All Episodes
Previous Next
July 31, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:04
July 31, 2013, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Look up there says O.J. got paroled.
OJ Simpson got paroled.
You're not free to go out and find a real killers.
Once again.
Oh, he's not going to be allowed to do this is just on some sentences.
It's not on every day.
So he's still going to be in jail.
Well, then the real killers are going to get away with it.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back, Rush Limbaugh and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, and we're happy to welcome to our program Senator Mike Lee from Utah going to bring us up to date on his effort here to uh lead the Republican Party in the Senate to attempting to defund Obamacare.
Senator Welcome, great to have you here.
Thank you, Rush.
It's a pleasure to be with you.
Tell me and everybody else, um what you're trying to do, because there's there are now people saying what you want to do can't be done because so much of the spending is locked in.
I've read no, that's not true.
Uh and then I I second question, I I'm re I remain perplexed.
I mean, you've got a majority of the American people that oppose this, and I don't see the Republican Party trying to connect with them outside of you and a couple others.
So a lot of this doesn't make any sense to a whole lot of people.
That's right.
It doesn't make any sense to a whole lot of people outside the Washington Beltway.
You see, inside the Washington Beltway, this discussion is controversial.
Outside the beltway, Obamacare is universally despised.
This is an issue, Rush, that is no longer just about Republican versus Democrat.
It's no longer about liberal versus conservative.
This is about Washington, D.C. versus everyone else.
This law is despised because it's going to make un uh our our health care unaffordable.
It's also going to make health care unfair because the President has said he's going to hold hardworking Americans to the line and punish them if they don't comply with the law's exacting demands.
But he's going to give a big carve out for big business.
Big business doesn't have to comply.
The American people shouldn't have to put up with it.
The President said he's not ready to implement the law.
We shouldn't fund it.
You mean the when you say big business doesn't have to comply, you're talking about the one-year uh waiver on the employer mandate.
That's correct.
The President's selectively enforcing the law in a way that he doesn't have an authority to do.
Isn't that a tanned mount admission that the law is punitive?
And he doesn't want it to be punitive going into an election?
Yes.
It's it's punitive, so he's he looked at that aspect of the law that is the most unpopular with those who can afford lobbyists.
The most unpopular with those who have contacts that can get into the White House and get an audience.
And so that's what he's doing is he's throwing this bone out there so that he doesn't get attacked as much within the business community and the lobbyist community.
Meanwhile, he's throwing the rest of us out into this wasteland that is the world of Obamacare.
Well, maybe you can help some of us understand.
Um even if the Republican Party does not want to be identified or known as a conservative party, they still are an opposition party.
I don't understand why they're not even even if they believe that what you want to do can't be done.
Why not make a stand?
Why not stand up and say this is who we are, this is what we're for, this is why this is bad, this is why we want to repeal it for you.
There's a majority of the American people waiting to be connected with.
What what why this capitulation with the Democrats, Senator?
The fact that that question is so difficult to answer is itself a great source of frustration to me.
Because look, we have a majority of the representatives in the House, uh and and a sizable plurality of the Senators who are against Obamacare, have been since day one.
In the House, they've voted 39, 40, 41 times to repeal it.
So those of us who say we're against it, those of us who recognize this law is going to be bad for the American people, ought to be willing to stand up and say, you know, one of the few powers that we still guard jealously within Congress is the power of the purse.
We should simply refuse to fund Obamacare.
We want to fund the rest of government, just not Obamacare.
Senator Mike Lee from Utah with us, what is being said by the uh uh established by Washington, as you describe it, is this.
Look, 98, 99 percent of Obamacare is autopilot spending.
It can't be cut.
It is just like any entitlement, Social Security, Medicare, we can't stop it.
But it that's wouldn't that be the truth in a in a normal budgetary process, but we're talking about continuing resolutions here.
And doesn't that make that entirely different?
Well, those who are saying we can't touch this because it's mandatory spending are simply wrong.
They're simply mistaken, or perhaps they've been misinformed.
The point is that Congress can decide to pass any kind of spending bill it wants.
The fact that you've got mandatory spending that's already been authorized for Obamacare's implementation doesn't mean that can't be cut.
We can run this with an amendment.
In fact, an amendment has already been drafted up to make it so that we fund everything else in government, but we claw back, we restrict funding for Obamacare, both mandatory and discretionary.
What about the argument that there's no way you're ever going to get fifty-one votes for this?
Okay.
So the argument that we're never going to win, so we shouldn't even try overlooks the fact that if every Republican who claims to be against Obamacare simply said, I'm not going to vote to fund Obamacare, we would win.
There would be no way that you could fund Obamacare unless you got some Republicans in the House and some Republicans in the Senate to vote for it.
And so that's why we're encouraging people to get behind this effort, to communicate with their congressmen and their senators, and to say, please don't do this.
And people can find out who is where on this position at a website we set up for this purpose.
It's don't fund it.com.
They can go to don't fund it.com, where they can be directed to uh the identities of those senators and those representatives who are with us and those who have not yet joined our cause.
Now, the one of the uh people that I've spoken to, not a name person, just uh somebody that might have some answers, at least in terms of understanding Republican establishment motives here, have said to me, Rush,
what they're really worried about is that while it's not popular now, after it's implemented and the subsidies kick in for a large number of people, it is going to be liked, like Social Security is or like Medicare is by the recipients.
And the subsidies equal Santa Claus.
And the Republicans don't want to take a stand against it right now since it's already the law of the land and they've got enough trouble being perceived as as uh anti-this and anti-poor and anti-uh uh you you name it.
So they don't want to be on record as opposing subsidies or help for people who need it because it isn't going to help them, and they're worried that somewhere down the line public opinion on this going to shift and people are going to end up liking it.
I think that's right.
And I've got two responses to that.
Uh first, Rush, the fact that entitlements, by their very nature, become popular among some of their beneficiaries is not a reason to let this law kick in.
It's a reason to stop it, because what we discover about entitlements rush is that once they're in place, they're almost impossible to get rid of.
You got death, you got taxes, and you've got entitlements.
So it's better to stop this thing before it kicks in, before it starts, you know, buying some loyalty among those who will never let it go away than it would be to let it kick in and just hope and expect we can repeal it later.
That becomes much more difficult.
The other thing to remember on this point that this was a a law supposedly passed by uh, you know, uh uh Democratically elected Congress.
Well, in a sense that's true, but we have to remember, Rush, that it's been amended now four times.
It's been amended four times by people who didn't have the authority.
It's been amended twice by the Supreme Court, who is I explained in my my book, uh why John Roberts was wrong about health care, amended the statute two times in order to make it constitutional, even though they found it wasn't.
Two more times by the President who didn't have the power to change it, but still did.
Well, here's the problem a lot of Republican voters have, and people that want to vote Republican.
The thinking that people are going to end up liking it, so we don't want to be seen as opposing it.
Even if they don't like it now, they might down the line.
A lot of people, Senator, you might be among them think that the country, I don't want to put words in your mouth, that we're hanging by a thread here, that this country is in the midst of a purposeful transformation that makes government not just the center of everybody's life, but essential.
And we ha and people do not want that to happen, and they've always thought the Republican Party stood against that.
So why not just stand up, even if you're afraid people might end up liking it, the fact that's not good for the country to make even more people totally dependent on government for another aspect of their lives.
It simply is not good for the country or for them.
Why can't that be said and have it said aggressively and compassionately and use that to attract voters and grow the party?
The biggest single reason why that's not being said at this point is because we don't yet have enough members of Congress in the House and in the Senate who have seen the electoral benefits, the political benefits that will come from making the right policy choice.
We see that good politics necessarily flow from good policy.
The right policy here is to stop this horrible law before it steps in and makes life worse for nearly all Americans, for the vast majority of Americans.
If we undertake the right policy, which is to stop Obamacare by any means possible, then we will benefit as a party, because that's what the American people elected us to do.
By the same token, if we don't do that, I we're in huge trouble as a party.
Because we were put into power in the House of Representatives after the 2010 election because of Obamacare.
We were put into power to stop Obamacare.
Exactly.
That's that's the whole point of the 2010 midterms, and Obama is out campaigning today, trying to sell Obama, which is already the law of the way.
Why is he doing that?
Because he doesn't want to repeat in 2014 of what happened in 2010.
They want to win the House.
And I there's no pushback, Senator, other than you.
And who who can you give me some other names that have joined you in this?
Sure.
Uh so in the Senate, we've got a number of people who have joined.
I was pleased to be joined by Marco Rubio, by Ted Cruz, by Rand Paul, John Thune, Mike Enzy, uh, we have uh Chuck Grassley on there as way as well.
Uh Mike Crapo, a Republican Senator from Idaho, just joined yesterday.
He's our latest edition.
We've got a total of thirteen.
We've got about seventy in the House that have signed a similar pledge, and we're building these numbers every day.
We're building because as people become aware of this effort, uh, they will get there.
Uh we've also got Mike Enzee and uh we also have Jeff Chiesa from uh New Jersey.
Uh I was just told by my staff that within the last day or so, the House of Representatives uh has risen to the level of about a hundred.
There are a hundred members of the House of Representatives who are now joined with us.
And these numbers are building every single day because the American people are speaking out.
Yeah, we have Senator Mike Lee from Utah with us.
He's in studio, not actually on the phone, which is why it doesn't sound like he's on the phone.
Senator, uh another argument that is made is the dreaded government shutdown argument that you can't get where you want to go in the continuing resolution fight without a government shutdown.
And then they say, look at what happened in '95.
We got killed.
Ninety-five ruined us.
Now, in reality, we only got killed in the media.
We picked up two Senate seats after the ninety-five shutdown, and the House, I don't think there was not great damage.
Plus that budget fight arguably could be said to have set the table for great policy that followed, such as welfare reform that Clinton signed, because it involved people taking a stand.
But it it's looked at as a debacle because of the impact it supposedly had on Newt.
But it really wasn't.
But that you're you're you're fighting a tremendous obstacle there with this fear that the if there's a government shutdown that the Republicans are finished.
So what do you say to people who have that obstacle in front of them?
Okay.
So in the first place, I want to be very clear that uh what I'm calling for is not a shutdown.
I don't want to shut down, I don't think we need a shutdown.
We ought to be able to fund the government responsibly without a shutdown.
What I am saying is that we ought to fund government, just not Obamacare.
We shouldn't have to vote for all of it, uh, including Obamacare, or have none of it.
That's crazy.
Secondly, if we signal in advance that uh, you know, no matter what, we're going to fund Obamacare, that's the best way to make that happen.
And so that's not the signal we should be sending.
Finally, if we get enough people who are on board in the House and in the Senate, who uh have expressed concerns about Obamacare and are willing to say, I'm going to vote to fund government but not Obamacare, you'd then put Harry Reid in the position, the untenable position of having to say, because we didn't get everything we wanted, even though you funded every other program in government, even the programs Republicans hate.
We're going to shut down the government from the Democratic Party because you didn't include funding for Obamacare.
That's a terrible position for him to be in.
I don't think he wants to fight that fight, and frankly, I don't think he can win that fight.
Where are the Democrats on your efforts?
I know publicly they would, if asked, would say that your task is hopeless and that it's not serious, but where are they really?
It would seem to me that if you've got this increasing number of uh signatories, essentially, if your support is uh growing every day, is there some legitimate worry on the Democrat side that you could pull this off?
Deep down, yes, I think there is.
And that's one of the reasons why they are more than happy to have fellow Republicans uh be at the tip of the spear in the attack against this effort.
And look, I I want to make clear, uh I I uh am fully aware of the fact that the Washington establishment is not happy with me about this effort.
I'm fully aware of the fact that many within the Washington establishment from my own party hate this effort.
Uh but the fact that they're against it simply tells me that I must be doing something right.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are thrilled that we've got Republicans doing their bidding on this, fighting against this effort.
And you've got Republicans essentially saying, Yeah, no matter what, we're gonna fund Obamacare.
That's a problem.
Because we've got to be the party that is not just the Conservative Party, but also the opposition party.
Well, that's the party that's standing for the people and the people's rights.
That's that's what nobody sees.
We don't see an opposition party, Senator, other than uh random individuals like you and and Senator Cruz and occasionally Senator Rubio, we don't see there's no pushback whatsoever.
Did I just hear you say that there are I think I did, there's some Democrats that really hope that Obamacare would be defunded, but they can't publicly say so, but they hope it happens so that they don't have a uh something harming them in their re-election campaign.
You know, you did not hear me say that just a minute ago.
I have wondered in the past whether there might be some who would secretly uh be relieved if that happened, because I think there is a lot of vulnerability on the Democratic side of the aisle uh due to the fact that Obamacare, again, is not just controversial.
It is despised outside of the Washington, D.C. Beltway area.
And we've got to stop it.
And uh I think the American people are with us, the winds at our backs on this.
We've just got to convince those who are here in Washington to do the right thing.
Now, is the fight over immigration reform at all affecting your fight?
Um, because it's much the same.
There are some Republicans that are that are under pressure here to fight the uh uh well the Amnesty or Pathway to Citizenship mode.
Uh is that overlapping or is that of no concern to you right now as it relates to Obamacare?
You know, as it relates to Obamacare, that seems to be having little or no effect.
And, you know, I'm I'm very grateful to have on our side of this issue Marco Rubio, who was on the opposite side of where I was and a lot of people were with regard to the immigration debate.
So so far, those two issues seems to have been kept in completely separate vessels.
They haven't uh impacted each other.
Okay.
Senator Mike Lee from Utah, thanks very much, sir.
I appreciate your explaining this.
And the the big thing is, I guess the takeaway is that people who are saying that this spending is mandatory and cannot be removed.
That's not correct.
It's not true.
As much as they might wish that were the case, it is not.
All right.
Senator Lee, thank you very much.
It's great to be able to do that.
Thank you.
Mike Lee from Utah will be back after this.
Don't go away.
Okay, folks, I'm gonna make a promise to you.
When we come back from the break, coming up at the bottom of the hour, we're gonna go straight to the telephones.
So if you are on hold, I uh I'm asking you to stay there.
Because your time is coming.
A sex tape, never before heard tape of Monica Lewinsky telling then President Bill Clinton that she could take all my clothes off, quote unquote, take all my clothes off.
If he agreed to an illicit meeting with her, has reportedly surfaced.
The tape, which records the White House intern desperately trying to lure Der Schlickmeister into meeting her, was reportedly released to the National Inquirer after it was obtained by a cleaner hired by friends of Lewinsky.
It was long thought that the raunchy four-minute tape recorded in November of 1997 had been destroyed after the sexual affair was revealed in 1998.
A recording made months after their final alleged twist in March of 1997 reportedly shows a determined Lewinsky, who was then 24, pleading with the married president to meet her and telling him she plans to be persistent because I really want to see you.
She adds that she is too cute and adorable to be ignored, according to the Enquirer.
The Mail Online has contacted a Clinton representative for comment on the latest reports.
On the recording, Lewinsky offers Clinton two choices.
That she could meet him at his orifice, or they could watch a movie together.
Since I know you'll be alone tomorrow evening, I have two proposals for you, neither of which is you not seeing me, she says.
This sounds like Snertly, you've had women who desperately want to be with you approach it.
Yeah.
Sounds just like it.
I could take my clothes off and start, well, I know.
Well, you wouldn't enjoy that, wouldn't you?
I mean, I hope to see you later, and I hope you'll follow my script and do what I want.
That's all on the tape.
Snap her fingers, get what she wants.
Move over wiener.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
We love fairness here.
They're all about fairness and equality and being nice and all of that.
And not shouting and not yelling and scaring 24, uh 25-year-old women who think NPR is exciting.
Here's Brad Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
Great to have you on the uh EIB network.
Hi.
Mega Ditto's uh Mr. Limbaugh, a pleasure to speak to you.
Um I told your uh your your call receptor there that uh I am an attorney, uh, I teach law, I'm a full public official and a Republican, and I advise my clients and my students you don't take legal advice from the people across the table.
They're going to give advice, obviously, that is in favor of their position.
Exactly.
Well, that you that that sounds obvious.
Why even say that?
Well, it's not.
A lot of people don't seem to get it, and a lot of politicians don't seem to get that.
Why is it that Republicans are always apologizing because of what the Democrats are saying?
Now wait a minute.
In the analogy that you used, the courtroom, for example.
I think if somebody was at the defendant's table, um, are you saying that it might make sense somebody to take the advice of the prosecutor in the courtroom, not in the plea deal segment.
If you're actually in court, would you take the advice of the prosecution?
It seems pretty obvious that you shouldn't do that, right?
Right.
Yeah, it's not obvious.
I can tell you, it's not obvious out there uh to some people, and it seems like it's not obvious to a lot of Republicans, as you're saying.
Uh, you know, they don't have the courage to stand up and trust the people.
That's the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
Trust the people with the facts, trust the people to be able to understand uh policies that make sense, and you win.
You can win them over.
Democrats say no, no, people are stupid.
You gotta you've got to appeal to their feelings, you gotta make them feel good.
And when we buy into that, making uh trying to make ourselves not look like the bad guy that doesn't feel uh towards uh certain groups of certain people, uh, that uh then we need to be apologetic and wring her hands and be Democrat light, as you say.
I know.
Uh no, tell the facts and articulate this, set the agenda.
People aren't stupid, and they will vote accordingly.
It has always amazed me.
Um, and there are many examples, but I think one of the biggest tricks that the Republicans have fallen for, and this is a trick, by the way, A Democrat media created trick that was used on Republican consultants who found a way to monetize it for themselves.
And it's this.
The trick is that every election is determined by how the independents vote.
The trick states that 40% of voters are going to go Democrat and 40% are going to go Republican.
And that leaves 20% the great undecided, the independents, the moderates, and they are the people who determine who wins and loses an election, not your base.
So the Democrats and the media create that trick.
And then the Republican consultants find a way to monetize it.
The Republican consultants then say to the Republican candidates, I'm the guy that can tell you how to win independence.
I'm the guy that can win independence for you.
I'm the guy that can devise a campaign so that you will win the independence.
And therefore the Republican candidates are always pursuing 20% of the electorate.
The consultants get paid whether the candidate wins or loses.
And they get paid in a number of ways.
One of the ways is a straight contractual fee, a retainer.
The other way is a 15% commission on all advertising that's placed.
And that's where the big money is.
And that's a lot of consultants really become wealthy.
But the trick has got Republicans, and it's been working like this for a long time, many, many years.
The Republicans actually now target their campaigns for 20% of the electorate.
And who are they, the 20%?
They're said to be non-ideological.
So don't approach them with fire and brimstone.
And then the trick was completed when the neat the media and the Democrats spread the notion that the independents don't like partisanship.
Right.
That the independents don't like arguing.
That the independents don't like bickering.
That the independents want compromise.
That the independents want no fighting at all.
They just want everybody to get along.
And the independents do not like strife.
And the independents do not like raised voices.
And the independents do not like, especially when the Republicans get critical of Barack Obama or any other Democrat.
So the consultants tell their candidates and devise campaigns based on all this.
You ever stop to think that your average Republican campaign may only be targeting 20% of the voters.
Why do you think the conservative base is staying home?
They're not being appealed to.
They are being taken for granted.
Now the Democrats are the authors of the trick.
So the Democrats are not just pursuing 20% of the electorate.
They're pursuing it all.
So the trick is a double whammy.
Republicans end up pursuing 20% of the electorate, and they do it with one hand tied behind your back, because they're not allowed to be argumentative, forceful, passionate, or whatever, because that's going to cause the independents to run right into the arms of the Democrats.
And the Republicans, God bless them, believe this, and I offer as proof John McCain.
John McCain personifies this strategy.
That's right, little boy.
Media is my bitch.
And these people, the centrists, the mighty rich, those are the people, and the election is one.
Right.
We see How that's been working out.
So Republicans get snookered.
Here's trick number two.
Trick number two is what's happening in immigration.
We already got trick one in play.
Republicans seeking 20% trying to win an election by appealing to 20% of the electorate.
I think this is mind-boggling when you stop to think about this.
So 20% of the electorates where they're targeting.
But now we move to immigration.
We add something to it.
The Democrats in the media are telling Republicans, the Hispanics don't like them.
Hispanics do not like you.
And you guys, you know what?
You're never going to win the presidency.
You're never going to win it back.
And we Democrats, we really want you to win the presidency.
I mean, that's what we're here for.
We want to share all this with you.
But you guys are going, you keep going the way you're going, and you're going to end up not being a party.
You're going to have to come up with ways to make the Hispanics like you.
You're going to have to open your mind on amnesty.
You're going to have to open your mind on border security.
You're going to have to realize that you can't win an election again if the Hispanics don't like you.
So the consultants, they hear this, and they they sop it up.
And after they've got their candidates pursuing 20% of the electorate, they then tell them, oh, by the way, you guys had better start supporting amnesty.
And what does that do?
Well, the 40% that's that you're taking for granted is going to vote for you, they split, they fly the coupe, and you don't have a prayer.
All this taking place under the guise of Democrats trying to help Republicans.
And all of us are sitting out here saying, who in the world could possibly fall for this?
That the Democrats want to share their voters with us.
That the Democrats really want to share the White House with us.
That the Democrats really want us to win now and then.
They're so eager for us to do well that they're advising us on how to steal Hispanic voters from them.
And the next thing you know, the Republicans are pushing a Democrat plan that will swell Democrat voter registration to point the Republican Party doesn't exist.
And the Republicans are all in.
And they're doing it with a smile.
And we're sitting out here, who in the world can fall for this.
Now the trick is being played a third time on health care.
Can't stop it.
Can't take the money out.
The American people are going to like this.
We can't be seen as opposing these subsidies down the road.
We got to let this pass and let it implode.
It can't possibly work, which, by the way, it can't.
It is too massively bureaucratically complex.
It can't work.
But that doesn't mean, I mean, what other entitlement does.
So I sit here and I I call her Brad is exactly right.
We are taking the advice of people who are trying to eliminate, I mean, really wipe out our existence.
We're taking their advice under the guise that they're trying to help us.
And that's where we get to this capitulation with the Democrats as a strategic.
But I think the real trick, and this has been a brilliant, brilliant trick.
The real trick has been.
Imagine pulling this off.
This is so good, I'm surprised the Democrats can keep this to themselves.
If I were the forehead or Carville, I would be out bragging about this.
I'd have already written books, but they know not to.
Bob Schrum, all these guys, they've got every Republican candidate is trying to win every election by targeting only 20% of the voters.
They've got them believing it.
That's where elections are won.
You gotta, you gotta win a majority of those people.
So that's where you aim for 20% of the electorate.
Meanwhile, as we sit here, the polls show that 29% of independents oppose Obamacare.
No, no, that's not right.
So no.
Only 29% support it.
The vast majority of independents oppose Obama.
They never have liked it.
And in this instance, for some reason the Democrats, the Republicans don't care about the independence.
In the one instance, I guess the consultants are telling the Republicans.
No, no, the independents, they're they're wrong on this.
Anyway, folks, go figure.
All right, more phone calls are coming up.
And we'll be back and do that right after this.
So what do you think?
Put it out there or just ignore it.
All right.
Well, let's go ahead and do it.
I mentioned this earlier in the program, and I promptly forgot it, and I got people sending me emails.
What about that CNN thing you were talking about?
Are you gonna play it?
So I did Greta last night, and it was a full hour, and they got enough tape that there's gonna be another full hour on Friday.
The fact that I was on Fox last night for an hour was almost the lead story on CNN today.
And we have three sound bites.
Carol Costello, the former Rush stalker, before she was an anchor, she was a reporter, and she she had the the rush beat.
And she had as her guest Brian Stelter, who used to work at a at a TV blog, and got hired by the New York Times as a media expert.
I think he's 16.
I'm kidding, but he's a he's very young man.
And Carol Costello was was was puzzled that I would be on TV in the first place.
I don't do it.
Then she puzzled that Fox would give me a whole hour when they don't give politicians that.
And that that formed the foundation of the discussion.
And then they concluded.
They concluded that I did this because I realize I'm gonna be gone in three years.
Career is gonna be over in three years, which they've been saying for 25 years, and that I'm desperately trying to put myself out there to save a flagging career, to show that I still can move people and audience meters and so forth.
Despite the fact that I told you why I did this yesterday, and that was that I mean, look, Greta was on me like Wiener is on the phone.
I'm telling you, she for two weeks, she was persuasive.
She she was I'd wake up in the morning, and the first three emails I saw in the inbox were from her asking me, pleading with me to do this.
And I like Greta's worker, and I decided to do it, and it was I really I did this in conjunction with nothing other than simply being nice to Greta.
That was it.
Because I don't even like it, which didn't air last night, but we talk about that in this interview about why I don't like TV.
That'll probably air Friday.
So let's go to the tape and let's laugh at this together.
Here's Carol Costello, this is the first soundbite, introducing this Brian guy from the New York Times.
I just found it fascinating that Rush Limbaugh appears on Fox News for almost an entire hour.
He never does that.
And he didn't specifically talk about, you know, his business dealings, but he talked a lot about his politics and kind of bashed Obama for an hour, really.
I mean, if you want to be honest about it.
Well, if you don't want to be honest about all bashed Obama, he didn't talk about his business dealings.
What she means by that is that I clearly felt a need to do TV because I'm losing all these radio stuff.
I mean, these people.
HR, how often does CNN call asking me?
That okay, they've taped it used to Anderson Cooper DC were calling all the time.
NBC, ABC.
Tell them no all the time.
Now they're calling in droves again since I did this.
Anyway, now she she asked that question of Brian Stelter of the New York Times.
Here's what he said.
I kind of felt like it was a reminder that he is the top conservative talker out there.
Look at him getting a whole hour on Fox News.
Nobody ever gets that, not even politicians that get that.
But Rush Limbaugh has been on for such a long time, more than 20 years, and there is some skepticism about whether he's going to be as big in three or four or five years as he is today.
Where is there that skepticism?
It was totally invented.
I don't even know if I'm going to do this beyond the next two years.
Skepticism for prayers.
Mistaking the word.
There's some prayers that I'm not going to be doing this three to four.
That's right.
They're praying.
I didn't determine.
I sat down, I asked Greta, how long is this going to go?
She's an hour.
I said, oh, jeez.
I said, oh, jeez.
I was a prisoner in this, folks.
I was I dictated nothing.
I had nothing to do with any of it.
Don't have time for it.
The third soundbite is Carol Costello.
▲
Export Selection