All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 23, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
November 23, 2012, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It is true, ladies and gentlemen, it's Duggar Bansky filling in for the Doctor of Democracy who is out.
It is the day after Thanksgiving, which as you know is a Friday, and you know what that means.
As you know, ladies and gentlemen, Friday is the day where Rush usually opens up the phones to allow amateurs, as he calls them to take over the show.
Today he does something vastly more risky.
He allows an amateur to be here taking over the show for a little while.
I'm sorry I didn't get to any of your calls in the last hour, ladies and gentlemen.
We will rectify that shortly.
I promise.
I must always be reminded to rectify that.
My old voice just drones on and on.
It's not a great various voices, you know.
1-800-282-2882 is the number once again, 1-800-282-2882 is the number.
You gotta go to Russia's wonderful website, Rush Limbaugh.com.
There's nothing else like it in all of Talk Radio.
It's brilliant, it's funny, it's worth it's worth going.
Have you seen the limbaugh letter is also now online.
That's how you get it now.
It's a big transition for me as a member of it myself.
I have to make the transition to go online and look at it.
Anyway, ladies and gentlemen, it's does it come as any surprise at all?
These people are so predictable.
Does it come as any surprise that for the fourth straight year, Obama's Thanksgiving message does not thank Almighty God.
Now, Ben Shapiro has written about this in Breitbart.com, but I've already we already noticed it before then, because I'm I'm one of the watchers of presidential Thanksgiving addresses.
This is his fourth Thanksgiving address, and it is the fourth Thanksgiving address, no surprise, in which Obama ignores the central message of Thanksgiving holiday.
In fact, he makes it in a sort of a very weird political little talk.
He says, as a nation, this is his Thanksgiving address.
He says, as a nation, we've just emerged from campaign season that was passionate, noisy, and vital to our democracy.
But it also required us to make choices, and sometimes those choices led us to focus on what sets us apart instead of what ties us together.
He says, We're grateful that this country has always been home to Americans who see these blessings not simply as gifts to enjoy, but as opportunities to give back.
Americans who believe we have a responsibility to look out for those less fortunate to pull each other up.
This is all this is Obama politics.
He mentions God at the end.
He says, and he has to mention God, of course, in the context of himself.
He says, Because there but for the grace of God go I don't thank God.
There is nothing new here.
He didn't do it in 2011, no mention of God.
In 2010, he did uh mention God.
Uh he said he said this thing, which is a sort of Michael Moore uh thing.
He says, we'll be spending some time taking stock of what we're thankful for, the God given bounty of America.
Now, when someone on the left refers to the God given bounty of America, they believe what Michael Moore believes, which is that America's exceptionalism comes not from its people, but from the fact that we had oil and natural resources, and that we plundered the Indians, and that the Western, the Western civilization came in and took all these natural resources.
When they say the bounty of God, they do not merely mean the industriousness of the God given people who have come here.
Now what's fascinating about this, of course, is that Obama, when when he makes these statements, when he makes his Thanksgiving Day statements, his messages, they're different from his proclamations, because his proclamations, he see his proclamations he does not read out loud, and he does not speak them at all.
They're full of they're full of all the normal God stuff.
But nobody sees them.
Obama doesn't have to be embarrassed by them.
You know what Thomas Jefferson wrote?
Shall I tell I'll tell you what Thomas Jefferson wrote?
He wrote this.
1789 proclamation having to do with Thanksgiving.
He says, I appoint a day of public thanksgiving to Almighty God.
To him that he would pour out his Holy Spirit on all ministers of the gospel.
This is Thomas Jefferson.
Mr. Separation of Church and State, we're told.
I can quote Ronald Reagan.
I can quote George Washington, whose entire Thanksgiving Day address, which is one of the please go online and read it.
Please, if you haven't read it lately, I won't bore you because we have other stuff to get to today, but I would tell and it's not boring, actually.
Go online and read it.
It's all about thanking Almighty God.
No surprise that Obama that Obama ignored this.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, in the last hour.
Before I move on to the candidate Romney, and the eleventh reason our side lost.
And I'm I'm not gonna let me be very careful here.
Because there seems to be this idea that we mustn't say negative things about Mitt Romney, and that we mustn't talk about it in a negative way.
I'm ultimately optimistic, and you're there's a lesson to be learned from what I'm going to tell you.
Let me make this very clear with what I'm about to go into.
Mitt Romney's character, I believe is impeccable.
And we're not going to be talking about that or criticizing that is obviously a good man, a decent man, a God-fearing, God respecting, an honorable man who is clearly highly intelligent.
So don't fasten your seat belts all getting word that I'm going to start saying negative things about person Romney.
But I am going to give you the tough medicine of candidate Romney.
Before I do that, we've had a number of you holding.
I meant to get to you the last hour.
We've been talking about Libya and the recent intelligence.
We are comparing it to what Mrs. Thatcher and Ronald Reagan and Secretary of State George Schultz knew and how they responded in 1986 compared to the mess that we have now.
And Frank in upstate New York, you've been holding an awfully long time, sir, and I would like to welcome you to the Rush Limbo show.
You're with a guest host at Stugger Bansky filling in, but I'm delighted to speak to you, sir.
Hi, how's it going?
Happy holidays.
To you too.
You sound very sad, Frank.
You alright?
Oh, I'm good.
I was just tired.
Uh long day yesterday, you know.
Thanksgiving and all.
Um I like to do it.
You mean a long you mean a long day at home eating and drinking with the family and all that.
Yeah, I still have Chip of Fanny in my system, so we know how that is.
All right.
Um but I I I agree with you on two points.
One, uh, I think it is impossible, well, not necessarily impossible, very difficult to get an incumbent out, because I think too much of this country has gotten into the habit of not thinking when it comes to who they vote uh for.
It's all what they see, what's flashed at them on the idiot box, you know, well, there's there's that, Frank, and there's another thing about this incumbent, which is why I'm just I'm not I'm not proffering any evidence of this, but I'm I'm throwing the question out there merely because when you think about the levers of power and influence and fundraising that an incumbent has in a modern media age, it it is until I see an incumbent beat, I'm gonna stick with the idea that we may have entered a new phase in this regard.
Absolutely.
And it might be a while before we see that.
Which makes it all the more which by the way, Frank, to interrupt you, which I'm a great interrupter, as everyone knows, the the to make it to make the point even harder, it means that who you elect as president is all the more crucial because if you have a person who's elected president who's an accident of history, who this man may be, an accident of a walking, breathing accident of history, it means that you're not gonna get rid of an accident in two terms, if if my theory is right.
Sorry, Frank, you had a second point you wanted.
I agree.
Um Well, I think, yeah, I I agree with that totally.
And uh, unless you know the media flashes the incumbent to the point where people decide they're not gonna vote for the person who's already in there, then it's gonna be even all the harder.
But um what what swung me this election is four years ago, don't hold it against me.
I voted for Obama.
I bought the hype.
Um let's basically he ran a great campaign four years ago.
I mean, I may I ask you Frank when Frank, may I ask you a question?
Yes.
When you say you bought the hype, please help me.
Uh please help me in understanding what the hype was that you bought.
No, no, no, but I'm not being silly with you.
I'm I'm um I'm really serious.
Um I'm I'm laughing.
Uh I'm gonna say two things.
One, the hype was uh buying the change, the taking our country to a a better place.
Two, um about three years ago I joined the army, so I can't say too much about that.
Um, you know, being the commander in chief and all, I'm not gonna speak out against him in in so many words.
But um what I was gonna say is what swung me this election is what happened in Benghazi, being a soldier, and you know, taking the the choice to defend our country and do everything I can to make it a better place.
Did you hear were you hearing Frank the little tale I was telling during the first hour about the last time we were involved with Libya with Ronald Reagan and Mrs. Thatcher?
I did, and that's that's what upset me is how could I how can I conscience in good conscience support a campaign that put my brothers and sisters in harm after actionable human intelligence, which is the most reliable form of intelligence the military worked on, told them that things were not good there, that things needed to they even needed to get out or something needed to be done to spare them from anything bad happening, and nothing was done.
Frank, what do you think about this idea that I talked about that even back in nineteen eighty-six, our CIA director, William Casey, who was a brilliant CIA director, that he had warnings out that Libya was watching American embassies around the world long before nine eleven.
And doesn't that make you wonder why we weren't thinking about this on the anniversary in Libya of 9-11?
Absolutely.
And I'm surprised more wasn't done to make you know things safe on 9-11.
I mean, obviously on the anniversary, things are gonna be heightened because the the way Al Qaeda is and you know all the terrorist action, they try to make as many statements as they can.
And were you were you further disgusted by this idea that it had to do with a video?
I mean, this is the other disgusting idea.
That's that's that's media's way of blaming it on something.
Yeah.
Basically their way of saying it wasn't uh our our fault.
And and I think our country slipped into a bad habit of saying it's not our fault.
And we live in an age where everyone gets a trophy.
Are you suggesting that we criticize Susan Rice, uh, Frank?
Um, I I can't speak to that because I don't know a whole lot about uh what role she played.
Well, we're told we can't criticize her because she's a woman and she's black and she's the United States ambassador to the UN.
Um all right, Frank, thank you very much for calling the show, the Rush Limbo Show.
We're gonna scoot in just a second.
It's Duggar Bansky filling in 1-800-282-2882.
Uh, in a few moments, I'm going to now dig into the Romney campaign, candidate Romney, and the 11th thing that we need to really take on board as conservatives if we hope to win elections in the future.
It's Duggar Bansky filling in for Rush.
Be right back.
Be right back.
All right, we're back here, ladies and gentlemen.
Guest host Duggar Bansky filling in for Rush Limbaugh 1800-2882-2.
Excuse me, one eight hundred-two eight two two eight eight two is the number on open line Friday.
I made an outrageous statement before the top of the hour break before.
I know it's gonna send several people reeling.
I made the statement that we are in the day and age when you need to understand how to win elections, and if you understand this, I believe that anyone, no matter what they believe, is electable.
He who has the best use the word messaging, marketing, usage of modern marketing techniques, and there are many.
He who has the understanding of how to do that ends up the winner.
And and the the evidentiary proof of this is the man we've just elected, who defies all odds of how you elect somebody.
I mean, the things he stands for, defy the odds.
We've heard it's a bunch of things.
The Latino vote, the black vote, Russia's commentary about Obama clause, all of these things are absolutely true.
But uh being a film person, I want to identify that 11th thing.
Now I've already told you.
This is not a conversation about this is not a conversation about Mitt Romney.
He's clearly a wonderful man, an impeccable, decent, honorable, highly intelligent man who I have no doubt loves his country deeply.
I have no doubt.
He succeeded at everything he's tried in his life.
I have no doubt Obama is the exact opposite.
I have no doubt that Romney would have even been a very good president, possibly with the ingredients of becoming a very great president.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mitt Romney's campaign, can't Let's call him candidate Romney, so we know we're not talking about the man Romney.
Romney ran a campaign.
Listen to me closely.
He ran a campaign to govern.
He did not run a campaign to win.
And they are two different things.
The Sunday before the election, I had a friend of mine come over to the House who's more or less an expert in how polling is done and poll numbers.
And we went way into the poll numbers.
We went way through all of Nate Silver's poll numbers.
And what you learned, if you bothered to get way into the poll numbers, is that the polls were almost flawlessly prepared.
As we painfully learned on election night, the polls were right, you know, to the tiniest millimeter.
I knew this on Sunday.
I didn't want to believe it.
Because like many of you, I thought, well, in my gut, there's going to be an outpouring.
In my feel the momentum of this election.
I feel a groundswell.
I have a gut instinct.
These polls can't be right.
I was there.
I was there with all of like all of you.
This is this can't be the case.
This is not right.
And yet, ladies and gentlemen, when I sat down, went through the numbers, it was clear that they were very well researched.
It was clear that they were going to be very right on the money.
And of course, election day rolled around, and they were right on the money.
What is that thing that we had, that gut instinct?
What we learn is, and instincts are very good things if you have the gift for instincts.
But often, when confronted with hard realistic information that's researched and asked appropriately by real people, look, these polling companies didn't want to be wrong.
They have a very it's a very profitable, very competitive business.
Their reputations, no matter what they're polling, are built on being accurate.
They gotta be accurate.
And the more and more people study polling, the better and better and better they get at it.
So I'm sitting there with my gut instinct saying, well, Nate Silver can't be right, but a friend of mine goes through, conservative friend of mine, expert in polling, goes through the numbers with me.
It's clear that Nate Silver is going to be right.
What is the gut instinct that we're feeling?
Well, the gut instinct.
The gut instinct is what keeps me, you know, at the slot machine an hour longer than I should.
The gut instinct is what makes me bet on that extra horse.
I got a gut instinct.
Gut instincts are very good.
I've been blessed and successful in my life by following them very often.
But in the face of hard, well-researched, well-approached scientific information, gut instincts don't hold candles.
So we went into this election.
Well, all of us conservatives telling each other, well, these polls are done wrong.
The sample has too many, well, the sample is reflecting this year, that year, too many democratics.
We're all doing this.
But the samples were careful.
Listen, you can't run away from the fact, none of us can run away from the fact that the polls were right.
Now, one of the things the Obama campaign had decided to do, oh, a year ago, this was a campaign for the vote of the naive, the non-curious.
I don't want to say the stupid.
I'm not going to go there.
I'm not even going to conclude necessarily that we live in a divided country.
How's that?
I believe we live in a country where people are stressed, where people are worried, where people are concerned.
Sure, the media is against us in this conversation.
Anyone who lived through the Reagan election through the Nixon era.
The George Bush era.
We know the media's against it.
Now, they went a bit further than usual this time because this is the first time, even though the media was against everything.
This is an old story, and I certainly don't want calls on the media being against us.
But here's the thing.
We know the media is against us.
This time they went a little bit further, just to put it out there, that they went further than being against us.
They actually helped cover up crimes.
I mean, they helped cover up Fast and Furious.
They helped cover up Benghazi.
The media is complicit in a way that is something you know only the mafia could envy.
But we know going in who the adversaries are.
We know going in that the media is against us.
We know going in that the electorate, not because they're stupid.
We know going in that they're largely naive.
They're stressed, they're not necessarily intellectually curious, they've got a lot on their minds.
They're going to take the broad stroke headline, and this is what we will address very shortly on the show.
Because I want to, and it's not enough time to do it now.
I want to get way into what conservatives need to do message-wise.
Thank you, uh open line Friday, Dr. Bansky filling it for rush, 1-800-282-2882.
Look, you've got to go into these elections to win them.
And to win these elections, you've got to go into them knowing what you're up against.
You go in them not to indicate that you can govern.
You go in to win.
If you don't go in to win, you shouldn't be.
I made the I don't even know if I should say it.
I'm going to say it because I wonder how many of you out there will hear what I'm about to say and say, yes.
I made the comment well over a year ago, well, year and a half ago.
It was a flippant comment, but I made the comment that anyone who ran against John McCain and lost to John McCain probably shouldn't go up and run against Barack Obama and couldn't beat him.
We have a problem.
The Republican image, and we are, ladies and gentlemen, in the day and age of image.
Something Ronald Reagan understood profoundly in his era.
Something that Rush has mentioned that the conservative message, when well articulated, always wins.
A brilliant man, a truly brilliant man named Roger Ailes, not only helped engineer presidential campaigns, but built a beautiful network understanding this reality.
The message is important.
The Republican image, the Republican brand, if you will, has been successfully defined by the as the party of the rich.
We are the party of the racists, the sexists.
We are the party of the heartless robber barons.
We have no compassion for the American people, and yet who has less compassion than the big government types?
Who are the true robber barons than the only ones who can come under the threat of governmental violence and confiscate your earnings, your money through taxation, through progressive taxation, to be specific.
That's the image of Republicans.
Racist, sexist, heartless robber barons.
That's the image.
And that has been accomplished successfully.
Because the Democrats have drilled this into the American people's minds.
You know, I know that this is a false image, that this is not the truth.
But why is it that the only ones who can drill images into minds is the other side?
Is the day not going to come when we can drill images into the minds of voters about the other side.
You had candidate Romney's multimillion dollar TV ads.
They were shockingly stupidly lame for the most part.
They were unpersuasive.
I live in California, which makes things even worse, because my vote ultimately doesn't count.
My vote doesn't count because we're told by the Republican establishment, by the so-called swing state experts that well, California's gone.
We've heard a lot of talk lately about the so-called political advisor class.
I call them the red tie or pink tie advisor class useless.
I've been talking about who useless they are for ten years or more.
It is the advisor class, ladies and gentlemen, that invented the swing voter and the swing state that made my vote worthless.
It is the pink tie advisor, political advisor class that said to win, you've got to go for the swing vote and the swing state.
These things don't exist in reality.
And you don't win.
You can't win big, you can't win successfully, you can't win with a mandate.
You can't go in saying we deliberately believe our campaign should be moderate.
Our campaign should be beige or gray.
You go in with orange and purple and big ideas.
Headline-making ideas.
We got not one TV ad that I recall seeing in California.
Not one.
Very distressing to learn that my vote doesn't count.
Very, very distressing.
Campaign Romney, candidate Romney, underestimated how far to the left the country has shifted.
How do you fight it?
You got to get your message.
You don't just fight it in a direct way.
You go on the field of battle the way the enemy has decided it.
More accurately.
We have a dependency class.
This is this is part of the crux of the matter.
It's one of the things.
But we sat back as conservatives, counting on a bad economy to do Obama in.
But the Obama forces were counting on the bad economy to get him re-elected.
We sat there saying the bad economy is going to cost him the presidency.
They sat there saying, oh no.
We get the culture better than you, Republicans, it's a bad economy that's going to help me win again.
The Obama team never doubted that they were going to win until Benghazi came up, and then they, that's why they're still covering it up.
Obama couldn't be painted as a guy who hadn't a man who had obviously decided that killing bin Laden and Al Qaeda on the run and terrorism on the run was going to be a helpful thing to us toward him being re-elected.
He could not bear the risk that a second term might be not a happening thing.
If we saw that Al-Qaeda wasn't on the run and that they were aggressive and brazen.
Up until that point, the Obama team never doubted they would win.
That's community organizing 101, ladies and gentlemen.
They understand that dependents, that dependents can be made angry if you gin them up enough.
And if you gin them up enough, they'll support you.
The direct message of campaign Romney, the message of self-reliance, prosperity, freedom of opportunity, American greatness, unity, patriotism, all the other themes that you like, that I like, that you and I grew up with, all those wonderful themes are not themes that resonate with all of the voters.
Now that that means we're not explaining them properly.
I mean, I hear very good pundits and commentators say, well, then how do you get the message out?
Ah.
Ah, there's an answer to this.
But it is very naive of us to think that if we simply say that creating a society of dependents and grievance groups, and that if we pander to them, that we'll win.
That's also foolish.
You know, moderates in the Republican Party, I don't like them.
I mean, I don't agree with all my friends over at the Vatican of fundamental conservatism.
You know who they are.
But moderates fight us.
They fight and claw against conservatives.
And the moderates amongst us are the weak ones because they're the ones who always surrender when they're confronted with Democrats and Democrats are no longer Democrats.
In fact, the left, way back pre-Franklin Roosevelt, have been the progressive party.
It never goes away.
It is dogma.
They believe the same things.
It never changes, it never adjusts.
Part of our problem as conservatives is that we are many independent-minded people who disagree on all kinds of issues.
That's what you are when you're a free-thinking person.
We agree on one issue.
We agree on one big issue, which is that liberalism doesn't work.
And that is the big issue.
Candidate Romney out there trying to get the nomination destroys Newt Gingrich.
When it comes to time to run against Obama, Obama with Benghazi with the economy with Fast and Furious and on and on and on and on.
We surrender the entire debate.
We surrender the entire debate.
You can't excite the base this way.
By the way, Obama doesn't excite his own base either in the election, we learn.
He excited me.
He excited you.
He glued us together, but apparently his base, or enough of them anyway, were not excited by him.
If they were not excited by him, why did we lose the election?
Clearly, Romney was the better of the two candidates.
But he ran an election on governing, an election not on winning.
And Obama did get his base out.
Not enough.
He got enough to win, not enough, not as many as the first time, but enough.
Enough to win, and that's all it really takes here.
Our message essentially stuck at this.
Vote for Republicans because we aren't Obama.
We won't give away as much free stuff.
We're a better candidate.
This is not of an election message.
I'm running way too long here, ladies and gentlemen.
Much more to say on this.
Douglas Jabansky filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
We'll be right back.
Doug Arbanski here back, filling in for Rush Limbo, who's out for the day today, day after Thanksgiving Friday.
It's open line Friday.
The phone number here is 1-800-288-2-1-800-282-2882.
You see, the brain is going so fast.
We're talking about the need to learn how to win elections.
We don't go negative.
Think of this.
Think of this, ladies and gentlemen.
We've got Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney.
There is a history that says centrist moderate candidates who run weak elections will lose.
Bush won led to Clinton.
Dole lost his election.
There are many people who believe that the successful campaign against a man who wasn't running, Bush II, led to Obama.
They managed to some measure to convince us that Bush too was still running.
They managed to convince us that it wasn't Romney running, that it was Bush.
You know that my dear friends, you can get anyone elected.
Romney the candidate, candidate Romney was in many ways hopeless.
The campaign decided for better or for worse, never attack.
Do not respond.
The points that could decimate your opponent, there were a lot of them where Barack Obama was concerned, were not brought up.
Which of you out there watching the debates didn't cringe the moment that Romney said, well, I actually happen to agree with the president on this.
Who didn't cringe when you heard that?
Which of you watching the debates when the subject of Libya could have been brought up?
And the candidate from our side could have said, Mr. President, I'm going to ask you the question that no one in the media is dared to ask you about what happened in Benghazi.
The president used the word math to candidate Romney over and over.
Clearly, they had come to some sort of internal decision that using the word math was working against this rich guy Romney.
And which of you didn't cringe and say, why isn't our guy coming back and saying, you know, Mr. President, you've used the word math three times tonight.
And now, sir, I'd like to teach you about math.
You know, people forget, Ronald Reagan was not just a softy candidate.
He was very firm.
He was very clear and he was very tough.
You cannot go into a cocoon.
You cannot bring a chessboard to a Chicago election.
You cannot any more than you'd bring sandals and a swimsuit and sunglasses to climbing Mount Everest.
You need to be prepared to cut into your opponent.
All of these images, Romney is bad.
He is bad.
He killed people.
He sent jobs to China.
He has his money in the Cayman Islands.
He doesn't pay his fair share of taxes.
He's bad.
It doesn't work.
And the proof, the proof that it doesn't work, is in the result.
We lost.
We lost.
The other side won.
I think there were other strategic things we could have done.
More involvement of Sarah Pellin, of course, more involvement of the Tea Party.
Why do we run from these things?
They're assets.
They're wonderful assets.
Reaching out to Ron Paul and his supporters.
There's a tremendous vein, Ronald Reagan talked about this, of libertarianism that belongs inside the conservative movement.
But you don't just go to Florida.
You don't just spend 20 million dollars to destroy Newt Gingrich.
Well, Obama is spending 200 million to destroy you.
And don't come back and fight against Obama the same way you fought against Gingrich.
It is clear to me that all this stuff had been carefully researched.
Rich, banker, Bain, Cayman, Swiss accounts, liberal media.
He did not press the Benghazi scandal.
It is absolutely clear to me, ladies and gentlemen, that we have to start thinking about how we market, how we sell the marvelous brand that you and I know as conservatism.
That's all.
That's all.
You've got to be able to close the deal of winning before you have a chance to govern.
You can have all the best ideas in the world about governing.
They're not going to matter.
If you can't close the deal by going in saying, I'm in this to win it.
You can't have the attitude that says, well, the American people just get a look at me, they're going to like me as I am.
We're long past that day and age.
We're in the media age.
We're in the television age.
We're in the online age.
We're in the social sites age.
The proper use of those things, in fact, may not even be seen as negative.
It may be seen as showing that you've got an inner strength to be a bold leader.
It might be seen, it might be a way of showing that you can make decisions in a controlled, in a non-controlled environment that's not the business world.
The combat of presidential politics is brutal.
It's brutal.
One of the things I got to I I gotta take a break, but I'll finish on this, and I know many of you are holding and you want to talk about the topic, and I see you there, and I will get to you.
It's Dugarbanske filling in for Rush.
right back.
*music*
You know, folks, one of the things I talked about about a, oh, well over, I mean, for five years about Mitt Romney, about camp, excuse me, about candidate Romney.
One of the things that he had to face, especially if he was ever going to be the one that debated Barack Obama.
You had to face the fact that at some point you needed to be prepared to publicly call him a liar.
You cannot go and say he's a nice guy, but doesn't but just doesn't understand how the economy works.
Not when the whole republic is hanging on the balance.
It would have, yeah, sure, yeah, yes, you're right.
It would create some heat.
He would have inflamed a lot of people, but also really got the debates going.
Is he a liar would be the debate.
Yeah, we're gonna get into how you speak over the heads of the media when we return, ladies and gentlemen.
▲
Export Selection