All Episodes
Previous Next
April 21, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:48
April 21, 2014, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
An amazing thing has just happened.
An American has won the Boston Marathon.
That's the first time since 1983.
The sport of distance running, especially marathons, has been dominated really the last several decades by athletes from high altitude countries that their training regimens are just so much better because they're running in high altitude and they're forced to be so much better.
Americans have not been all that competitive in the sport of marathon.
I hope I pronounced this correctly.
Meb Keflisigi won the Boston Marathon, the first American to win the men's division, at least at the Boston Marathon, since 1983.
Of course, most of the runners, the regular old marathon runners as opposed to the world-class people, are still on the course.
There's very, very strong security.
And it's gone on so far without incident.
I think, in addition to the fact that it's just kind of cool that an American won the year after the terrible attack on Boston.
There is something real to this whole Boston Strong thing and the bouncing back and 36,000 people willing to run in the marathon a year after the terror attack.
It does show that America does have resilience when we choose to call to call it from ourselves.
And I'm glad that the event was held.
I'm glad that there wasn't a fear on the part of the participants in taking part because something bad could theoretically happen.
You see this and you realize that we're not a beaten down country, that we can stand up for ourselves, and I think it's a tribute to everybody involved in the 36,000 people who attend.
I actually is going to run myself today, but we got the call to do the rush program.
So how do you all right?
It is a joke, and I'm kidding, and I wasn't going to run.
I just wish that you didn't so quickly know that it was a joke.
You didn't both look at one another and say, is he serious?
Is he actually run?
There wasn't even a notion on the part of the staff that this might plausibly be true.
All right.
I want to get to a story that just about everybody right of Barack Obama is talking about, which would be the whole nation.
And that is the infighting within the Republican Party, the number of contentious Republican primaries in this year's elections, is the quote Tea Party taking over the Republican Party, or the other way around, will the establishment smack down the Tea Party?
The whole thing.
There's this group called the Main Street Main Street Partnership Pack.
I believe it's been discussed by myself and a couple Russian, a couple of guestos.
It's been talked about on the program.
On their website, giving you an indication here of what they think of themselves, they call themselves the governing wing of the GOP.
Get it?
As opposed to say the Ted Cruises of the world who aren't interested in governing, but they're only interested in pontificating.
The governing wing of the GOP.
What this group has done, and it's backed by three United States Senators, Republican, and about 45 or 50 moderate Republican members of the House.
They formed a pack, a political action committee, and they are going to spend their money in congressional and Senate races around the country backing incumbents who are being challenged from the right by so-called Tea Party type candidates.
That's why they exist.
Eric Cantor, who might be the next speaker of the House of Representatives, majority leader of the House met with them several days ago, was criticized by some on the right for doing so.
One of the problems with this main street pack is where their money is coming from.
They're getting funding from traditionally Democrat sources, including the labor unions.
It's clearly an attempt by establishment Republicans to fight back against this insurgency that comes from the right.
Well, why does the insurgency exist?
Why are there all of these challenges to incumbent Republicans?
The answer is that the challenges are coming because there are A lot of people who normally vote Republican, who feel as though the Republican Party doesn't fully represent them.
These campaigns wouldn't exist if there wasn't a problem.
It reminds me actually of the Democrats back in the 1960s.
I shouldn't admit that it reminds me of that, but it does.
In the 1960s, the Democrat Party was the pro-war party, and it was a pro segregation party.
It was the Democrats that filibusted against the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, and it was the Democrats who got us into Vietnam, and it was the Democrat president Lyndon Johnson who was the target of the anti-war opposition.
A leftist movement developed, which is going on to ruin the Democrat Party, but that movement developed to challenge the old bull establishment on the side of the Democrats.
And they largely succeeded.
The old segregationists were thrown out.
The Democrat Party went from being supportive of the war in Vietnam to largely opposed.
They changed the rules for their convention.
They created all of these quotas, both in terms of political success and also taking the party way to the left, they succeeded in remaking the party.
What had happened was the Democrat Party stopped representing or didn't represent what this liberal wing wanted it to represent.
The same thing is happening, I think right now with conservatives, who are frustrated that even when we have had Republican rule, some of our problems have gotten worse.
During the George W. Bush presidency, which I argue is underrated, there were, however, problems.
We spent way too much money.
When the Republicans ran the House and Senate and had the presidency, the federal budget deficit did go up, the entitlement programs grew.
Many of us look upon the dominant wing of Republicanism as accommodationists.
They accommodate the Democrats and the Liberals who are spending us into the ground.
They object not to excessive spending in government programs merely to their size.
They're Democrats, but not in the same scope as the Democrats.
They want to spend money, but not as much.
They're a little concerned, but not all that concerned about the deficit.
Conservatives feel as though these Republicans do not represent them.
They feel as though their voices aren't being heard.
And they also feel as though they are taken for granted.
Every single time, a moderate Republican wins nomination for anything.
The conservatives are there and they support them in the general election.
They backed McCain when he ran for president.
John McCain made it fairly clear that he was never one of us, if the word us is to apply, to the activist conservative movement in this country.
Nor really was Mitt Romney.
Both of them came out of the moderate wing of the Republican Party.
Yet the party by and large rallied around and united behind them.
The same thing exists in all of these congressional races around the country and in some of the races where moderate Republicans win the nomination for governor.
The Christian conservatives are there, the Tea Party type conservatives are there, the small government conservatives are there.
They're all always there and they're generally very loyal.
Who are the people who are the backbone of the party, the people who show up to do the lip drops and do the phone banks?
They're by and large activist Republicans.
And they see many of these people who are elected as being to the left of them.
But it's not like they're disloyal.
It's not like they're running around backing the Democrats.
Other than a handful of fringe instances, there hasn't been really a third party movement where they've broken away.
They don't run right in challengers generally speaking, there have been exceptions, but usually if you've got a moderate Republican running against a liberal Democrat, they don't put up a third party candidate, usually.
They've been there.
All these primary challenges are are people taking advantage of a pretty basic right they have, which is to run for public office.
Whether you're Senator McConnell in Kentucky or any of the other Republicans that are facing primary challenges, our process does allow you to run for office.
And just because you hold that office now doesn't mean that you're immune from a challenge not only from the other party, but from within your own party.
So this main street partnership that's developing, they're trying to smack this back down.
They're trying to stand up for the when they say the governing wing of the Republican Party, that means the reasonable wing of the Republican Party, the party, the side that will cut the deals, the side that will accommodate.
Having said all of that, that I just prattled on and on about, I do think this main street crowd and the establishment has one valid point.
In order to win, you do need a big tent.
I do buy into that argument that the Republicans can't become exclusively a Tea Party small government entity that says we're going to have a litmus test that throws everybody else out.
I don't want to throw them out.
In order to win, you have to get better than 50% of the vote in a general election.
And in 2008 and 2012, Obama was able to grab through pandering, but without regard to the method, he was able to grab enough of the middle in order to win.
You still do have to win.
We can't repeal Obamacare unless you win the presidency in both houses of the Congress.
You do need to do that.
There are some people who lean right of center on some issues, but not all of them.
You need to get them to be able to vote for your candidates.
So the tent has to be big enough that you can become a majority party.
But I do think the primary ideology of that party has to be one that is in touch with the vast majority of the people who vote.
So this process of challenging candidates from within, I think is generally speaking healthy.
There are a couple of caveats to this, though.
If our side, and I say this as a committed conservative, if our side is going to put up candidates in these Republican primaries and conservative-minded people are going to vote for them, we do need to make sure that our candidates are good candidates.
We can't put up a wingnut.
We can't put up people who get out there and, after they win the nomination, say so many stupid things that they end up costing themselves the election.
What happened in Missouri was a disaster.
That was a seat that was there to be taken.
And the candidate who won the primary wasn't the only conservative candidate running.
For heaven's sake, Sarah Palin, who is as conservative as the day is long, I think in that state, back to different candidate.
You can't just vote for the most conservative candidate if it's going to be somebody whose skills as a politician are so weak that he or she isn't going to get elected.
I still think the best summary of this came from William F. Buckley Jr.
He said his philosophy in voting was to vote for the most conservative candidate who could win.
And I think that's the key.
The other thing is I do think that you have to understand where you are in terms of where the public is.
In some states, the Republicans have such a dominant majority that you don't need to sell out.
Texas is a perfect example of that.
Senator Cruz was the right person to win that primary election on the Republican side in Texas a couple of years ago.
Texas is a state that you can expect to go Republican.
Senator Cruz is certainly a core conservative.
He's somebody who's ideologically to the right of a lot of members of the party, but he was somebody that if he won the nomination would win the general election.
Maybe you have to be a little bit more careful in a couple of other states.
The problem that I have with the establishment arguing, well, if you nominate all these Tea Party candidates, you nominate all these conservatives, you're just going to lose, is that it presumes that conservative ideals can't win the argument.
I think they can.
When they fail is when the person making the argument isn't any good at it.
And they get sidetracked by making nonsensical comments about rape or other issues.
So if you're going to put up a conservative candidate with conservative values, it has to be somebody who not only has those values but has the candidate skills and the intelligence in order to make the case well enough and win.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I've been discussing this interparty fight within the Republican Party, and if it sounds like I'm playing both sides, I kind of am.
I think it is incumbent upon people who truly believe in conservative values to understand that if you don't win, you don't have any power.
And I think that that's a point that Rush has made that we have to translate rhetoric into actual power, and that means winning elections and adapting to a reality right now that includes Democrats that are pandering worse than ever.
Conservative principles can prevail.
They can also prevail in swing states.
I know this.
I'm from a swing state, Wisconsin.
We have one of the more conservative governors in America.
He was re-elected in a recall election, and I think he's going to be re-elected this fall and might even run for president.
You can run and then govern conservatively, even in swing states.
But you can only do it if you have a candidate who can express his ideas with his or her ideas with competence and is going to implement their programs.
I want to talk about a couple of elections very briefly.
You see a lot of the usual suspects on here.
Some people are pretty good, and others, the moderate wing of the party, Larry Buxton, Ken Calvert, Dave Camp, Shelley Moore Capito, she's from West Virginia, Chris Collins, Phil Cook, Rodney Davis, Jeff Denham, Charlie Dent, Mary O'Diaz Ballard from Florida, Peter King from New York.
And I see on here Representative Tom Petry from my own state of Wisconsin.
Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, has said that we're going to crush all these Tea Party candidates all across the United States.
They aren't going to win anything.
And indeed, a lot of them might, in fact, lose, taking on the establishment.
Well, let me talk about Tom Petry's race.
Tom Petri has been in the United States House of Representatives for 35 years.
He was elected in 1979.
He's from, he's nice guy, the whole thing, but he's from this accommodationist wing of the Republican Party.
He's best known as the champion of federal funding for bike paths.
Any Republican who's the champion of federal funding for anything other than maybe national defense is out of sync with the conservative movement.
There's been talk for years of a Republican running against him, and all of a sudden, a couple of weeks ago, one Republican announced that he was running.
There was state senator, fairly well-known guy, Glenn Growthman.
He decided to jump into the race against Pete.
Petri's probably got a million dollars in the bank and he's a wealthy guy.
He's in a position where he could have tried to fight this off.
P. Try bailed.
He said he's not going to run for re-election.
Rather than run in a contentious Republican primary and lose, he decided to walk out the front door before being kicked out the back door.
Now, in that instance, there was a credible conservative alternative to him, and I think he would have beaten P. On the other hand, a lot of people are talking about this challenge to Senator McConnell in Kentucky.
Not only did Kentucky's a swing state, not only do the Democrats want to beat McConnell because he is the Senate Republican leader, he does face a conservative challenger in a Republican primary, and I believe the Kentucky election's in a few weeks, it's next month.
His name is Matt Bevan.
I know because a couple of them have contacted me, including a friend of mine, who say we're very conservative and we've been disappointed by Mitch on a lot of things, but we're going to vote for Mitch because we fear that Bevan will lose the general election.
I'm not going to Comment on Matt Bevan and his campaign because frankly I'm not close enough to it.
I'm not in Kentucky, and I don't know whether or not he'd be a credible candidate or not.
But I do understand by a conservative voter would be willing to vote for McConnell if they fear that the alternative would be losing the general election.
That might be a wrong judgment, but it's a valid reason to cast your vote.
Senator McConnell, I think isn't all that I think a lot of us conservatives give him the heavy jeebies.
Saying that, though, I do think he has an almost impossible job.
And in the end, he's been on our side more often than he hasn't.
I think those two races do, though, show the dilemma that a conservative voter faces in deciding what kind of Republican they want to win.
I'll go back to the Buckley standard.
Vote for the most conservative person you can find, but make sure that that's somebody who's going to win.
Rush is doing well.
He's going to be back on Wednesday if all goes as planned.
So that's good news.
Uh, I'm here today, Mark Belling, Eric Erickson is going to be with you tomorrow.
Here's a switch.
You know how this normally works.
Some conservative is named to be a commencement speaker somewhere.
The lift the liberals go nuts and the person is disinvited.
That's what just happened to Ion Hercy L. at Brandeis University.
Here's a switch.
Michelle Obama is to be the commencement speaker for the high school of graduation in Topeka, Kansas.
Twelve hundred people have signed a petition saying they don't want her to come and want her disinvited.
Story here from the Associated Press.
Tina Hernandez.
I'm a single mother.
I've raised my son for 18 years by myself.
I've told him education is the only way out.
This is one of the biggest days of their lives.
They've taken the glory from the children and put it on Mrs. Obama.
She doesn't know our kids.
Others are saying that they fear that there isn't going to be enough seating for all of the parents and relatives of the graduates because Michelle Obama is going to be there.
Abby Rubottom, 18 Topeka High School senior, described herself as a diehard Democrat, but even she doesn't like the idea of Michelle Obama sharing the stage with graduates.
No disrespect for the first lady.
It's amazing she wants to come speak.
I just don't think it belongs at a graduation.
Here's the problem.
You know what her commencement address is going to be.
It's going to be all about her.
Every talk Michelle Obama gives is always about her.
Remember when they made the pitch for Chicago to get the Olympics?
We sent over Oprah and Michelle and all these Chicago people.
And Michelle got up there and she didn't, you know, she's from she she lived in Chicago for years.
She didn't get up and talk about the ability of Chicago to host an event.
She didn't talk about Chicago being a world-class city.
She talked about how as a child she sat in his fat on her father's lap and watched Nadia Komanic get her perfect ten at the Olympics.
It had to be about her.
Then somebody went and fact check and found that when Nadia Komanic got her perfect ten, Michelle Obama was like 15 years old, meaning she probably wasn't sitting on anybody's lap.
I haven't done the uh Lindsay Lohan story yet.
I'm going to do the Lindsay Lohan story.
I want to do it late in the program, so if I have to get out of here, I can get out of here.
We were talking in the last segment about the infighting within the Republican Party about the ideology of individuals.
Are they conservative enough?
That's going to come to a head in the 2016 primaries.
Yes.
All this talk now about Jeb Bush running.
Jeb seems to be bending over backwards to alienate a lot of people who are fairly loyal Republicans that comment about illegal immigration being an act of love and all of that.
In the meantime, I think there's an indication here that the media and the left may be a little bit afraid of him.
Big story in the New York Times today, Jeb Bush's rush to make money maybe hurdle, and they find that he was on the board of a couple of companies that got into trouble.
Also paid board of director member at Tenant Healthcare, which is a major supporter of Obamacare.
You know, you get out of politics and you want to go into business.
That means that you're going to be tied with all of the positions that business takes for better or for worse.
Let's go to the phones.
1 800 282 2882 is the number on the Rush Limbaugh program to Link in the Hills, Illinois.
Paul, it's your turn on the Rush Show with Mark Belling.
Hello, Mark.
What a great show today.
I really appreciate being on with you.
Thank you.
Okay, I wanted to say that I really agree with both uh the eighth grade debater that called in and with you on the rules of debate.
Uh he described the classic rules, and I agree with what you had said, because the left has taken to redefining words, and they've redefined the debate to what we used to call a lecture.
And they've done this with so many words in the recent past the redefinition of marriage, they've redefined racism, uh, the census is uh redefining what uninsured means.
They even redefined uh shovel ready to mean something different or enrolled versus paid.
This is one of their common modes operandis, and what it is is it makes it harder to hit a moving target, especially when you're not really even sure what that target is.
Well, I I think those are all very good points, Paul.
The other thing that has been done with regard to the attempts to debate anything is they always call for the debate.
I mean, how many times have we been told that America needs to have a conversation about race?
Paul uh Eric Holder has said we're too cowardly to have a conversation about race.
But whenever anyone enters that conversation and says something that the left doesn't agree with, they immediately accuse you of racism.
They don't want to have a conversation on any of these things.
You use the term lecture.
The other thing that they like to do is they'll take a political position and suggest that you are a bigot or almost an illegitimate arguer if you are on the wrong side of that issue.
The situation with regard to the guy who was the CEO of Mozilla, the uh the software company they run Firefox, he was forced to resign, and the company apologized because he donated to the initiative that declared marriages between a man and a woman in 2008.
That was six years ago.
That initiative passed in California.
If he's a bigot because he supported that, it meant the majority of the people in California were bigots.
That was also the position in 2008 of Barack Obama when he ran for president of the United States.
But now, not only opposing gay marriage, but opposing it in the past is something that deems that is sufficient to be able to deem you a bigot.
They make these kind they use these kinds of tactics because they're largely successful.
Nobody wants to be thought of as a bigot or a hater, so they end up avoiding taking the positions that result in those labels.
That's a common tactic now used on the left.
We should be able to discuss gay marriage without people being accused of being homophobic and haters if they happen to think that the conventional definition of marriage is valid.
Now, it's pretty clear to me that this gay marriage argument is going to be won by the people who want gays to be able to marry.
That that seems to be the way the winds are moving, not only politically, but the way that the legal rulings are coming down.
Still, you ought to be able to argue that without being labeled as someone who despises gay people, and that's the tactic that is used here.
That was the point I was trying to make with the young man, although he is correct.
If you don't have any forum for civility, if you don't have any rules, it just becomes a shouting match in which people, generally those who are conservative, are not even allowed to have their point of view expressed.
But whether you use the rules or you use the absence of rules, the goal is the same.
The goal is to have right wingers not heard at all.
Thank you for the call.
Let's go to Chelsea, Massachusetts, and Jeff.
Jeff, it's your turn on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Oh, thank you very much, Mark.
Now, as far as the Boston Marathon is concerned, I was actually there when the bombs went off.
I actually heard the two blasts from Copley Square.
Now, the key to the Boston bombing is this.
They shut down the transportation for the most part.
Me and my friend had to walk from one part of Boston to the other part of Boston.
And the panic among the people.
You see, I don't think we're Boston strong.
I think what will happen is the terrorists will just strike at another time.
The key is shutting down the mega mosque, like the Boston Islamic Center and other ones scattered throughout the country.
That's how you defeat radical Islam and shutting down the mega mosque, the root of it.
The reason I wanted to compliment Boston today, Jeff, is because I'm glad the event was held, and I'm glad as many people participated as did, because I don't think the fear of terror can allow us to not do the things that we want to do.
The larger point, though, about the world that we live in is that there is a philosophy that exists in our world that believes in terror.
It is still almost miraculous to me that we have as little terror as we do here in the United States.
Incidents like what happened at Fort Hood, which was terrorism, it wasn't workplace violence, as the attorney general claims.
Incidents like that are still rather rare.
The Boston Marathon attack was rare.
There are people though who live in parts of the world where these are just ordinary common things.
We can't let it get to that point.
So long as you have people who want to commit terrorism, though, it's likely to continue.
I don't know if the right tactics or the right safety measures or the right precautions were put in place in Boston.
So far the day has gone on without any incident, and I think that is a good thing, and I'm glad the event occurred.
And whether or not you agree with the approach that they're taking or not, I think the fact that the marathon occurred, that as many people ran, and that it is this celebration of people not only for their city but the event itself, I think that that is a good thing.
We've got another caller in Massachusetts, Ludlow Mass.
Tom, it's your turn on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Hey, Mark, how are you doing?
I'm great, thanks.
Hey, uh, my take on this uh, you know, fossil fuel industry and you know, the war on coal and oil, I I believe that's the democratic platform where they don't want that because those are high paying skilled jobs for men, and that's the demographic that they don't really care about.
They're caring about women and minorities and young people engaged.
That's it.
And their their opponents are you know, men or conservatives or elderly conservatives, and by squashing down that industry and hiding behind regulations and EPA, that's that's taking a lot of their opponents off the board, you know, putting them out of jobs or economically not as viable or just kind of keeping their voices down because they're they're kind of poor, they don't have to be a problem.
Well, whatever whatever their motivation is, it's pretty apparent that the recovery that we are in, this slow growth recovery where each quarter is like one percent over last year, has produced no gains in employment.
The unemployment rate is still miserable, but it is so misleading because you have this massive group of people that aren't even seeking work.
So without regard to what the motivation for the left is and for what and what Obama's motivation is, there haven't been any gains in jobs.
The thing the the funny thing about it is is that even though he so despises the fossil fuel industry, one of the few thank you for the call, Tom, one of the few booming areas of the American economy is oil.
They haven't figured out how to stop the fracking.
But the Bach and Field in the Dakotas is real.
The field in the pa in Pennsylvania is real.
The ability to extract oil from shale and the ability to use this fracturing technology is creating just boom towns out there.
The United States is going from a nation that was a an enormous importer of oil to one in which we're moving closer to energy sufficient self-sufficiency.
I don't know that Obama likes that.
I do know that it's really massed over his economic numbers because so many people have gone to work in that field, and the economy has gotten so strong and so many businesses are thriving because of the exploration for gas here in the United States that it's benefited his economic numbers.
You can't think of many industries that are thriving under him.
I guess it goes back again to my point that every time he tries to do something, it backfires on him.
In some instances, it backfires on his own liberalism.
Who would think that the Obama presidency, as anti-coal as it is, anti-fossil fuels as it is, even opposing Keystone, That one of the big boom industries of the period in which Barack Obama has been president has been exploration for oil in the United States by fracking.
But the reality is that's what's happened.
He would prefer that the only industry that was growing in this country not be that.
But the facts are what they are.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I want to give you a prediction.
I think that the Democrats are going to lose the governorship of Illinois, one of the bluest states of all.
When does anybody reform themselves?
When they hit rock bottom, right?
Illinois has hit rock bottom.
I mean, it is sticking out like a sore thumb in the Midwest right now.
Their unemployment rate is going up.
Even with the way we're we define unemployment, their unemployment rate is going up, and they're in this death cycle of raising taxes, which kills the economy, so they have to cut spending.
And because they're cutting spending, they raise taxes again.
In the meantime, they're borrowing and borrowing and borrowing.
Their budget is completely in the hole, and they face this crisis in that their pension funds, which pay out an enormous amount of money.
Both the City of Chicago funds and the state of Illinois pension funds are deeply in the hole.
They are terribly underfunded, and they can't seem to be able to raise taxes fast enough to be able to pay for them.
But they won't address the root cause.
And the root cause is that they spend way too much money on these pensions.
They don't get any kind of a contribution from the public employees, and the pension payouts are enormous.
It's literally bankrupting the state.
There's talk of Illinois eventually having to file for some sort of bankruptcy because they can't make these pension payouts.
It's an environment like this that leads the public to make a major shift in public policy.
Bruce Rahner is the Republican nominee for governor.
He's running against the incumbent Governor Quinn, who is got no charisma and is just something of adult.
I think the Republicans are going to win there.
The problem they will face, though, is they're not going to be able to fully reform that state.
One of the advantages that Governor Walker in my state, Wisconsin, and the Republicans with Snyder in Michigan have had, and there's been tremendous improvements in both states, is they both came in with state legislatures as well, and they were able to pass whatever they wanted.
In Michigan, which is a big union state, they passed right to work legislation.
And that's attracting a lot of businesses to Michigan.
They've redefined that as it from an anti-business state to a pro-business state.
Likewise in Wisconsin, we were able to pass our reforms and collective bargaining, which made employees kick in for their pension benefits and dramatically lowered the cost of government.
If you have divided government, you'd never be able to get those initiatives through.
That was one of the real advantages that states like Wisconsin and Michigan had in fixing their problems.
Illinois right now, though, sticks out like a sore thumb, and I do think there's a major opening there for the Republicans to win this fall.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Lindsay Lohan is upset because she compiled a list of 36 men.
I don't know if they're the only 36 men, 36 men that she has had sex with over the years, and somebody leaked it to a tabloid.
She said, This was part of my time at Betty Ford.
It's step number five or step number eight.
She doesn't first of all, I didn't know that that was one of the steps.
Everybody that you had sex with, she doesn't know what step it is.
This is in my Betty Fard book, so that was really personal to my sponsor.
You write that for your sponsor.
And then she said, after her exploits were made public, she said she doesn't really care how it affects her.
I'm don't care about me in that situation.
I care about the people that are involved with other people because it's really unfortunate and disrespectful.
She feels badly for the guys.
I'd offer a comment on this that I know would get me in trouble, which is why I'm very glad that I'm out of time.
Join Eric Erickson tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection