All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 19, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:16
February 19, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome to another three-hour excursion into broadcast excellence, hosted by me, your guiding light.
There are all kinds of trouble and tumult and chaos and even the good times.
We're here regardless.
Serving as a beacon.
El Rushbow behind the golden EIB microphone serving humanity each and every day.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program.
800-282-2882.
The email address, LRushbow at EIBnet.com.
Dolphins offensive lineman Richie Incognito has now apologized.
Well, he has offered apologies to teammate Jonathan Martin, team owner Stephen Ross, and investigator Ted Wells in the wake of this report detailing what a bully he was in the Miami Dolphins locker room.
Something tells me this is not going to be enough.
No closure on this yet, folks.
And by the way, you know, the NFL scouting combine is getting ready to kick off in Indianapolis.
That is the equivalent of the NFL meat market, where all kinds of college prospects show up and work out and try to impress teams with their athletic and NFL football abilities so as to get drafted as high as they can and make as much money as they can.
They want to make the NFL.
And guidelines have been issued to the teams.
Apparently, there are rumors going around that three players last year were kind of asked about their sexual orientation in roundabout ways.
Three players that teams took the back door in trying to get answers.
Well, no, I don't know if they got into the back door or not.
There's such questions as, so we hear you like women.
You like to date women.
And the player said, wait a minute now.
Is that a trick question?
It really was.
So the NFL has now issued guidelines.
This is a huge C, I told you so.
First of many, NFL has issued guidelines.
No such questions permitted because there's an interview process in the scouting combine.
And there's no such questions permitted.
That's my question.
If it's supposed to be celebrated, how come we can't ask?
If there's nothing wrong with it, why can't you ask?
But you can't.
The NFL sent out the guidelines.
You're not supposed to ask about it.
You're not supposed to allude to it.
You are not supposed to go in the back door with it.
You're just not supposed to bring it up.
Well, it's not a psychological test.
It's an intelligence test.
It's got some psychological aspects.
It's called a Wonderlick test.
And it basically tells the NFL whether or not these guys are smart or not.
And then just general real-world smart.
And there's football smart.
And it's not supposed to leak out how players do on the Wonderlick test.
Well, it has leaked out when players have really bombed on the Wonderlick test.
And I tell you, it's very competitive.
You know what happens?
Sometimes a team will leak that a guy is a raving idiot when he isn't.
Just trying to lower other teams' interest in him.
When Warren Sapp came out, University of Miami, there was a vicious rumor that he smoked pot, and it wasn't true, and it did hurt him where he was chosen in the draft.
So it's highly competitive in there.
And I mean, Jeff Ireland, who is the general manager of Dolphins, you know, Des Bryant, number 88, wide receiver for the Dallas Cowboys, this general manager said, so what was it like to have a mom that was a whore?
Really?
What was it like to have a mom who's a prostitute?
That spread like wildfire, and he ended up apologizing to Des Bryant for it.
It's vicious.
I mean, folks, it's bloodthirsty capitalism in the NFL at this time of year.
Because if a team is interested in a guy, they'll do everything they can to make nobody else interested.
And they don't want to know.
That's that the league says you can't ask the sexual orientation now.
Well, I don't know.
Do they want to know or not?
Does the league want to know?
I mean, when players come out, they celebrate that.
So you would think that they would.
I haven't the slightest.
I don't care.
You know, I really, it doesn't matter to me.
I'm just telling you people what's going on there.
Anyway, Richie Incognito.
Let me get back to this and close the loop on this.
Richie Incognito has offered apologies to his teammate, Jonathan Martin, the owner of the Dolphin, Stephen Ross, and Ted Wells, the investigator, because there was a pattern of harassment.
It's hard to say there was bullying because there was nothing physical.
But the not yet.
He has not cried yet.
I've got some swear I'm headed with this.
I've got some solutions for Incognito if he really wants to fix this.
They accused him of bullying, but he didn't do anything physically.
So the wizards in the sport media are now saying, well, you don't have to do anything physically to bully anybody.
You can psychologically bully people, which is what happened.
But anyway, I, like you, I'm sensing this won't be enough, that it's too little, too late, particularly since last week Incognito was out acting like the report was going to come out in his favor.
So he's got a lot of egg on his base here.
Only two things that could save Richie Incognito right now.
One is obviously declaring that he's got some questions about his sexual orientation.
He's not sure.
And it'd be a tough thing for him to do, I'm sure.
These are just suggestions.
I'm not recommendations.
But he could either come out as gay or suggest that he's confused and conflicted about it.
And that's why he engaged in all that behavior.
He was just trying to cover up what is, and he's trying to make sure people didn't find out any number of ways.
The second thing he could do would be to attack me.
That seems to be the ultimate get out of jail card for people like this.
He could say that he'd been listening to me for a number of years, and that's where he got the idea of bullying.
And you think he wouldn't get out of jail free if he did that?
You know, I've been listening to Limbaugh regularly, and that's where I got the idea of bullying people.
Snerdley's cringing.
Don't give him the idea.
Snerdley's huddling and cringing.
And I'm sure some of you, I'm just trying to make light of this, folks.
But serious, given the media and me, you think that would work?
It might.
I don't bully anybody and never have, but it could be.
Could be.
It might be even now.
See, I'm just here to help, folks.
I'm willing to, like they said, the pioneers take the arrows.
Now, this Mrs. Clinton business, you know, yesterday we talked about the revival of the Clinton-era 90s and how there's a whole young, a group of young people that don't know anything about it.
They weren't old enough or weren't alive during the Lewinsky scandal.
We think it was just yesterday, but in terms of voting age, you've got some young people going to be voting for the first time next couple of years to whom that's nothing more than something that happened either in their childhood or they weren't even born.
And so the question is, when they learn what, I mean, what is their impression of Clinton?
I mean, their impression of Clinton is Clinton Global Initiative, their impression of Hillary, Secretary of State.
They're great people.
People who were not alive or paying attention back then, and based only on what's reported about the Clintons today, will have a viewpoint that maybe the Clintons are wonderful people, filled with compassion.
They help others, and everybody loves them.
Clinton's popular.
He's everywhere.
He's with all these pop culture guys.
He hangs out with Bono.
And then they learn about Lewinsky.
What's going to be the impact?
They go either way.
Kathleen Willey was on, was Megan Kelly last night?
Yes, it was.
By the way, what prompted me to bring this up?
There's a bumper sticker.
You know, you've all seen these before, but they're being revived.
And, you know, Rand Paul is out there talking about what an absolute disgrace Bill Clinton was.
And Kathleen Willey is saying that Hillary Clinton is the war on women.
And there's a lot of young people, remember political parties target them.
They don't know anything about this.
And so there's a bumper sticker.
I saw it.
Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife for president.
That's the bumper sticker.
Now, if you don't know Monica Lewinsky or how she's even in the news or why she's in the news, that bumper sticker might not mean anything to you.
But if you do, what a putdown of Clinton, Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife.
Now, this stuff is starting to resurface.
And so, and as you know, the Republicans are scared to death.
The Republicans think that if Hillary runs, she's automatically going to get the nomination and she's automatically going to be elected.
And they have thought that since back in the 90s, I can remember elected Republican officials, party officials, back when they were talking to me, telling me that there was no way we could ever stop Hillary Clinton when it was her time to run.
There was no way.
And of course, Obama came along and did it.
But prior to 2008, I can't tell you the number of people telling me Russia's a fait accompli.
There's no stopping her.
If she runs, she's going to get nomination.
She's going to get elected.
And it's all repeating itself now.
You know it, and I know it.
I mean, you see it out there.
People on our side, deathly afraid.
I've always said, why are we afraid?
She puts her pants on like every other guy, one leg at a time.
What in the world is there to be afraid of?
But they are.
They are terribly afraid.
The people on our side.
So I'm just interested in what these youths who don't know because they weren't alive or old enough to really know, who are now going to be learning about Clinton and Lewinsky and all the other babes, Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones.
So let's go to Kathleen Willie, see what she has to say about it.
She was on Megan Kelly's show on Fox last night.
And we got two bites.
Megan Kelly said, you've come out now and said that you believe that former President Clinton's harassment of you is relevant to any potential run that Hillary might make in 2016.
Why do you think that?
She needs to be exposed for all of the terror campaigns that she has raised against the women who were in the wrong place at the wrong time with their husband.
How can you be a champion of women's rights and turn around and do what she's done to women like me?
When I was reading the article last Monday, the thing that bothered me the most was when she was having a discussion with somebody about how they were going to handle Jennifer Flowers, and she was trying to find a way to hang a crime on her.
She wanted to send that woman to jail.
And that's when I thought, you know, this isn't right.
This is not right.
Now, she's right.
This is another thing.
Hillary Clinton, I mean, talk about Betsy Wright.
Betsy Wright was the titular head of the Bimbo Eruptions Unit.
And some of you may have forgotten, there was a Bimbo eruptions unit that Clinton, Carville, and George Stephanopoulos put together in 1992 as part of a war room.
And Kathleen Willie's right.
There were all kinds of women all over the country that Clinton had, shall we say, interacted with.
And the campaign developed a strategery to deal with these women as they came forward.
It was Hillary who did the strategery.
Hillary created a bimbo eruptions unit.
They put Betsy Wright, you know, as the titular figurehead in charge of it.
But it was Hillary's idea.
And the idea was whenever one of these women popped up, just destroy her.
And in the process, that was supposed to keep other women from popping up.
That was to keep the other women quiet.
And so you had Paula Jones come forward on sexual harassment.
And that's when James Carvo said, well, you know, when you drag a dollar bill through a treadmill park, you never know what kind of trash you're going to pick up.
And all of this was going on.
And it was an actual war on women being run from the Clinton war room.
It was an actual war on women.
While Bill was being feted as the greatest women's rights president ever come down the pike, and Hillary, of course, the greatest feminist and smartest woman ever to come down the pike, they're out there destroying all these women who could have damaged Clinton.
And the now gang was right in there with them.
The nags were joining them in destroying these women.
Didn't matter who they were, and Kathleen Willey ended up being one of them.
And so she's just saying to Megan Kelly last night, I'm reading about what they tried to do to Jennifer Flowers, and she says, Hillary needs to be exposed for all the terror campaigns that she ran against the women who were in the wrong place at the wrong time with her husband, meaning they happened to be in a room when Clinton walked in and got eyes for him.
That's what happened to Kathleen Willey.
Clinton flew into wherever she lived, Virginia, West Virginia, wherever it was, and she's on the tarmac with a bunch of other Democrats welcoming Clinton as he arrives.
And he asks some guy, hey, who's that?
That's Kathleen Willey.
Hey, give me her number, will you?
And the guy got her number, and Clinton called her, and she claims hit on her, harassed her.
Husband committed suicide not long after.
So she's surfacing now.
Here's the next bite.
Megan Kelly says, well, look, when you look at the Clintons' approval ratings, both of them, I mean, they're sky high, Kathleen.
The younger women who are looking at it's going to be really cool to have a first woman president, and I'm going to vote for her.
And they have no idea about what she stands for, who she is.
They're just going to vote for her because it's going to be cool to elect the first women president.
And I just think women like that should be, they should be educated.
Because, Megan, what happened to me?
It was terrifying.
And she's not alone.
She's not alone.
But you hear, she thinks that a bunch of young women, such as college students at Georgetown who want endless contraceptions so they can stay in bed all day and night and the government pay for it, that those women are going to think, whoa, first woman president, Hillary Clinton, Rah-Rah, not going to know any of this stuff.
May not care.
So she thinks that the younger generation has a chance here to be totally fooled.
And that's what she's on this campaign to try to alert people who weren't alive then and do not really know exactly who the Clintons are.
Now, that's been tried all through the 90s.
I have to say it didn't work, right?
If you think it did work, give me the definition.
And I'm not talking about impeachment succeeding.
Well, it doesn't.
I'm not talking about Democrats.
I'm talking about voters.
It hasn't hurt the Clintons at all.
That hurt Hillary.
I mean, she didn't lose the nomination because of that.
She lost it because the media was fascinated with the first African-American candidate.
Anyway, got to take a break here, folks, because we're up against it on the broadcast clock.
Be right back.
I was just asked a question by the official program observer, and that would be Bo Snerdley.
Why don't we have an official program observer?
Because think of it as an official archive.
There's someone that constantly is observing the program so as to know everything that happened in it.
Every major media enterprise that's worth its salt has at least one observer.
And Snerdley, sometimes we slough it off to others if Snerdley gets tired of observing.
But he asked me a question.
He said, well, you think Hillary is going to have a primary opponent.
Oh, there's no question.
If they have to invent one, she will have a primary opponent.
And the reason will be that a primary opponent bringing up other issues will take all this Lewinsky stuff off the table in the Democrat primary.
In fact, Newsweek, listen, Newsweek magazine, a U.S. News and World Report had just tweeted that a primary challenger would allow Hillary to move past her husband's affair early on in the campaign.
And they link to this article, Why Hillary Needs a Primary Challenger.
And the subhead is, There's a Way to Distract from the Scandals That Engulfed the Clintons in the 90s.
So even if there isn't one, they will invent a challenger and so forth.
And for that express purpose, we'll be back.
And we are back.
Great to have you here, Rush Limboff to our rousing start.
It's hump day, middle of the week, Wednesday, on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
And let's go back to the top of the audio soundbites.
This was late yesterday afternoon in Los Angeles, KABC-TV, Channel 7, Eyeball News in L.A.
And what we have here is a portion of the bureau chief in Orange County, Eileen Freres.
And she's reporting about the University of California at Irvine's efforts to get President Obama to be the commencement speaker this spring.
And again, this is the Orange County Bureau Chief, Eileen Freres.
And there's a couple other people.
I'm not going to bother with their names, but they are officials at the screw.
The Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, who references the past to encourage the president to say yes.
50 years ago, President Johnson flew Marine One and landed out in these fields here to dedicate the campus.
It would be an interesting fulfillment of that circle and that legacy to have the sitting president come in and complete that circle 50 years later.
Even if the president does not accept, some students have other people in mind.
If it's not Barack Obama, I'd love to see one of the tech giants.
I personally like Rush Limbaugh, so I would think it would be awesome if he came.
Whoa, whoa, did you people hear that?
A female college co-ed, University of California Irvine, suggested me.
Now, this is the demographic that supposedly is afraid of me.
Remember that?
These women are afraid of me.
That's what the drive-by.
So who was it that actually said that?
I need to dig deep into the recesses of my fertile memory.
Normally, there was this, oh, I know what it was.
I had this notion that I scare 24-year-old women because of my passion.
And my passion sometimes results in my voice being raised.
Yes, that's what it was.
I scare 24-year-olds.
They just don't like it.
And here's a woman, obviously very close to age 24, asking and suggesting that I be the commencement speaker.
And you know, I have appeared on the campus at Irvine, one of the very first ever Rush to Excellence tour performances after we got KFI in Los Angeles.
It's a beautiful part of town.
Not saying I do it.
No, no, Miss.
I'm not even lobbying for it.
Not going there.
I just thought it was interesting because I supposedly scare people like that.
You hear what she said?
I personally like Rush Limbaugh.
It'd be awesome if he came.
Another one.
Last night on the road, Greta, I'm sorry, on the record, Greta Van Susteren, she was talking to Haley Barber, accredited member of the Republican establishment and former governor of Mississippi.
He's from Yazoo City, Mississippi, and admits it.
And she said, she played a soundbite of me reacting to Obama.
We played the soundbite yesterday of Obama claiming that his new cafe standards and fuel efficiency standards are going to result in you saving $8,000 a year in gasoline costs by the year 2025 because Obama and his chick over at the EPA, they're going to magically wave a wand and they're going to double gas mileage.
In light trucks and every other vision, they're just going to make it happen.
These people don't know a thing about the private sector, don't know anything about the oil business, don't anything about the engine business.
They know nothing about it, but they are smarter than any of the rest of us.
And they're going to double money.
And you are going to save $8,000 a year in gasoline costs.
All you have to do is stay alive until 2025 to reap the benefits.
Greta played that soundbite of me reacting to Clinton's promise and said to Haley Barber, is Rush right?
Is President Obama just ramming through another policy?
Should Americans look forward to getting $8,000 reductions in their fuel bills by 2025?
Well, if you like your health insurance, you can keep your health insurance, period.
And I think the chances of that statement, $8,000 savings being true, is about as likely to turn out as Obama's promise about health insurance.
But we can say this, to the degree that we are having an energy revolution in America, the administration has had nothing to do with it.
Wait a minute, Governor, you've got to be real careful.
Do you hear that?
Governor Barber is an accredited card-carrying member of the Republican establishment.
He just attacked Obama.
He was partisan, in fact.
Did you hear that?
Listen to this again, folks.
This is a breach.
This is a violation of the policy memo that's come from the highest reaches of the Republican industry.
You're not supposed to attack Obama.
You're not supposed to be partisan because doing this, doing this is going to scare independents and have them running right back to Obama.
Listen to this again.
Well, if you like your health insurance, you can keep your health insurance, period.
And I think the chances of that statement, $8,000 savings being true, is about as likely to turn out as Obama's promise about health insurance.
But we can say this, to the degree that we are having an energy revolution in America, the administration has had nothing to do with it.
Man, oh man, he's really on the edge there.
I mean, that's not going to make some people happy.
A consultant class.
I wonder if anybody called him and said, Haley, you can't keep doing that.
You've got to dial it back.
You can't go out and attack Obama like that.
Remember, the midterms are coming up.
You can't, you keep talking that way, Haley, and the independents are going to be running right back to the Democrats.
You can't attack Obama like that.
A noteworthy soundbite, folks.
I don't mean to hurt Governor Barber here, but he's exactly right.
And that obviously, it used to be, folks, that if I praised a drive-by journalist's work, that was the end of them.
They were humiliated and embarrassed and all that because their colleagues laughed at them and made fun.
What do you mean?
You did something at Limbaugh-like?
Oh, my God.
No bigger screw-up than that.
How could you possibly have done it?
Same thing here.
Here I am praising Governor Barber, and that is going to make some people nervous.
I don't mean to be hurting Governor Barber at all.
I want that out front understood.
But he's right.
I have to say he's right about it.
He's right that there isn't going to be any $8,000 savings on gasoline bills, not because of Obama.
And there is an energy boom, and not only is it happening without Obama's participation, it's happening in spite of Obama because it is happening.
It's totally related to all fracking.
The fracking business is going through the roof.
The environmentalist wackos don't like it.
Obama doesn't like it.
Why do you think he hasn't okayed the Keystone Pipeline?
Because of the rabid, well, he disagrees with it too, but his supporters on the left don't want anything to do with fossil fuel energy and all that.
It's, you know.
Oil is politics to these people.
It's amazing.
To you and me, oil is the fuel of the engine of freedom.
To these people, oil is a problem, and it is an enemy.
And so are the people that produce it, find it, drill for it, market it, distribute it, ship it, refine it.
They hate them.
So Obama's tried everything he can.
He has invested in totally fraudulent wind and solar energy companies.
He has done everything he can to penalize the fossil fuel business, particularly the oil business, but in the South Dakota region and wherever fracking is taking place, there are miniature economic booms.
Do you realize in the Dakotas whole cities have to be built to house all the employees moving in, all the people moving into work in this industry?
The unemployment rate where the fracking business is doing well is under, it's like 3.5%.
It's under 4%.
Contrast that with 11, 13% nationally, the real unemployment rate.
So Haley Barber, I mean, this is in one 21-second bound soundbite.
Haley Barber is really dumped on Obama, truthfully.
I really hope I haven't gotten him in trouble here with the establishment, I believe.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
One of the reasons why Obama is not going to okay the Keystone pipeline.
You ever heard of a guy named Tom Steyer, S-T-E-Y-E-R?
He is a huge, he's a billionaire.
Major, major Democrat bankroller, donor, bundler.
Tom Steyer just promised to give the Democrat Party $100 million for the 2014 campaign if they do not.
If Obama, among other things, will continue disapproving of the Keystone pipeline.
$100 million from a Democrat donor.
Let me grow to the phones and start in Antwerp, Ohio.
John, thank you for calling.
It's great to have you with us today.
Hello, sir.
Hello, Rush.
How are you?
Good.
Good.
Very good.
Thank you.
Fantastic.
Good to finally speak with you.
Yeah, yeah, the same here.
Hey, I had a comment.
You brought up the cafe standards just a little bit ago.
I worked with General Motors.
I worked for the company for 13 years.
What did you do?
Assembly.
I worked in a foundry for a while and then it moved to an assembly plant.
There's a trick with the cafe standards that's imposed across the entire fleet of vehicles.
Yeah, John, let's explain.
Well, first place, for the low-information Yahoo news readers in the audience, would you tell us what cafe stands, a corporate average fuel economy?
Is that it?
Yes.
And what that means is you take the average of every vehicle you make.
That's what you, the whole fleet, right?
Absolutely.
And the whole fleet, average mileage, has to come in under whatever the cafe standard is, right?
Exactly.
Okay.
And now that doesn't it may change slightly on some of the larger vehicles, but it really doesn't take a hit on their crown jewels.
Right.
So if you use their SUVs, what they profit on, but the vehicles they make money on.
Right.
They're not going to take a hit on those.
So that's why you get your cobalts and your bolts and the vehicles that they offer high incentives on.
Folks, this is important.
This is important to know because John here is exactly right.
In order with these cafe standards that the government just unilaterally imposes.
And I'm going to make up a number.
Let's say that the corporate average fuel efficiency, the average mileage that a company must achieve with every car in its fleet is 15 miles a gallon.
Just making it up.
That means if they have a car, an SUV that gets 12 to 13 or whatever, they've got to make a bunch of little lawnmowers with seats on them that get 30 miles to a gallon.
Exactly.
Which I'm sure John's going to say nobody wants.
Right.
Which is why you see at the end of the model year, these huge incentives on the smaller cars, the ones that there's not a large people aren't just standing in line to buy these.
Now, let me ask you a question, though, John.
And it's calling for political opinion, and you may not have thought about it.
And I don't mean to be forcing you into an answer, but how serious are they?
If you're the government, and if you really, really, really think that automobiles are destroying the planet, and you have established a fuel efficiency of 15 miles to the gallon, and you're dead serious about it, why would you allow them to even make a car that gets 8 to 10 if you're really serious about it?
I mean, the question, if you're going to have a 15 mile per gallon, let's make it 18 just for the hell of it here, just to make it more reasonable.
If you're going to have a demand that the company cannot have an average fuel mileage over 18 or under 18 miles a gallon, why wouldn't you just impose it on every vehicle?
If you're serious, and my point, why do they even allow the SUVs to be made if they're the problem, if they're destroying the planet?
Because the cafe standards are window dressing.
It's a way for the government to say we've done something.
Exactly.
They're still processing off the corporation.
It also...
They're not going to cripple the corporation.
No, because they have to allow the company to make the products people want.
And they want the trucks and the SUVs.
The moms want it.
The soccer moms want those things.
Yes.
But here comes this cafe standard thing.
So they've got to make a bunch of crap, relatively speaking.
I mean, if that's all they sold, they'd be out of business.
Yes.
In order to come in under that average fuel efficiency that the government demands.
It's a total arbitrary intervention in the private sector, and it leads to the creation of production of cars that a company would never make otherwise.
Exactly.
And that I think your point is that is why General Motors is still crippled now, right?
Oh, exactly.
Yes.
Yeah, when they're forced to offset the vehicles that they profit from with vehicles that they don't, of course, it's going to hurt their bottom line.
I need to tell you a short story.
I went to German Motors six years ago, five or six years ago, in advance of them becoming official sponsors.
And I reacquainted myself with Bob Lutz, who back then liked me.
But we've had a falling out over global warming.
He's big on the vault and so forth as a corporate guy.
And he blames me for.
Anyway, I went up and spent two hours with him.
And I knew before I got there that he had designed a really luxurious Cadillac that was either a 12 or 16 cylinder engine.
It was going to be a beast.
Luxury, not an SUV.
It was a sedan.
And when we're walking around, I saw the mock-up of it, the life-size mine.
It was gorgeous.
It was beautiful.
I said, when is that coming out?
He said, we can't make it.
Cafe standards.
And I said, no, wait a minute.
And I was dead serious.
Every year, BMW, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Mercedes produce these big hog sedans of 600 horsepower, twin turbo V12s.
What do you mean you can't do it?
He said, well, they're not going to be able to do it for long.
Well, the 2015 Mercedes S-Class just hit, and they're still doing it.
And he said that Cadillac, GM, couldn't do it.
I guess they couldn't fit that car into their corporate average fleet.
Mercedes must make a bunch of puddle jumpers in Europe that get them under the stand.
I still don't know why Mercedes can do Daimler Benz.
I don't know why they can do it and GM can't.
It was a gorgeous car that Lutz had designed, and they couldn't make it.
Because of the cafe standards.
▲
Export Selection