All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 3, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:52
January 3, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
That's 35.
That's too much going on here.
I can't possibly get it all in.
I'm starting to get to get ticked off.
I know already I'm not going to be able to get it all in here.
Just even though I got two hours on.
I'm going to hustle here, folks.
Great to great to be back.
Great to have you with us, Rush Lindba.
And the excellence in Broadcasting Network, the most listened to and the most talked about.
Radio Talk Show and host in America, 800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program.
Just to repeat now, speaking of defining, you know, we've got we got uh some lib on the Chris Matthews show yesterday, David Ignatius.
Yeah, yeah, Obama, he got a year to define himself.
He's defined.
Our problem is that Republicans will not use it.
I am, you know, we we've got we got Republicans, media, conservatives, you name it, that are trying to kill Republicans in a political sense.
We've got people saying horrible things about Gingrich, horrible things about Romney, horrible things about Bachman.
Nobody will say one horrible thing about Obama.
We're like a circular firing squad.
I know it's politics, but what about the other guy?
What about the real enemy here?
Why does the real enemy get a pass?
There was an analysis last week, released last week, showed that 45% of all political ads in Iowa were negative commercials aimed at Gingrich.
And they worked.
Gingrich was once leading.
Do you remember?
He had this big surge.
Gingrich was up in Iowa.
He was up everywhere.
He was up nationally.
And a never-ending barrage.
And you could say that Romney's pack has taken Newt out.
It worked.
Negative ads work.
You define your opponent.
Newt had not defined himself.
Or at least not sufficiently so to ward off the attacks.
So now he's he's uh he's going after Romney big time.
He's calling Romney a liar.
The media can't believe this is happening, but he's doing it.
You have to define your opponent, and you have to define yourself.
In principle, of course, easiest way to define yourself.
But the the Republicans, well, they they just they seem to be great at doing this to each other, but they're always afraid to do it to the Democrat nominee.
For some reason, we're not worried about ticking off the independence in our primary.
You notice this?
We can go out there and we say the most horrible things about our own people.
We're not worried the independents aren't gonna like it.
You get into the general election, oh, we can't criticize Obama.
Oh no, the independents are gonna be running right back to the Democrats.
What a bunch of hooey.
Got ourselves in a straitjacket.
Now, you know, I we had a call.
We went back, I looked at this transcript of this program.
We had a um uh Santorum supporter on the program on December 9th.
That's what I said to the Santorum supporter.
I think that it's still possible for Bachman and Santorum, because I think what's happening out there, buddy, in this mix thinks, you can read it, you can sense it.
Everybody in this mix senses Newt is going to implode.
And remember, early December, this is what the conventional wisdom of Newt was.
And by imploding, what is meant by that?
He's gonna do a commercial with Pelosi on a couch for global with something like that.
He always does stuff like that.
Out of the blue when nobody's expecting it.
And everybody was thinking that one of the problems with Newt is he has this tendency to do things like this.
The other candidates, they all were of the opinion, and they were saying that Newt, if they just have a little rope and just give him a little space, that he will implode.
That he he's one of these guys that can't stand prosperity.
Um a lot of people that think Newt is just gonna do or say something that causes an implosion to one degree or another, and they all figure Bachman, Paris, and Torum.
This is why they were hanging around.
When the this is my point to the Santorum supporters, somebody called, why isn't Santorum uh taking off?
I had a bunch of those calls in December and leading up to Christmas, the break.
Why isn't Santorum taking off?
I said they're all lurking.
Santorum Perry Bachman.
December 9th, I said it to a Centaurum supporter.
They're lurking, they're waiting, because they just they figure that Newt is going to implode, or that something's going to happen to the front runner because it always does, and that's why they're working and lurking out there.
They all figured they're going to be the ones left standing for conservatives to flock to if that happens.
Newt was getting the conservative vote in the polls.
There weren't any votes cast, of course.
But now Newt's down 45%.
Well, not down 45%, but 45% of all political ads were negative spots directed at Newt, and he's gone from leading the race to third place, right?
In the polling data.
And one of the people that they're staying in the race.
One of the reasons that they are staying in the race.
And I essentially on December 9th, told the Santoran supporter that he could win because he would be the last man standing.
And I also predicted this coalition or this coalescing that would take place among the last viable conservatives to go against Romney because I guarantee you that the Tea Party side and on the conservative side, nobody is yet willing to cede this to Romney.
This is right no this is just the beginning today, folks.
This isn't over.
Nothing's over after the Hawkeye Corkeye tonight.
It's just the beginning.
And so I see all this stuff here about Obama has got a year to define himself.
He's been defined.
He's a Marxist socialist.
I know Republicans are saying, oh, you don't call him that rush.
No, no, no.
Don't, don't, don't, don't call him that.
That's just that you can't.
We call Newt that, and we can call anybody else on our side.
We call them all kinds of names, but we can't call Obama.
No, we can't because the independents aren't going to like it.
So we hamstring ourselves.
Anyway, my whole my whole point here is that you have to define yourself, and you have to define your opponent.
And the media, of course, knows this.
Media's trying to pick our nominee.
They do every four years, and they pick somebody they think can be beat.
They pick somebody that they think is going to lose.
Some people get caught up, hey, you know, the media likes this guy.
Maybe we no, that's the death knell.
You don't want somebody on our side that the media likes.
Now the Obama campaign, this Jim Messina guy.
They say, well, there's a lot of myths out there.
So no, we we're not going to have a billion dollars in this campaign.
We're not going to raise that much.
That's also been conventional wisdom.
The Obama campaign is going to have a billion dollars.
First one ever to raise.
Now the campaign's saying they're not even going to get close.
I know they the ones that said they're going to raise a billion.
Now they're saying that they're not going to raise a billion.
I don't know which to believe, but they're out there saying it.
I've got it here in the stack of stuff.
Now also mentioned, and I got a call I want to get to here for a quickly.
I mentioned in the first hour that the economy is not issue number one in Iowa because it's not bad.
Agriculture doing well, employment's at 5.7%.
I've got a caller, oh, that's that's not correct, Rush.
It is a big issue here.
But there's a story from Selena Zito, real clear politics about Obama.
Here's a pool quote.
Basically, all he has right now, despite Washington media reports predicting his resurrection in the polls, which isn't happening, is a political machine that can turn out just enough voters for him to win electorally.
Let me pick this up in progress.
Last week, Romney packed an enthusiastic crowd into Black Hawk's Gold Room.
Garrison Gardner, the hotel's on duty manager, watched the former Massachusetts governor make his pitch for caucus voters.
Gardner, who leans Democrats, said he's ripe to be persuaded to vote for Romney.
Anything's better than what we have going on now at the White House, the former Obama supporter said.
While everybody focuses on the Republicans shifting nomination process, they overlook Obama's Iowa problem.
The Hawkeye State began Obama's string of caucus victories that gave him a majority of the Democrats superdelegates over Hillary in 2008.
And you remember how he did it.
Buses of people that don't live in Iowa coming in to participate in the Cork eye.
Iowa does not share this, the second story making this point.
Iowa does not share the country's high unemployment rate, but it does share the Midwest's disapproval of the president's performance.
Public policy polling.
Late last summer showed just 45% of voters approved of Obama.
48% disapproved.
Independence split against Obama 43 to 47.
Only 79% of Democrats thought he was doing a good job.
On Earth Day, just a handful of months after being sworn into office, Obama visited Newton, Iowa.
Standing at the TCI Composites wind turbine plant, he praised the state's efforts in green alternative energy.
Went on to talk about how this is not playing.
Last week, TCI Composites, recipient of city and state tax credits, federal stimulus funds, laid off 200 workers.
The company said it hoped to rehire them next spring.
So the story under the surface is that while a Republicans are duking it out in Iowa, Obama is losing support in Iowa among people who voted for him back in 2008.
And I bring this up because I'm telling you, don't doubt me on this.
There are high-placed Republican establishment types who do not think Obama can lose.
Who do not think he can be beat, let's put it that way, in 2008.
So their focus is on the Senate and stopping Obama legislatively.
And there are people in the Republican Party who do not share the view you and I have of the country being in peril.
They just don't think it's any big deal.
Yeah, we got $16 trillion national debt.
Yeah, well, it was one time it was five trillion.
We survived.
We're not at a crossroads.
We're not at a fork in the road that we're going to take.
We're not at a cliff that we're about to fall over.
This is just normal ebb and flow politics.
It's uh be nice if we could win and put ourselves in charge of the money.
But if we can't win the White House, let's win the Senate and hold the House and uh we'll do what we can do.
The stop Obama.
And that's a prevailing uh point of view.
High levels of the Republican Party.
Well, that's not what we're interested in.
We want to win this.
You want to start the process of rolling some of this back.
Anyway, brief time out.
We'll get the phone calls.
We come back right after this.
Coming up in mere moments.
Ladies and gentlemen, from the Washington Times today.
Requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Kid you not.
New from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission high school diploma requirement might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In the meantime, we're going out to Atlantic, Iowa, starting on the phones with Andrea.
I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Russ.
Happy New Year.
It's been a couple years since I talked to you.
The last time was I was trying to send my daughter off to college and was uh commiserating over the uh student loan thing, and you told me I would figure it out, and uh we have figured it out, and she's in her second year and doing well.
So you know I vaguely I've I vaguely remember, not the specifics, but I remember talking to you about the student alone.
I don't remember what I told you, I'm sure it was right.
But um, of course you were right.
Yeah.
So I uh live in Omaha, but I work in Atlantic, Iowa for Walmart as a pharmacist.
And I worked there for the last year, kind of Throughout Southwest Iowa.
And I've got to tell you, I don't know who that who did that poll, but the number one thing that people are talking about as they're getting ready to go to the caucus tonight is the economy.
Jobs, jobs, jobs, and the economy.
Well now, I should have known it's a CNN uh story.
CNN Money dot com story.
And let me it's it's basically that uh uh the economy's not the big story there because it's it's not issue number one because uh agriculture doing well and unemployment's only five point seven percent.
It's a CNN O R C poll.
So it's a CNN poll itself.
We have people come in the Walmart, of course, all the time because they're trying to save money, and people are working a couple of part-time jobs to get by.
Both husband and wife are working.
They may be farming, but they're also working a part-time job or even a full-time job.
Um people are very concerned about their kids uh being able to make it to college.
Uh, and yes, maybe agriculture did well this year, but you know, that can always change with the weather.
One bad season, and you know, you have uh bad harvest, bad weather, uh a t a couple of tornadoes come through, couple of hailstorms, all that could change in a moment's left.
Now something else, uh that is salient here, and that is maybe unemployment in Iowa is only five point seven percent, but Iowa knows Iow ones know that they are Americans.
And they know that the country is in heat big trouble economically.
They know what the national unemployment situation is.
They know what's happening to prices.
They know what's happening to gasoline price, they know a number of things, and their concerns obviously go beyond Iowa.
Everybody's do.
Everybody's concerns go beyond just where they live.
For crying out loud, if that were the standard, I couldn't care less.
If if if if things were okay where you lived.
We we know that this is uh uh most real Americans are concerned about the country at large.
And uh it's it's I think this is uh uh a point here that's well taken.
I'm glad you called to point this out.
Of course, they would love.
The media would love to be able to say in Iowa the economy is not number one.
The economy doesn't matter.
Other things do.
Because they can then credit that as um no, why not?
Because Obama's president, Obama's policies are doing well in Iowa, what have you.
No question.
Andrea, thanks for the call.
Appreciate it.
Steve, Lebanon, Pennsylvania.
You're next.
It's great to have you with us.
Hi.
Hi, Rush, uh, long time listener.
Uh, you've been attending one of your TV papers.
Uh I just wanted to call about your uh your tea.
I ordered a case of your tea, and uh while I was at work, my wife had a friend over, and she says, Would you like some tea?
She says, uh, nobody orders tea online.
She says, Well, my husband got this, and she gets it out, gives it to her.
She says, Well, I don't like that guy.
But she loves the tea.
So I don't know if uh drinking your tea is gonna make her a rush fan, but she loves your tea.
Well, you see, what what does that say to you?
Good quality, that's what I think.
It's great tea, and it and then and the tea, of course, appeals beyond the boundaries of the of the radio program.
It's it's it's um uh actually one of our secrets, but we don't want to spend a whole lot of time talking about secrets.
We execute the secrets.
Uh we don't really bally who them.
But it's an excellent point.
I appreciate the call.
Who's next?
Bobby in New York City.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, sir.
Nice to thank you for taking my call.
You bet.
Sir, it's the first time calling them black.
I'm conservative and I'm an American.
Sir, I respect you and I've read your book.
And I've been a long time reading and listener of your program.
And I think the the Republic uh Democrats are basically very wrong about how they are basically your influence over people's mindset and the uh upsurge in St. Thomas election election in Iowa.
The Republican people are open minded people.
They are willing to listen to other people's opinion.
And because he is all of a sudden have an upsurge in their in his uh election, all of a sudden they think that other people are not listening to what he has to say.
It is like they believe that uh the Republican people are like dead people.
All of a sudden they go run into them because they're Democrats.
Well, no.
No, what's happening is that uh uh the media is crediting me for Centaurum surge.
And that's that's the interesting part about it is that so you are a gifted speaker.
You're a gifted person.
Yes.
You open people's minds to other things, and you're willing to give everybody an opportunity to hear other people's.
That's exactly right.
That's exactly that's exactly what the media is saying.
And I know I was just minding my own business.
I come back, and it's what they tell me happened.
You know, our last caller, the uh Aerudite Bobby, said that he had read my book.
You know, we're coming up on the 20th anniversary of my first book, The Way Things Ought to Be.
And I got an email over the weekend from uh somebody who was just now reading it for the first time.
And they were struck by how relevant it is.
They said, you know, you ought to come out of the 20th anniversary edition.
People tell me ought to do another book every day of the year.
There's no shortage of people who think I ought to be doing that, but the book markets is crazy.
Everybody in the uncle does books now.
But um this guy was going on and on and on about about how relevant it is and how good it is, and how much he was learning about the show that he thought he knew, just some listening.
Twentieth anniversary of the way things ought to be.
That book was number one on the New York Times list for 54 weeks.
Ended up selling two and a half million hardcover copies.
The media did not know what to do.
That it was the first time in history that the New York Times bestseller list was ignored for a full year.
Because I was the for now, the second book came out, and it was number one for eight weeks.
Sold the same amount of books, but just much faster.
But the 20th anniversary of that first, that's a long time ago.
And since it's a book of principles, it is still relevant.
Of course, it was about the Clinton regime back then, but it's still uh highly relevant.
Can probably put out the same book, 20th anniversary edition, upgrade uh the conclusion chapter here or there.
But class warfare, global warming, it's all in there.
It it's uh time.
It's uh timeless.
Now the Sullivan Group has come.
By the way, where are that audit?
Yeah, that's right.
I've been waiting.
I sent special consideration for that audit, and I thought I would have thought that new audit opinion audit be waiting for me when I got back.
But uh no, Clinton Clinton ran on class warfare just like Obama is.
It's what the Democrats do.
Worst economy in the last fifty years was the campaign theme of 1992.
Anyway, the Washington Times.
Employers are facing more uncertainty in the wake of a letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warning them that requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The development also has some people wondering whether the EEOC's advice will result in an educational backlash by creating less of an incentive for some half scrual students to graduate.
The informal discussion letter from the EEOC said an employer's requirement of a high school diploma, along a standard criterion for screening potential employees, must be job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.
The letter was posted on the EEOC's website on December the second.
Employers could run afoul of the Americans with Disabilities Act if their requirement of a high school diploma screens out an individual who's unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the definition of disability.
The EEOC's advice, which at the moment does not carry the force of law, is raising alarms among employment law professionals who say it could carry far-reaching implications for well, no kidding.
You think this is an accident?
Here you have a bunch of Obama liberals at the EEOC who are worried about any difference from person to person to person.
There cannot be any difference.
There cannot be any risk in life.
There cannot be any difference in outcomes.
If anybody has anything more than somebody else, then we are faced with unfairness that must be remedied.
And now requiring an education in order to get a job may be discriminatory against those who simply can't be educated.
And so we define everything down again.
We dumb and define everything down.
This is not accidental.
This is who these people are.
And it's all taking place under the guise of fairness, but what does it do?
Punishes achievement.
And heralds the lack of it.
Creates sympathy for the lack of achievement, excuses the lack of achievement, and then rewards it.
Why?
What purpose could this possibly serve?
It's all about getting votes.
It's all about furthering the whole notion of class envy.
Mary Teresa Metzler, a lawyer with a firm in Philadelphia.
So there may be an unintended and unfortunate repercussion of this decision.
Yeah, there will be less incentive for the general public to obtain a high school diploma if many employers eliminate that requirement for job applicants in their workplace.
You think?
Really, what's your first clue?
So you don't have to have a high school diploma in order to get a job or to get to be hired?
Then why go to high school?
Officials at the EEOC said the letter in question addressed a particular inquiry and disputed that would have repercussions in secondary education.
But some people nevertheless worry that the EEOC's letter could place less emphasis on a diploma in the workplace, but the push in Congress has been in the opposite direction.
House Republicans sought late last year to reform the federal unemployment benefit system by requiring recipients of aid who don't have high school degrees to be enrolled and making satisfactory progress in classes toward a GED.
General education.
So here you have the American left in charge of these bureaucracies doing everything they can to reward below averageness, to herald it, to use a favorite word of theirs to celebrate it.
And of course, the emphasis is on a lack of a diploma, which means lack of knowledge, which means lack of education.
Well, you know, you a degree in anything is discriminatory.
Once you go down this road, the ADA, the Americans with Disabilities Act already is used to include a whole bunch of plain old aberrant behavior and characterize it as a disability, therefore to excuse it.
But it's just more of a country in decline.
It's more of we cannot have high or great expectations of people.
We cannot...
Give them reasons to reach high.
We're going to give them excuses to reach nowhere.
here.
Imagine it's going to end up being discriminatory, unfair to have an education, to have a diploma.
So how do we remedy that?
You tell employers that you cannot have that as a requirement.
And you see what opens up here?
Lawsuits.
Guess who gets to move in here and start suing people left and right if this ever gets actually applied?
It's already in practice.
It's a it's a recommendation, does not carry the force of law.
But I'll tell you what, if you're an average little business and you're already scared to death of the government, and there's a little suggestion on their government website, and the last thing you want is trouble.
What do you do?
Quick timeout.
Much more straight ahead.
El Rushbow, brand new week broadcast excellence on the day of the Hawkeye Hawkeye.
Don't go away.
you Why not just say that?
Why not just say that being unemployed is a disability and then force employers to hire everybody.
Why not just cut straight to the chase here?
Being unemployed is a disability.
The hell with whether you got a degree or not, or a diploma.
Just being unemployed is a disability, force companies to hire everybody.
How soon will it before not being a citizen is considered a disability that cannot be discriminated against.
Don't laugh, folks.
If the EEOC can come out and claim that requiring a high school diploma violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, then certainly requiring citizenship could be said to do the same thing.
Yeah, I have a disability.
What is it?
Well, I'm not a citizen.
Oh, that's right.
You have a terrible disadvantage.
Why you are really being discriminated against.
We're going to move you to the top of the line.
Where does this stuff end?
But there is a silver lining.
If you don't need a diploma, then you don't need to go to school.
And if you don't go to school, then nobody's going to get paid because you're not there.
And then you're not going to be eating school lunch.
I know they'll come get you.
Yeah, come get you.
You're gonna have to be there when you graduate, whether you get a diploma won't matter, but you are gonna have to go.
It's all about the money, it's not about what people are learning.
In fact, it's what about it's about what they're not learning.
Here is Elizabeth in St. Louis.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi there.
Happy New Year, Rush.
Same to you.
I was calling because when you were talking about Newt and how you predicted on December 9th that he would implode.
I remember that show.
I remember you saying that.
And for me it happened.
I'm not sure when Newt actually said this, but I swear it was, you know, the second day he was up in the polls, he said, Well, clearly I am going to be the nominee.
I think it's clear to everybody.
And and the minute I heard him say that, I thought, oh my gosh, you have just jinxed it.
You've just got to Yeah, I remember that.
Yeah.
That's a good point.
Let me say I know Newt.
Let me say what Newt was doing there.
Uh-huh.
Newt was simply trying to instill confidence in his supporters.
He was trying to be positive.
He it comes across in a way he doesn't intend.
This is this is the uh uh the blind spot or the uh whatever however you want to characterize it.
But going out and saying, I I remember I I um I'll tell you a little story.
This goes back over a year.
I had breakfast with Newt and some other people before he announced, but he told us he was gonna announce.
And he said, Oh, yeah, I'm I'm a here's how I'm gonna win.
I'm gonna this thing's gonna be over about a week after I announce.
Because everybody's gonna realize that once I get going, they don't have a prayer.
So I'll be out I'm gonna take Romney out this way, I'm gonna do this, I'm gonna do that, I'm gonna do it over there, it's gonna happen.
Yeah, that's one real obstacle, I forget what he said it's gonna be, uh, and I'll take care of that.
And and that this is he in about 20 minutes told us all how he was gonna be the nominee.
Yeah.
Well, uh, you know, I take your word for it because it it I just cringed when you're Well, I've got no reason to make that up.
Uh and or anything else.
But uh he would And what he was doing, a lot of people mistaked this for arrogant ego out of control.
That's that's really not what it is with him, at least in this instance, saying, okay, I'm on the nominee.
He's he's trying to be positive.
He's trying to be uh uh certain.
He's trying to give people uh uh something to latch on to.
He doesn't want to be squishy, squiggly, uncertain, unsure.
This is how he chooses to do it.
Right.
I had one other comment about Iowa.
Yeah.
I think my biggest takeaway from the caucus process is that Obama is not gonna win Iowa.
He's not he's not gonna win that state.
Iowa is not gonna go for him again.
You mean in the caucus?
No, in the election.
I was gonna say he's unopposed in the caucus.
Obama is not going to take the state of Iowa.
There are a lot of states that Obama won in 08 that he's not gonna win, and then they know it.
There are a lot of them.
Yeah.
I think you're right about about Iowa.
I look at I don't want to pull a new here and predict a 49-state landslide for whoever the Republican is.
But I'm in a sane world, this guy wouldn't even be running for re-election.
The Democrats would have found somebody else and a polite way to get rid of him.
He's destroying the country and the party in a sane world.
The problem is the Democrat Party's not sane.
The Democrat Party has gone off the cliff extremist liberal.
And Obama is their dream candidate.
And what he wants to do is their, I mean, this is not Lyndon Johnson's Democrat Party.
It is not John Kennedy's Democrat Party.
I mean, it's not even Woodrow Wilson's party.
And that's saying something.
This is more like Anastash Mikoyan's party.
And and and but in a sane world, somebody who's done this, somebody whose policies have done look at the value of people's homes, their jobs, the debt, uh people's queasiness over the future.
For the first time, parents really think their parents their kids are not going to do as well as their parents have done.
Parents are looking to the future and seeing their kids not leaving home until they're 35 or 40.
Uh in a sane political world where you had a media that just two days of a week was fair.
Just two days a week with the proper reporting analysis and perspective of this country versus or vis-a-vis the policies of this administration wouldn't have a chair, a prayer, wouldn't have a chance in the real world, in a say we're not, we don't live in one right now.
There's nothing sane about the American political system.
There's nothing sane about the uh about the media and its uh reporting of these things, as we all know.
But uh it's I I can't, I'm I'm I'm I'm 60.
There hasn't been this kind of destruction of our nation and its fabric in my lifetime, closest to Jimmy Carter, and Jimmy Carter was swept out in a 49-state landslide in a sane world, but nobody knew that that was gonna happen until election day.
The polls never indicated a 49-state landslide.
They never did.
That's why I'm constantly imploring people to work hard and not get caught up in the daily conventional wisdom of media.
The daily reporting, the the way the table is set every day, the the stories that are focused on, talked about, reported on, discussed, none of it's real.
The real world doesn't get reported on.
The thinking of real Americans does not get reflected until they vote, and you wait.
You just wait.
I don't mean the hawk, then it's a tantrum.
It's exactly what this is a tantrum, and it's a bunch of immature kids.
Children had a tantrum, so forth and so on.
That was a Peter Jennings.
That's how he described um the the House victory in 1994.
Exactly right.
A tantrum.
Got a brief timeout.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
So Rupert Murdoch signs up for Twitter.
And the first tweet, I think it's the first tweet he sends out, announces his support for Santorum.
And Santorum's the only guy who has everything necessary to get this country back in the right direction.
And the next thing that happens is that Rupert's wife gets on there and says, eh, well, you know, Rupert likes to have a lot of fun here on Twitter.
Rupert Murdoch tweeting.
I tried to have someone explain this to me over the week.
I still never mind.
▲
Export Selection