All Episodes
Previous Next
March 18, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:40
March 18, 2014, Tuesday, 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.
Great to have you here.
It's Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, where we excel in many things, and among those many things at which we excel.
And by the way, that was spoken grammatically correct.
One of the things that we dramatically excel at is making the complex understandable, including what happened to the jet.
So now what I happen to say about this on the program yesterday has become fodder for the drive-by media.
The fact that I said that when it's all over with, that a simple logical explanation is going to tell us what happened, and that that simple explanation isn't going to be believed because there's been so much crazy speculation that the simple will not satisfy.
And so they are out there getting people to react to that.
We'll have that for you coming up.
Remember, by the way, telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, it's 800-282-2882.
We also said last week that this Ukraine situation was a showdown between the Acorn and the KGB.
If you will recall, that is one of the ways I characterized it.
But in view of the mocking that Obama is getting from the Russians, folks, they are openly laughing at our president.
They are openly mocking Barack Obama.
This was not supposed to happen.
If we call the campaign of 2008.
In view of the mocking that Obama is getting from the Russians, this is also looking like the prankster versus the gangster.
Because Putin's calling Obama a prankster with his sanctions.
And Obama's going to sanction some individual Russians, so the Russians came and says, okay, well, we'll sanction you.
And they're mocking him.
Now, one thing that you have to admit, they did not laugh at George W. Bush.
You know, it's funny, folks, our news media claimed for years that the world viewed George Bush as a cowboy, a renegade, an out-of-control hayseed that did not have the respect of any nation around the world.
And we were being laughed at and joked about and made fun of.
Well, they never laughed at George W. Bush.
They never mocked George W. Bush.
They may have wished he was dead, but they are laughing at Barack Obama.
And they are laughing both at his face, to his face, and in his face.
You remember back in 2008 when Obama ran on the promise of restoring America's prestige around the world.
You know, come to think of it, that may have been the mother of all Limbaugh Theorem ploys.
If you recall, I devised the Limbaugh Theorem to explain how and why Obama was not blamed at all by the American people for this disastrous economy.
It was I and I alone who came up with the explanation for this.
Not going to bother you with the explanation.
You know it.
You are regular listeners.
I dubbed this the Limbaugh Theorem.
Okay, essentially it was that Obama was never seen literally governing.
Even after being immulated, he continued to posture himself as always campaigning.
He was always opposed.
On TV, he was seen as opposed to what he was doing.
And he was able to fool people into believing that he also opposed what was going on, even though he was the one doing it.
And of course, he had the cooperation and help of the drive-by medias.
But I'll tell you, I think the mother of all Limbaugh here employs was that 2008 presidential campaign where Obama promised to restore the prestige of the United States around the world because increasing America's standing in the world was the last thing Obama and his team wanted to do.
And if you have any doubt about that, just look around.
This cannot be accidental.
There's just too much wreckage.
There's just too much ineffectiveness.
There's just too much apathy on the part of the president about things happening around the world for it to be anything other than purposeful.
Everywhere you look.
Thanks to the missing Malaysian airliner, our media guardians pretty much succeeded in maintaining a blackout on the news about Putin's invasion and annexation of Ukraine.
I think it's safe to say the low-information crowd doesn't know anything about that.
And not just the low-information crowd.
There are a lot of Americans knowing about it because all that's on the news is the missing airliner.
And whether or not supernatural forces have taken over.
Whether or not there's a new Bermuda Triangle in Malaysia.
All of this.
I have another simple explanation for this, by the way, coming up in a moment that I'll offer.
And it's simple.
And it's entirely plausible.
And it's with the help of a former pilot.
So, all in due course, I can't do everything here in the opening monologue, but I will comment on things as they occur to me during the monologue.
So anyway, the coverage that the American people are getting about Ukraine, Obama being laughed at, it's really being obscured by the 24-7 coverage of the missing Malaysian airliner, which has to be frustrating to Putin.
I mean, look at how much money he has spent on plastic surgery, Botox injections, preparation for his star turn on the world stage.
I mean, he's gone out there and he's fought with bears and he's gone fishing and hunting.
He's taken the shirt off.
He's got the Botox.
He's been lifting weights, maybe taking steroids.
He's been doing everything he can to look like an American superhero actor.
And he can't buy 30 seconds of media time because we're focused on the Malaysian airliner.
He's got to be really bad.
And an angry KGB guy is something we don't want to deal with.
A KGB guy in his natural state, bad enough.
But now he spent all this money being noticed for his big moment on the world stage, reassembling the Soviet Union, and nobody is seeing it, which means, folks, that he is going to have to amp it up.
He's going to have to do even more to call attention to himself and get media focused on him.
Well, you're not going to find it.
Maybe he could find a plane and be done with it.
Maybe Russian technology could be that which finds the plane.
Who knows?
But he's got to do something.
Obviously, annexing Ukraine and Crimea, not enough.
Well, he could take over Poland.
He could, hell, make a move on Germany.
I mean, any number of things, but I'm just telling you, Putin has spent a lot of time and a lot of money to the Olympics.
And all to get noticed.
And he can't bump this Malaysian airline off the front.
Hell of Botox injections alone, folks.
I mean, even when you have the government to pay for it, it still is a lot of money.
He's up to Pelosi spending levels by now.
I would think.
But then again, Putin, of all people, should understand.
I mean, just like in his country, our news media know that their primary job is to protect the regime.
And so the media here is doing.
He understands this.
He understands the media here's job is to protect the regime.
And it's much better to devote wall-to-wall coverage in a story nobody has a shred of information about than having to report on Obama's obvious humiliation at the hands of Comrade Putin.
But I've got the stories, and they're laughing at him.
They're laughing at our president.
ABC News, Russian Deputy Prime Minister laughs at Obama's sanctions.
Russia's deputy prime minister laughed off Obama's sanction against him today, asking comrade at Barack Obama on Twitter if some prankster came up with the list of Russian officials that Obama is sanctioning.
The regime, the Obama regime, hit 11 Russian and Ukrainian officials with sanctions today as punishment for Russia's support of Crimea's referendum.
Among them, aides to President Putin, a top government official, senior lawmakers, Crimean officials, the ousted president of Ukraine, and a Ukrainian politician and businessman allegedly tied to violence against protesters in Kiev all have been sanctioned by him.
What does that mean?
How do you sanction an individual?
I guess you tell them you're sanctioned.
In some worlds, sanction means a contract on you, and you're dead.
That's not what Obama means.
What's he freezing their assets?
Is he freezing their bank accounts?
What is he doing?
But it's a minor detail in this story that our media guardians are ignoring.
But I, Il Rushbo, discovered it.
Buried in the bottom of the ABC story, we find this: quote, U.S. officials said that among the sanctioned individuals were the key ideologists and architects of Russia's Ukraine policy, while adding that some of the Russian officials were included in the list for their role in curbing human rights and liberties in Russia.
In other words, some of the Russians are being sanctioned because they have said mean things about homosexuals.
That's what the real reason Obama is sanctioning these people.
You have to dig deep in the story is because Obama is unhappy with what the Russians have had to say about men who sleep with men and women who sleep with women, which some people find less objectionable.
I leave it up to others to make those judgments.
But now we understand.
In fact, one of the people listed by ABC as being sanctioned is Elene Mizulina.
She's a senior lawmaker considered one of the Kremlin's morality enforcers in the parliament.
She's best known as the co-author of last year's homosexual propaganda law, which sparked outrage overseas.
And that's the real reason Obama is not even doing it because of Ukraine and Crimea.
Not that it matters to people.
But it's another example of Obama mocking that the drive-bys seem to be ignoring.
Although Thomas Loopy Friedman in the New York Times has been made aware of it and is worried that Obama is looking weak in this circumstance.
So we've got this ABC story.
The Russians basically think Obama is a joke.
The Daily Beast, Russia will sanction U.S. senators.
Now, if Putin is doing this kind of nonsense in response to Obama's nonsense, it's only because it's another way to mock and show his unbridled contempt for Obama.
And by the way, by the way, I should point out, ladies and gentlemen, that Mikhail Gorbachev has chosen sides in this battle.
Now, you know as well as I do, the American left loves Mikhail Gorbachev.
It was the savior.
It was Gorbachev that saved the world from the cowboy Reagan.
It was Gorbachev that brought sanity, glasnost, perestroika, freedom to the world and stopped the evil cowboy, Ronald Reagan, from nuking the world.
They even gave Gorbachev a portion of the Presidio to start some environmentalist wacko 501c3 out there, the Green Cross or some such thing.
Mikhail Gorbachev has thrown in with Putin.
And he too, Mikhail Gorbachev, is mocking our president.
Meanwhile, the AP reports that Putin has approved a draft bill for the annexation of Crimea.
So while all of this is going on, Putin continues on his expansionist role.
And here's the deal about Gorbachev.
Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev, however, hailed Crimea's vote to join Russia as a happy event.
Gorbachev remarks, I came Tuesday, online newspaper said that Crimea's vote offered residents the freedom of choice and showed that people really do want to return to Russia.
Gorbachev added that the referendum set an example for people in Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine who also should decide their fate.
So the hero of the left, a guy that the left thinks would be cozying up to our president, Obama, a man who single-handedly, in their view, ended the Cold War, that Gorbachev has signed on with Vladimir Putin.
Also, ladies and gentlemen, in the media soap opera today, there is a sizable global warming stack, and it is absurd.
Share that with you as the program unfolds.
Bill Gates is weighed in now on how to deal with immigration and employment.
Bill Gates has not thrown in with Putin.
He's actually a renegade on his, he's an independent contractor on this.
He just says what we need to do here is raise taxes here and cut taxes there and let the borders open here and close the borders there.
But share with you the details of his ideas.
Also, there's a rare redwood tree in Northern California that if this were 20 years ago, there'd be no doubt that the environmentalist wackos would do everything they can to save it.
Now, the environmentalist wackos don't care.
They want to cut it down.
It's a magnificent illustration of how the evolution in the environmentalist wacko movement's taking place.
Also, big news on Obamacare.
Everything with Obamacare is big news.
It continues to worsen.
And funny, we've got a guy who was on TV yesterday who thinks that we're making our schoolchildren get up too soon.
They need to sleep it, particularly as they're reaching puberty.
We need to let them sleep in like they do in Europe so that they will learn faster and learn better.
Of course, this is not new.
This has been an effort the left started some years ago.
And once something starts on their side, it just keeps snowballing.
They don't ever throw an idea out just to be thought of.
When they throw it out, they're actively working on it.
So a lot to do today.
Sit tight.
We'll come back and continue with all the rest right after this.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network.
Here's a story from Florida.
When I give you the details, you're going to think it's Port St. Lucie, but it isn't.
Times are tense during the last few remaining days of Shamrock Shake season, as evidenced by a woman in Florida.
Witnesses say a Jacksonville woman allegedly set a man's car on fire late Sunday because she was mad that he didn't want to buy her dessert.
A witness told Action News Jacksonville Eyeball News.
The couple was entangled in a fight about whether she wanted either a McFlurry or an ice cream on top.
And he was not up for it.
The argument apparently escalated when a woman threatened to torch their 1994 Cadillac Eldorado, and she followed through.
I got a video of the woman pouring alcohol and gasoline on the guy's car, lighting it on fire, and then running off.
It's unclear if she ever got her dessert.
What is it about McDonald's?
First, in Port St. Lucie, you walk in, you want McNuggets, they don't have them, you call 911, you ask for Obama.
And there was one other episode involving McDonald's, and here in Jacksonville, a woman wants a McFlurry, and the goofball guy that she's with is yet no way.
So she torches his car.
Is there any other food, at least in Florida, that evokes this kind of reaction when people don't get it?
What's in it that makes people want to burn cars if they don't get it?
And welcome back.
I was going to head to the Putin and Crimea sound bites to back up that which we had discussed in the opening half hour.
I've got a call up I want to take now.
It's a retired 777 pilot.
If I wanted to really sound like I was hip, I'd say triple seven.
If I want to sound like a network TV guy, I say we have a retired triple seven pilot.
And it would make you think I really knew what I was talking about.
It is a man calls himself Captain Luke, and he's from South Carolina.
And Captain Luke, great to have you with us on the program.
Hello, sir.
Great to be back.
Rush, I talked to you once before in 1990, and it's been a long time.
Well, that's like 19 years ago.
Yes, it is.
20, 22 years ago.
I forget the that is.
Well, it's great to have you back, Captain.
How long did you fly the Triple Seven?
I flew it for four years on an international basis and domestic from 2000 to 2004.
I flew into Beijing and Singapore and all that area.
I flew through that area as well as Frankfurt and Europe and other places.
Did you ever launch out of Kuala Lumpur?
Never did.
Your first flight on a 777, were you in the right side seat or the left side in your first flight?
In other words, you got your rating in the simulator, right?
Complete, yeah.
The way the way these simulators are, the virtual reality, they're just amazing, like multi-axis simulators.
They have huge computer rooms that control all the visuals and the movements.
And you really can't tell you're not in an airplane.
I mean, except you can kind of tell the visuals are a little cartoony, sort of like a video game, but they work in real life.
So it's entirely possible that people on a, it doesn't matter, 777, 767, or whatever.
The pilot there may actually be flying it for the first time.
Yeah, I flew my first flight as a captain.
I had a Czech captain in the right seat who was giving me a line check.
And once he signs me off for so many landings, I make five successful landings that we can taxi away from.
Then he signs me off to be in command of the airplane.
Of course, I had 15 years of command experience on other aircraft, including the 767.
Well, it's so expensive.
It's so expensive to fly these things that actual onboard training is cost-prohibitive.
That's why the simulators, for other reasons.
Okay, so you've heard everything, I assume, that's being bandied about to explain this.
You flew the airplane.
You've heard everything.
What are your thoughts?
Well, my thought is basically, I think you aren't thinking on the same lines.
You've heard of Occam's Razor, right?
Yeah.
Occam's Razor is what I believe, that the simplest explanation is probably the one that's true.
And the thing that I believe happened is I think one of the pilots commandeered the airplane from the other pilot.
My personal feeling is it might be the captain.
The flight path, where it climbed up precipitously to 45,000 feet, stalled, and then dove down to 25,000 feet until it was recovered, would probably parallel a cockpit fight for control of the aircraft.
And so I think what happened was the other pilot didn't want to go along with what the other pilot was doing, so they started fighting.
And during that time, nobody was flying the airplane.
It started climbing, went into a stall, and then finally somebody got control and recovered the airplane at 25,000 feet.
Then it took off in whatever direction they think it took off.
My personal feeling is the airplane is probably at the bottom of the sea.
He probably dove it into the ocean a la Flight 93 at about 600, 700 knots, and they won't find any debris field.
It'll be too small.
Now, I need to ask you a question based on some of the stuff I've heard on television.
For example, it has been all over television that if you take a 777 at 45,000 feet, the passengers automatically die.
And I've been screaming at the TV listening to people say this.
Can you, are you telling, these people want us to believe it?
You can't pressurize a 777 to fly at 45,000 feet.
Yeah, the 45,000 restriction is really more of a stall, high-speed stall.
But I mean, you can get up there, and you can pressurize.
Just the magic altitude of 45,000 feet does not depressurize the airplane to kill the passengers, right?
No.
Okay, this is it, folks.
It's a classic of what I'm talking about.
I mean, this is all over the media.
It got a 45,000 feet and the passengers died.
The only way you can do that is if you guys in the cockpit depressurize the cabin, right?
Well, even if we do, there's still about 20 minutes worth of oxygen that's going to pop out of the airplane.
Oh, no, the experts on TV say to be dead in two seconds, Captain.
No, we have, but you have, I've been through a hypoxia school, you know, where they train you in a pressure chamber.
Yeah.
And you can actually be without oxygen at 35,000 feet for about 20 seconds before you lose useful consciousness.
And what that means is you cannot think anymore.
You aren't dead.
You aren't unconscious yet, but you have lost the ability to flip a switch or to squeeze in.
It's what happened to the poor people on board that Lear that was carrying Payne Stewart somewhere.
Yeah.
They depressurized.
They slowly lost consciousness and they just went to sleep.
And then the plane ran out of fuel and crashed.
Right.
The property's still alive.
They just were unconscious.
Right.
Now, explain something to me.
I just want to clarify.
The 777, what is like, for example, the Gulfstream 550 is rated at 51,000.
You can go up there, stay there perfectly safe.
It'll actually fly higher than that, but the rating is 51,000.
What is it for a 777?
It's 43,000 is recommended.
And I don't know if that's the limit.
That's just a recommendation.
That's the maximum they want you to fly.
But the airplane is manufactured.
It could easily fly at 45,000 feet.
Easily.
I could fly it all day at 45,000 feet.
Okay, so there's, I just, folks, I just want, there's no magic that equals passenger death at 45,000 feet.
This is exactly the kind of misinformation.
Now, I have a scenario here that I ran into by another pilot, a former pilot.
I don't know if he flew the 777.
His name is Chris Goodfellow.
And he put this theory of his up on Google Plus.
And it is a theory rooted in simplicity.
It does not involve your theory, but I want to get your thoughts on it before I – shortly after – this theory is written shortly.
Shortly after takeoff, plane flying out over the ocean.
Just after the co-pilot gave his final goodnight sign off to Malaysian air traffic control, smoke began filling the cockpit, maybe from a tire on the front landing gear that had ignited on takeoff.
The captain immediately did exactly what he'd be trained to do.
Turned the plane toward the closest airport so he could land.
And the closest appropriate airport was Palau Lang Koy, 13,000-foot runway.
The captain programmed the destination into the flight computer.
The autopilot turned the plane west.
They put it on that course right for the runway, which is the heading the plane turned to.
Then the captain or co-pilot tried to find the source of the smoke and the fire.
They switched off all electrical buses to try to isolate it.
In the process, they turned off systems like the transponder and the A cars, the automated update system, not presumably the autopilot, which was flying the plane.
They did not issue a distress call because in a mid-air emergency, your priorities are aviate, navigate, communicate in that order.
Is that true?
If it isn't, I don't need to go any further.
Aviate, communicate, navigate.
That's correct.
Okay, so let's go.
But smoke soon filled the cockpit and overwhelmed them.
A tire fire could do this.
The pilots passed out or died.
Then the smoke spread to the cabin.
That cockpit door is locked.
Nobody can get in there.
There's nobody that knows what's going on.
Smoke inhalation.
They didn't get their masks on or whatever.
And they're on that heading for that runway.
And they run out of fuel seven hours later.
And just what you said, plunge.
Now, the root of this theory is some sort of mechanical tire fire is his theory that eventually incapacitated the crew.
Nobody could get in the cockpit.
I'm glad you're here.
Could nobody get in the cockpit if this scenario had happened?
Well, flight attendants can get in the cockpit.
They have a way to access it.
I won't give it out over the error.
But they can't.
Yeah.
Okay, so what are your thoughts on this theory?
It's a mechanical.
It's relevant.
Well, the first thing that bothers me is that the first procedure you do when you have smoke in the cockpit is you raise the cabin pressure.
And for no, actually, the first thing is you put on your oxygen mask 100%, which means you block out any ambient air that could come into your mask.
Second thing is you do you raise the cabin pressure to evacuate the smoke.
The possibility of a nose wheel tire being on fire, there's no brakes on the nose wheel.
I don't understand how it could heat up enough to catch fire.
I know a main gear brake can catch fire, but for it to get into the cockpit, it would have to get into the ventilation system or burn its way through the pressure hull.
It would take an hour or two, an hour, for a fire to burn through the pressure hole from the nose gear compartment.
What if they maybe half an hour?
Okay.
What if the smoke was due to fire?
They've got the masks on, but the fire just consumed them.
A fire is probably the most scariest thing to happen in flight.
If you remember that TWA flight that had a fire, they had landed the airplane within 20 minutes, and within 20 minutes, the whole airplane was engulfed in flames.
And our teachings as pilots when we go through school is that once you have an uncontrollable onboard fire, that you have to get that airplane on the ground within 20 minutes or less, or everybody's going to be dead.
You'll lose control of the airplane.
The airplane will become unflyable or everybody will be dead from asphyxiation.
So he had to immediately start descending, which he didn't do immediately.
Okay.
Yeah.
So that would kind of shoot that down.
The second thing is him being asphyxiated, unlikely unless the pilot's oxygen system was malfunctioning.
That's a double malfunction now you're talking about.
I think the theory is good in theory, but it's not the simplest.
It's not Occam's razor.
It's not the simplest explanation.
Well, there's something else that argues against it, and that is the latest news that that left turn was programmed into the onboard computer before the co-pilot signed off.
Now, we don't know.
It might have been planning to attack the co-pilot and programmed it without the co-pilot knowing and had it set to go so I had to do is punch the go button and then start the fight with the co-pot and they can't cook, of course.
Why would you conduct a test on the co-pilot that way with passengers on board?
If I heard you.
Say it again.
I'm sorry.
You said they might have been testing the co-pilot?
Did I know?
Before he attacked the co-pilot.
Oh, oh, before he attacked the co-pilot.
I'm just assuming the captain's the one because he has the ones that had issues.
Right.
It also, you know, so that's the simple explanation to me.
I mean, and if he took it into the Bay of Bengal or somewhere in the Indian Ocean going about 600, 700 knots vertical, just like Flight 93, the pieces of the airplane would be the size of your thumb.
There won't be any debris field.
There might be an oil slick, but if it flew on for several hours and then he did it, there would be no oil slick because he burned up all the fuel.
Okay, got a run, but one more question.
Given your theory, are they ever going to find any evidence?
Probably not.
Probably not.
So, what will people like you, pilots, what will officials, airlines now tell them going forward to try to learn from every incident?
Try to educate flight crews based on every malfunction that happens.
What's going to be taught about this?
Well, I've talked to the chief pilot of our company and talked to the FBI about this.
I said, I think we have a lot of foreign nationals that are flying for American flag carriers now, and we need to do background checks, see who they're calling in Pakistan, see who they're associated with politically.
I think there's a lot of danger when you have the cockpit door locked.
You might have a jihadi or a person with some kind of suicide mission in his mind.
See, up until when I first started flying for the airlines, there were no foreign nationals except Canadians flying with us.
It was after the 80s we started hiring a bunch of people from Afghanistan.
You mean on American airlines?
Or an American carrier.
I think you need an American citizen to be a command pilot of an American carrier.
Right now, they're not.
You don't need to be an American citizen to be in command of an American carrier.
Obviously not.
You go to flight school and learn how to take one off but not land it.
I mean, there's all kinds of that's what the problem is, you know, in the airline business.
I mean, just getting hired by an airline.
I think part of the ATP requirement to be a command pilot in the United States should be you have to be a citizen of the United States.
Well, that'd be discriminatory.
That'd be unfair.
Well, it's also safe.
You have to swear allegiance to the United States, be a citizen.
Oh, no, no.
Background checks.
That's nationalism.
You can't have that.
Yeah, I know.
I'm an old Navy vet, so I'm pretty nationalistic.
Sorry.
Well, Captain, I'm really glad you called.
I'm really glad you got through.
Yeah, I'm amazed I got through.
Yeah, me too.
There's a reason why you only got through here twice in like 20 years, but you did it.
I'm glad you did, and I thank you.
God bless you, buddy.
Take care.
We'll be back, folks, after this.
No problem.
I just want to say again, folks, that the kind of analysis an experts CNN is putting on about this airplane is just over the top.
And it's bordering on irresponsibility.
When they get into the supernatural and all of this, it really is irresponsible.
And I've got some audio soundbites with this coming up, but not enough time now.
So I want to stick with the phones.
We have Addie with us from Cottonwood, Tennessee, who has, I think, read my book.
Hi, Addie.
Great to have you on the program.
Am I right about that?
You've read the Rush Revere book?
No, I have.
Whitney, you've read the first one, right?
Yes, but I'm on the second one.
Oh, you have this, and you're on the second one.
Okay, well, cool.
Excellent.
How can I help?
What can I do?
What do you need?
What do you want?
Why did you call?
Make it happen.
Well, I was just wondering how you got your inspiration for Liberty, because whenever I think of him, I think of Donkey from Shrek.
Well, if you must know, I don't want to give too much away here, but let's say that there was a Scooby-Doo influence in the creation of Liberty.
But what I really wanted, Addy, was what's called a vehicle or a vehicle.
I wanted a mechanism to actually do the stories.
The thing I like about these books is that the reader is not told in third person about these events that are covered in the book.
You, the reader, are taken to the event.
You are the time-traveling horse, Liberty, takes Rush Revere and these students and the reader right back to the event.
You are there as they board the Mayflower.
You are there as they're crossing the Atlantic.
You are there as they land at Plymouth Rock.
You are there with the first Thanksgiving with the Native Americans.
And I wanted a smart Alec, funny, sort of scatter-brained character that would provide the humor and the lightheartedness.
But then when necessary, the character is totally reliable, totally loyal, and always on time, even if it looks like the character I'm going to make it, but was a scatterbrain, somebody that's just, you really never know what they're going to do next.
And that was the vehicle that the horse, Liberty, allowed me to create.
Does that make sense?
It does.
So Liberty is your favorite character, I assume.
Yes, he is.
Do you have, are you able to surf the net on your computer?
I tell you what, I really, you know, Rush Revere has a Twitter account.
He does?
Rush Revere.
Yeah, it's at Rush Revere.
Rush Revere has a Twitter account.
I don't.
Well, I do.
I don't use it.
Rush Revere does.
So you can follow Rush Revere on Twitter.
You can also go to the toifbyt.com website.
And when you get there, click on the adventures of Rush Revere.
And that will open up the entire Rush Revere and Liberty world.
And it'll open up to the social center, Addy, where you can be interactive.
You can post pictures, videos, and see pictures and videos and letters and stuff that other readers have posted.
It's really a fun thing, and we're building it up, building it out, so to speak.
So hang on, Addie, don't go away because I want to send you something, but I'm out of time to tell you about it now.
So hang on, don't go.
We sent Addie some audio versions of both Rush Revere books.
That's what I didn't have time to ask her about because I had to go to break.
So we've got another obscene profit timeout right here, folks, and we'll be right back.
▲
Export Selection