All Episodes
Previous Next
March 12, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:58
March 12, 2012, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Yes, America's anchorman is away today, and this is your undocumented anchorman, Mark Stein, just another foreign mercenary in the Republican Party's war on women.
I've been down in Australia, Australia, for the last few weeks.
Anything happen around here while I was away, HR?
No, no, no.
Okay, no, it just seems like kind of odd.
I turned up this morning and the building was surrounded by a huge picket line of members of local 47 of the Amalgamated Union of Substitute Hosts.
Mark Belling, Mark Davis, Mark Foley, all there all wearing giant condoms for some reason and demanding that I disassociate myself from associating myself or whatever it was.
Anyway, Rush has suspended himself for the day, but he will be back.
He will be.
It's just a temporary suspension.
But he will be back tomorrow.
And it's a golf suspension.
Oh, come on, HR.
He can't still have enough people still willing to associate himself to make up a round of golf.
That's absolutely absurd.
He's golfing.
Actually, Obama, he always golfs alone, doesn't he?
He golfs last, who golfs alone.
But Rush is golfing today during his suspension of himself, but he will be back here tomorrow live to associate with himself, live for three hours of true non-substitute host excellence in broadcasting.
But this, in the meantime, this is your foreign mercenary in the Republican Party's war on women, and we will try to keep today's show a contraceptive-free zone.
No contraceptives need be involved in the making of this radio, in the radio broadcast.
So if you pick up anything from the show, it's because we're flying completely without protection for the next three hours.
So you may be at risk of catching something nasty from this pure, undiluted right-wing hate speech coming to you all the way for the next three hours.
You know, the odd thing about the so-called Republican War on Women is that the state-run media keep telling us that it's a great gift to President Obama and has made him a shoe-in for re-election.
Yet, oddly enough, what do we find?
From this morning's Washington Post ABC News poll, Obama's approval rating is 46%.
His disapproval rating is 50%.
50%.
When it hits that magic number, generally speaking, as incumbent congressmen and senators know, if you hit the 50% disapproval rating in the run-up to Election Day, you're pretty much done for.
But oddly enough, despite the Republicans handing him all this gold in this gift of the war on women, Obama's disapproval rating is 50%.
57% of those famously sensitive and nuanced independents disapprove of the president.
57%.
In other words, the guys who determine the result of the election, 57% of them disapprove of the president.
65% of poll respondents disapprove of Obama's handling of gas prices.
Now, I think that's unfair, actually, because I don't know what there is to disapprove of in his handling of gas prices.
He actually hasn't done anything about it at all.
But 65% of poll respondents disapprove of Obama's handling of gas prices.
50% general disapproval rating.
59% Disapprove of his handling of the economy.
You are going to need a ton of contraceptives to bury those numbers.
The energy situation, the gas prices, that's not going to get any better, by the way.
You know, what's the point of this slight improvement in the jobs numbers if you're paying $4 a gas to drive an hour to a low-paying job?
This is an interesting Associated Press story.
Unions may be united in working to re-elect President Barack Obama, but their leaders also are trying to repair bitter divisions over his rejection of an oil pipeline from Canada to Texas.
This is the Keystone pipeline that's going to bring all this Canadian oil down through the United States.
Now, oddly enough, it's all going to be going from Alberta.
Instead of going from Alberta to Texas, it's going to be going from Alberta to Vancouver and on big containers all the way over to the Chinese.
That's ingenious.
After the White House blocked the pipeline in January, Laborers' Union President Terry O'Sullivan said he was, quote, repulsed by some of our supposed brothers and sisters lining up with job killers like the Sierra Club and the National Resources Defense Council to destroy the lives of working men and women, unquote.
Get used to it, Laborers' Union President Terry O'Sullivan, because the modern-day Democratic Party is a job killer.
It's not like the Sierra Club.
It is the Sierra Club.
It views the United States of America.
It views the United States government as a giant Sierra Club, as a kind of non-profit that is there to promote good causes and is entirely disconnected from anything so vulgar as genuine wealth creation.
But an interesting difference of opinion opening up between unions and the president.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Stein in Farash.
We're going to talk about that and all the rest of the day's news.
There are so many wonderful health care innovations around at the moment.
You know, that's really what this whole business has been with the birth control debate, is that it's something you need.
It has an impact on your health, and therefore the government should mandate it.
In the Wall Street Journal this morning, Alicia Finley has a wonderful open letter of other essential benefits that she thinks that government healthcare mandates should impose on employers.
Fitness club memberships.
Most doctors agree that exercising is one of the best ways to prevent disease.
However, gym memberships can run between $240 and $1,800 per year.
Such high prices force us to choose between exercising and buying groceries.
Why not require employers to pay for workers' gym memberships?
Coffee.
Studies show that coffee can ward off depression, Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes, and sleepiness, which makes it one of the most powerful preventive treatments.
Why shouldn't employers be required to cover coffee consumption of their employees?
And I think that's an interesting point.
Going back to this Georgetown University business, some students group and George and Georgetown, the ones who are advocating for all this free birth control.
I love the way they put it.
They say that Georgetown discriminates between its faculty and its employees and the students, and that it covers the faculty, it covers the employees, covers the janitors, but it doesn't cover the students.
And that's true.
That's like complaining when you go to check in at the Hilton Hotel that the Hilton's healthcare plan covers the bell hops and covers the room service delivery made and covers the janitor, but it doesn't cover the guests.
That's true.
That's true.
It is utterly discriminatory.
I agree with those guys.
I think when you check into a Hilton, you check into a Comfort Inn, you check into the Econo Lodge, you should be covered by their healthcare plan.
Where will all these healthcare innovations get us?
There was a story you may have seen in psychopharmacology recently.
I don't know how many of you read psychopharmacology.
I only buy it for the pin-ups.
But it was propranolol reduces implicit negative racial bias.
They found a pill that can cure you of being a racist.
It's an amazing thing.
It's a common, a common, well, I think it's a white pill.
I think actually.
It's a white pill, Mike, but it will cure you of, despite that, it's a non-racist white pill.
And it will cure you of being a it will cure you of being a racist.
I think this should definitely be covered.
Employers should have a responsibility to put this in their employees' water cooler so that we eliminate racism among across the fruited plane.
If we put this in, if employers are mandated to cover this pill, which is called, what is it called again?
Propranolol, propranolol, and it reduces inbuilt racism.
These are just the headlines.
And I like this one left-wing website who says, this pill should be mandatory for all right-wing Republicans, teabags, Ku Klux Klan, people who hate the immigrants and want them deported.
Let's put propanolol in the water supply and stamp out the ugliness of Republicanism forever.
Stop being so paranoid and take a chill pill.
I think they're putting it in the water.
Are they already putting it in the water?
Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I feel less racist right now than I usually do.
Are they already putting it in the water?
Anyway, this is just the kind of medical innovation.
It was developed by a Scottish scientist called Black.
So even if the pill is white, even if the pill is white, the man who invented it is called black.
It targets brain areas that regulate fear.
So you see, you racist Republicans and Tea Party types out there, you might just be paranoid and fearful, irrationally fearful about all the good work that President Obama is doing.
But just take these pills a couple of times a day and you'll soon be feeling great.
Implicit, by the way, implicit racial bias can occur even in people with a sincere belief in equality.
So just because you think you're not racist doesn't mean you don't need the pill.
I certainly think, I certainly hope, I certainly hope the president can manage Kathleen Sebelius, Commissar Sebelius.
I certainly hope Commissar Sebelius will be able to get a government regulation mandating, mandating that employers all cover the non-racist pill in their healthcare plans.
I think, by the way, Jim Goad on the internet, I'm not sure what website this comes from, but Jim Goad has a great line on this.
As a friend of mine asked, what's next?
An enema that cures homophobia.
They're working on it.
They're working on it.
1-800-282-2882-Mark Stein Infra Rush.
We're talking about all the news of the day.
We're going to try and remain a contraceptive-free zone.
I know that's impossible in America.
In America, everyone's.
It's all about contraception now, all the time.
Catholic Church is basically just one giant condom dispenser now.
But we're going to try and keep it a contraceptive-free zone for the rest of the show and talk about Obama's 50% disapproval number.
We'll also talk about this dismal turn in what is already a pathetic and sad dribbling away of the Afghan campaign.
This U.S. soldier who killed a dozen civilians in outlying parts of Kandahar province over the weekend.
And we will talk about all the rest of the day's news, too.
1-800-282-2882, Mark Stein in for Rush.
More straight ahead.
Mark Stein in for Rush on the EIB net.
Well, okay, okay.
One more contraceptive thing.
This over the weekend from CBS Detroit, man shot at Detroit gas station reportedly over price of condoms.
A man was shot and killed Friday night after an apparent dispute over the price of condoms at a Detroit gas station.
WWJ's Beth Fisher spoke to an employee at the BP gas station on Fenkel and Myers, where the shooting took place.
The employee said the argument was apparently over the price of a box of condoms.
He said the customer bought a box of condoms but made a comment that he was overcharged and could have bought them somewhere else for a cheaper price.
After being told he couldn't get a refund, the customer allegedly began tossing items off the shelves.
That's when, according to the employee, the overnight clerk came out with a gun and fired a warning shot which struck the customer in the shoulder.
Police say the customer was taken to a local hospital where he later died from his injuries.
Ron Scott with the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality say they are working on conflict resolution between gas station owners and Detroiters.
Something they will be discussing at a meeting on Sunday.
This is why we need government mandates for contraceptives, folks.
They are killing them.
They are killing each other over condoms at a Detroit gas station.
BP, by the way, that's British Petroleum.
They don't use that anymore, though.
Remember their ads, Beyond Petroleum.
And then after they had the troubles with the Gulf, the big spill in the Gulf, and they were the bogeyman, the preferred bogeyman of the Obama administration for a while.
By the way, British Petroleum were basically Obama's and the Democratic Party's preferred oil company.
They were massive donors to the Democratic Party.
They were on board with all the environmental climate change nonsense.
They basically had the same relationship.
BP had the same relationship with the Democratic Party that Total FINA Elf, the French oil company, had with Saddam Hussein.
And a fat lot of good it did them because when it came time for Obama to toss them under the bus, he did it gleefully.
So they were British Petroleum and then they started, they turned their logo into a daisy or whatever it's meant to be and became Beyond Petroleum.
And today they've just announced a $7 billion settlement with people in the Gulf region.
So they were, what were they, British Petroleum Beyond Petroleum, now BP Big Payout.
Although if you're buying condoms at a Detroit gas station, it's BP Better Protection.
Anyway, they've got problems at both ends now.
They've got problems in the Gulf with massive payouts and they've got problems with BP gas station nightclerks shooting people over condoms.
This is why we need a government man to stop the senseless killing, folks.
This is why we need the government to take over the supply of contraceptives.
Maybe this is just the rumors that the Republican Party are going to prevent you having sex when they take power.
When they come to power, they're not going to let you have any sex.
And that's why there's already a rush on condoms at Detroit gas stations.
But that's the way it looks in Detroit.
They're killing each other over condoms in Detroit.
Now, what's the bigger picture here?
1-800-282-2882, Mark's time for Rush.
What's the bigger picture?
I was thinking about all this, and I remembered a piece I'd read that somebody sent me by an Indian professor, Professor Vyadhyanathan, who's a professor in Bangalore in India.
And he says that he puts really what's happening with this whole sort of attitude with contraceptives and healthcare mandates and all the rest of it in the kind of broader context.
He looks at the declining weakness, the ongrowing weakness of the West.
In 1990, the G7 was responsible for 51% of global GDP, and the emerging nations were responsible, that's China, India, and so forth, were responsible for about 36%.
In 2011, that is precisely reversed.
In other words, in 20 years, the G7's share of global GDP and the emerging nations like China and India and so forth have reversed.
And he says the crisis faced by the West is primarily because of a six-letter word called family.
The West has nationalized families over the last 60 years.
Old age, ill health, single motherhood, everything is the responsibility of the state.
Now, this guy, by the way, he's a professor in India and he's got a touch of sort of post-imperial chippiness about him.
He's not anybody's idea of a right-winger.
He'd be the kind of guy liberals would love.
If he popped up on national public radio or PBS, liberals would love this guy.
He's not in any sense right-wing.
He's making a very simple point here.
The West has nationalized families over the last 60 years.
Old age, ill health, single motherhood, everything is the responsibility of the state.
And when family, when that's the case, why do you need to save?
That's why household savings, America was the biggest saver.
American families were the biggest savers on the planet in 1980.
Now they're the biggest debtors.
Household savings are negative in the U.S. Total debt to GDP ratio is up to 400% in many Western nations.
The fact is the West is facing a total demographic crisis.
Its population is aging.
It was responsible at one point for 25% of global population.
Now it's down to 11% and expected to shrink to 3% in another 20 years.
This Indian professor says Europe is going to disappear from the world map unless migrants from Africa and Asia take it over.
And he puts it down to a single thing, the nationalization of the family.
Once upon a time, governments nationalized industries.
Now they've nationalized us.
Yes, Rush is away today.
Suspended himself for the day.
He's off playing golf, but he will return live tomorrow at 12 noon Eastern.
This is Mark Stein, a mere foreign mercenary in the Republican Party's war against women.
The war against women.
I love it.
I rappelled into an IUD factory and blew it up this morning just on the way to work, just to make me feel good.
The war against women.
Let us go to, let us go to Brent in Charleston, West Virginia.
Brent, you're live on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Great to have you with us.
It's a pleasure to talk to you, Mr. Stein.
I'm calling about the fuel prices.
We are, I am sinking, the middle class and everybody's sinking because of the fuel prices.
The president told us when he'd run, he'd bring the prices of fuel down.
It never even happened.
He didn't even look at it.
Look what his policy has done.
Wait a minute.
Just a minute, Brent.
When did he say he was going to bring gas prices down?
I don't remember him saying that.
He said that.
He was running against George Bush on his election.
They were complaining about fuel prices back then, and he said he'd bring fuel prices down, energy prices down.
I see nothing but everything.
My power bill, my gas bills almost tripled, and I don't see no end in sight.
Well, here's the bad news, Brent.
Stephen Chu, who is the energy secretary in the Obama administration, he came into office saying that we have to, this is a quote, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe, unquote.
So if you don't like gas at $4 a gallon, the goal of Stephen Chu, the Obama energy secretary, is to double them or triple them.
He's thinking of $8, $10, $12 a gallon like the guys pay over in Europe.
Totally ridiculous.
He will not win this re-election on the gas prices alone.
It is sinking the American people.
We can't afford it.
Hey, well, here's another thing.
I'm just riffling through my file of Obama nonsense from 2008.
And here's what he said in 2008.
He said that people were angry about the rapid increase in prices as opposed to the price themselves.
And that what he was in favor of would be a more, quote, gradual adjustment to the present cost.
So whether he wants, it may be the case that his energy secretary wants you to pay $10 a gallon for gas, but Obama, Obama's position is that he's in favor of getting it up to $4, $5, $6, $7, $8 a gallon, but he just thinks it should creep up slowly as opposed to happening, say, in the few months before an election here.
And so that's the point.
This guy, this is the Brent, there's nothing difficult here.
He's not in favor of a buck fifty gas.
Do you remember it's not so long ago that gas was a buck fifty?
Remember that, Brent?
When I was growing up, it was 50 cents a gallon when I lived in Alabama.
And then we had the gas wars, and they were going to doing this energy thing, and I never saw anything happen around it.
Well, you don't have to go, you don't have to go back to when it was 50 cents a gallon in your childhood, because it was like a buck fifty within the last decade, a decade, you know, whatever it was just before 9-11 or so.
It wasn't that high.
Because of the whole environmental business, Obama and Stephen Chu and all the clever people think you are driving around too much.
What are you driving, Brent?
I'm driving around in a Sonata.
In a what?
A Honda Sonata.
Okay, what is that?
It's a Korean-built car.
Right, okay.
So you're not driving around like in the big BMW that Stephen Chu, the energy secretary.
Well, the Energy Secretary's wife drives around in a BMW.
I'm not going to believe it.
I can believe that.
So, anything's better for them is the top of the line for us now.
Well, that's the thing, is that they think that she should be allowed, the energy secretary thinks that his wife should drive around in a BMW, but all you guys should be in a thing that's the size of the cup holder in the average American pickup truck.
You should be driving around, instead of driving around in a Chevy Silverado, you should be driving around in a Chevy cup holder, a tiny little thing like they drive around in Europe.
And better yet, you shouldn't even be in that little car.
You should be on the high-speed Joe Biden Memorial High-Speed Rail Link, or you should be on a municipal bus.
And the reason for this is to save the planet.
And of course, it's not to save the planet.
It's essentially a means of control.
That freedom of movement is fine in theory when it's Mrs. Stephen Chu driving around in her BMW.
But if you just let everybody do it, if you let Brent in Charleston, West Virginia go around with freedom of movement, there goes the neighborhood.
And so there's nothing, the idea that Obama is in favor of gas prices being $1.50 a gallon again is ridiculous.
$4 for him and Stephen Chu is where it's going to be, is a good place for it to be.
He'd be happy for it to be $6, $8, $10.
They're not bothered about this.
What difference does it make to the governing class?
Obama has a 40-car motorcade that accompanies him when he goes around in his ridiculous Canadian weaponized bus when he pretends to visit some small town out on the prairie.
And on either side of the Canadian weaponized bus are 20 vehicles full of Secret Service agents, and they're all paying $4 a gallon.
He doesn't care because Brent in Charleston, West Virginia picks up the tab for that.
So he has no plans to lower gas prices.
He's not bothered about gas prices.
As I said, the government of the United States now thinks of itself as the Sierra Club.
It thinks of itself as a kind of non-profit that can afford to maintain the United States as some kind of theme park.
So we don't need to have any unsightly oil rigs off our shores or in the Arctic National, what's it called, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, home to the world's most pristine mosquito breeding grounds.
We don't need to disturb that by having anything so vulgar as oil exploration.
We don't even need, even if the oil comes from elsewhere, even if it comes from Alberta, north of the border, we don't need to have some unsightly underground pipeline that nobody can even see.
But even just the thought, and the country is crisscrossed with pipelines anyway, but just the thought, the thought of that brand new pipeline having all that beastly horrible energy in it running down from Alberta to Texas, just the thought of that is so offensive, is so offensive to environmentalists who care about the planet that they would rather that it was put on big container ships and all that oil went across the Pacific Ocean to China, which, by the way,
is far more damaging to the planet than just putting it in a pipeline and sending it from Alberta to Texas.
And by the way, all the oil that has to come from the Middle East by container ship to the United States, instead of that oil coming from Alberta to Texas, that too is more damaging to the planet.
The whole point, I thought, of environmentalism was to think globally but act locally.
They've acted locally, but nobody's thinking globally because the net result of Obama's pandering to the Sierra Club on the pipeline ban is that it actually is worse for the environment if you think of the planetary environment, which environmentalists are meant to.
So, if it's all about saving the planet, Obama's pipeline ban actually makes the planet worse.
He's destroying the planet.
The great savior, the man who promised to lower the oceans, the oceans are roiling with container ships taking all the oil from Vancouver over to China and all the oil from the Middle East over to the United States.
He's actually destroying the planet.
The great savior of the planet in pandering to the Sierra Club has made the planet's environment worse because it's about with liberals, it's always about the ideological pose.
The practical result of it is always entirely irrelevant.
Thanks for your call, Brent.
Great to have you with us on the show.
Mark Stein in for Rush 1-800-282-2882.
Rush has suspended himself, but he will return on the EIB network tomorrow.
Mark Stein in for us on the EIB network.
Let's go to Barbara in Avon, Connecticut.
What a mellifluous-sounding town.
Hello, Mars.
An Avon lady from whereabouts in Connecticut is Avon, Connecticut?
About 20 minutes west of Hartford.
Okay, very, very nice.
And great to have you with us on the show today, Barbara.
What's on your mind?
Mark.
Well, during the Nixon administration, wasn't the Department of Energy put together then?
Isn't that when it got started?
I think the Department of Energy actually is one of the malign legacies of the Carter administration.
I think he founded it after the whole business with the 1973 oil spike in prices and all that.
I remember waiting at the pumps for many hours.
But I think that we've spent billions of dollars on that department and they've done nothing.
No.
I think they should all be fired.
Well, but that depends on what you think the point of them is.
The point of the Department of Energy, which, as I said, is a Carter administration invention, is not to enable America to become booming in energy.
The idea of the Department of Energy isn't that it should preside over oil licenses offshore in the waters of the United States or opening up the mosquito breeding grounds in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
That's not the idea of it.
The Department of Energy is designed to constrain and regulate and depress and shrink and shrivel the opportunity.
That's why you create a government department.
It's Mrs. Thatcher's famous line when I can't remember what it was now about some problem or other.
And a cabinet minister suggested they create a cabinet department to deal with it.
And she said, no, no, if we do that, we'll never be rid of it.
And she's quite right.
The Department of Energy was created by Jimmy Carter in Malaysia mode as a means of managing American decline.
It's a complete waste of time.
The Republican Party has been pledged to abolish it for over 30 years now.
And even this stupid, pointless little rinky-dink nothing department that is entirely irrelevant has not been abolished by the Republican Party, which is not encouraging when it comes to driving a stake through Obamacare as needs to be done after the next election, Barbara.
Right.
So the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does something different from the Department of Energy.
They regulate in a different way because they regulated me.
They stopped me from generating hydropower and told me I would go to jail.
Really?
Where were you generating hydropower in Connecticut?
Yes, on the Farmington River.
Really?
And they and they said and they said that's within the jurisdiction of a federal body that's that said you would go to jail if you were to if you were to use the.
Yeah, you know, that's fascinating, because like my little town in New Hampshire, the only reason it exists is because there's a stream running through the little village.
And when people came here, they thought, wow, there's a stream here so we can run sawmills.
That was the Industrial Revolution.
Yeah, and you had all these little...
You don't need, actually, a terribly big stream in order to run a small sawmill.
So in this rather miserable and pathetic little book of mine, they had these little mills all along the river, and that's how the village grew, the village grew up.
And now, of course, as you say, there's some federal regulatory authority that will threaten to put you in jail if you were to do anything like that again.
So in other words, if we'd had these bodies around 200 years ago, there would have been no United States because you wouldn't have been able to go and you wouldn't have been able to go into the hills and mountains and the Great Beyond and the frontier and settle them and do stuff there because the federal regulatory authority would say, no, you can't do that.
Whatever you want to do, we're going to shut you down about it.
You're right about that, Barbara.
I believe that might be...
How long ago was this that you were told you couldn't do this?
It was in the 80s, the 70s, 70s, and the 80s, all through the 80s.
And we did everything they told us to do.
We spent about $140,000 putting together a license application, which once it's submitted can be copied by anybody in the country, and they can then submit a license application.
Right, right.
This is the amount.
You can't get a license on your property.
But you know, Barbara, that's where you went wrong.
You should have done what the Keystone Pipeline guys, this Trans-Canada, the Canadian company did.
They spent, I don't think it was $140,000.
They spent closer to $14 million on paperwork, and they still didn't get it.
So that's the whole point of that stuff.
No matter how much you spend to jump through the hoops, they can always come up with one last hoop and prevent you from doing it.
Thanks for your call, Barbara.
You know, that's actually a very good point she makes.
The whole point about the Department of Energy is not.
It was created in the wake of the oil crisis of 1973, when the OPEC boys decided, boom, we're going to bring the West to its knees.
And so if the Department of Energy, if Carter had had any sense in his response when he became president in early 1977 to that oil crisis, if it had really been intended to ensure that the United States would never be vulnerable to anything like the 1973 oil crisis ever again, then obviously we would be drilling everywhere.
But all Obama says, all Obama says is we can't just drill our way out of this.
Obama is the hand-wringer par excellence.
When you ask him about oil prices, the only thing he says is, oh, we can't just drill our way out of this.
There's nothing we can do.
There's nothing he can do.
He says it's foolish to think you can drill your way out of this.
Nobody's asking him to drill your way out of this.
All he was being asked to do with the pipeline is pipeline your way out of this.
But he won't even let that happen.
It doesn't matter what it is.
It doesn't matter whether it's oil, gas, doesn't matter whether it's nuclear energy, doesn't matter whether it's electricity.
They want to regulate you into smaller, meaner, more cramped, more restricted lives.
To go back to what Brent was saying, driving around, it's about restricting your horizons and your ability to live your life to its fullest potential.
The Department of Energy does not exist to enable the United States to become energy independent.
It exists to manage and regulate and shrivel the American spirit into smaller, meaner, shrunken lives.
Markstein for Rush, more straight ahead.
Hey, it's a boogie wonderland on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Occupy Wall Street is running out of money and says it only has enough funds left.
It says it will be broke in three weeks.
It will need a corporate bailout in three weeks.
It's down to its $45,000, last $45,000.
This is an organization which, within a couple of days of setting up camp at Wall Street last September, had raised over half a million dollars.
It had the support of Ben and Jerry, the hippy-dippy Vermont Ice Cream Makers, and wholly owned subsidiary of the Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever.
All these groups who supported it, they have had hundreds of thousands of dollars Occupy Wall Street.
It has gone and left no trace.
▲
Export Selection