All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 25, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:47
November 25, 2011, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right, 99.6% of the time, no change, the latest opinion audit from the Sullivan Group, my official opinion auditing firm.
They have a hundred people out there doing this in Sacramento.
It's Friday, folks.
Let's go live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
And on we go.
Telephone number 800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
It's open line Friday.
There's something happening in the National Football League that intrigues me.
Joe Namath is ragging on the Jets at least two times a week.
And I'm trying to figure out why.
Somebody in the Jets organization had to do something to Joe Namit, because Joe Namath is out there pulverizing the Jets.
He's pulverizing draft choices, the front office, uh the way they're handling the quarterback, Mark Sanchez.
Well, no, I don't think no, he's not ripping players.
He's ripping coaches in front office.
But it just every time he shows up in the meeting, he's got a new dig at the Jets.
Now, Rex Ryan, the coach of the Jets, so I'm sorry, I maybe we could sign Joe could be our second string quarterback.
Get in here and tell us how to do this.
So I was a picture two years ago during training camp.
Apparently, Namath shows up every year.
Now, the last time the Jets did anyone name it, what was in the 60s, Super Bowl III.
That's a long time ago.
But Namath shows up at training camp every year to survey the scene, see what's going on as though uh he never left the team.
It's it's interesting.
And I I I know I I can just bet you that when they see Namit's car arriving, oh God, here he comes.
He's gonna act like we care what he thinks.
Oh, geez, he's got a old Mr. Jett, the only guy's won a Super Bowl, the Albert Trosser running.
If he comes in, he surveys things and he leaves.
He's ragging on the team.
And I think it's I don't know.
I think it's funny.
I don't know what it is.
It has to be something, somebody the Jets did that that ticked off Namath, because every time he's opening his mouth, speaking up.
Folks, um this this first caller that we had today with his uh Clarence Thomas, Jenny Thomas, uh Ruth Bader Ginsburg story, and who should be recused from the Supreme Court with Obama.
By the way, this this, you know, we mentioned a couple of possibilities as to why the regime has asked for a quick review and decision from the Supreme Court on Obamacare.
And I want to throw out another possibility.
Given where Obama is in the polls, and and folks, it is much worse than the state control media polls indicate.
I think it's disastrous.
Simple logic would tell us it's disastrous.
We're on the verge of a depression.
The idea that the incumbent president has a chance to be re-elected is absurd in those circumstances.
Yet the media narrative each day is, of course, just the opposite because Obama's their guy and so forth.
But I mean, it's this there, there's there's literally nothing that recommends more of Obama.
There's nothing that has happened.
Uh Larry O'Donnell berating Herman Kane.
Herman Cain, if he has a chance, if he's ever elected president, is going to end up creating far more jobs than Obama ever has for black people.
Look at what's happened to black unemployment rate since Obama has taken office.
The Congressional Black Caucasians are living at him.
And they're openly saying if the president were white, they would be marching on the White House the hell with his Wall Street bunch.
So I think it's I think it's worse now.
Now we're still a year and away from the election, so anything can change, but nobody sees employment getting any better.
Nobody sees the economy growth rate ratcheting it up in ways that would rescue Obama.
So even the Democrat polsters who are honest are talking about how big a hill Obama has to climb here.
So they asked for a quick review of Obamacare.
One of two ways to look at it.
They're either very confident they're going to win this thing, or given who Obama is, a community organizer who loves agitating people, and who is probably very connected, if not personally, his regime to these Wall Street protests.
And he's currently, he's egging them on, and so's Biden.
They're egging these people on.
So there's a part of me that says Obama would love the court declaring Obamacare unconstitutional.
I think Obama loves playing the victim.
I think he would love to take that to the bank and say, see what they're doing to your free health care.
You see what they're doing to your never ending.
The best health care bill in the world, your premiums are going to come, all the lies that have been told will come rushing back out, and they've all been taken away from you now.
The evil Republicans and the conservative Supreme Court, and this is who they really are, and this is what they really want to do.
They don't want you to have health care.
They don't want you to have any money, they want the banks to have all the money.
That's the campaign he's running now.
And so if Obamacare is overturned, it adds to that.
So you have to ask yourself at this point, what's more important to him?
Obamacare being fully implemented or being re-elected.
And I think that contrary to people who think, you know, he's tired of it, jobs beneath him, he's bored, but I don't buy any of that.
I I really think Obama can't wait for a second term.
He's got unfinished business here.
And he's on a roll.
You looked at from his standpoint, he is on a roll, and he is asking for more to do more of what he's done.
$787 billion stimulus, look where it got us.
He wants more.
He wants bigger government, he wants higher taxes, he wants less freedom for people and less liberty, more money out of your pocket going to government, less economic activity.
It's all there in Saul Olinski's book.
Everything that's happening is right out of Olinsky.
I would not put it past them.
Not that they're openly trying to have it declared unconstitutional, but I'm not, I'm I wouldn't be surprised if they would look at it as uh as an opportunity of uh of a sort, given where Obama is and how he's campaigning and and what uh he intends to do and how he's intending to run his campaign, making himself a uh a victim.
Now, I also, you know, I want to help the liberals.
Not that it really matters.
But you heard that first caller's a seminar caller.
Didn't that caller get past you that caller screw uh uh fool you?
Oh, you knew.
Well, while you were in there throwing a hissy fit, I thought maybe the guy lied to you about who he was.
Okay.
So he's up there and he has this analogy.
Well, what if Ruth Bader Ginsburg's husband is 700,000 or move on.org, you guys will be calling for impeachment hearings.
Um Jimmy Thomas, the wife of Clarence Thomas, not on the Supreme Court, and she will not be ruling on Obamacare.
She is an independent career woman.
She has her own activities, her own interests and views, just exactly like the feminizes want.
Just exactly like all the liberal feminists in our country want independence and their husbands.
Have it all.
Clarence Thomas has no conflict, period, whatever.
He has no conflict whatsoever, regardless what his wife has done for the Heritage Foundation.
Let me tell you about Midge Randell.
And I told the caller I could come up with more conflicts of interest on the left.
That would be the wife, you're right, of the governor of Pennsylvania fast Eddie Rindell.
Midge Randell is on the Third Circuit Federal Court.
Third Circuit Federal Judge Midge Randell, a Clinton appointee.
She served as that judge while husband Ed was Governor of Pennsylvania, and while husband Ed was the chairman of Democrat National Committee.
And as chairman of Democrat National Committee, Fast Eddie was out there raising big bucks from all corners, and he was appearing on MSNBC every night.
He was he was she, uh Midge, the judge, his wife ruling on all manner of issues in which a case could be made for conflict.
And not surprisingly, not a peep from the critics of Clarence Thomas.
And Midge Rindell is still on the on the bench while her husband does analysis on all issues for NBC and MSNBC.
And nobody talks about conflict there.
And nobody talked about conflict when he was a DNC and she's a judge, governor, and she's a judge.
Nobody had a problem with that.
Nobody had a problem with uh Stephen uh Stephen.
The real loon on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Stephen Reinhardt.
His wife is Ramona Ripston, head honcho, ACLU.
Nobody had a problem with that.
Yeah, Ramona Ribston, Google it.
She was head of the, she was in the top two, top three of the ACLU, and she's the wife of Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
I mean, the Democrats, look at the incestuous relationship for crying out, wow, why is there never a conflict of interest?
Jay Carney, Time Magazine, Biden now, he's over there as press secretary for Obama.
Elena Kagan, however, let's talk about Elena Kagan.
Elena Kagan is on the Supreme Court.
Jenny Thomas isn't.
Elena Kagan is on the Supreme Court.
She was the solicitor general of the United States, which means that she was the government's lawyer at the Supreme Court.
She tried cases there.
She represented the government.
The government was her client.
She was involved in helping to develop the legal position for Obamacare.
She structured the legal position for Obamacare.
Elena Kagan now is on the U.S. Supreme Court.
And one of the reasons she's there is precisely because of the conflict.
She is there because Obama and the Democrats know that the Republicans do not have it in them to say a word about it.
The Republicans are too gentlemanly.
The Republicans want to be seen as the most reasonable people in Washington.
And it is that, by the way, mentality and quest that led to Eric Holder getting 71 votes for confirmation in the Senate when everybody knew he had no business being attorney general.
But Obama was the Messiah.
He was the one.
It was a choice.
Republicans didn't want to make any waves.
It wasn't the time.
And so go ahead and confirm mediocrity.
And Elena Kagan ditto, confer mediocrity.
Obama wants her up there because she has a direct link to Obamacare, and she's a solid vote for it, regardless of the law.
But she has an actual conflict, which is why she should recuse herself.
Clarence Thomas does not have a conflict.
Can't make a case that he has a conflict.
All these efforts to try and neutralize Elena Kagan's conflict by bringing up Jenny Thomas is not going to work.
We're not going to let it work.
While we're on the subject of ethics.
And since it's open line Friday, Snurley put stop screening a call first.
I want you to listen to this because they have an effect on your future screening.
Because I'm putting out a call there to liberal seminar callers.
You liberal seminar callers who use Friday as your golden opportunity to get on the most listen to show in a country.
Maybe you call in here tell me why Eric Holder is still attorney general.
When it clearly appears he was not forthcoming about the amount of information he was in fact provided about Fast and Furious.
Why are you silent about this?
Two hundred people are dead.
You cringe at the loss of a single life except in the womb.
Where are you?
A border agents now, I guess that's okay.
Certain federal employees don't deserve to live.
Keeping the poor and oppressed of the world out of the country.
You don't have to live.
It's okay if you die.
Is that it?
Two hundred people dead in a program that had as its primary purpose to undermine the Second Amendment.
Eric Holder lied about the Mark Rich pardon.
He lied, I didn't know Mark Chris did all that.
He shepherded that pardon outside of the normal procedures that take place for part presidents are not presented or they're not lobbied personally by advocates for the pardon me.
It comes from the Justice Department, the the uh the but Holder was Mark Rich's advocate, and he got a private meeting with Clinton, and he didn't tell him everything that he knew, and he claimed I didn't know it all.
Just like he's claiming now he didn't know all this fast and furious stuff.
But his top aide, Cheryl Atkison has revealed, was getting emails with handwritten notes on them, but somehow not sharing them with the attorney general.
Not one of them.
So maybe some of you liberal seminar callers can tell me why Eric Holder's still attorney general.
You remember Fast and Furious, thousands of weapons sold at drug dealers and cartels at the direction of the Obama administration.
It was their idea.
Undermine the Second Amendment.
What are the secret group working under the National Security Agency that approves assassinations that we just learned about yesterday?
They can assign people to be killed.
Nobody can do anything about it.
I thought you liberals opposed stuff like this.
I thought you opposed FISA because it involved intercepting terrorist communications overseas without a warrant.
Well, here Obama has a secret group, no oversight of any kind determining assassination targets.
Why aren't you talking about that?
Liberal seminar callers, why aren't you upset about that?
You got the regime with a secret group can decide who lives and who dies with no oversight.
Suddenly your moral outrage doesn't exist, isn't that funny?
What about the crony capitalism involving Cylindra?
And the wanton giveaway.
You weren't the banks.
How about Celindra?
Do you idiots realize how much this man is costing you and your kids?
Who's next?
Chester, New York.
Alan, it's open line Friday, and you're next.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
Thank you.
Um, the other night, you had a lady stating that uh on the Wall Street protest that she was upset about Bank of America sp uh charging five dollars a month for uh their fees.
Yeah.
Um, many years ago, not too long ago, I used to pay a dollar a gallon for gas.
Now it's three and a quarter.
That comes out to three hundred dollars extra a month.
That's extra.
Yep.
I pay in gas.
Yep.
That everyone pays in gas, not to mention extra fees and so forth.
Yeah.
Uh you want to know why people are upset over the five bucks and not the gasoline.
It might well be.
Um why do I ask you this question?
How do you know for sure that everybody is up in arms over the five bucks?
You hear one citizen complain about it.
You then see the media making a whole big deal about it in concert with Obama attacking the banks.
And then we see little groups of people out there protesting against the banks.
As I said yesterday, today it's just the banks.
Yesterday it was big oil, and it will be big oil again if this fizzles.
When the price of gasoline goes up, people do get mad.
If the media doesn't cover it, you don't know about it.
You don't hear it.
You just feel it yourself.
So you might think nobody's complaining about it, and you're the only one upset about it, which is never the case.
We're all prisoners of the media.
Some of us have developed ways to immunize ourselves from the narrative and a template of the day that the media has.
But I I remember when credit card interest, uh 1986 tax reform, credit card interest was no longer allowed as a deduct deductible on your tax return.
People were livid.
There was no doubt people were livid.
When ATM fees went up sometime a few years ago, people were livid.
And there probably is some outrage over the Bank of America there, but I think a lot of it is being drummed up.
I don't know how genuine it is.
You've got Democrats out there trying to create run on the bank.
Dick Durbin, the Florida Senate, urging people to leave Bank of America and go to smaller community banks.
It's just this is this is uh I think it's reprehensible, but I think uh people are upset about a lot of things if you want to know the truth.
Right.
I just blew a gasket.
I had to call.
Uh well, you blew a gasket over the fact what which fact?
That you the word about five dollars a month, and it's only some people, meanwhile, every day.
I know.
Look, I blew a gasket when people were upset over the ATM fee.
Remember that?
I mean, I really why it's a buck.
It's a bucket of but at the if if if the target of the demonization campaign then is forced by the demonization campaign to raise fees to make up for what the demonization campaign is forcing them to lose, it all makes sense.
Everybody's being manipulated here.
You just have to find ways to avoid being manipulated.
To those of you still trying to uh understand what all's going on, it's always useful to return to Alinsky.
Always useful.
Folks, these these uh occupy Wall Street protests wherever they are taking place.
This is just this a boot camp.
This is boot camp for the bigger and better protests that are in the works.
Boot camp, training, rehearsal time.
Let's put this together.
Due to Obama's policies, corporations are cutting back.
They are increasing costs, or they are dropping health insurance altogether.
There's a big story.
In fact, uh, ladies and gentlemen.
A story from the associated press yesterday, feds to design health insurance for the masses.
By Ricardo Alonso Zalivar.
The federal government's taking on a crucial new role in the nation's health care, designing a basic benefits package for millions of privately insured Americans.
A framework for the Obama regime was released Thursday.
The report by independent experts from the Institute of Medicine lays out guidelines for deciding what to include in the new essential benefits package, how to keep it affordable for small businesses and taxpayers, and also scientifically up to date.
About sixty-eight million Americans, many of them currently insured, ultimately would be affected by the new benefits package.
That's bigger than the number of seniors enrolled in Medicare.
And Obama promised it would bend the cost curve down, and Obama promised if you like your plan, you keep it.
And yet, here's the story.
Federal government taking on crucial new role in the nation's health care, designing a basic benefits package for millions of privately insured.
The AP gets its collectivist language right.
The regime is designing health insurance for the masses, just like Romney did in Massachusetts.
And he's mandating it, and this word masses.
Dead giveaway for what lies ahead.
Ronald Reagan knew all too well what Democrats had in mind when they talked about the masses.
That famous 1964 Barry Goldwater speech.
Let me read to you an excerpt from that speech of Ronaldus Magnus.
And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.
Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me as the masses.
This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America.
But beyond that, the full power of centralized government.
This is the very thing the founding fathers sought to minimize.
They knew that governments don't control things.
A government can't control the economy without controlling people.
And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose.
They also knew those founding fathers that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.
So he and obviously dead on, right?
The masses.
Material needs of the masses.
Central planners don't look at us as individuals.
We're just robots and pegs to be plugged into holes to make it all work out.
And so here we have feds to design health insurance for the masses.
So, back to Walinski.
Due to Obama's policies, corporations are cutting back or increasing costs or dropping health insurance altogether.
Corporations, because of Obama's policies, are forced to lay off employees.
Salaries, workable hours, and bonuses are cut back.
Fees such as debit card usage and cost of goods have been forced higher to pass on the costs of Obama's regulations.
And yet yesterday in Obama's presser.
He said, Some people think get rid of all these regulations.
Well, what's that gonna create any jobs overnight?
Yes, it would.
Get rid of Obamacare and a massive number of regulations evaporate.
You get rid of Obamacare, and there's gonna be a huge spike in economic activity real fast.
Roll back some of these regulations that have been imposed on business and Katie barred the door.
And there's Obama saying, yes, well, some people say get rid of the regulation.
That ain't gonna make any difference.
Where do you think the five dollar credit card fee comes from?
It comes from Durban forcing the banks to reduce an existing fee for credit card swipes from 48 to 24 cents.
They have a business to run.
They have income streams that are defined.
The federal government just cut an income stream in half.
They have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and everybody else, plus their employee, they got to stay in business.
They have to make it up somewhere else.
So they go out and raise the credit card fee, five bucks a month for debit card usage, and everybody has a cow, including Obama, because Obama, the Democrats think the bank's just gonna sit there and take it.
Just like you're gonna sit there and take it when your taxes go up.
You know the press conference, Obama's holding up his bill.
447 billion dollars right here is 1.9 million jobs.
Right here.
My bill.
Pass that bill, 1.9 million jobs.
Not one reporter deigned to ask for how long are those jobs created, Mr. President?
Because they're all for one year.
Whether they were teachers or doctors or nurses, firemen or cops.
They were jobs funded for one year.
But taxes do not create jobs.
There's never been an occasion where taxes create jobs.
The private sector and activity there is what creates jobs, not taxes.
Taxes kill jobs.
Not one reporter said, Mr. President, I don't understand.
You just spent $787 billion two years ago for jobs, and we're in much worse shape.
How is half of that?
Mr. President, I don't understand how the federal government spending anything creates jobs anyway.
Could you explain to me how it happens?
Not one reporter said, Mr. President.
You've just described how various Americans are having to do with less.
Have you ever thought maybe the government could do with less?
Not one reporter.
And not one reporter ever will.
Not in the currently constituted White House press corps.
So to review: because of Obama's policies, American businesses are cutting back or dropping health insurance altogether, or they are raising costs to their employees for it.
While this is happening, businesses are forced to lay off employees.
Salaries, workable hours, and bonuses are cut back.
Fees, such as debit card usage, and the cost of goods have been forced higher to pass on the costs of Obama's regulations.
And the president is blaming the businesses.
When it was in fact the president who caused the very problems that businesses struggle to overcome.
And not only is this president blaming the businesses, the corporations for the misery that Obama has caused.
It's funny he likes to compare himself to Reagan.
These problems didn't happen under Reagan.
So not only is he blaming businesses for the misery that he is causing, he's now orchestrating or encouraging phony protests designed to further damage American companies.
Why would anybody do this?
What would be Obama's purpose in causing all of this misery and pain and suffering and chaos?
What's his purpose?
Stanley Kurtz explains it.
His 2010 book, Radical in Chief.
Quote, Olinski was convinced that large-scale socialist transformation would require an alliance between the struggling middle class and the poor, and the key to radical social change, Olinsky thought, was to turn the wrath of America's middle class against large corporations.
Well, Olinski is Obama's godfather.
Mentor.
It was Alinsky that Obama was teaching when he taught some kind of constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
The key to radical social change turned the wrath of America's middle class against large corporations.
That's exactly what's happening.
Everybody's mad at banks or big oil or big drug.
This is the Democrat way.
It's right out of Olinski.
Another question not asked.
At Obama's press conference yesterday.
Mr. President, you uh keep talking about Ronald Reagan and that quote that billionaires shouldn't pay more taxes than a janitor or some such thing.
But Mr. President, you're taking it a little bit out of context.
You're not telling us all of the tax cuts that Ronald Reagan instituted and all of the attacks he instituted against a growing government.
The Reagan model worked, Mr. President.
Yours didn't.
How long are you going to continue on this path, Mr. President, holding the economy hostage to failed theories?
They didn't ask that question.
The Reagan boom, which lasted nearly 20 years, did not have an American jobs act.
But it worked.
The Reagan boom did not have stimulus one, stimulus two, stimulus, period.
But it worked.
The Reagan boom did not attack smear or vilify the other party, but it worked.
The Reagan boom did not pick on one percent of the voters to incite ninety-nine percent of the voters.
But it worked.
They call it taxpayers, I call it voters because the attack on the achievers is not economic, it's political.
I know that Obama does not have a clue about business.
And yesterday's press conference confirmed it.
Here is how he characterized the Republican jobs plan.
Well, we're gonna roll back all these uh Obama regulations.
Anybody, anybody really think that's gonna create jobs right now and meet the challenges of the global economy, rolling back regulation.
Now in poker they call that a tell.
A giveaway.
A tell is when a poker player gives away his bluff.
And that was Obama's tell.
That was the giveaway that he doesn't have a clue.
If we would roll back, quote, these Obama regulations, close quote, it would create jobs right now.
If we could roll back Obamacare, it would create jobs faster than all of the porculi that have been combined in history.
Not only is business burdened by Obama regulations, they are realistic enough to know that there are countless Obama czars working around the clock for new regulations, and they don't have any accountability.
How can anybody as smart as Obama is supposed to be behave as unsmart as he does?
I don't have to say it.
It's all in Saulinski's book, rules for radicals, and it's all what Obama wants to happen.
Back to the phones we go on open line Friday, this Diana in Stockton, California.
Great to have you with us.
Hello.
Hello.
I just want to defend Kane.
You know, he had a father that was working, working three jobs.
That's very true.
Him and his family.
That's very true.
And he was pushing his sons to go to college.
That's exactly right.
And he was trying to help his dad support his family.
He had responsibilities to his family.
And they insult him because he's not out on the protesting line.
Yep.
I mean, he is a man that I wish we had more men.
He's not allowed to be his own man.
He's got to tow the liberal line as a black.
He has to have marched.
He has to have been down for the struggle.
He has to be part of the civil rights movement.
He has to be liberal.
He's not allowed to be his own man.
He that's not fair to him.
He had a family.
He had responsibility, which more children today should have.
Of course.
He had respect for his father.
He wanted to accomplish in life.
He wanted to be something in life.
And he accomplished it.
And they're going to throw him into the mud hole because he didn't go out and fight back then.
I mean, sure.
Maybe.
You know, not everybody goes out and protests.
Doesn't mean that they don't back their people.
I mean, he loves this country.
His father loved this country.
Doesn't matter.
And he had a right to take care of his family and doesn't matter.
He made the wrong choice.
No, he didn't.
He may.
I mean, he made the choice right for his family.
I am no, I agree with you.
Don't misunderstand.
I'm just, I'm just telling you that I'm answering, though, answer you as though you were talking to any liberal.
He betrayed his people.
He is nothing more than a phony black.
He wants to be approved by rich white guys.
He wants to be in their club, and he knows he has to act and talk and sound like them.
That's Herman Cain is would be horrible for black people.
He doesn't care about black people.
He didn't march in a civil rights march.
He just wants his family and his people taken care of just like anybody else.
That's not up to him.
That's up to us.
We will take care of your family and his family.
The government will do that.
He's supposed to be on the protest march enabling government to get bigger.
But the government doesn't do anything but take our money, and then they get the money, and then they dish it out to their interests that they want.
Wrong.
And the government is the only group that cares about black people.
The government's the only group that has any compassion for black people.
The government's the only people that care about the black family, tearing it apart.
But if you think about it, the welfare wouldn't have any money if there wasn't for the rich and the people that uh work for the rich and the small businesses, because they're the ones that put the money into the government so the government can pay the welfare, the social security.
The You have it exactly backwards.
The money is all governments, and what people end up with is what government decides they deserve.
And you if you keep talking like this, you're gonna be on welfare.
No, we're gonna send people to your house.
Do you know what?
When I was young, I was on welfare because I got left with five with my five children.
Why didn't you say that?
I taught my children that if you work for a living and you try, you can make it better if you're not going to be able to do that.
You are an enemy of the state.
You're an enemy of the state.
You've been brainwashed.
No, I'm not.
I'm just somebody that believes in the United States and believes if you work hard enough you can have more than that.
God bless you.
God bless you.
I gotta go.
You know, I don't remember about uh Larry O'Donnell complaining about Bill Clinton not marching for civil rights in the South.
Bill Clinton's mentor, J. William Fulbright, a noted segregationist.
Heck with these people.
Not for the rich, we're for allowing people to become rich if they want to.
▲
Export Selection