All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 15, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:35
August 15, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I'm today's guest host, one of the many marks that Rush uses to occasionally fill in for him.
I'm the one from Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
Paul Ryan's district is right in my listening area.
By the way, whenever the national media writes anything about Wisconsin, you could tell that they clearly don't get us.
It's like we're an alien planet.
I'm reading all these stories about Ryan's district and they describe it as rural.
It's not.
It's a combination of suburbs, factory towns, and some rural.
He's got the southern one third of Milwaukee County, suburban area.
Racine County, Kenosha County, those are blue collar areas.
Rock County where he's from, Janesville, another blue collar town.
Walworth County, that's Lake Geneva, kind of an affluent area.
It's an interesting district.
It's clear swing district.
Yet he's won every time he's run, he's won by a wide margin.
Republicans that can win, swing or democratic areas need to be watched.
Well, a lot of people have some concerns about how conservative Mitt Romney is.
The fact that he, a Republican, was able to win in Massachusetts, implies that he has the ability to get swing voters to vote for him.
The dream conservative is one who has the ability to attract moderate voters, independent voters.
It's the thing that Reagan had.
We even invented a term for it.
They're called Reagan Democrats.
People who are Democrats but would cross over and vote for the right type of Republican.
Romney clearly doesn't seem to be a Reagan Democrat type of guy, because there's nothing about Mitt Romney that comes across as blue collar.
And I think any attempts by the campaign to try to pass him off as such are going to fail.
Mitt Romney's a business guy.
He's a classic white collar guy.
The reason that the Democrats have been focusing on the taxes so much is I think they're trying to lay out this case of class envy.
Here's a rich guy, he isn't paying much in taxes and he wants to lower them even more.
Romney says he'll release two years of tax returns.
They want what?
Ten?
They're looking for anything.
They're looking for any year in which he didn't have much of a tax burden.
Here's why I don't think that's going to work, though.
If we were in a prosperous, thriving economy, maybe you could play the class envy thing to voters who feel as though they're being left behind in a strong economy.
Right now, making the argument that Mitt Romney is a successful person who understands business.
I think that plays right into Romney's hands.
So Romney releases his tax returns.
They're gonna show what?
Romney's rich?
Is that really bad right now?
You know, there are a lot of voters who are intrigued at the notion of Trump running for president.
The idea that you can have a president who knows what he's doing.
You contrast the record of Romney at Bain and in his other positions, a record of success, where the things that he did worked with the record of Obama.
Nobody thinks Barack Obama could run a Starbucks for heaven's sakes.
He's never run anything.
He can't run his administration.
Even running his campaign now, with their backs against the wall.
This really insular administration is going and doing the one thing they know.
Barack Obama has a narrow inner circle.
He's got his chief political advisor, Axelrod.
Valerie Jarrett has always been close to him.
And he relies on Michelle.
When he uh switched chiefs of staff earlier in the administration, he brought in Bill Daly.
These are all Chicago people.
They only know one way to go.
They go the Chicago way.
Which is rough, bruising, generally nothing to do with policy.
Win at any cost.
Well, that's how he's running the campaign here.
Let's just attack and vilify.
There's no substance to his campaign anymore.
Hope and change in uplifting rhetoric, inspiring the people, that's gone too.
There's no policy to offer.
Instead, Mitt Romney's a rich guy.
Mitt Romney's response ought to be, yeah, I've been successful.
I've done well.
Let me bring some of this knowledge that made me successful into the office of the White House.
The attacks on Paul Ryan that are bound to come.
I think are also going to fall flat.
Well, he's this right wing ideologue.
He's as normal a guy as you can imagine.
He talks about his Wisconsin roots.
In fact, he uh when he was back in Wisconsin on Sunday said he uh his veins flow with cheese and brats.
He likes spotted cow lineys and millers.
First stories out there said that he mentioned two beers.
That's because they didn't know what spotted cow is.
This is how my state is.
Spotted cow is actually a beer that we drank.
I think people thought that he meant that he liked looking at the spotted cows walking around in the field.
There's actually a beer named Spotted Cow.
Yeah, that is that's what you thought.
That's what you assumed.
Or something what?
Something that we something something that we do back in high school that, you know, to give ourselves a buzz?
Some Wisconsin thing.
Let's talk about the administration.
Barack Obama is still the president of the United States and he has an administration and you don't know if you should laugh or cry.
There's no a sex scandal in the Obama administration.
Now think about this.
If you were told a year ago there would be a sex scandal in the administration, and it would be in a cabinet level department.
Which cabinet member would you have thought of first?
Who would be the likeliest one to oversee a sex scandal in his or her department?
I mean, my first thought that comes to mind is somehow there might be something with Hillary, but no.
Then maybe Holder just because everything there seems a little bit corrupt and untoward and devious.
It's Napolitano's department.
The beautiful, gorgeous, seductive Janet Napolitano, Department of Homeland Security.
This story developing over the last 24 hours here.
The top homeland security official accused of cultivating a frat house style work environment has voluntarily placed herself on leave amid an internal review.
The department told Fox News.com late Tuesday evening, just after Fox News.com contacted the agency about new allegations against her.
The official Suzanne Barr, his chief of staff for immigration and customs enforcement.
Two more ICE employees came forward this week to complain about lewd conduct inside the agency, submitting sworn affidavits that depict graphic comments made by two top officials working under DHS Secretary Janet Apolitano.
The affidavits were given as part of a discrimination and retaliation suit filed earlier this year by James T. Hayes Jr., the head of the New York Office for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
ICE Public Affairs Director Brian Hale said in a Ripman statement that the department would respond directly and restrongly to the long suit in court, but noted internal measures were being taken over the claims against Barr.
In newly emerging affidavits, one of the employees claimed that in October of 2009, while in a discussion about Halloween plans, the individual witnessed Barr turned to a senior ICE employee and say, You a sexy expletive deleted.
She then looked at it.
This is a I can't.
I she said it to a guy.
In the meantime, the uh employee who's filing the complaint is alleging that Napolitano has continued to promote a longtime aid at the expense of male employees who are more qualified.
So in the meantime, then you have the person who's the chief of staff over at ICE, that's the immigration agency, which clearly hasn't been doing much enforcement of immigration laws, who's apparently running a body house.
The account said Palmer and Barr, Barr is the woman who is the chief of staff at ICE, were quote, drinking heavily at the house of the deputy chief of mission to the U.S. Embassy.
It said Parmer took the Blackberry of another employee, Peter and Vincent, and sent lewd messages to Barr.
The affidavit went on to say during this party, Suzanne Barr approached me and offered to perform oral sex.
So this is the second sex scandal we've had in a few months coming out of the Obama administration.
The first one from the Secret Service, which struck me as like the straightest agency imaginable.
And now Janet Napolitano's frat house that she's running over there.
Then we have this one.
Some of you know a congressman named Adolphus Towns, he's of he's from New York.
This is from the Associated Press.
A Democratic Committee chairman overrode his own subpoena three years ago in an investigation of former subprime mortgage lender countrywide financial to exclude records showing that he, other house members, and congressional aides got VIP discounted loans on the company document show.
The procedure to keep the name secret was devised by Representative Adolphus Towns Democrat of New York.
In 2003, the 15-term congressman had two loans processed by countrywide's VIP section, which was established to give discounts to favored borrowers.
The effort at secrecy was reversed when Towns' Republican successor is chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, California Representative Daryl Issa, I love him, issued a second subpoena.
It yielded countrywide records identifying the four current House members, a former member and five staff aides whose loans went to the VIP unit.
Towns was on the list.
The thing that's beautiful about this is Townes was the chairman of the committee.
This is when he was demagoguing about.
Who was going on in the mortgage business?
So he puts out this subpoena trying to get all of these records.
He overwrote his own subpoena to cover up his own load.
This one's good too.
Chris Christie's going to be delivering the keynote speech at the Republican National Convention.
Chris Christie isn't perfect.
Got a couple of flaws, I think, as a conservative.
Boy, that's gonna be a good speech.
Remember the one Giuliani gave eight years ago?
I think it was eight years ago, the keynote, maybe it was two thousand two thousand four, maybe, he gave the Republican keynote speech.
That was a good one.
Chris Christie will be very, very good.
That's one to watch that's the perfect job for him.
Chris Christie's one of those guys who kind of tells it without having to apologize for telling it.
Anyway, let's go to the phones here.
1-800-282-2882 is the telephone number.
Uh, real quickly to Aaron in Colorado Springs.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Hey, Mark, how's it going?
I'm great, thanks.
Yeah, I know I gotta be quick.
I was listening to my local affiliate in Colorado Springs yesterday about lunch when they came on to say that Festest, a local wind manufacturing company for generators.
Another wind manufacturer facing financial problems.
Was this one of the was this one of them that happened to have benefited from any kind of stimulus grants as far as you know?
I don't know.
They've they're new three years ago here.
They built a complex the size of most sports arena and parking lot.
Yeah, the problem they they said it was an unsure economic future and they had to lay the people off.
The problem with all of this is is that they're trying to create an industry for which there isn't a whole lot of demand, as opposed to the Republican approach on energy, which is to try to exploit the natural resources that we have here in our own country.
I mean, if you do any type of reading on this subject, the future for this country is in natural gas and coal, but especially natural gas.
We are swimming in natural gas.
We could be the OPEC of natural gas.
Yet we've got a president who has instead spent a fortune handing out grants to companies involved in wind and solar.
The Democrats carry on all the time about corporate welfare, yet they go out and dole it to all of their buddies.
In the meantime, has anybody taken note of the fact that almost all these companies that got the stimulus grant went under?
He can't even pick the right companies to give his corporate welfare to.
My name is Mark Belling, and I'm sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I'm Mark Belling, sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
We've got another interesting story developing today.
A district judge in Pennsylvania has upheld Pennsylvania's photo ID for voting law or voter ID law.
A lot of states are facing this, including my own, Wisconsin.
I don't know how many states right now require photo identification for voting, but the number is growing and the Democrats are fighting it.
You've got to show a photo ID to do just about everything in our society.
I'm here in New York guest hosting for Rush.
To get into my room, I had to show a photo ID at the hotel.
To get in the airplane, you gotta show a photo ID.
Most cities you've got to show the photo ID to get a library book.
To rent a video, you have to show a photo ID.
Cash check at a bank, you've got to show a photo ID.
You don't have to show you don't have to show a photo ID, however, in most states to vote.
States like Wisconsin that have seen a lot of voter fraud.
In my state, all you have to do to vote is show up and say that you're somebody.
That's all you have to do.
You can say that you're Mark Belling and give my address and they let you vote.
You show nothing.
That's that's that's the check that we have.
None.
Now obviously the person might the you know, the poll worker might know who I am.
Let's suppose you're somebody who isn't well known.
Somebody all they have to do is show up and vote.
Furthermore, our voter registration laws in my state, and I don't know about Pennsylvania, but my guess is that it's similar, allow anyone to register anyone else to vote.
So you've got all of these third party groups, generally liberal, that conduct voter registration drives to get all of these names on the poll on the poll rolls.
So nobody has ever shown up in any government office anywhere.
So you get all these names on the list.
Without photo identification for voting, a fraudulent person merely has to be the to claim to be the person whose name is on the rolls, who may not even exist.
Photo identification is merely a requirement that makes you prove that you are who you say you are.
It's not foolproof.
You can still get around it.
Somebody could probably succeed in multiple registering and not get caught.
But it is at least a check.
The Democrats are talking about how this will disenfranchise people and it's aimed at cutting into the minority vote.
They've been comparing it to the old poll taxes that it's Jim Crow laws over again, that there are so many minorities who don't have photo IDs.
I don't know how that can be.
I don't know how you can survive in this country without a photo identification.
The point that they are trying to raise is that the Republicans are acting in a racist fashion here in trying to suppress the African American vote by requiring photo identification for voting.
The Republicans are arguing that they want elections to be safe and fair.
The only way to reverse this issue is if Republicans start cheating the same way Democrats do with regard to vote fraud.
I'm not encouraging them to do so.
Because we know what the reaction would be that if they did it.
But if all of the cheating was being done by Republicans, you'd have to show not only a photo ID, the Democrats would make you pr blood tests, fingerprints, DNA.
You'd have to be producing a birth certificate.
You'd have to go suit through so many hoops.
Look at what they require that you do in order to get onto an airplane.
Anyway, watch this issue in a lot of states.
The photo voter ID laws that have been passed by the legislatures there are under attack by liberals in court, and having as many of those laws upheld by November by election day is a big deal.
To the phones, Chico, California and Scott.
Scott, it's your turn on EIB with Mark Belling.
Hello, Mark.
How are you?
I'm great.
Hey, uh President Obama is going to see these farm states and uh complaining that Paul Ryan did not sign the farm bill, and the reason being because of the food stamp, uh huge amounts of food subsidies uh attached to it.
Why does he not just whip out his paycheck and bail them out?
Bail out the farmers.
Uh uh in his in his eyes, the people that need it, Cylindra, etc.
etc.
Well, based on his track record with regard to solar and wind, the last thing any farmer would want to have, I think, is a stimulus check from Barack Obama.
It seems to be a sure guarantee that you're gonna go under.
The thing about Obama is is that you know you can make the argument about whether or not the government should be subsidizing industries.
A lot of conservatives believe that pro business policies do include incentives for businesses to be able to succeed.
The problem with Obama is that almost everyone that he picked was a failure, so we didn't get anything out of it.
He was so determined to reward A his political friends, and B choose politically correct industries that he picked a bunch of losers that weren't going to go anywhere.
He didn't make any of these stimulus grants to companies that were involved in coal or natural gas or oil.
Industries they've produced products that we actually need right now because he didn't approve of them.
So what he did is he chose a bunch of companies that didn't have a product that had a market.
All the money did was stave off a couple of years of losses and they went under anyway.
One of the reasons why is why stimulus failed is that the president went out and gave all of the money to companies that were never going to succeed.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
Seems to me that we put the biggest safeguards in place and things that are really, really important.
I mean get in an airplane these days used to be you could walk right to the gate.
Then they put in the scanners now you go through the most incredible inspection imaginable.
You've got to take off your belt, your shoes you have to pick your liquids out and put them in a clear plastic bag and no more than three ounces per liquid.
Then you walk into a full body X-ray scanner and after that you're patted down and felt up why?
Because we have had terrorism on planes rightly or wrongly and people will debate forever whether or not TSA is too intrusive.
We have decided that preventing terra a terrorist act on the skies is something that's of high importance.
When you go to cash a check anywhere if they don't know you have to show a photo ID why?
Because it's important to the merchant not to lose three hundred dollars with somebody who's got a stolen checkbook.
They determine that that's important you can't do anything in our society without photo identification anything that matters.
Yet the backbone of our government the thing that makes Americans believe that we have legitimacy is the notion that we choose our elected officials for better or worse and we've screwed it up a lot we do have self-determination in this country.
It's why we haven't had violent revolutions since we broke off from England.
It's why most Americans are willing to accept the other party being in power because you know that part of the deal is is that if people voted for the other guy that person gets to be in office.
It's the reason we are still here we believe that we have self-determination and whether we screw it up or not it's within our control is there anything more important to the American heritage is there anything more important to the legitimacy of our government than the notion that we can vote.
If we don't like Obama we can throw him out if you don't like Bush you can throw him out.
If you don't want McCain in you can throw them out whomever it is that incredibly important thing has fewer safeguards than almost anything else you can do you have to do in life.
To buy a pack of cigarettes you've got to demonstrate that you're a certain age and you have to show a photo ID.
Try buying alcohol in a grocery store if you're under the age of forty without photo ID.
Try to win anything without photo ID.
Yet when it comes to voting the Democrats are saying somehow we should have no safeguards at all.
Why?
Do you really think that if they thought Republicans were stealing votes, they wouldn't put in as many checks as possible almost every case of vote fraud that you can find from acorn on down is committed by liberals and then they turn around and say well there's hardly any vote fraud you can't prove that there's much of it.
But every time we find some they say that it's isolated.
The problem with vote fraud is that it's hard to catch if all I have to do to vote is walk in and say that I'm someone and vote, how does anyone know that I committed fraud it's almost impossible to catch what this is all about is the Democrats trying to empower and keep stealing fraud is a key part of the agenda of the Democratic party to win elections in closed states.
It's why they have all of these voter registration campaigns.
It's why they have third party organizations trying to register every Tom Dick and Harry.
Their whole initiative is to get as many people who are either casual voters or non existent voters to vote.
All our side is asking is that we get a fair count.
Tell everybody what the rules are you have to have some sort of official Identification in order to go in and vote.
We'll give you months to find it.
We'll even pay for it if you say you can't afford it.
If it's good enough to rent a movie from Blockbuster, it ought to be good enough for choosing the leaders of our nation.
Freeland, Michigan, Daryl, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program with me, Mark Belling.
Yeah, the voter ID thing, uh, I agree with you.
Um, why is it and you need to put this into the liberal side, the Democratic plays, okay?
Next time this comes up in any bit debate, Romney or Ryan need to slightly say, hey, if they can make it to the precinct to vote, they can make it to the DMV to get an ID.
Otherwise, you're just encouraging voter fraud.
So you put it in their lap and see how they respond to it.
They always have excuses.
The thing that they haven't been able to do is produce any of these.
They always say that there are millions of people who don't have photo identification, but they never seem to be able to produce that person.
And if they are able to produce that person, put them in a car and drive them down to get an ID.
Now it is true that a lot of people don't drive, and therefore they don't have driver's licenses, or the licenses have been revoked or suspended, which is why in every state that has this, they allow you to have an uh alternate form of identification.
Every kid who's 21 years old knows they've got to show an ID in order to get into a bar.
It can't be that hard to do if some of those idiots are able to get it.
For people who may be um, you know, confined to their own home, who don't have physical ability, all they have to do is say they need an identification, and you'll be able to make it available for people to get it.
What this is all about is trying to stop fraud.
And the reason the Democrats don't like these laws is because they are the beneficiaries of voter fraud.
The only way you'll ever change that is if Republicans start committing fraud, which I'm not advocating and which will never happen because most Republicans are honest law abiding people while Democrats are fully capable of engaging in vote fraud.
Look at the places where vote fraud has been notorious.
Chicago, Philadelphia, all of these democratic strongholds.
Look at the trouble that occurred on election day in 2008 that Eric Holder has refused to investigate.
All we're asking is that if you're gonna beat us, beat us with a majority, win fair and square.
It's not unreasonable to ask.
For heaven's sakes, when they voted in Iraq for the first time, they put ink on their fingers, which they proudly displayed.
Why?
Because they wanted to make sure that their first vote post-Saddam was honest and fair.
We should be requiring the same of ourselves.
Carmel Indiana and Betsy, Betsy, it's your turn on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello, thank you for taking my call.
I enrolled a uh six-year-old in kindergarten today in a school where I already have two children.
I had to show two uh forms of proof of residency, and I have to show a birth cer his birth certificate proving that he's mine.
And you had to prove that the child you were taking to kindergarten was your own kid.
That's pretty onerous, I think.
I mean, what if you didn't have that?
What if you didn't have one?
You'd be disenfranchised from being able to educate your children.
If you didn't have that identification, those kids those kids would have to stay at home forever.
The things that we require photo IDs because we say it's important.
We we need to protect the process, we need to protect the integrity.
Yet we don't do it for the most important thing that we do.
So you already have two kids in that same district.
Betsy.
I think we lost Betsy.
Let's try Madisonville, Texas, and Bill Bill, it's your turn on EIB with Mark Belling.
Good morning, Mark.
I'm joining the show this morning.
Great show.
Thank you.
And uh first thing I want to say is I'm really ecstatic about this ticket we've got.
Uh a pair of really true conservatives.
I think they're gonna hold a line all the way.
The main thing that's been bugging me lately is the Democrats talking about taxing the rich and that would help pay for everything.
And you could take all the money from the top one percent, and it would run the government for maybe a week.
And so it's a that's one of the biggest forces.
But I think that if we could take and cut corporate tax at least by fifty percent, and offer amnesty for all of the money that's overseas if it would come back in, which is probably some estimates are fourteen trillion dollars, that this would energize our manufacturing thing, it would give the entrepreneurs the money that they need to provide jobs.
And without jobs, this whole thing falls apart anyway.
You know taxes don't mean a thing.
If we uh provide the money for the entrepreneurs, they will provide the jobs.
And a previous comment that you made about uh white collar.
Before you go on to that, Bill, I want to respond to what you had to say.
What you just did in your call, in which you argued for lowering corporate tax rates, and by the way, we have one of the largest corporate tax rates in the world, the Democrats that keep whining whining about outsourcing to other nations.
Well, maybe if you made it easier for corporations to be able to make a profit with all of their operations here because they weren't taxed to death on them, there wouldn't be as much outsourcing.
Nonetheless, what I hope the audience noted in your comment when you argued for lowering corporate taxes, and when you argued against this notion of taxing the rich, you made an argument as to why what you are advocating would work.
Their side isn't arguing on the basis of what works.
They argue instead to the emotional point of fairness.
The idea that wealthy people or wealthy corporations would be able to keep more money.
That's what they're against.
They are arguing purely on emotion.
The idea that we need to soak the rich guy, soak the corporation, whereas what you just did is argue on the basis of what might work.
You are right.
What you describe would work.
Lowering corporate tax rates would encourage hiring and would encourage businesses to stay in the United States and would encourage businesses to invest because they'd be able to keep a greater return on their dollar.
Barack Obama doesn't care whether or not it's going to work.
Instead, he is playing to the worst kind of emotion that we have.
The envy that we have that somebody else is getting too much money.
They're not arguing on the basis of results.
Well, is it any surprise that an administration that's been so determined to achieve all of this fairness is presiding over a rotten economy.
If they based their policies on what worked rather than on how they can get even with the rich guy, maybe we wouldn't be sitting here with a non-existent recovery, 42 months of unemployment, and a government that is taking in so little money that he's spending 40% more than he's taking in.
Thank you for the call.
That is the difference, though, between conservatives and liberals.
Liberals argue on the basis of feelings and emotions, and conservatives try to use logic and argue on the basis of what works.
We've tried it their way.
Not surprisingly, it doesn't work.
One other point that I want to make in piggybacking on what Bill said, if you listened to Ryan's uh speech on Saturday morning in Norfolk, the day that he was chosen by uh Romney be the running mate, Ryan said something that you almost never ever hear a politician say.
And so many people have brought it up to me, including a couple of people that I know that aren't real political, that it just struck them they couldn't believe he said it.
He said we promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
That's so out of vogue to say that.
That our notion of fairness isn't that we all get the same amount of money.
Our version of fairness isn't that we take money away from the successful.
Our version of fairness is that everybody gets a chance to go up to bat.
But the only guy that gets to go to first base is the one that gets the hit.
It was so refreshing to hear that.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush Limbaugh.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Should we listen to it one more time?
Should we hear the vice president of the United States showing us exactly who he is and what his campaign has degenerated into?
Yeah, let's do it.
They said every Republican's look at what they value and look at their budget and what they're proposing.
Romney wants to let the he said in the first hundred days, he's gonna let the big banks once again write their own rules.
Unchain Wall Street.
They're gonna put you all back in chains.
Put y'all back in chains.
Put y'all back in chains.
Remember the campaign four years ago when they followed Sarah Pale paling around, kept trying to ask her gotcha questions, get her to say something stupid.
And then what an embarrassing selection she was.
Sarah Palin, who had never been involved in foreign policy, who was a governor of a state, but was a person who had conservative political views, but was threatening to them, kept trying to catch her making an error.
Kept looking for all of the gaffes.
Look at the guy who won.
For heaven's sakes, one of the first things that Obama had him do was after we were having the flu outbreak.
They sent him on the Today Show to calm everybody down, and he's don't fly airplanes.
He's been making mistakes ever since.
But now these aren't just slips of the tongue.
They seem to be designed to make a point.
They're ugly.
They're obnoxious.
He's taking a policy position and not only racializing it, comparing it to the most terrible parts of American history.
The thing about is you might expect this sort of stuff five days before the election.
They're doing it in the middle of August before either party has had a convention.
Left with nothing to run on, they don't just go to the gutter.
They go lower than that.
The implication here is that the Republican candidates, I guess, are slave masters.
Why do you even have to say that?
If you wanted to attack that policy position, attack it.
Criticize it.
Say whatever you think is wrong with it.
In the end, I don't think it's going to work.
I think that they are showing the American public what a low opinion they have of them.
They don't want to defend their policies because their policies have failed.
They don't want to offer their plans for the future because they don't have any.
Instead, they want to attack and demonize, and they don't even have the decency to do it by the current low standards of American politics.
They're creating their own standard of disgust right now.
They are embarrassing themselves, which is why you'll be hard pressed to find any Democrat in America today defending Joe Biden.
I'm Mark Belling, sitting in for Rush.
I'm Mark Belling, sitting in for Rush.
We do have the official Joe Biden reaction to the criticism of him for using the term chains, watching chains, in those comments.
But first, U.S. defense officials are accusing Iran of increased meddling in Syria.
They've been doing that for three months, accusing Iran of meddling in Syria.
No kidding, Iran and Russia are meddling in Syria.
What is the defense department?
The news?
Telling us this stuff?
What are you going to do about it?
Once again, they don't know what to do about it.
Here's a story.
The Air Force is planning a test of an experimental aircraft designed to fly at six times the speed of sound, about 3600 miles per hour.
I think that's about what that Shelby 500 Mustang does.
Now the reaction from the vice president.
The campaign flap again after Biden told supporters in Danville, Virginia that the Republican ticket wanted to unchain Wall Street.
He then added they're all gonna put y'all in chains.
Biden said he meant to use the term unshackled.
Meaning Joe Biden is saying what he meant to say is they're all going to put you all back in unshackled.
Only Biden can have his clarification make even less sense than the original comment.
They're gonna put you all back in unshackled.
Thanks, Joe.
Hope you like the show.
I'll be back tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection