All Episodes
Previous Next
April 14, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:48
April 14, 2014, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And testing.
Hey, hey, hey, hey, it's just fine.
It's not bad at all.
I just got to reduce the potentiometer here just a little bit.
If you could reduce me just a tiny bit in there and bring up the mix minus on the studio a little bit, bring it up, take me down a little bit.
There we go.
Think that out of cover.
Greetings, my friends.
How are you?
El Rushbo, Rush Limboy here, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have before I even start doing what is more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
How about that?
And the reason is we just had a bang up weekend here with the Leukemia Lymphoma Society Radio Cur-A-Thon.
Folks, I, again, I'm just, I'm in awe and I'm kind of, I'm not speechless, obviously, because I'm speaking, but I don't have the words to come up with.
Look, we're facing a country with massive unemployment, skyrocketing mandatory health insurance premiums.
People's income tax refunds being stolen in some cases by the IRS to supposedly settle debts that previously deceased family members incurred.
I mean, nobody got any money.
Fewer and fewer people are getting raises and so forth, and yet you came in with an increase over the previous year.
It's just mind-boggling.
Well, I guess you broke another record.
I don't know if we keep records here.
We just keep an annual total.
And we had more donors this year than last, which is really one of the telltale signs of growth.
And I think the average donation was down a little bit, but just as I said, the fact that there were more donors, we ended up raising more money.
We're over $3 million $3 million is less than three hours because we don't go wall to wall with that.
I mean, I do not sit there all three hours and just throw the phone number to you.
We do the rest of the program at the same time.
So it's not even three hours.
So, again, you all are just the best.
There isn't, and everybody in media says this, but there isn't an audience out there that it can hold a candle to all of you.
And I'm honored and proud.
I'm humbled and in awe of the way you all come through.
Thank you.
Well, I know.
It's a great thing that I do too, giving people the chance to give back, giving people the chance to make a difference.
And I ought not slight myself in this.
I need to give myself the proper amount of credit because if I didn't do this, you wouldn't give anything.
It's that simple.
Just kidding.
Anyway, you ought to be on the program today.
Telephone number, as always, 800-282-2882.
Email address, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
So I'm looking at the audio soundbite roster, and what is the first three, and I'm not going to get to them right now.
Maybe later, other things I want to get.
The first three are just filled with everybody in the drive-by media livid with me that I have not joined the crowd and praised CBS's choice of Colbert to replace Letterman.
I think I might be the only person in public not to sign on to this.
And it's, what a lesson here.
You conform or else.
You conform or you are an enemy of the state.
If you don't conform, if you don't think exactly the way we do, and if you don't think exactly the way we want you to, we're coming for you.
What does it matter?
What is it about the choice of anybody to host a late-night TV show that is a litmus test for anything?
But it is.
It is obviously a litmus test that I, ladies and gentlemen, have failed.
It isn't a big deal because they don't really care one way or the other.
My only point is the fact that every one of these people in the media are all saying the same thing, using the same words and the same opinions.
What does it make them but robots?
The last thing they are is individuals.
I mean, they're all falling over themselves.
They're all falling over each other to top each other in coming up with words of praise and insight and compliments.
And all I'm saying is that this choice says some things.
It clearly indicates that the people making this decision have chosen to write off a portion of the country, that they don't care whether a portion of the country watches or not, that we've got a new definition of what's funny.
We have a new definition of what's comedy.
And that's fine because as the left loves to say, it's a changing world.
And things adapt.
Things change.
People adapt.
You know, I'm supposed to sit here and praise the guy who said the Taliban has a better record with women than I do.
I'm supposed to praise that.
I'm supposed to be bigger than this.
Oh, man, but what talent?
What kind of talent does it take to say that?
So where is it anyway?
I think it's funny.
And Dick Cavett, I didn't know Dick Cavett was still breathing.
I didn't know Dick Cavett was on the sun side shy to the dirt.
Well, that's what we say on the golf.
When we're out playing golf, when we're out playing golf and we're having a lousy round, the joke is, well, at least we're on the right side of the dirt.
You know, it's how you mollify yourself.
I didn't know Dick Cavett was on the sunshine side of the earth.
I really didn't.
Dick Cavett's out there.
Hell, you may as well grab it since I've talked about it now.
Grab soundbite number three.
It was of all reliable sources on CNN.
They took two minutes out from reporting that nothing's been found since April 8th and the missing Malaysian airlines.
By the way, speaking of that, before we get to Dick Cavett, can I just share with you a brief observation about this airline business?
For the last, well, 1988, when I started this program, Ted Danson said that we had 10 years to save the oceans or they were going to die and us along with them.
And then 10 years went by, then Al Gore came, picked up the baton, said 10 years from then, which would have been 1998, 10 years from then, if we don't fix global warming, we're all going to die.
And of course, here we are still alive with no warming taking place, which means the left is in even greater panic.
They've been searching for this thing.
They can't find it.
Shouldn't they be finding loads and loads and loads of garbage dumped by the cruise ships?
Shouldn't they be finding lots of satellite debris from satellites that have fallen out of orbit?
I mean, Ted Danson and these clowns told us that the oceans are becoming the biggest garbage dumps on the planet.
And who was it that wrote that somebody wrote a column or a book that the cruise ships throw away more sewage and leftover food than Haitians have to eat?
Where is it?
We've been searching the ocean out there for what?
Since when did the plane go down?
down.
They haven't found anything.
Shouldn't they find some oil from oil spills?
Shouldn't they find oil slick jet fuel carrots?
Shouldn't they find something and found diddly squat?
And yet we're told the oceans are so polluted that we barely are going to survive.
Anyway, Dick Cabot, he's on some reliable sources, CNN.
Brian Stelter is interviewing him about the CBS hiring of Stephen Colbert and said, what do you think Colbert should be most concerned about, Dick?
You have so much experience at this.
You saw a lot of conservatives critiquing him this week.
Rush Limbaugh said CBS lost the heartland with this pick.
Does Colbert have to be concerned with that?
That was a comment from the wasteland of the country.
Wasteline.
Sorry, can I do that joke again?
What Rush Limbaugh says is about as far as anything I would be interested in as anything I can imagine unless it were Dick Cheney.
I am honored to be in that company.
Dick Cabot, thankfully, fortunately, still on the sunshine side of the dirt, glumps me with Dick Cheney in terms of people.
He could be less concerned with what we say.
And how about that joke?
You know, the comment from the wasteland.
Oh, waistline.
Sorry.
Hey, Dick, that's easy, isn't it?
Those kinds of jokes are really, really easy.
Okay, now to the serious stuff, folks.
We've had enough fun with jocularity here.
Now to the Syrian stuff.
The serpent head, otherwise known as James Carville, says that the GOP must win the presidency in 2016 or it'll go extinct.
It was on ABC's this week during the superstar roundtable, George Stephanopoulos, who used to work with Carville at the Clinton campaign, and now they're both journalists.
Well, one's a commentator.
About the 2016 races, Stephanopoulos said, James, you actually think that probability or electability is going to be the number one issue.
When is it not?
When is electability not an issue?
When is probability not an issue?
These people recycling everything.
25 years, you see a lot.
So the questions are repeating themselves and the answers repeat themselves, but nevertheless, oh, I'm going to try not, I know that's highly irritating.
Try to back off on that habit here, banging the table.
What?
I don't know if Cabot's still getting electoral shock.
Therapy, how would I know that?
Why are you asking me?
I don't care.
Was he ever?
Here is Carville answering the question, Stephanopoulos.
You actually think the probability or electability is going to be the number one issue?
It's going to be the dominant issue.
Fast forward to January 2016.
The most likely, not the only scenario, is Hillary Clinton is the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Everybody's going to have a poll showing how they fare in the general election against Hillary.
They're not going to not nominate somebody because of Common Core.
Trust me.
The party knows, and I use this word advisedly, that if it loses the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party, as we know it today, will be extinct.
This will be the sixth out of seventh election it lost the popular vote that Republicans want to win this.
They will do.
That's going to be the biggest issue in January 2016.
I can beat Hillary Clinton.
Okay, so James Carville says that the Republican Party, if it loses in 2016, is going to be extinct.
And he's assuming here that like everybody else on the left is that Hillary is going to be the nominee.
And therefore, what he's saying is that the Republicans don't want to go extinct.
I know some of you think they already are.
And it's debatable.
But regardless, Carville says that they're not going to want to go extinct.
And therefore, whoever wins the nomination will be the one who convinces the most people that they can beat Hillary.
Now, is Carville being honest or is he playing a trick?
Because I'll tell you what, how about if you had a dollar for every time the Democrats threw out this kind of stare tactic, you would be wealthy.
They are always, they tell it, what do they tell us?
They say, if you guys don't win the independence, you're not going to win anything.
And if you criticize us, you're going to lose the independence.
You criticize Obama, the independence is going to go running back to the Democrats.
So you can't criticize Obama.
So the Republicans don't criticize Obama, don't want to lose the Independence, and thereby fall for the trick.
Now here comes the Hillary trick.
This trick was played in 2007 before Obama surfaced.
You better come up with somebody who can beat Hillary because if you don't come up with somebody who can beat Hillary, you don't have a prayer.
If you can't beat Hillary, you can't win the White House.
And so they're recycling this.
And the odds are the Republicans are going to listen to it.
The Republican consultant class, hell, everybody I know is already scared to death that Hillary is the nominee.
It's amazing.
It's a repeat of 2007, 2008, before Obama surfaced.
I talk with people routinely.
I can't tell you.
I can tell you.
I mean, I'm using an expression.
I had a big weekend of people at my house one weekend, one spring, I forget what year, 2006, 2007.
And it was all about the paranoia everybody had about Hillary Clinton.
One guy said, I tell you right now, as we're sitting here, there is a 75 to 80 percent chance that Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president of the United States.
And the person was scared to death that that was going to happen.
And it's a very influential person that said that.
So a lot of people, the gathering agreed with it and started chiming in.
And it never changes.
Now we're back to the same thing.
If Hillary gets a nomination, we don't have a prayer.
Meanwhile, what's the reality?
She didn't even get the nomination in 2008.
All it took was an unknown African-American, relatively unknown, to come out of nowhere.
And the powers that be in the Democratic Party dropped her like a hot potato.
And 2008, don't forget that was hers.
By silent previous agreement, that was hers, a payback for everything she had done, every sacrifice that she had made, starting with moving to Arkansas and giving up her own life while melding hers with Slick Willys.
And then Slick Willie doing what he's doing, and she stands by him and allows him to be the philanderer-in-chief and all that and defends him, blames it on conservatives.
She made his presidency possible.
She made him staying in office possible.
And he gave her health care.
She botched that.
But nevertheless, despite the fact that everything they gave her politically, she made a mess of, and she made a mess of Benghazi.
She made a mess of Secretary of State.
And yet people on our side seemingly are scared to death.
Now, I know some people are simply mindful of the way that Clintons manipulated everything in the 90s.
And given that they did it once, they can do it again.
You never forget how they got away with things.
It means they can get away with any of it.
But look at what happened.
The reality is that the first chance that the Democrats had to reneg on their promise to her, they did for a fairy tale.
Now, I'll tell you, there's a story in the stack here.
I hadn't even planned on mentioning this today.
I put it at the bottom when I'm going through the prep because the head is never going to get to this, but we do improv here.
And so Bernie Sanders, the socialist senator from Connecticut, is toying with the idea of seeking the presidential nomination Democrat Party, not because he expects to win it, but because Hillary isn't liberal enough.
And he's going to take that campaign and he's going to take the party to the left.
He's going to go full-fledged, undisguised socialism.
He's going to drag Hillary there if that's how she, if she wants to win.
So he's going to play the role.
Well, play the role of Obama.
I mean, he's got a little problem in playing the role of Obama, too, probably age and race.
But my point is, there will be other people that are going to want this besides Hillary.
I got to take a break right now, folks.
We'll sit tight, however, come back, be back in just a second.
Don't go away.
One more audio sunbite here before we move on.
This is in conjunction with the James Carville bite that the Republicans, if they don't win in 2016, they're extinct.
So let's go to the guy who defines what it is to be a Republican political consultant.
His name is Mike Murphy.
And if you want to know what the consultant class thinks in the Republican Party, this is the guy.
He was on Meet the Press Roundtable, David Gregory.
So there's been a lot of talk this week about Jeb Bush and his comments about illegal immigrants committing a crime that's an act of love.
A lot of focus on whether, A, does he really want to do this?
Two, is he going to be eaten alive in the primary process?
What is your read on all of this, Mike?
I was proud of him, regardless of if he runs, because I believe that leadership has been replaced in American politics by marketing.
We micro-target, micro-pander, let's focus group and figure out how to win, you know, this, win that.
And we've lost sight of politicians who tell you what they think is right, they make an argument for it, and then you figure it out.
That's who Jeb Bush is.
He's not a typical weather vein kind of guy.
So if he runs, that's what you're going to get.
I think it's what the country's looking for, but we'll see what happens.
So the Republican consultant class, I mean, I'm not going to speak for every one of them because not every one of them is going to get hired by the same guy.
But I mean, they do hold various things in common, such as you've got to win the independence or you don't win anything.
And you can't criticize Democrats.
We should cross the aisle, work with them.
They all believe that.
Problematically, that they do.
But here's Murphy.
Bush is the guy.
You know, Bush, he doesn't market.
He doesn't poll tests or focus group tests.
It tells you what he thinks.
If he leaves, he tries to persuade you.
So this is, I think, these two soundbites go together.
Carville saying 2016, Republicans lose.
They're extinct.
The Republicans probably think that.
And therefore, I think Jeb is their answer.
And greetings to you, my friends, El Rushbo, with half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
All right, public pressure being brought to bear.
Check the email.
Come on, Rush.
Let's hear the soundbites on this Colbert guy.
Okay.
All right.
There are just two of them since I got Dick Cavett out of the way.
First up is a montage from Friday and Saturday from InfoBabes and reporters from NBC, CBS, the Daily Beast, CNN.
That pretty much sums it up.
It's about 25 seconds.
And listen to this.
Right-wing, loudmouth Rush Limbaugh firing the first shot.
CBS's not-so-conservative move that has Mr. Rush Limbaugh sing red.
Not everyone thinks faux conservative Colbert is the right choice.
By everyone, by that, I mean conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.
Well, I get why some on the right like Rush Limbaugh are at least pretending that they're upset, because I actually think that for him, it's red meat.
Polarizing voices in the media, including Rush Limbaugh.
Yeah, see, I'm the polarizing voice here, see.
Why?
Because I don't conform.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of people in the media have all praised the choice.
I'm the one person, and I'm polarizing.
I'm the nonconformist.
This, by the way, folks, is why I would never have succeeded in a corporate environment.
And this is why I never follow the conventional wisdom, because there is no thinking involved.
This is just sheeple, mind-numbed robots doing and thinking what they think they should do and think in order to, what, be accepted, included in what they think is the dominant clique of whatever network, peer group they pretend to be a part of.
You notice here such things as not everyone thinks faux conservative Colbert is the right choice.
And by everyone, I mean conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.
It was Kelly Goff, by the way, of where's she?
Kelly Goff is the daily beast.
And she's the one that says, I don't think Limbaugh means.
He's just pretending to be upset because this is red meat for his audience.
He's just pretending.
So, of course, now, not only am I not a conformist, I'm a liar.
You know, the thing is, I must have spent maybe what, two minutes on this?
No, I wasn't mad or because I don't care.
I'm sitting here.
I'm talking about something else.
And Snerdley shouts, what do you think of this?
I said, what do you mean?
I don't care.
He's okay, okay.
And I answered, I'll tell you what it means.
We're redefining comedy.
They've just told half the country to go to hell.
I don't care about them.
Blah, blah, blah.
It took about two minutes to go through it.
And man, those two minutes, it must have been a commencement speech that they all heard for all the importance they're attaching to it.
Next up is somebody, I think, disagreeing that it's faux outrage.
Kelly Goss, he's just making it up.
He doesn't really mean he's opposed to it.
And who was it?
Brian Stelt says, Kelly, do you get why some on the right, like Rush Limbaugh this week, were offended by the hiring of Colbert?
I'm not offended by it, folks.
They can do what they want to do.
Anyway, here's the remaining bite.
Well, I get why some on the right, like Rush Limbaugh, are at least pretending that they're upset, because I actually think that for him, it's red meat.
I think that for someone like Rush Limbaugh, faux outrage is what motivates their audience and what gets them viewers.
So I get why they're at least pretending to make hay out of this.
Okay, so she expands on the notion that my outrage is faux, meaning not real.
It's F-A-U-X.
For those of you in Rhea Linda, faux outrage means fake, supposed.
And just so what she actually believes is that I do the exact opposite of what I do.
She thinks I just come here and say outrageous things just to get you all fired up.
And this is, I think, a great example of how here are these people in the media totally don't get, totally misunderstand this show, the relationship I have with you, the audience of this show, and why this show is a success.
And in the process, we learned a little bit about how they operate.
They might actually be the ones that engage in saying things they don't believe just to get people ticked off.
But here's my point about this: Colbert's success, fame, whatever, was established as a character mocking middle America.
Middle-right politics was the target of his humor.
He made conservatives look like buffoons and idiots, which is why he's so beloved and popular with everybody.
And his comedy was 100% politicized.
They're making a big deal.
The New York Times has a story today.
Well, you know, he never once mentioned Democrat.
He never once openly endorsed Democrats or the liberal position.
He didn't have to for crying out loud.
This is the point.
He didn't have to.
He was making it clear.
He's making fun of.
He assumes this character of dopey, offensive, idiotic, arrogant, you name it, conservative.
And in doing that, he launches assaults and attacks on everything that center-right people believe.
That was his shtick.
And he became famous for mocking more than half the adults in this country.
That's fine.
It's what he does.
It's inarguable, though.
And CBS picked somebody who's a partisan political comedian.
And what's the first thing they did?
He's not going to be that guy.
If you'll notice.
Oh, no, no.
He's not going to be that guy.
He's going to be something entirely different.
He's going to be a Colbert you've never seen.
That was an act.
That was in character.
He ain't not going to do that.
Really?
We'll have to wait and see.
I don't know how.
Well, they, yeah, they claim they know who the real Colbert is, that we don't.
We'll just have to wait and see.
But my point is, I don't know how much of this has really been an act in the first place.
Anyway, the fun point here, folks, is just look at 99.9% of everybody anywhere.
Right on, right out, right on.
There's no independence of thought anywhere in the dominant media culture.
All they're doing is trying to out-accolade each other and have one voice come along.
It doesn't sign on.
And all of a sudden, you've got a major enemy of the state that you have to deal with.
And that is me.
You know, moving on to something serious here.
In recent days, in the recent past, we've talked here about the millennials, people that are basically 2134.
And how one of the things I am fearing or fear has happened is that as Obama continues to break promises and Obama continues to wreak havoc on the economy and basically destroy the foundations of the American dream,
which is what he's doing, that young people who, by virtue of their age, have no living experience with conservative victory.
You and I do, those of you who were alive in the 80s, we have a memory of a conservative victory in eight years of it.
We know.
But people 21 don't, 25, no idea.
To them, conservatism is nothing more than a theory.
It has no real life dominance or victory in a lot of people's lives.
So they all, these young kids, they just all signed on to Obama in 2008.
And they signed on to Obama for the reason young kids sign on to any liberal Democrat.
Utopia, it's going to be cool.
There isn't going to be any confrontation, going to be any unhappiness.
This is going to be the perfect American novel, Boy Meets Girl, he live happily ever after, the end.
No conflict, no confrontation, no death, no disappointment, no sadness, no failure, nothing.
Obama was going to bring all of that, which is what every young person wants.
Well, Obama's failed miserably, but rather, and this is the thing that upsets me and it has concerned me for a while, rather than blame Obama, they're just losing faith in the country.
They're just thinking America's over.
They're just thinking America's best days are finally behind us.
There is no great American dream in my future, they're saying.
They don't blame Obama.
They blame the system.
They blame the country.
They blame whatever.
And there's a story in the New York Times: Obama effect inspiring few to seek office.
Eric Lesser was shaking hands with diners in a Portuguese restaurant last week when he spotted the owner of Manny's TV and appliances.
Oh, I've got to get a picture, Mr. Lesser eagerly said, draping his arm over Mammy, whose low-budget commercials have run for decades in western Massachusetts.
Mr. Lesser's giddiness about meeting the local celebrity had not faded when he sat down for lunch.
Awesome, he said.
Although Mr. Lesser spent much of the last six years in the company of President Obama and Washington hotshots, now as an earnest, hug-prone 29-year-old candidate for the Massachusetts state Senate, he is far more interested in people like old Manny here of Mammy's TV and appliances, which is a good thing.
Mr. Lesser, a former White House staff member, has returned home on the path Obama hoped to inspire many of his young supporters to follow when he said, We are the ones we have been waiting for.
But they go on to say that Lesser is the exception to the rule.
The Obama effect is inspiring few to seek office.
Another way of putting it, the Wall Street Journal does their version of the New York Times story, and their headline is: Obama generation losing interest in Obama.
The president who hoped to be the Democrat Reagan sees diminishing influence plus the highest state tax burdens.
So what we have here, we have a story about how basically young people elected Obama, but now they're bored with him.
They got bored.
And because they're bored and because the vote that they gave Obama hasn't turned out the way they wanted it to, now they are down on America.
They are not down on Obama.
And the kids, these young people, if the story makes it plain, they figured out that he's disingenuous.
They figured out he's smoking mirrors.
He's turned them off of the country.
He's turned them off of politics.
Unlike John F. Kennedy, it's a quote from the story.
Unlike John F. Kennedy and Ronaldo's Magnus, who inspired virtual legislatures and politicians, became generational touchstones, Mr. Obama has so far had little such influence.
Another poll quote: The Obama era has been a disaster for these millennials.
And they're the first in the modern era to have higher levels of student loan debt, poverty and unemployment, and lower levels of wealth and personal income than their two immediate predecessor generations, the Gen Xers and the Boomers, had at the same stage of their life cycles.
So I would suggest to you that in this, Obama's been successful.
But the point of the story is how he's failed.
He has failed to inspire these young people, and they're just giving up now.
And I knew this is going to be that this is tragic with these people giving up on the country.
And it's all about the Limbaugh theorem and Obama escaping any real accountability.
Well, if Obama couldn't do it, it can't be done.
If Obama couldn't make us rich, nobody can.
If Obama couldn't restore the economy, nobody can.
Not so much saying that as their indifference now is leading people to conclude it for them.
Now, the New York Times is worried that there aren't future Obamas in this group wanting to run for office.
To them, it's all about finding future little junior Obamas that are going to get elected and become junior Obamas in office.
And that's not happening.
The journal, their concern is that these people are just tuning out of politics, period, and are just down on the country.
It's not good.
And it's exactly, I think, part of the plan, to tell you the truth.
Now, a brief timeout.
Snerdley, I need to ask you a question.
Nope, I got to take the breaker.
I'm going to have deep duty.
Just quick.
Did you see the Washingtonian story on Jay Carney and Claire Shipman?
Have you seen that, Snerdley?
Ho-ho.
Yeah, well, but that's not.
The Soviet posters are not the big deal.
Well, it's coming up.
Don't go away, folks.
Sit tight.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Rush Limbaugh into the phones we go.
This is William in Winter Park, Florida, but he's from St. Louis.
And William, welcome to the program.
How are you?
Russ, it's an honor.
Thank you very much for having me on.
Yeah, you bet.
So my senior seminar class is, or I'm a senior at Liberal Arts School, or in Winter Park, Florida.
And one of my classes is a senior seminar.
And our senior thesis or final paper is a political biography on the political figure of your choice.
And I chose you, and the title of my essay is, Who is Rush Limbaugh?
And I figured there was no better way to answer that question than to ask the man himself.
Well, now, wait a minute here.
In the first place, if I start telling you who I am, then I am doing the work for your paper.
Why did you choose this political?
I'm a radio guy, yet you lumped me here a political figure.
Why did you choose me?
There's no wrong answer.
I'm just curious.
You were on a list, and I was a political science major, but I'd never really been that interested in politics.
I knew my parents had listened to you in the past, but they never really had put their political views on me and anything.
But did you?
Have you listened to the program much or not?
I have been, I'm a Russ 24-7 member now.
I have been following you for about two and a half months, and it was the best decision I've ever made.
Well, then you're halfway home.
You're halfway home.
If you already are of that opinion, you're halfway home.
Who is Rush Limbaugh?
In what way do you want to take this?
Do you want to take it in the...
Well, I've read, forgive me if I pronounce the name wrong, but Zev Shaffetz's book, Rush Limbaugh, Army of Wanderers.
I've read that cover to cover.
Okay.
And so I can answer it in a bunch of different ways, but I figured it would be a good way to conclude my essay with a transcript from you.
Oh, a transcript of me talking to you, me explaining myself.
Yeah.
If somebody were to ask me, who are you?
What would I say?
Because my teacher, even my teacher, refused to believe that I can adequately answer the question.
Your teacher refused to adequately answer it.
Why?
Because I'm so complicated and multifaceted, multi-dimensional?
Yeah.
That would make too much.
Well, who made the list that I was on that you got to choose a name from?
my professor it was everyone from you know harry reid to yourself and you chose me Oh, that's flattering.
Well, look, William, hang on here to this thing.
I've reached the end of this busy broadcast segment.
I've got to take a break here.
But hang on, I've got to figure out how to deal with this because I'm 63 and I don't have 63 years to tell you who I am.
So I've got to figure out the best way to approach this.
Okay, William, stay on hold.
We'll get to you here after the top of the hour break.
But I want you to research that list.
I've got a question for you about that list.
I want to know, you've got to do your essay on political figure.
My name's on the list.
I want to know if anybody else on the list is unelected, does not run for office.
▲
Export Selection