All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 21, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:49
September 21, 2012, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
What's FTA?
I have no idea what FTA is.
Just send me a note.
Greetings, my friends, greetings.
Welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence and Broadcasting Network, and it is Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
Yahoo.
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email address.
L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
Whatever you want to talk about, hunky dory.
Cool.
Fine.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen.
This presidential power to turn off the internet.
It's not legislation.
Right here.
Uh big sis.
Janet Napolitano says cybersecurity executive order is almost ready.
And the story is dated yesterday.
You want some details?
At a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing, big sis.
Napolitano said the executive order is still being drafted in the interagency process and is close to completion, depending on a few issues that need to be resolved at the highest levels.
Says here that the White House began to explore an executive order last month after Republicans blocked the bill.
Yep.
Republicans, what do you mean the president's gonna have the power to turn off the internet?
We're not gonna do that.
So Obama said, okay, hell with you guys.
So we'll just we'll just uh bypass you.
Obama is is again set to bypass Congress, which has rejected any attempt to pass this kind of legislation.
From the article, the voluntary program in the draft order based on a measure in Lieberman's bill that drew opposition from Republican senators and bidness lobbying groups, chiefly the Chamber of Commerce.
Critics argued the program would serve as a backdoor for regulatory agencies to force companies to meet new security demands.
as though that's all anybody's worried about with this.
An executive order granting the president sweeping power over the Internet is close to completion.
There you have it.
I mentioned yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, this story, media montage, all the reporters going bonkers over the recovery that we bottomed out.
This is it.
I mean, is it real?
We're finally now in the recovery.
Uh we added 3,000 jobs and uh uh or there were 3,000 fewer claims on employment, whatever.
Uh but the Census Bureau from last year's a lot of people are moving again.
Yeah, they're leaving their parents home like four-tenths of one percent.
Difference from year to year people moved.
So when we were doing this, I was beginning to accumulate, even yesterday, prepping today's show, a bunch of stories that believe this notion that the economy is recovering.
And I don't like this.
I mean, I as I said at the beginning of this program, it's a dichotomy.
I mean, this stuff is.
It's sad because there are real people's lives behind all these numbers and behind all these facts and stories.
And yet, for the purposes of our side in the campaign, the news is is useful in terms of illustrating to the people to vote in this country that we're on the wrong track with this regime.
So let me just give you a little sample of some of the economic news around the country that I've been accumulating.
From the Chicago Tribune, Illinois unemployment rises again to nine point one percent in August.
Household income in Chicago, nearly $7,000 less than the national average.
That's one.
U.S. stocks follow global markets lower.
The Raleigh News and Observer, a batch of worrying economic figures tugged stock markets slightly lower Thursday.
Despite the way the drive buys read these reports, the market was not amused.
Measures of manufacturing and business activity, both China and Europe slumped.
You all said a story toward the end of the program yesterday that China's economy is about at a standstill.
That's not good.
CBS report, number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended the work requirement.
In welfare reform.
This is another thing Obama did with the stroke of a pen.
He just stripped the work requirements out of welfare reform.
Been the law of the land since 1996.
And Obama just stripped them out.
Why would you do that?
The program was working.
There were fewer people on the welfare rolls.
Well, that's exactly why you do it, folks.
I hate to say, but you don't want people being self-reliant and self-sufficient if you are a Democrat today.
If you're a big American leftist, Democrat, socialist, Marxist, whatever, you want people dependent.
You don't want people self-reliant.
Does that let me ask you a question?
When I say, does that sound believable?
I mean, it's the damn truth.
But how does that sound to you when I say that?
I mean, I know you agree with me.
Yeah, but it doesn't sound like it's actually possible, does it?
So you say something like that was which is true from front to back, 100%, and I'm trying to imagine some on the fence voters saying, come on, I can't believe the president of the United States really doesn't want.
I don't know how to deal with you.
If if you hear me say that and and you think that it's over the top, I assure you it's not.
It's mainstream.
Let me just ask you, why take the work requirements out of welfare?
What in the world is wrong with work?
Nother limb, the economy is in such bad state that we must do everything possible to help people be able to survive and no, no, no, the economy's recovering.
You know, you guys got to keep your story straight.
We've either got a rank bad economy or people are helpless, or we've got a recovering economy.
Either way, it doesn't matter.
The way out of a bad economy is people working.
The way out of a bad economy is people working and being productive.
So now, after stripping the work requirement out of welfare, now the work requirement's gone from food stamps.
That's what this story is.
It's not the same thing, it's a new one.
Why would you do this?
Obama administration officials have insisted their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare would not gut the landmark ninety-six welfare reform law.
But the number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended the work requirement.
I think this is a big story.
I can't believe it's gotten so little attention.
This is gutting welfare reform part two.
And without anybody even noticing, what Obama has done here is effectively stripped out the requirement that able-bodied adults without dependence eventually have to work a little to continue to get food stamps.
That's gone.
He slipped this in around uh stimulus bill.
Incomes fell or stagnated in most states last year.
This is from the Wall Street Journal.
The income, the typical U.S. family fell or was flat in almost every state last year, with the drop particularly steep in places where the economy's been hit hard by the housing bust.
Median income in Ohio hits twenty-seven year low.
This is the Columbus dispatch.
Ohio households were poorer last year than they've been in more than twenty five years.
The number of people living in poverty in Ohio higher than it's been in more than 30 years.
And this is from the Census Bureau report that the media was all agog yesterday about talking about the economy recovering.
Same census report.
James Newton, chief economic advisor to Commerce National Banks, that people are getting squeezed from every direction.
I am among many who say very freely that it's beyond my comprehension how a majority of people in Ohio could vote for Obama.
Given this, given the economic realities on the ground, that if you read the latest NBC, the latest polls out this week.
Obama is cleaning up now in Ohio, and he's cleaning up in Virginia.
And he's cleaning up in uh Florida.
Obama's wiping the slate in these swing states.
It's over.
Romney didn't have a chance.
He's the only chance he's got is to uh is to uh strip away the uh voters already pledged to Obama.
The undecided's already made up their mind.
Twenty-seven-year low median income, Ohio.
Households poorer last year than they've been in 25 years, number people living in poverty higher than it's been in more than 30 years.
How is any of this the fault to Mid Romney?
Or the Republicans or anybody else.
See, do I have more?
Oh, yeah, here's a Connecticut unemployment rate jumps in nine percent.
This is AP.
Connecticut officials yesterday questioned new U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data that show the state's unemployment rate jumped half a point to nine percent from July to August, the largest monthly percentage point increase since 1976.
Massachusetts unemployment rate rose 6.3 percent in August as local economy lost 4800 jobs.
That's the Boston Globe.
Hey, hits just keep on coming.
I've got a whole page here.
Just from Google.
Mingo hit hard with alpha layoffs.
Layoffs hit Sony PR.
Layoffs at American Airlines could make things a lot worse.
Eleven thousand people were talking about.
Group Health announces layoffs and cuts.
First Energy expects about 200 layoffs.
That's an Akron Ohio, a power company.
From BBC News, Eurozone recession looms as business activity falls.
What is this?
What is this story about the economy rebounding?
There's no such thing, and not just here, it's worldwide.
There is no economic recovery.
And I'm gonna, you know, folks, when Greece goes south or Spain or Portugal or whatever, and nothing against those places, but it doesn't ripple across the world.
When we do, it does.
The world needs the United States to get the world back to working.
The world needs the United States for the world to get back to prosperity.
How do these European Union countries survive?
We do it.
We provide them.
We we provide their defense, we enable their welfare states because they don't have to pay for much of what they really need and do.
If we go south, if our financial system implodes, there's no backstop like there is of Greece or Portugal or Germany or what have you.
So that's just a summary of some of the economic renews that uh was reported yesterday.
In the midst of all this high fall and talk about a great economic recovery because of the Census Bureau report that people are moving.
Let's take a brief time out, my folks, uh my good friends, but we got much more straight ahead.
We get back, we'll get straight to your phone calls.
So sit tight.
I said we're gonna get straight to the calls.
I gotta do one thing here before we get to the phones, and it's just one more soundbite or two from the Univision appearance of President Obama yesterday, which was an absolute disaster.
Next question from Jorge Ramos.
Ew, Presidente.
You told me during an interview that neither Eric Holder or you did uh did not authorize Fast and Furious that allowed 2,000 weapons from a U.S. to Meiko.
And they were in drug trafficking hands.
I think up a hundred Mexicans might have died, and also American agent Bryan Terry.
There's a report that 14 agents are responsible for the operation.
But shouldn't Attorney General Holder have known about that?
Shouldn't you fire him?
It's important for us to understand that the Fast and Furious program uh was a field-initiated program begun under the previous administration.
When Eric Holder found out about it, he discontinued it.
Uh Eric Holder has my complete confidence because uh he has shown himself to be willing to hold accountable those who took these actions and is passionate about making sure that we're preventing guns from getting into the wrong hands.
No, he's not.
Folks, we've been through this.
You're on the cutting edge.
You've heard this before, but I'm going to tell you again, what you just heard the president say was not true.
He's lying.
Fast and Furious was a program that originated under the Obama administration.
The plan that originated under the Bush administration was called wide receiver.
It was disbanded and discontinued when it was determined that it was a failure.
It did not work.
Bush's program, wide receiver, had ended more than two years before Obama took office.
There is no evidence that Fast and Furious ended because Holder found out about it.
Fast and Furious was something that this administration conceived They they knew about wide receiver.
They were intrigued by that program.
What wide receiver did that Fast and Furious didn't do was track the guns to refresh your memory.
Fast and Furious was ostensibly a program designed to figure out how in the world American weapons were ending up in the hands of drug cartels in Mexico.
And what they did is is it's firmly established, this that I'm going to tell you is undeniably true.
A very few number of gun shops in Arizona and Phoenix sold weapons knowingly on order from the U.S. government to people who were the who were gun runners.
They were allowed to cross the border, take the weapons across the border, and they were to be used by Mexican drug lords.
They were not tracked.
The guns were not tracked.
All Fast and Furious did was give guns to drug cartels.
Wide receiver, the Bush administration program, tried to track the guns.
There were tracking devices in them.
Wide receiver arrested buyers, but they weren't able to get all of them, and they weren't able to get the guns out of people's hands once they were there, so they shut it down.
Many people theorized that what seemed attractive about wide receiver to Eric Holder and Obama.
Now, who are they?
They are liberals, and that means something.
And one of the things being a liberal means is that you don't like people, private citizens having guns.
You just don't like it.
You don't like the Second Amendment.
If you could, as a liberal, you would erase it.
If you could, as a liberal, you would take guns out of every private citizen's hands.
Even for hunting, even if you are a liberal, that's what they believe.
There may be a couple very rich liberals that like to hunt, but for the most part, being a liberal and an Obama liberal and Eric Holder liberal wants to get guns out of the people's hands.
So what's their problem?
Well, aside from the Constitution, their problem is the majority of American people don't want to give up their guns.
In fact, gun sales continue to skyrocket during the Obama administration.
There are people who think they might actually need them to protect themselves.
Well, Obama and every liberal like him simply doesn't like that.
And they don't like the idea that the American people don't agree with them on the Second Amendment.
So how to get rid of guns?
The American people don't want to do it.
And by the way, it's a it's it's such a losing political issue.
All the polling data doesn't matter.
Election data standing for gun control, you lose.
You will lose an election.
Al Gore came out against gun control in a presidential debate with Bush in 2000.
John Kerry went into Ohio or Indiana dressed up like uh some some guy in camouflage gear, walks into gun stores, this rock get me a hunting license.
I mean, they do everything they can to make people think they don't want to get rid of guns, but they do.
So you got a problem.
American people don't want to give the guns.
What do you do?
What liberals always do, try to create a false narrative or impression that the American people have had it and are fed up with it, and and and we've got to get guns out of people's hands.
They want that cry erupting from all over America.
So many people think that the point of Fast and Furious was very simple.
Get these guns into the hands of some of the deadliest vicious, trigger happy criminals you can find.
And they're very close.
They run drug cartels south of the border, they're in Mexico.
So you give them the guns.
And they'll go crazy.
Because people die in gun raids, gun car or drug cartel activities every day.
And what happened was one of our agents, Brian Terry died, and uh more than a hundred Mexicans.
And what was supposed to happen, the American people were supposed to hear this news, and there's supposed to be outraged at two things.
A, that drug cartels have American guns.
You mean it's that easy?
That some local weed can cross the border, buy a gun, and take it home to Mexico, and there's nothing to stop.
That's right.
And then they start shooting people.
The outcry was supposed to be the American people were supposed to rise up in indignation.
So you've got to shut that down.
We've got to stop making guns so easily.
That's what they were trying to shape public opinion so that you ended up demanding gun control.
But it didn't work.
And there are now emails back and forth, Daryl Isis committee, that the uh attorney general's office, DOJ's lied about all of this.
It's it's pretty clear that this is a very serious bit of corruption, and that's why the question should hold or be fired.
Okay, now back to the phones we go, and it's to Philadelphia.
Joe, great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hi, how are you, Russ?
Very well, thank you.
Uh long time listener, been listening since 92, never called before, but uh I was watching Rock Center with uh Brian Williams last night, uh mistake I don't usually make.
And uh Ted Koppel was doing a report on NBC News of all places on network bias in the news.
So I've got some I've got some audio sound, excuse me, audio sound bites from this, and it's worse than that.
The segment also included a uh feature on talk radio and how it incites.
And uh yours truly was uh mentioned, called an assassin by Bill O'Reilly.
Uh that's uh it's uh playing for radio.
I've got the sound bites here.
Me, Hannity, uh Levin, all called assassins and um inciting people.
Uh Bill Maher made the comment, uh O'Reilly said uh he agrees with that kind of thinking.
And so, yeah, I've got I wasn't even gonna play a sound bites.
You now you brought it up.
Now I may as well play them.
Are you gonna play other should I you want to play them now or no?
I well what is that what else did you call about?
Uh just you just reminded me.
I just was calling because I I thought the whole thing was just so laughable that the most biased network of all would have the guts to run a story like that.
And then when he's talking to Anne Coulter, uh actually says to her, Well, you've got to admit the the New York Times isn't bad.
That's a good newspaper.
I almost fell out of my chair when he said that.
Well, what now that shouldn't surprise you that Coppel would love the New York Times.
It doesn't surprise me, but uh I don't know.
It just seemed to be really throwing it in our face.
It's like Well, of course there's a problem doing we are the one element of the media that hasn't fallen in line.
We're the one element of the media and and certain places at Fox that haven't fallen in line.
And as such, uh we're looked at as dangerous renegades.
But the uh I I I agree with you.
I think it's laughable of all places NBC to be worrying about media bias and this and this kind of thing.
They asked us.
Uh Joe, thanks for the call.
HR told me months ago that Ted Coppel had called him and asked participate in this, and I I made the decision not to appear on it, just like I've made the decision.
I'm not going to appear on any of these networks for anything about anything any time.
There is no reason to.
They're not interested in what I have to say.
They don't care about what I have to say.
That's not their purpose in asking me on.
It makes no business sense, and it's not enjoyable, so there's no fun in it, so there's no reason to do it.
I didn't do it because it was Coppel.
I just did it because it was NBC.
Why, why, especially with this premise?
Why go on where the assumption is I'm guilty?
And somehow I have to defend myself against some allegation out there, and I don't know who else they're going to be talking to on tape.
They go out and play whatever I say and get people to react to it.
I used to have a good relationship with Ted Coppel.
Back in the late 80s, early 90s, I was on nightline now and then, and had a falling out over.
Something Barney Frank said on the I I forget totally what it was now.
But it hadn't been the same since.
Ted and I had a falling out, and it just has not.
I think oh, I know what it was.
He apologized to me privately for uh I I had been maligned on the show by a guest, and he apologized privately, and I mentioned his apology on the air, and he thought that was a betrayal.
As I I thought the apology should have been in public.
It happened on his show.
Why not the apology?
He thought that was a betrayal.
And we haven't spoken since.
Until HR gets this call, hey, NBC's doing this thing for the campaign.
It's going to be in September, October, and blah, blah, blah.
I said, I'm sorry.
Don't try to talk me into it.
Going nowhere near it.
So let's grab sound bites 29, 30, 31, and 32.
Let's start this.
Because I uh Cookie gave me this for reason.
I don't know why, but I when I hear it all, I might.
This is what I said Monday about the arrest of the guy did the video.
This is supposed to have incited the attacks on the U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya.
This is Susan Rice have been out there on Sunday making this point.
Obama, Hillary, to this day still apologizing to countries in the Middle East for this video.
And again, I ask you, why in the world, when your ambassador is killed by these, why would you exonerate the terrorists?
Why would you go out of your way not to blame the people who did it?
Why would you want to give them a pass by blaming some internet video?
And of course, we answered that in the first hour.
But let's go back, let's play what I said.
I don't know if this is a factor in what they talked about last night or not, but there's a reason this is here.
I just got these.
So I haven't had a chance to read them, understand what it is.
We're gonna hear them together for the first time.
A guy was rounded up.
He was pulled out of his house at 1.30 in the morning by sheriff's deputies.
He was taken in, interviewed, supposedly parole violation or what have you.
It was left to uh no speculation whatsoever that this video caused all this.
We've all been manipulated, and I'm telling you that my theory is the reason that this has happened.
This is a campaign aid.
This was designed part of the Obama campaign.
It does two things.
It makes this guy who did the move.
What is he?
He's a Coptic Christian.
What is he?
Intolerant.
What is he?
Making fun of Islamists.
What does he causing violence?
All of this filling in a cliche or a brand or an image.
The purpose of this is to make it impossible to support a guy like Romney because Romney's also is a Mormon, but uh intolerant Republican, racist, sexist, big all of this stuff.
It's designed to suppress the Romney vote.
It's designed to dispirit the Romney vote.
It is designed to make liberals and Obama look like the compassionate, big-hearted, understanding, tolerant.
Okay, so I said that on Monday.
Um I guess it's a C I told you so, because Obama's still apologizing in the Middle East for this guy and his video, and there's I'm just explaining why.
Now, I don't know that's got anything to do with what comes next, but it doesn't hurt to have aired it because it is still a C I told you so.
This is Rock Center last night at NBC.
Special correspondent Ted Couples report about civility and media.
And Ann Coulter is in this, and uh Bill O'Reilly and me.
And here we've got uh three of these, I think.
Yep, and here's the first of them.
O'Reilly is loud and frequently over the top.
But support Obama is a liar?
The nuns have gone feminizing on everybody.
The bar for civility on cable television and talk radio has fallen so low that by comparison O'Reilly seems almost reasonable.
Talk about the folks who take it too far.
You and I had a phone conversation a couple of weeks ago.
You used a term that really resonated with me.
You called a couple of people assassins.
Sure, you can make money by assassinating people that differ from you.
You make money speaking to the choir, the haters.
Okay, now, who do you think O'Reilly's talking about there?
You need to know who we better not be talking about.
Well, I'm uh who else could he be talking about?
You mentioned a couple of names to me, Bill.
Uh Obama's a liar.
Is that uncivil?
And Colter's Obama's life is that uncivil?
What'd they say about Bush?
I wonder if Ted ran any of these comments about Bush that people like Bill Maher made, or anybody else on the left, I wonder if he ran any of those comments by these policemen of the uh civility discourse.
I wonder what they thought of that.
Or is this just a one-way street?
And by the way, the nuns have gone feminizing on everybody.
You think about talk about taking something out of context.
But wasn't O'Reilly doing character assassination here?
By calling people assassins?
And of course, Coppel ate it up.
You heard Copels, oh man, you said something and I fully resonated with me.
You call a couple of people assassins.
And uh this is again this Ted Coppel.
We got Stenny Hoyer and Bill Maher in this bite.
Today's journalists too often, because it's profitable to do so and it builds audiences, uh, see their job not to inform, but to incite.
To get people riled up, to get their juices running.
The people who who wake up to AM radio and listen to Rush Limbeau at lunch and Sean Hannity at dinner and only have Fox News on.
They live in a world uh outside of facts.
Okay, aside from the fact that that's not true, what business is it if it is there's a First Amendment, there's a free speech.
What is what this is about is the latest effort to try to drum up support for shutting down speech that you don't like.
And that's why focus on the video, by the way.
There were there were stories, there were stories in the LA Times just this past week.
You know, maybe criticizing a religion is outside the bounds of the First Amendment.
Maybe criticizing Islam is outside the First Amendment.
And of course, Stenny Hoyer here, today's journalist too I was profitable to uh uh incite.
So you see what this whole theme now is.
Is it talk radio insights that we're intolerant?
And you bring in guys like Stenny Hoyer of the American left today to uh to carry this forward.
And finally, this is Brian Williams with Koppel talking about the report.
Brian Williams said, does one of the three remaining petitioners of the kindly evening newscast genre?
First, do you think any of this is splashed up against what we do for a living?
And then second, is it baked into our society?
So I guess he's asking Ted, you know, all this rot gut insight insightful assassination type media out there, is it hurt us, Ted?
Has it has it hurt us?
Um is it has it harmed what we do for a living, Ted, or or or or is it is it baked into the society now?
Yes, on both counts.
What works about cable television is it's cheap and it makes a ton of money.
There is nothing cheaper than a bunch of talking heads.
And the people who are those talking heads have discovered that the more irascible, the more partisan, the nastier they are, the bigger an audience they get.
Yes, it has an impact on us.
And the only way it's ever going to change is if the audience says you know something, I'm tired of it.
Well, I uh one did MSNBC come under their microscope.
Hmm.
So um what if if if these guys don't like what I have to say, why don't they just riot?
Isn't that what they do in the civilized world?
Just riot.
Uh Harry Reed called Bush a liar.
Harry Reed is as has tried to get me taken off the air.
What was Harry Reed trying to incite when he called Bush a liar?
All the people who Bush Hitler, Chimpy, all this kind of stuff.
Anyway, I wasn't gonna play that stuff for you, but the caller talked about it.
And his he was curious how could NBC of all people be doing a special report on bias in the media and not finding any uh where they are.
So that's that.
A little long here in the segment.
Got to take a brief time out.
We'll be back after this.
Speaking of the civility, you believe this is come back again.
Obama gets this started after Gabby Gifford's.
Who was it called Mitt Romney uh felon?
Who was it?
Would it be Stephanie Cutter of the uh Obama campaign, right?
Who who was it that called Romney a murderer?
Who who said that Romney stood idly by while some steelworker's wife died?
Who who tried to make the connection to Romney and and and some guy's death?
That wouldn't that be the Obama campaign.
I'll tell you, this is my friends, what it all means is that the daily drivel and bilge that you see is not true.
If these people were so on top of the world, and if what they were doing was winning so big, we wouldn't be any more than you know, a bunch of gats.
Talk radio Fox News wouldn't matter a heel of beans to them.
But we are still profoundly effective, and that is what bothers them.
Now, even if we were just a bunch of gnats, they'd still try to squish us just because that's who they are.
But they're worried.
They're not amused, they're not just irritated, they're worried.
And all this stuff about Obama running away with this, and Romney's imploded, and Romney didn't have a chance.
Don't buy it.
And they know it.
They know they're running a rigged game, and they know they're cheating, and they know this isn't a level playing field.
They know they're rigging their polls.
Looky here.
Sixty percent of Americans had a little or no faith in the media to report the news accurately and fairly according to Gallup.
Forty percent trust the media a fair amount or a great deal.
Three-fifths of the American people distrust the mass media, it is an all-time high, according to a poll released yesterday.
In 2011, 55% of Americans were distrustful.
Today, one year later, 60%.
So you might say, well, what rush, well, wait a minute.
If it's true, then how come Romney isn't ahead by 6040?
The two don't necessarily follow, but what does follow is that if 60% of Americans have little or no faith in the media to report accurately, it could well mean that what the media is reporting in these polls is not anywhere near true.
If the if people don't believe the media by 60 to 40 percent, then they're not gonna believe by 60 to 40 percent all of the crap that's being said about Obama and how wonderful he is, and how he's trying, and the economy's not that, but People aren't buying it.
It may not be reflected in the polls in these percentages, but let's wait for election day.
Or let's wait for the polls in the last week leading up to the election.
These people in the media know they don't have their monopoly anymore.
They're worried about their ability to move public opinion on a mass basis the way they used to.
And their day is now given to daily demonstrations to themselves of their power.
They write news for each other.
They do TV and radio reports for each other.
They do magazine articles for each other to read, not for their audiences.
They have the biggest disconnect, and that's what this poll shows.
Mainstream media today has the biggest disconnect with its audience that it's ever, ever had.
And as the disconnect grows, and as more and more people distrust them, then the media digs in more and more and says, You don't know what you're talking about.
You don't know how we do our jobs, you don't know what's important.
They're the only business in America that customers always wrong.
I gotta take a break.
We'll be back much more straight ahead to EIB Network.
Don't go away.
I know it's open line Friday, and we try to get more calls in on uh Friday.
And I'm gonna make an effort the next hour to get more than the usual number.
But I told you when we started the program that I was looking, do you know Vince Young, 26 million dollars he once had, he's now broke, quarterback, NFL.
And uh he once spent five thousand dollars a week at a cheesecake factory.
There have been a couple stories on this poor guy and and and how he's lost everything.
Twenty-six million dollars.
▲
Export Selection