around embracing this.
It's a fuse that's been lit.
And who knows if it's gonna go all the way down to the bomb and blow up.
We'll do what we can here to see that the fuse doesn't get extinguished.
There's been some violence there wasn't.
There's been violence everywhere.
There's been debauchery everywhere.
There's been there's been destruction of private property, and 700 arrests, of course.
Yeah, I was wearing my Nostradamus hat last Wednesday, predicted all of this.
Adbusters.
I wouldn't be surprised if Brooks got this idea from me.
Where else is Brooks going to learn that?
Where else is anybody going to anyway?
That's of minor concern.
But I mean, you've got Kanye West, a guy who earns over $30 million a year, which peanuts, but he's still he earns $30 million a year, and he's out there protesting Wall Street greed.
No, I just said peanuts sternly just irritate people.
I mean, they the protesters have been attacking the police, but we never hear about any of that.
There's nothing peaceful about this.
And I would say of these 99% people, the percentage of them actually know anything, know what's going on, uh, who are who are competent, cognizant is what would stun you.
How low.
This is a bunch of hangers on.
You put an ad out there, 350 to 650 a week to come down there and maybe.
I mean, there's all kinds of groping of women going on.
They're being paid for it.
Come down and get some free smack, paid for it.
Come down and get some free dope, being paid for it.
How else do you think they're attracting people?
This is not spontaneous and bubbling up from underneath the surface of reality.
Yeah, I may have to rethink that.
I may have to re have to correct myself.
I'm not still not quite sure.
I you know, with the White House leaking, the fact that Romney's advisors were consulted on putting together Obamacare, it would stand to reason that they want to damage Romney and therefore uh don't want to run against him, that they would prefer to run against somebody else.
But that's not what I've heard from other sources.
▲
Export Selection