All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 2, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:49
August 2, 2012, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, then let me clear it up.
People are confused.
I just said before the break, Harry Reid would not be the focus of a felony investigation.
The felony issue applies to the leaker.
The felony issue applies to who it is talking to Harry Reid, this imaginary guy from Bain Capital that Harry Reid says is calling him.
The felony issue applies to the leaker.
And the reason for an investigation, the reason for an interview of Harry Reid is to determine the identity of the leaker.
That's who's breaking the law, and Harry Reid's facilitating it.
And then, in the course of that investigation, were it to happen, now you and I know it's not going to happen, but were it to happen, if while interviewed by the FBI and the IRS, and even if not under oath, if Harry Reid lied about this, then he is subject to a 1001 prosecution.
It's not perjury, but it's lying to a federal investigator.
And you say Martha Stewart.
A process crime.
Now, it's never going to happen, but this is a way to call Harry Reid's bluff.
Either he's lying to the American people now, or he has information that federal investigators might find useful.
It's one of the two things.
He's either lying that somebody from Bain Capital called him and said Romney hadn't paid taxes in 10 years, or somebody's out there breaking the law.
Somebody is out there potentially committing a felony.
And Harry Reid knows who it is.
But see, I don't know who it is.
I just answered the phone.
But the point here, folks, would be to call Harry Reid's bluff on this.
I thought we played the parodies and we've given you history.
This is a page out of their playbook.
This is what they do.
They run around, they make all these wild allegations with no evidence whatsoever.
Then they demand that whoever it is they're alleging all this lawlessness confirm that they didn't do it.
Essentially go out, prove a negative.
Anyway, welcome back.
Great to have you here.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB network as the fastest week in media rolls right on.
Let's stick with the media.
I got a piece here by Roger Simon in the Politico.
And I know, folks, it gets tiresome talking about the bias of the media.
But this goes beyond media bias.
Now, we're into, I think, what is genuine media corruption now.
With what these, who was it?
It might have been John O'Sullivan writing at National Review.
I'm not certain.
But he called these guys running around asking Romney questions while he was at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Poland hecklers, not journalists.
And whoever said that, whoever came up with that characterization is dead on right.
The media has become a bunch of hecklers.
They're not journalists seeking information.
They're not asking questions that are on the minds of the American people.
They're seeking to trip Romney up.
And so this trip, the foreign trip, the words out, the reporting on this is that it was a debacle.
And it was a gaffe-prone mistake.
And Romney shouldn't have never gone on that trip.
Never, ever.
He shouldn't have left the country.
Shouldn't have gone to Great Britain.
Shouldn't have gone to Israel.
Shouldn't have gone to Poland.
He stepped on himself every time he opened his mouth, one gaffe after another.
That's the template, and that's what they're reporting.
And it doesn't matter what happens.
So it goes beyond media bias, even though even for me, it gets tiresome talking about this.
And who knows, it may get tiresome for you to listen to.
But now and then an article comes along that is perfectly illustrative of the game and shows their mindset.
And that's what this is from Roger Simon today.
Now, Roger Simon is called Politico's chief political columnist.
And I suppose they call him that so as to allow him to write opinion as a news story.
But I think everything in the Politico is an opinion piece anyway.
But this piece here is not journalism.
It's not even thoughtful punditry.
It is the ravings of an adolescent and hysterical Obama fan who is beside himself.
They can't figure out why they haven't put Romney away yet.
They also can't figure out why Obama isn't up 70 to 30.
Although, I do have a soundbite coming up from F. Chuck Todd, who himself is surprised that Obama's still leading.
Well, that's what it's F. Chuck.
Let me find it here.
Let's see.
Number 14.
Yeah, he doesn't understand.
We may as well play.
It was on Charlie Rose last night, and Charlie Rose said, look, there's this notion that the president has more empathy.
People who are polled care more about them.
I mean, that's something from my own political observation.
It goes to the heart of likability, which is always a factor.
People out there, F. Chuck, they just like Obama.
What about that?
Sometimes I look at this political landscape, the economic landscape, and I say, how is the president ahead?
And so I actually look at this.
I always ask another question to try to figure out what's wrong here with Romney.
Why isn't Mitt Romney already ahead?
And the fact is, I keep coming back to a couple things.
One, he's not ahead because I think that he hasn't articulated who he is, and he's losing this values argument to Obama.
But the second thing, which we haven't brought up yet, but I want to get to, is I actually think that the Republican brand is still a mess with the middle of the American public, the independents and the sort of center-right, center-left folks who might be persuadable.
And that is serving as more of a drag on Romney than I think any of us talk about.
What in the, will you talk about Convoluted losing the values argument to Obama?
He says that the night of the Chick-fil-A event.
Losing the values argument to Obama.
And the Republican brand is a mess with the middle, the American, the independents.
Has he seen the polling data on independence?
Is he looking at polls outside his own corrupt poll with the Wall Street Journal?
Romney probably is ahead.
They've thrown everything at Romney.
They have spent so much, they've spent more than they've raised.
Obama is nothing.
He's not even president of the United States, right?
He's not even a celebrity of the U.S.
He is the fundraiser in chief.
That's all he's doing.
And they can't put Romney away with the best stuff in their arsenal.
I'll tell you what this is all about.
I'll tell you why people are confused.
Genuine, open-minded people.
I'll tell you why they're confused.
There was another piece on this today by Victor Davis Hansen at National Review.
It's what we, it's about cutting-edge stuff here.
We talked about three weeks ago on this program: why the economy is not the dominant political factor that it traditionally always has been.
If the economy were as traditional, if it were just as big a factor as it was in 1992, Obama would be toasted.
And so people are starting to ask themselves: wait a minute now, this economy, Forbes magazine, worst recovery since the Depression.
Forbes magazine, a guy has a piece out that refer, yeah, Obama wins the goal for worst economic recovery ever.
Now, in the midst of the worst economic recovery ever, how is Obama still in the game?
And it's because of one of two things: either the American people have just thrown in the towel and have accepted that this is the new norm, or else all the polling data on this is skewed.
And it could be a combination of the two.
But we do know the polling data is skewed.
We do know that every poll out there, other than Rasmussen, is oversampling Democrats, every one of them.
We know that these people on the Democrat side are lying to themselves with their polls about how well Obama is doing.
Now, I think this Roger Simon piece, again, is illustrative of the panic.
Remember the template?
Romney, gaffe after gaffe after gaffe.
Listen to this.
Title of this piece, Mitt Romney Needs a Running Mate to Replace Flop.
Mitt Romney needs to announce his choice for VP quickly, very quickly, like within the hour.
It doesn't matter who he chooses.
Anybody will do, even Sarah Palin.
Hell, even Todd Palin.
Why?
Because Romney needs to change the narrative, the conversation, the buzz, the impression left by his recent foreign trip that he can't chew gum and chew gum at the same time.
A few days ago, I called Romney's trip a disaster.
I'd like to apologize.
It was a disaster wrapped in a debacle inside a calamity.
This is front-page political stuff here.
You notice, you notice how this guy, Simon, is harping on the Palin family.
This is no accident.
It's Freudian.
He and the rest of the news media are trying to do to Romney what they did to Sarah Palin.
But this piece is instructive in two ways.
It shows the agenda at work behind the media's invention of Romney's overseas gaffes, and it shows the mindset at work at the Politico.
He says here, the press is being attacked for making too much of Romney's gaffes, but why should we ignore what actually comes out of a candidate's mouth when he's forced to think?
Should we instead cover only the speeches meticulously crafted by his staff or the TV ads in which every frame is painstakingly edited and often focus grouped in advance?
He goes on to talk about this was the most embarrassing trip.
Romney should not even be showing his face.
That's how bad the trip was.
One gaffe after another.
And it's so bad, Romney better pick a VP right now and take all the focus off himself.
The worst thing he can do is keep the focus on him.
If he doesn't get the focus off himself, it's over.
Now, folks, I know that you in this audience are above average informed, above average IQ, above average aware.
Does any of this ring a bell?
Do any of you, Before I read this, any of you think that Romney's trip was a disaster?
A disaster of epic proportions?
So bad that even naming Todd Palin as his VP is something that would be helpful?
Once again, ladies and gentlemen, they're telling us who they are, telling us more about them and their level of panic than they are about Romney or about us.
Now, companion piece, Washington Times by Dr. Milton Wolfe.
Does that name ring a bell, Dr. Milton Wolf?
He's a Washington Times columnist.
He's a radiologist and President Obama's cousin.
And the title of his piece is, I'll say it, President Mitt Romney.
Conservatives' growing enthusiasm is palpable and deserved.
Let me read you just a couple things from this.
During the frenzied slugfest days of the Republican primary season, even conservatives who were skeptical of Romney have found reason for optimism as desperation set in for his opponents, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, their attacks on Romney made them sound more like liberal class warriors than conservative Republicans.
Until now, conservative support for Romney was based largely on this.
He's not Obama.
But that was then, and this is now.
Conservatives are finding reasons to not just vote for Romney, but to get excited about voting for him.
At long last, conservatives have found in Romney a presidential candidate who understands and can explain the free enterprise system that made America the most prosperous nation in the history of humankind.
The guy goes on to praise Romney.
He's making great strides.
He's connecting with the conservative base.
In this guy's opinion, Obama's cousin.
He's connecting with elements of the conservative base that really weren't jazzed or charged up during the primaries.
Now, Snerdly's in there frowning at that.
I have a – look, follow my instincts.
I have a sense that this guy's onto something.
I think he's more right than he is wrong.
But I still think, despite the best efforts of F. Chuck Todd and Roger Simon at Politico, this is all going to come down to Barack Obama.
But folks, look, it really is dangerous to start speculating now.
Any number of things here, what are 96 days or 97 days out now?
You've got Mahmoud Ahmedine Izad once again suggesting that the world needs there to be no Israel.
He is now advocating that Israel be wiped off the map.
He did it again in as blunt, straightforward language as he's ever used.
So, just using that as an example, and we talk about the economy and what impact it might have.
What if Israel attacks Iran?
What if Iran messes around, obviously, so and so.
What happens if there is an al-Qaeda terrorist attack?
What happens if Iran is attacked successfully by Israel?
Does that help Obama or not?
None of this is known.
There are all kinds of things.
They're foreign dictators who without question would much prefer Obama in office.
They're saying so.
When they talk about this country, it doesn't differ much from the way Democrats talk.
If some far-in-head honcho decides he wants to try to do something to help Obama's election in September, October, who knows?
Any number of things can happen out there.
And Ahmedine Zad, don't forget, that's the guy Obama said we needed to negotiate with without any preconditions.
We got the Muslim Brotherhood rising up in this Arab Spring, taking over the Middle East.
Militant Islam, Sharia.
And if any of these people decide they want to play a role in this election, it really is dangerous to start speculating on only what's known under the assumption that pretty much nothing else is going to happen between now and that, because we know that's not true.
And now a brief time out.
And when we come back to the phones, we will go.
Oh, yes.
Some excitement lurking there, folks.
Don't go away.
Let's start in Jacksonville, Florida.
Up first is Jason.
Thank you for the call, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Hey, good afternoon, sir.
Thank you for taking my call.
You bet.
You've got a good show.
I really like it.
Congratulations on your 24 years.
Thank you, sir, very much.
Yeah, I've only been listening about a year, and you make a lot of good points.
I just, sometimes, and I know I've heard you say you're persuasive.
You're trying to persuade folks.
I know what you're doing.
I think you have a much better show, though.
You had a kid call in here last week about some potato chips and being too much air in the bag.
And he tried to speculate that it had something to do with President Obama.
And I just, I don't know, man.
I mean, that's been going on for like years and years and years and years.
I just don't know why you didn't shoot that kid down and let him know.
Well, I'll tell you what, the young man was 12 years old, and it's obvious that his parents had put that idea in his head.
And you've only been listening a year.
It's a very tough thing.
You have a 12-year-old on the phone.
I try not to contradict parents.
I tried to treat that as lightheartedly as I could.
I can't figure out what Obama would have to do with so much air in a bag of Lay's potato chips.
Thank you.
I'm glad.
I just want to get into two more points.
And I'm going to get up this show.
As an American citizen, I pay a lot of taxes a lot.
I do a 1099.
I don't do 1040 easy, lucky people.
If Romney didn't pay taxes for the last 10 years, it most certainly would bother me because he's going out here telling us that he knows how to, you know, his thing is money.
He comes from money.
He knows how to deal with money.
Our country is bad economically right now.
There's no evidence he didn't pay his taxes.
I'm not saying he did.
I'm not saying he did.
All I'm saying is, in fact, see, you're very right.
And by the way, the name Denji Harry is awesome.
That is the awesome nickname.
That's clever.
But if he's wrong and Romney has paid taxes, then I think somebody should be brought to justice for that.
But if he has not paid taxes, he's no better than these illegal immigrants that are coming to this country and not paying taxes and getting all the benefits and trying things to be.
Why do you feel it necessary to participate in what is obviously an attempt to smear Romney?
How could he have not paid taxes over the last 10 years?
This is not even possible.
It's not possible.
He would have been audited by now.
After having paid so much for so many years, it's stupid.
The guy wants to run for president.
He doesn't pay taxes for 10 years.
You're unwittingly falling into the trap here of helping to perpetrate a smear.
I don't want to fall in.
See, my card affiliation.
See, my party, you can help me out with this.
My card, I just got in the mail the other day.
It says NPA.
What's that?
No party affiliation?
I don't know.
Yeah, I don't have a.
I used to, I thought, say swing on my card, but it says NPA.
And see, I'm not left and I'm not right.
I'm somewhere in between, and I kind of, and what I do is I'm not.
All right, look, look, I got a commercial right here.
Hang on.
Don't hang up.
I hope.
I think.
Okay, back to Jason in Jacksonville.
You were talking about your party affiliation.
Yes, sir.
Okay, looked it up.
NPA means no party affiliation.
Right.
You're right.
Right, okay.
Yeah, see, so, you know, and I'm not all the way left, and I'm not all the way right.
I'm just, I'm not one of those people.
But I've been, since I've been listening to your show.
Wait, wait, wait, what does that mean?
You're not one of those people.
You're not all the way left or all the way right.
I'm just not, I'm just, I'm not extreme anything.
I'm not an extreme leftist.
I'm not an extreme right.
And I've been listening to your show and how you describe, you know, these certain liberal behaviors.
And I've been seeing, I've been seeing a lot of them.
And it's amazing when you go out and you're hanging around certain people and you see these attitudes and the way they behave.
But I don't necessarily think that you can stereotype people that way.
I think people vote based on their emotions, based on what's going on, the oh, they vote for all kinds of reasons.
Yeah, all kinds of reasons.
I don't think it's just necessarily.
Not everybody voting is very bright.
I mean, you've got to factor a lot of things in this.
Yes, sir.
Let me ask you one more question.
I know this isn't the sports talk show, but what do you feel?
I just want to get your belief on what do you feel about, let's go with football because I know you like football and football's about to start.
How do you feel about athletes holding out for more money?
What do you think when you hear about athletes holding out and they're under contract and they're holding out for more money?
I think that they should do it.
They got, especially the way, particularly with the new CBA and the NFL, the length of time, first-round draft choice, second round, first two rounds, the length of time that the team has an option on them has gone for three to four years.
They basically have got one window to make it.
They've got one window.
After they play out their original contract, unless they hold out, they've got one window to score based on the average lifespan of an NFL player and so forth.
You're up against here the contract and whether to morally adhere to it or to ask for more based on performance.
But my attitude over this has changed over the years.
I used to think that it was disloyal to the team to hold out.
Now I think if you've got the leverage, use it.
Absolutely.
One last question, sir.
How did you get started in the business that you're in today?
How did you get started in this business?
How did I get started?
Yes, sir.
My dad and mom bought me a thing called a Remco Caraville that allowed me to broadcast in the house, this little toy that allowed me to broadcast in the house on any AM frequency that I set it to.
And I could play records and Tara's little microphone, and they'd sit around and listen to me.
I wanted to do that ever since I was eight years old.
Oh, that's interesting.
I went to Dallas, Texas when I was 16, and I got my first-class radio telephone license, which was then a requirement by the Federal Communications Commission.
I was down there for six weeks, had to pass all kinds of arduous tests.
I was the youngest one in the school by five years.
I actually got out in four weeks.
I aced it so well.
I was so motivated.
I was so inspired.
I wanted to get that license, and I wanted to get back home and see if I could get on the air.
Well, congratulations, sir.
You did just that.
Hey, I really appreciate you.
So, and you have a great day, sir.
Thanks for the call.
Jason in Jacksonville, Florida.
And who's next?
Bill in Keller, Texas.
Great to have you, sir.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
How are you doing today?
Very well, sir.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, I heard you talking earlier about someone who had called you about Obama's Harvard experience.
And I had some questions, too, that I've been kind of wondering about.
I went to Occidental College quite a few years, of course, before Obama, but tremendous difficulty getting in that school.
You have to be in like the upper 5th percent of your high school class.
You have to be involved in extracurricular activities.
They like it if you're a student body officer, captain of the football team, those kinds of things.
And I've wondered the entire four years that the president has been in office, how in the world he ever got in there, because according to his book, he was such a reprobate in high school.
And wondered if you had any thoughts on that.
How he got into Occidental?
Yeah, I don't see how he did based on.
Well, you would know better than I. You went there.
Yes, I did.
So what do you think it could be?
Well, that's what I don't understand.
I can't imagine how a young man who claims that he was such a failure in high school could possibly have qualified to get in at that time one of the most prestigious colleges.
Let me ask you a question.
Only you know the answer.
What are we talking?
What years are we talking?
Are we talking the 90s, late 80s?
Did Occidental have an affirmative action program that you're aware of?
Not when I went there.
They did not.
But they did, I'm sure, when Obama went there.
So you're thinking that that could possibly be what allowed him to get in?
Well, if what you say is true, if the entrance requirements are what they are, affirmative action was a program designed to allow people in who otherwise wouldn't get in on the premise that they've been discriminated against most of their lives because of their skin color.
And as such, these universities and any business that had any interaction, regulatory or otherwise, with the federal government, they implemented these programs and they took them to degrees that weren't even required just out of fear of the government harassing them.
So I remember when I was in Pittsburgh and affirmative action hit, they started at radio stations all over town.
They started hiring women who had never been on the radio before just to satisfy the requirement because their license would be up for renewal soon.
And they had to keep the federal government off their back.
They had the affirmative action requirements.
This was a big, big deal in the 70s and 80s.
Huge deal.
Yeah.
Well, and I thought about that too, but then I wondered also I wonder why he left Oxy.
I can't help but think about his time spent at that school because I remember how difficult it was for me.
And I was in like the top fifty five.
Well, look, his wife, Michelle Mybel Obama, has said that she would never have gotten into Princeton if it hadn't been for affirmative action.
Yeah, that must have been it.
And I'm wondering if why he left and went back to the East Coast.
wondered if he just couldn't couldn't hack it.
Is there any way that anybody could ever find out about his college background?
Sure.
Somebody from there could call me.
Somebody that went to school with Obama at Occidental could call me.
Well, if anybody, admissions office, whoever knows, somebody from Occidental could call me, and then I can tell you what they said.
Well, it's just like I got the call a little over an hour ago from Harvard.
You remember during the first commercial break of the first hour, I got a call.
I was told to take, I don't use the phone.
I don't like the phone.
You know, I panic when I hear a phone ring.
I either get panic or irritated.
I've got to do something about it because it has the potential to ruin five minutes after it happens.
It's nothing, ever, any good when the phone rings.
Nothing.
It's always a problem.
There's something always wrong.
Nothing ever good other than taking phone calls here, but I never hear it ring.
My cell phone rings or the phone at home.
Uh-oh.
But they said, you better take this one.
So I picked it up during the break, and it was somebody from Harvard, and they said that Obama got the worst records or worst grades of anybody in the history of Harvard, and that professors were covering for him when he wasn't even going to class.
And then the guy was gone.
So now the allegation's out there, and I think Obama has to deal with it.
Obama is going to have to explain.
Is it really true?
You got the worst grades in the history of Harvard?
Because I got a call.
I got a call from a guy said he went to Harvard, knows this.
What do we do, folks?
What do we do about it?
El Rushbo, have my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair for everybody.
Otherwise, it'd be bloody every day on this program.
Here's Terry in Philadelphia.
Great to have you.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome.
Hi, Rush.
You are truly a brilliant man.
I have to tell you, every day I listen to your show.
You know, I was sitting here in the car, and I'm thinking as you're going through this article about all these criticisms of Mitt Romney, and he'd better hurry up and name his vice president.
When did you, I was thinking of it in terms of, okay, let's put Obama in there instead of Romney and see how this plays out.
I guess Joe Biden had to pick a new vice president, but it says nobody ever talks about Obama in the ways that they talk about Romney.
And I was listening to that litany of trash that you were referring to of how the news coverage is for Romney, and it's really scary.
It's just the orders have gone out throughout all of the mainstream media.
And it is Romney gaff after gaffe after gaffe on his foreign trip.
No matter what happened, no matter what he said, we're reporting it as gaffes.
The reason that they heckled him with the questions was so that it could report that he had no answers and that he appeared flummoxed and stymied and out of place and didn't know what he was doing.
But you're right.
You never, you have never seen a story like that about Obama in politics.
And try and put Obama's name in whatever.
But you can easily put George W. Bush's name in there.
You can put any Republican's name in there.
But you will never see a story of that tone and with that purpose written about any Democrat.
That's shameful.
It's absolutely shameful.
And thank you so much for doing what you do.
You bet.
Thank you.
Speaking of which, let's go to the audio soundbites.
Late yesterday afternoon, CNN's newsroom, the anchorette, Brooke Baldwin, is speaking with the political correspondent, Shannon Travis, about Ted Cruz and his primary victory over David Dewhurst.
And Baldwin said, what's going on in Texas?
Good lordy out there.
Shannon, you've been following the Tea Party since the beginning.
Are they back?
Did they ever leave?
Have they been working out in local campaigns like this in Texas?
There's an old song lyric that says, don't call it a comeback.
They've been here for years.
This is not really a comeback.
The Tea Party has been quietly working behind the scenes.
You've seen less of the rallies, less of the people going out pounding the pavement, and really more of them quietly negotiating, adopting, if you will, some of the tactics of the political parties, the political establishment that they abhor in a lot of ways, adopting some of those tried and true strategies of building up their staffing offices, building up their volunteers, knocking on doors.
And that's what they've quietly been doing.
This Cruz victory really just represents the latest in their trek towards a hostile takeover of Washington.
Yeah, hostile takeover of Washington.
The Tea Party is engaged in a hostile takeover.
Have you ever heard any group of Democrats who wish to win elections being described as engaged in a hostile takeover?
It's like when the Republicans took over the House in 1994, when the Republicans took control of the House in 1994, the Tea Party engaged in a hostile takeover.
There's nothing hostile about it.
They're winning elections.
I'll tell you what the Tea Party is trying to do.
The Tea Party is trying to take over the Republican Party, and the Tea Party is trying to get rid of Harry Reid.
The Tea Party is attempting to secure the United States Senate for conservative leadership.
That's exactly what they're trying to do.
Now, are elections hostile takeovers?
You note the language that in the story yesterday we had about the Cruise victory, again, in the Politico.
And it's a one-way street.
Caller from Philadelphia is exactly right.
Here's Mark McKinnon.
Now, McKinnon ran all the media for Bush in 2000 and 2004.
And McKinnon, by reputation, media pro, he is a leader in this no-labels group.
Now, who are the no-labels people?
They're basically disaffected liberals.
They're liberals, moderates, liberals, but they don't want to be called that.
So they're no labels.
They're better than moderates and better than independents because they're not labeled anything.
He was on CBS this morning today, and the co-host was Charlie Rose.
And the question, the victory that Ted Cruz had in Texas, does it further divide the Republican Party or not?
Ted Cruz is not a typical Tea Party candidate.
I mean, he is a very thoughtful guy.
He's very conservative.
But he is a very, very smart guy.
Not to suggest that other Tea Party candidates aren't.
But I think he's been cast as a sort of typical Tea Party guy.
Right.
And he's not.
I think he's going to bring a lot to the table for conservatives.
He can kind of create a different persona for many of the conservatives on the Tea Party side and kind of change a little bit of the branding of the Tea Party.
Oh, he meant to say exactly what he said, didn't he?
Not a typical Tea Party candidate.
I mean, he's very thoughtful, very conservative, very, very smart guy.
Now, I don't mean to suggest the other Tea Party.
Well, you don't have to suggest it.
You said it, Mark.
You said it.
Cruz is not a typical Tea Party candidate.
I mean, he's a very thoughtful guy.
He's very conservative.
Very, very smart.
Not a typical Tea Party candidate.
But nevertheless, nevertheless, McKinnon likes the guy.
Now, who's labeling people now?
The no-labels guy is not labeling guys.
Cruz went to Princeton.
He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law.
And I'll bet you we could see his transcripts.
He was Supreme Court litigator, and he is a real conservative scholar.
He's not like all those other Tea Party people.
Birth certificate?
Cruz's birth certificate?
Oh, I'm sure.
If you wanted to see it?
Oh, yeah.
Well, I don't know.
I'm assuming that, yeah, he'd show you the birth certificate.
I don't know.
What are you trying to stir things up in there for?
I don't know if he, I'm sure he would.
Anyway, not your typical Tea Party guy, folks.
Very smart.
Very, very thoughtful guy.
Very conservative.
Not your typical Tea Party.
I don't mean to say the other Tea Party candidates aren't, but they're not.
Let's be honest.
Okay, let's take a break, folks.
We'll be back and continue.
Forge on.
I talked about Stanley Kurtz and his new book that is out, Spreading the Wealth, How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities.
And there's a piece that he has at National Review expounding on this.
I'll share a little bit of that when the program resumes at the top of the next hour.
We've got a boatload of fabulous audio sound bikes yet to come.
▲
Export Selection