All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 24, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:48
August 24, 2012, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
The New York Daily News and a lot of the New York media, some of the television networks, New York Daily News reporting that the Empire State Building shooter.
You heard about this?
Okay.
New York Daily News reporting the Empire State Building shooter did indeed kill his boss.
Well, he was fired yesterday.
He went out there and he killed his boss.
I wonder if Obama's constant warfare on bosses and so forth might have led this guy to pull the trigger.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's open line Friday.
Oh, you ought to see the faces of the people on the other side of the glass.
Oh, no.
Rush, you didn't really say that.
Say that we got time on the delay.
No, Rush.
Oh, you didn't really say it.
Yes, I said it, and we're not going to bleep it out.
I'll guarantee you, the last time there was a shooting in New York, who the mayor blame it on?
Tea Party people that didn't like health care, right?
Gabby Giffords, you name it.
The shooting out in Colorado.
Brian Ross, Tea Party did it.
Well, here you got a guy shooting his boss for being fired.
Who's out there ripping bosses to shreds every day?
Who's out there ripping businesses to shreds every day?
And who's out there killing jobs every day?
So, yes, we're trying to illustrate absurdity by being absurd.
The absurd way the news media, the rest of the left try to capitalize and politicize any terrible crime that they think they can associate with Republicans or conservatives.
We've seen it time and time again.
So why not give them a dose of their own medicine here?
You think Obama and the Democrats have any blood on their hands with this shooting today?
Don't be frightened in there on the other side of the glass.
It isn't any big deal.
By the way, Mayor Doomberg went out there immediately stressed the shooting had no relation to terrorism.
And that's how we know that the alleged perp can't be connected to the Tea Party because people like Doomberg and the Democrats think the Tea Party is a bunch of terrorists.
Yep, did kill his boss.
So Obama's constant class warfare, could it be a factor?
Might it be a factor?
The Democrat Party and all this fear they're putting in people's hearts and minds.
How are you, folks?
Great to have you with us.
It is Friday, Open Line Friday here on the EIB network.
There's a lot of reasons why we do Open Line Friday, and that is to give everyone, no matter how uninformed, a chance to ask the host anything, a question that might begin their journey to becoming a better informed citizen, a better voter.
That's what we're here to do.
It's a golden opportunity.
Monday through Thursday, you have to talk about things I care about.
If you don't, you don't get an ear unless you trick Snerdly, which is getting increasingly easier to do.
But on Friday, it doesn't matter what you want to talk.
I don't care if I care about it or not.
You have your chance.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 and the email address, LRushbow at EIBNet.com.
We don't know.
I don't know whether or not the Empire State Building shooter used a legal gun or not.
I don't know.
It's a good question.
It's a good question.
Did he have a 32-ounce soda in his hand when he pulled the trigger?
Or, more importantly, had he maybe consumed a 32-ounce soda in the hours preceding the dastardly deed?
These are important questions the mayor of New York City needs to look into.
He could have been a celebrity.
Very easy for celebrities, politically connected people to get gun permits in New York City.
You just never know.
By comparison, folks, at least 19 people were shot in Chicago last night.
19 people.
There were 15 homicides in Chicago last week.
And Chicago probably has the second or third most stringent gun laws after New York City and D.C.
And the mayor of Chicago, the godfather, Ram Emmanuel, is now all for building casinos in the city.
He says they want to do it for the kids.
They want to build the casinos for the children.
And they want to get the gangbangers to stop shooting the children, the gangbangers to start shooting other people.
Lance Armstrong, what to make of this?
I'll tell you, ladies and gentlemen, you know me.
I think if you wait long enough, you will detect politics in everything.
Now, let's do a quick comparison.
When Roger Clemens was accused of doping, the sports media turned on him like that.
He was guilty.
Lied to Congress, they needed to throw him away and throw away the key at the same time.
They were just, I'll never forget it.
I thought Clemens was this beloved sports figure, but when this happened, the media turned on Clemens.
Now, it'd be interesting to watch the media deal with Lance Armstrong and how they react to this.
But, and it won't take long.
In fact, we got a couple soundbites from the CBS early morning show today.
In fact, let's play those.
Let's get those out of the way.
It was Charlie Rose talking to Bicycling Magazine editor-in-chief, Peter Flax, about Lance Armstrong dropping his challenge against charges that he used performance-enhancing drugs.
I'll tell you, Lance Armstrong is a hero to millions of people.
He wasn't supposed to survive testicular cancer.
His percentage chances were single-digits.
He got involved with the doctors.
He learned everything he could about it.
He overcame that and goes on to win seven Tours de France, a number of other championships.
He has passed over 500 tests of urine, blood, other bodily fluids, precious and otherwise.
Some of these tests have been random when he didn't know they were going to hell.
He's passed every test.
And here comes this agency that they say it's not a government agency.
It's just a private sector nonprofit.
But I'm not sure that it doesn't have ties to the government.
And they have been after Lance Armstrong and practically every other winner of the Tour de France and other bicycling events.
In Armstrong's case, I think since 1999, they have been after him.
And then yesterday, Armstrong finally, I'm not going to go to arbitration.
I'm not fighting anymore to hell with it.
And so the immediate question is: well, what does that, what does that say?
What is the most natural conclusion?
And sadly, the most natural conclusion is it's guilty.
He's going to stop fighting it.
The next phase of the Armstrong battle with this agency was to go to arbitration.
And that's what he's not going to do.
And he said, look, I'm tired.
I'm tired of putting my family through this.
I'm tired of putting myself through this.
I don't know what more I can do.
He claims they've got no evidence.
They are pursuing him even in retirement.
And so many people think it's a witch hunt.
Many people.
I'll tell you, folks, let me go out a little bit on a limb here.
If you look at what's going on at Penn State University, we had the story a couple of weeks ago about how the entire university might lose its accreditation over what happened with Sandusky in the football program.
If it loses its accreditation, it may as well close up shop.
There's no reason to exist.
If an education from Penn State is said to be worthless.
Now, the Louis Free report at Penn State indicted everybody from Joe Paterno to Spaniard to every underling in the president's office to football coaching staff and so forth.
Prior to this, and that statue of Paterno at the stadium, and there was nobody, there was nobody with a more impeccable reputation for integrity than Joe Paterno.
And now Paterno passes away, and whatever reputation he had, if it's not in tatters, it's seriously questioned.
Paterno politically was a very conservative guy.
I never told anybody this.
But after each of my books came out, I received requests for autographed copies from Coach Paterno.
And I never met him.
I never spoke to him.
But I remember the first book I autographed.
I couldn't believe that Coach Paterno wanted my autograph, wanted to read my book.
I just said it's an honor to sign this to you.
Blah, blah, blah.
He was a for all of his career and for a few months after his death, he was impeccable.
Now it's gone.
His reputation in tatters, finished.
Louis Free, well, no, he can't fight back, but of course that's true.
But even when he was alive, he was doing his best to fight back.
And I don't want anybody to misunderstand.
I'm not trying to say he didn't do anything here.
This whole Sandusky thing is sordid and in itself it's despicable.
But they're trying to make it out like Paterno was Sandusky.
And that I don't believe.
So you have this great, impeccable reputation now totally destroyed, not partially, totally destroyed.
Somebody worth looking up to going.
I do believe that there are forces that want to tear down such people.
We see it every day.
I mean, part and parcel of the purpose of the United States media is to build people up.
You've heard this yourself, build people up and then eventually tear them down.
It's why, ladies and gentlemen, I may inject myself personally.
Here's something I very rarely do.
It is why I have studiously, and I've made the point to you many times, I have studiously avoided any opportunity to let the media have anything to do with my success.
The media didn't make me, meaning you don't list this program because way back long ago, the media said, wow, this is a great show.
This is a funny guy.
You know what?
You need to be listening.
And they weren't doing daily, weekly, positive profiles of me.
You listen here because you found the program on your own or however you found it, and you listen to it, you like it, it's a good show, it provides you whatever you want, and that's it.
And because of that, the media can't tear it apart, but they try.
Doesn't stop them from trying.
You know the drill.
Now we have Lance Armstrong, somebody who is universally respected by people for overcoming incredible odds.
If there was doping in cycling, he clearly wasn't the only one.
Somebody won those Tour de France races.
And there were witnesses.
Lance Armstrong won them.
They haven't found one bit of evidence he doped.
It's just supposition.
And you've got people, oh, I have no question.
I have no doubt that he doped.
There's no evidence of it.
So here's somebody else that's in the process of being ripped to shreds that a lot of people admired and looked up to.
Now, Armstrong's not conservative.
At least as far as anybody knows.
He's not, I don't know that he's actively political in any way, but culturally, he'd be closer tied with the pop culture left than he would anybody else.
Doesn't matter.
They're still after him.
But then when he stops the fight, it's only natural to conclude that there must be something there.
Oh, it is.
It is a personal vendetta.
That's why he puts a personal, if it's not a professional vendetta against success, against achievement, rip it down, tear it apart.
I said, it happens to people in our culture every day.
Media rips people apart after building them up.
It's how small people make themselves feel big.
It's how small, irrelevant people make themselves feel like they matter, is to disqualify the achievements of others or to criticize them or to destroy them.
It's the only way that these little people can build themselves back up or make themselves feel like they're something.
But then, on the other hand, Armstrong is dropping the fight.
And the only natural conclusion is that he's this is what most people are concluding.
He's guilty.
But some are saying they don't care.
Everybody else did it.
And since everybody else was doing it, he might have been doing it.
It was all fair because everybody was doing it.
You know, Floyd Landis, a couple other people that won the Tour de France have been found to be doping, but they haven't found it on Armstrong.
Let's get his audio sound bites.
Peter Flax, bicycling magazine editor-in-chief, talking with Charlie Rose, who said, Is there any doubt, any doubt, Peter, that he in fact used these doping products?
I'm absolutely convinced that he did, but I'm also convinced that he is the victim of a witch hunt, and there's no justice possible here.
The legacy is being shaped on Bicycling's Facebook page.
Hundreds and hundreds of comments, and I'd say 95% of them are pro-Lance people communicating their support for him.
He is guilty, but in a lot of people's eyes, he's still an inspiration.
He still won those tours to France, and it takes some time to see how this all plays out.
Now, here's this guy.
I'm absolutely convinced he did dope.
I'm absolutely convinced.
Has anybody ever seen any evidence?
Some of you have to help me out.
I don't know if there's any evidence.
I'm not aware of it.
I got to take a break.
There's one more soundbite that goes with this.
We'll get to it when we get back.
We got a guy in his truck in South Bend.
Is it Kansas?
South Bend, Kansas.
This is Joe.
Joe, I want to get you in here real quick.
How are you, sir?
Doing good.
You?
Very well.
Thank you.
Yes, the reason I think he's being torn down is because he's an exceptional person.
He did many things in his life that makes him extremely exceptional.
And to a liberal, you cannot be exceptional.
You had to either steal it from somebody else or cheat to get there.
Yeah, that's why I wanted to get old Joe in here because he's singing my tune to a certain extent.
It's like Obama now.
We're not a superpower.
We never were.
All we did was steal from the poor people around the world.
That's how we became a superpower.
And the rich and the successful in America.
Nah, nah, nah, nah.
They just stole it from people.
They had an unfair advantage, or they got lucky or they cheated or something.
And so we're going to spread the wealth and we're going to redistribute.
So liberals do have a big problem with individual achievement.
This Armstrong business, folks, we're told now that Lance Armstrong didn't win those seven tours de France and Penn State didn't win all those football games for 10 years.
The Soviet Union was never this good at rewriting history.
They tried, but the Soviet Union was never this good.
Armstrong has never been found guilty of anything.
He gives up on proving a point after over 500 tests that prove his innocence.
He's simply exhausted.
What more do I have to do?
Now, this agency, United States Anti-Doping Agency, the USADA, it's a taxpayer-funded nonprofit.
They say it's not government, but it's taxpayer-funded.
So it's not simply cut and dried that it isn't a government organization.
They call themselves the anti-doping organization for the United States, created by the Olympic Committee back in 2000.
That's just an amazing thing.
I saw it.
Catherine pointed it out to me last night.
And she admires Lance Armstrong for a host of incredible reasons.
A lot of people do.
A lot of people don't want to believe this and are sick and tired.
This kind of behavior by government agencies.
It's Open Line Friday, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Here is that second soundbite.
It's Armin Katayan.
CBS this morning, Charlie Rose talking with the bicycling magazine guy, Peter Flax, who in a previous soundbite we heard say he is convinced that Lance Armstrong doped.
He's convinced of it.
But he's also the victim of a witch hunt.
How?
I mean, if he did it and they're trying to track him down, what's the witch hunt?
Witch hunt if he didn't do it.
Now he's into his retirement, and they're still pursuing the guy.
Armstrong says, I've had it.
I've had it.
I got 500 tests.
I passed every test.
They've got no evidence.
I've had it with this.
So Charlie Rose says, okay, Armin Katayan, Armin Katayan is the CBS chief investigative correspondent.
He's on Gumbel's show on HBO or was at one point, Real Sports, is sports investigative guy.
Here's what he said.
This process has become so politicized from going back five years now.
It's not a government agency.
It's a private organization, a nonprofit organization that has a stake in this politically to prove that Lance Armstrong has been doping to send a message to other athletes.
And I don't know when you talk about a fair process and safe sport how much this really adds to that.
So he loses all these titles.
What happens if they just hand the jersey to whomever came in second?
All of those men are convicted dopers, people who've made financial settlements to get out of a doping case.
Well, I spent seven years watching it.
Someone won those Tour de France.
Lance Armstrong did.
I saw it.
Yep, he did.
And other people have doped, and they've proved it on the others.
And they're also talking, Snerdley, they want to take away his endorsement money retroactively.
They want to get every dollar he was ever paid.
He was on the U.S. Postal Service team.
He was on the U.S. Postal Service team, and as such, the team was bankrolled by the Postal Service.
But they want to go after his endorsements, prize money, everything.
They want to strip Lance Armstrong of everything he's got.
Well, Snerdley said, who did he make mad?
Who the hell did he tick off?
That's sadly, it's a legitimate question.
Speaking of this, I was reading Phil Mushnick today.
Oh, speaking of Mushnick's sports columnist, the New York Post, he had a piece earlier this week on politics.
He's an acknowledged Democrat, and he says he's finally become convinced of media bias.
And his story was about David Plough, Obama's advisor, going all over the world, making $100,000 a speech from little countries that can't afford it, advising them on the ins and outs of the U.S. political process.
And Mushnik was like, why the hell is this not a big story?
Why is the media not reporting?
Now, of all the things that are out there that would convince somebody in the media that his buddies are biased, I mean, there's a, but nevertheless, he thinks it's a big story that the media isn't covering the fact that one of Obama's chief advisors is out making $100,000 a speech from little countries that don't have the money to pay it in the first place for advice on how to get in the American political cronyism.
And he's got a point.
Anyway, reading Mushnick today, Mushnick's every Friday, Sunday, and Monday, New York Post.
And he has a thing about Warren Sapp, the former defensive tackle number 99 of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
Sapp has filed for bankruptcy.
One of Mushnik's big causes is the cultural rot that is taking place in sports on television and throughout our society.
And he chronicles it.
And he also is a critic of various sports telecasts, ESPN, this sort of thing.
But he, in discussing this Warren Sapp business, is Warren Sapp filed for bankruptcy.
He's got alimony and child payments and so forth.
And when it listed his assets, Warren Sapp has 240 pairs of Air Jordans.
And I'm thinking, what do you, what do you need 240 pairs of Air Jordans for?
And I, well, I collect stuff.
So maybe it's a collection.
Anyway, just a little side note.
But, yeah, they're going to take everything away from Lance Armstrong.
That's their objective, including all the money.
A random act of journalism.
By the way, Nike is standing by Armstrong.
They're going to keep Armstrong's endorsement contract.
That's what they did with Tiger Woods as well.
I mean, Nike.
Nike loves guys with tood.
Nike loves the guys with attitude.
They love them.
They love the guys that skirt the edge.
I love those guys.
So anyway, random act of journalism on CNN last night.
Everybody was getting emails all night long.
Rush, you got to see this.
Rush, you got to talk about this.
Rush, you got to tell people.
Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz was taken to the woodshed by Wolf Blitzer.
Now, folks, can I say something about this?
We've got a lot of soundbites on this.
And there's no question.
Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz went on CNN and tried to lie about a story in the LA Times and Mitt Romney and Wolf.
No, I'm sorry, it's Anderson Cooper.
Anderson Cooper would not let her get away with it.
Anderson Cooper just jumped down her throat, made her look like the blabber mouth fool that she is.
Now, stopping the, I'm getting emails all night.
The conservative media press came to a stop.
It was stop the presses.
Look what's.
And it struck me how rare real journalism is.
How rare it is that a mainstream media outlet actually questions the honesty and veracity of a Democrat.
How rare that is that when it happened last night on CNN, everybody stopped what they were doing and told everybody they knew about it.
And to me, that alone is an illustration of just how out of whack the media is.
We all know it is.
But it's great to find unique different illustrations of it.
And I think this is a good one.
Here we have, this ought to be happening every day.
I mean, the media loves to say that what they do is speak truth to power or whatever that convoluted phrase is.
The media loves to tell us that they're the ones that are going to make sure the powerful are kept in check.
We are going to make sure that the powerful are held accountable for what they do.
When we find cronyism, of course, they don't anymore.
They align themselves with the power when the power is with Democrats.
There is no interest in holding the powerful accountable.
The only thing the media cares about is the same thing the Democrats care about, and that is defeating, however, necessary conservatives.
Tarring, feathering, discrediting, impugning the character, honesty, and veracity of conservatives, whatever it takes.
The media has joined that.
And here we have a random act of journalism.
Here we have the media actually doing something that ought to be happening every day for everybody in power.
They ought to be doing this to Republicans, conservatives, liberals, Democrats, whoever.
But they never do it with Democrats.
And when they do, it shocks and stuns everybody.
And they looky, looking, that's how rare it is.
So we've got to take a brief obscene profit time out.
We come back.
I'll let you hear this random act of journalism that took place with Anderson Cooper on CNN last night.
It's Open Line Friday, Rush Limbaugh executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
Here we go.
Last night's CNN Anderson Cooper 119 talking to Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz, the Democrat National Committee spokeswoman.
Anderson Cooper said, factually speaking, you know what's interesting?
See, the media normally, the reason this stands out is that most people in the media are not journalists.
They're collaborators.
And so when one of them acts like a journalist, it's stopped the presses.
It's jarring.
It's unbelievable.
Because they are.
They're collaborators.
The media collaborates with the Democrats, pure and simple, with the regime.
Well, I don't know what it is, but they've been going after Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz lately.
When was the last time?
Who was the last time?
Somebody went after Debbie Blabbermouth.
It might have been somebody on Fox.
So anyway, Cooper says to Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz, factually speaking, Mitt Romney didn't design or direct the writing of the Republican Party platform.
In particular, the language on abortion is the same as it's been for years.
And you can fault Romney and Ryan as you did for not pushing their position, but you can't say that they designed the abortion section.
Anderson, we definitely can say it because even in the previous platform, Mitt Romney has embraced previous Republican Party platforms and embraced that language and said he'd be delighted to support a constitutional amendment banning all abortion.
You have to acknowledge he has for years publicly said that he supports abortion in the case of rape, incest, and where the life of the mother is at stake.
I can certainly acknowledge that he says that out loud and I think it's very clear that Mitt Romney talks the talk, certainly doesn't walk the walk.
Anderson Cooper is not accepting that.
Do you at least acknowledge that the quote that you gave from the LA Times is completely incorrect?
No, I don't acknowledge that.
I know that's what you're saying, but I can read it to you right now.
What you said is, guess what?
It doesn't matter.
I think what you say does matter.
You're quoting the L.A. Times, and again, you've misquoted them.
And to back up a position.
Anderson.
Anderson, the point of the email, and there's no getting around that, and I would think you would agree that there's no way that a presidential candidate, a party's nominee, can separate themselves from that party's platform.
There is no exception for rape and incest in the Human Life Amendment.
So she's out there.
She is lying.
And she doesn't care what he said.
The thing that Anderson doesn't get through all this is that she doesn't care.
Anderson doesn't care whether she doesn't, Debbie Blabbermouth doesn't care whether what she's saying is true or not.
That's what Anderson does.
The truth is never going to get in the way.
He's trying to tell her, look, you're lying.
Romney is for a rape exception.
And she's trying to tell, no, he's not.
He may say so, but he doesn't believe it.
She's just blatantly lying about it, and she's using the CNN forum to do it.
And Anderson Cooper keeps challenging her.
And it's becoming a daily occurrence now.
Her lies are so blatant that even these hosts, after a while, can't help but accidentally call her out.
Here's the next bite.
I do think accuracy is important, and my job is to point out things that are not factually correct.
What you said, you said, guess what?
The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that the platform was, and I quote, ridden at the direction of Romney's campaign.
That sounds very direct, but that's not actually what the LA Times was saying.
The bottom-line message of our email is that A, women need to know the difference between the two parties and the two presidential candidates on a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, and that Mitt Romney can say that he's for an exception for rape or incest.
His party platform doesn't reflect that.
By the way, the party platform doesn't talk about it, nor does the Democrat Party platform.
The Democrat Party platform doesn't talk about a rape exception.
Anyway, the great thing here, after all, there's still one more soundbite.
The great thing here is that the Democrats really are in the midst of utter economic decay, in the midst of their own policies wreaking havoc on the middle class.
They are excited to make this about abortion.
Let them, folks, let them.
They are just jazz.
Their whole convention is going to be about abortion.
It's like a knee-jerk reaction to something.
Somebody's tripped them.
The next bite is Anderson, he's so frustrated.
He says, look, he's only really trying to help her.
He tries to look at, Debbie, lying doesn't look good.
You have to understand that.
It's my job on both sides of the out to point out things that are inaccurate is in a fundraising email to misquote something to serve your argument just doesn't seem in the long term to serve your argument very well.
I understand your point, but I think we, I mean, the balance of the email makes the case very clearly.
And the main thrust of the information we're trying to convey is that Mitt Romney is disingenuous when it comes to his position on a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices.
And he's extreme and has embraced an extreme position.
And we want women to know that.
But he hasn't.
He's said he's for the rape exception.
And she's out there on CNN and saying, no, he's just lying about it.
And Anderson Cooper said, but it's not true what you're saying.
Anderson, it doesn't matter.
Don't you get it, pal?
I'm here to advance the agenda.
And Anderson said, well, but look, my job is to hold both sides accountable.
My job is to point out things that are inaccurate.
Come on, Anderson, wake up.
What do you think I came here for?
A lesson on the truth?
I'm here to smear Romney.
And I'm going to smear Romney no matter what you do.
There's nothing you can do, Anderson, to make me smear Romney.
Now, when I got these emails last night from people saying, you've got to watch this, I'll be honest with you.
People told me that Anderson Cooper just creamed Debbie Blabbermount, that she was just embarrassed her to all.
I don't hear that.
I hear him very sheepishly.
You know, Debbie, really, you know what?
What you're saying isn't true.
Don't you think it'd be better if it was a, Anderson, look, you don't understand our fundraising email is designed to lie.
Romney is saying one thing, and it doesn't help us what he's saying.
So we've got to tell people that he's lying.
He doesn't really mean what he's saying.
He's an extremist.
Every Republican is an extremist.
Every Republican wants babies to live.
Oh, John, we can't have that.
Every Republican, because we're the ones killing babies.
But I don't think he profoundly embarrassed.
I don't think she can be embarrassed.
I don't think Biden can be embarrassed.
Oh, speaking of that, Charlie Wrangell.
You're damn right, Biden was talking about slavery, and he's damn right about it.
Yeah, Wrangell's out, you're damn right he was talking about slavery.
Another circle in the wagons around plugs.
Anyway, maybe I'm hearing this differently than you guys, and I didn't see it.
Maybe Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz looked guilty, but as far, okay.
HR says he saw it.
She looked guilty.
Fine.
When you just hear it, she got her message out.
Romney's lying and hates women in his extreme.
Now, it's absurd, and again, it's illustrative of their pursuing the moron vote.
No question about it.
Mitt Romney and Ryan drawing a huge crowd in Michigan.
And get this.
I love being home in this place where Ann and I were raised, where both of us were born.
No one's ever asked to see my birth certificate.
They know that this is the place that we were born and raised.
Rado!
Rado!
▲
Export Selection