All Episodes
Previous Next
June 6, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:28
June 6, 2014, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Eastern Command, which is in New York City.
The weather is beautiful, the last hour of the last week of Russia's vacation.
It's also live from New York City.
It's open line Friday.
1-800-282-2882 is the phone number.
I barely worked through this stack of stuff that I was so proud of.
I said I was going to rip off Keith Albert.
Back on one of his shows, maybe it was the one on MSNBC, or maybe it was the one who was working for El Gore Television or whatever.
It is now.
He had this thing in which he talked about, I don't know, the most despicable person of the week or the most terrible person in the world or something like that.
I wanted in one of my stints in which I'm privileged to come on and do the Rush program.
Take a few minutes to make clear how little respect I have for one particular prominent figure in American politics.
So indulge me for a minute.
Back when I started in my talk radio career, and like a lot of us conservatives, I was someone who evolved from a liberal when I was a kid and very liberal when I was in college, gradually becoming conservative as life kept hitting me in the face.
Reality, as much as anything else, reality and Ronald Reagan really turned me around and opened my mind.
As I then became a talk show host, I get from a lot of people who I knew in my former incarnation as a news reporter.
Say, yeah, I hear you say all the, but you really believe that stuff.
You just saying that to get ratings.
You get that a lot.
I suspect Russia's gotten it from some elitists.
Okay, Limbaugh, you're an intelligent guy.
You don't really believe you say that's you're pandering, aren't you?
They never really want to believe that we conservatives believe these things.
The condescension from the left toward contemporary conservatives.
It's just intense.
They never want to believe that you could possibly believe these.
Well, this is because they are so arrogant that they've never examined their own beliefs.
They just presume that you ought to be like them.
In fact, for most of us, the beliefs we hold we've come to because they make sense to us, and we pursue things that we believe in.
Even on the left, the addled left, the wacko, condescending Barbara Boxer left, even on that left, on the Occupy movement left, on the coexist bumper sticker left.
In Wisconsin on the recall Scott Walker.
We hate anything that's Republican left.
A left that I deal with all the time.
There is usually there at least some sincerity.
Now, they fake their outrage all the time, and they take cheap shots, and they use allegations that we are saying things offensive, not that anyone is offended by it, but merely as a tool to silence.
I get all of that, but deep down they usually do have an ideology that they buy into.
Liberals are liberals because they're liberal.
There's one guy, though, that just sticks in the craw who's so phony.
And I just put him at the bottom.
In terms of contemporary public American figures that we can respect or not respect.
I'm talking about Charlie Christ.
He's the former governor of Florida, Republican, who's now running for governor of Florida, Democrat.
Now I understand some people change parties.
It happens, if not all the time, it happens.
There are a lot of Republicans who used to be Democrats.
And there are some Democrats who go over and become Republicans.
And then there are people like myself who've evolved ideologically.
I've listened to Rush tell his story.
I think Russia's been conservative forever.
I wasn't.
I moved from where I was to where I've gotten to be as my life is going on.
All of that's true.
There's also nothing wrong with changing your mind.
It isn't always a flip-flop.
Sometimes you see things differently.
But none of that is the case with Charlie Christ.
Charlie Christ is a guy who was a Republican governor of Florida who wanted to be in the United States Senate.
Marco Rubio, who was a congressman, ran against him in the Republican primaries.
Rubio ran against Christ from the right.
He said Charlie Christ wasn't sufficiently conservative.
Rubio got tremendous traction.
And Florida Republicans voted against their sitting governor, and they voted to nominate Christ.
Charlie Christ was so determined to go to the Senate that he decided, okay, I'm not a Republican anymore.
I'm gonna run as an independent.
I'm a pragmatist.
I'm not a conservative, that's not as conservative as Rubio Rubio.
He's out there on that right wing fringe.
I'm a guy that's a mainstream Floridian.
So he ran as an independent.
That didn't work.
He lost that.
The Democrat lost the independent the independent Charlie Christ lost, Marco Rubio went to the United States Senate.
Charlie Christ apparently can't imagine himself, though, not in government.
So rather than go off and accept that he's one more rhino that got tossed out by conservatives who have taken ideological control of the party, Charlie Christ has decided that, okay, now I guess I'm a Democrat.
After all this, I'm a Democrat.
And he gets up and he's telling this story in Florida that the thing that drove him from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party was the racism of the Republicans.
In several recent interviews, he has argued that the primary opposition to President Obama from Republicans is racist.
Here's a quote.
I couldn't be consistent with myself and my core beliefs and stay with a party that was so unfriendly toward the African American president.
I'll just go there.
I was a Republican and I saw the activists and what they were doing.
It was intolerable to me.
So the reason he had to leave is because we're all a bunch of racists.
It's not only a bald face lie.
It denies the essential truth of Charlie Christ.
The fact of the matter is that Charlie Christ, who was pretty much a mainstream establishment Republican, when he ran for governor in the first place, he was supported by most Republicans down in Florida on both the right and in the middle.
Governed as governor of Florida, as a basic moderate Republican.
Maybe he was a rhino, maybe he stirred a little bit too much to the left, but he fit in in that broad scheme of Republicanism.
He now fits in, he's lockstep on every single issue the Democrats hold down in Florida.
How does that happen?
Really?
At your advanced age you had some sort of metamorphosis?
Well, that isn't plausible, so he gets up and these Republicans were just a bunch of races.
Oh, okay, you were in that party for for heaven's sake, Charlie Christ was in Congress before he was the governor.
Suddenly you picked up on this revelation that Republicans are racist.
No.
Charlie Christ had nowhere to go politically in the Republican Party.
The only opportunity there for him is on the Democrat side.
The incumbent governor of Florida right now, Rick Scott Scott's a Republican.
The only way for Chris to have a plausible chance of winning is to go over and be a Democrat.
This isn't a reinvention of oneself.
This is a guy who's making it clear that ideas, beliefs, they're meaningless to him.
Charlie Christ evidently doesn't hold a conviction important enough to even hold it.
All that matters to him is that he be elected.
Power.
He'll program himself evidently to do anything.
Rather than be out of power, Charlie Christ will go from being one type of person with one set of ideas to someone else.
Well, who can so easily sell their ideas out?
You talk about a Judas.
This takes it to a different level.
I don't know what's worse.
Liberals who utter stupidity are confronted by reality and refuse to learn.
They keep making the same mistakes over and over and over again, Or this guy, Christ, who was a Republican, who simply programs himself and comes up with an entirely different platform, an entirely different set of values, an entirely different agenda of issues, and a promise that he will, as governor, govern more from the left than he did the first time around.
That means none of it matters to him at all.
In deciding what to do, he doesn't consult at all what he, Charlie Christ believes in.
He just programs himself to take whatever position is necessary in order for him to get elected in this decade.
And the last decade, it was Republicanism that got him elected.
Now he's going to switch over.
You wonder why Americans have such a cynical view of politicians.
It's because of guys like him.
In fact, most people in government are interested more in being re-elected than anything else.
But still, somewhere, there's a system of beliefs.
I mean, I suspect all that crazy stuff that people like Barbara Boxer say, Barbara Boxer believes.
I suspect that Senator Rand Paul, very controversial figure in both the Republican Party and nationally.
Those beliefs that he holds, I think are sincere.
I agree with Rand Paul at about 80% of it and disagree with him on about 20% of it, but I think 100% of it is what Rand Paul believes.
True, everybody packages ideas, and there are ways to spin things, and sometimes you're disingenuous about your intentions.
But to simply remake yourself, and then to come up and get up and use this old tired canard, and it's because the Republicans are a bunch of bigots, give me a break.
There is a movement right now within the Republican Party.
You may have heard some of the commercial, I don't know who hears all of what, but I hear the feed that we have here.
There's a big movement going on, advertising and everything, to draft Dr. Ben Carson to run for president.
The Republicans are so doggone racist.
How can that possibly be?
Everyone knows that there are African American Republicans, black American Republicans, that this party has been willing to embrace.
To trot out the well, everybody's against Obama because we're a bunch of racists, is so sickening.
So old.
You don't, Chris, have anything better than that.
No, it really doesn't have any.
No, we actually don't have a problem with a government takeover of health care.
No, we don't have a problem with a foreign policy so vague that it's not definable.
No, we don't have a problem with having Americans under fire in Benghazi that we didn't defend.
No, we don't have a problem with any of that.
No, we don't have a problem with having the IRS, the Internal Revenue Service, going through private tax documents to target individual organizations on the basis of the beliefs that they hold.
No, we don't have a problem with Eric Holder's miserable Justice Department.
No, we don't have a problem with Fast and Furious.
No, we really don't care about the deficits that are being run up.
No, we really don't care that this recovery has been jobless.
It's all because Obama is black.
This is what he's selling.
The activists in the Republican Party, they are only against the president because he's African American, and I couldn't be part of that.
This becomes his rationalization to essentially sell out his entire life and say that he's something else.
I don't know what's going to happen in the election down in Florida.
And I also don't know what kind of governor Charlie Christ will be if he's elected.
Will he revert back to the warmed over Republican Charlie Christ?
Will he be the warmed over Democrat that he passes himself off as?
Will he become will he become a radical?
Maybe he'll go back the other way.
Maybe if the tides change again in Florida, he'll go from being a Democrat governor to a Republican governor.
Maybe Charlie Christ doesn't care about anything other than Charlie Christ in his own image.
Nothing about the guy seems real.
The thing he's most noted for is the tan.
I bet it's a spray on.
It's probably not even real.
You talk about political chameleons, and I understand you will see politicians change their position on a dime if they need to in order to get re-elected.
How do you change everything?
You wonder deep down, well, what are you?
What do you believe?
And you get the sense that all this guy believes in is Charlie Christ himself.
I know that was long, and I know it's a lot of time, and I know Florida is only one state, but he is running for governor of that state.
And the Democrat, but by the way, the Democrats are making a deal with the devil here.
How can they trust him?
How can they presume that he won't turn on them in the same way that he turned on the Republicans?
Anyway, it is open line Friday, and we're going to talk to some of the folks out in Rushland next.
1-800-282882 is the phone number.
I'm Mark Belling filling in for Russian law.
Mark Bellingham for Rush.
I have to correct.
I I made a mistake earlier in the program, and it's such an unbelievably stupid mistake, and I can't believe that I have I keep saying in the during the I'll correct it next break, and I haven't gotten around.
I was referring to the Band of Brothers, the uh HBO series that I I don't know what's on Netflix or where you find any of this stuff, but I know it's on video and it's probably on Netflix.
I give Band of Brothers and its companion miniseries, The Pacific, which came out a few years later.
My highest recommendation anyway, in referring to Band of Brothers, I said they follow the same company and I called it Charlie Company.
It's easy company, which I know.
You guys seen Band of Brothers?
You have to.
It's just outstanding, and it followed the one company from basic training, or training at least, not basic training, but training, as paratroopers overseas.
They were then involved in the landing on D-Day and fought in the Battle of the Bulge, and that company actually was the one that went on to capture Hitler's, I think they called it Eagles' Nest, his big lair.
It's just an extraordinary thing.
Spielberg and Hanks are behind it.
It had a very good cast and the Pacific was a little bit different because it was a different type of war, but really, really tremendous dramatic depictions of World War II.
Uh, let's go to the phones at Denver, Colorado, and Jim.
Jim, you're on EIB with Mark Belling.
Hi, Mark.
I I just wanted to quibble with you a little bit about your statement that we need if we're conservative, we nevertheless need to vote for more moderate or liberal Republicans uh in order to win the elections.
And I I don't think that's a winning strategy.
I've been listening to that argument for a long time.
The Republicans essentially say you have no place else to go.
Um if you don't vote for the more liberal candidate, that's the same as voting for uh the Democrat.
Um and I think that's how you end up with a 17 trillion dollar deficit.
That's the way you end up with Lindsey Graham.
That's the way you end up with Charlie Christ.
So I just disagree with that.
Well, you misquoted me a little bit, but you mostly have my indictment correct.
My argument was is that he had a if you had a problem with Romney, you needed to overlook it.
I have major problem with Senator McCain.
Senator McCain fought against most of the things that I cared about for 10 or 15 years and ridiculed my type of Republican, my type of conservatism.
I still felt he would be better than President Obama.
You are right that the moderate ring of the Republican Party has been almost as responsible for the problems we have as the Democrats themselves.
But to suggest that there isn't a difference between an America with an Obamacare and one without one is wrong.
To suggest that the foreign policy of the United States would be as addled as it is right now under a President McCain than a President Obama, I think is wrong.
You also have the reality that the party itself has gotten more conservative.
Individual Republicans are more conservative, and there'd be a governing strategy that certainly would be a differentiation.
If you keep looking for perfection, all you're going to do is continue to cede the country over to people who don't share our values at all.
Now, I do think it's critical that the next Republican candidate for president be someone who does represent core conservative values, because I do think that there's been an alienation from a lot of conservatives to the Republican Party as a whole, and I felt it.
I mean, I in my own state, Wisconsin, I've railed against these people who do not take advantage of the power they have to try to fix the problems that we have.
We have a governor now in Wisconsin who proved that you can govern conservatively and achieve political success.
The point I was making with regard to running candidates against people like President Obama is sometimes the alternative is gravely worse.
You can go back to the nineties and argue that there wouldn't have been much difference if Dole had won as opposed to Clinton, other than basically in terms of morality and the decent and decency and how he conducted oneself in office.
I just don't buy that there would not have been a difference between a Romney and an Obama.
Obama has set this country on a path toward there's no point in sugarcoating this.
The path we are on is towards socialism.
It's toward government control of everything.
Republicans who aren't perfect indeed aren't perfect.
And there are problems with that, and they need to be moved to the right.
But we have put ourselves in a disaster situation because some people sat on their hands and thought that we could survive a Barack Obama presidency.
Speaking of returns, Rush is back on Monday, been on vacation this week.
He will be back on Monday.
In the meantime, Rush Limbaugh.com is running.
You can use Russell Rush Limbaugh.com.
That's how you can sign up and join Rush 24 7.
That's how you get to see Rush on the Niddle Cam, podcasts of the radio show, other fun stuff, and website's really cool.
Plus, it just looks good.
The colors and all that stuff, it looks good.
See, I'm pressing.
My name gets on the website the whole thing.
I had a guy over the weekend ask me, Well, why did they wh why do you fill in for Rush Limbaugh?
I don't like it in general when the public asks me questions because it's usually stuff like that.
Why do you do it?
Because they asked me.
They asked me like a long time ago.
I don't I think it's like 15 years now, off and on.
I've been it's been a long time.
It's since we were in the other place, and I don't even think were you here?
I don't even know if you were here.
Yeah, you were probably you've been here forever.
Somehow you've been doing the Rush show before Rush was doing the Rush show.
Well, they asked me, well, why wouldn't they've asked somebody from a larger market?
I don't know.
Well, yeah, but why you?
Okay, I get the drift.
You kind of think, I stink.
Uh this is my fan base, by the way.
He said he likes my show.
That's my fan base in Milwaukee.
I've got a remarkable story for you here.
I think almost nobody knows this.
From the Hill, Congressional budget scorekeepers estimated Thursday that only a fraction of the people without health insurance in 2016 will actually pay a penalty under Obamacare's individual mandate.
They're finally running the numbers.
When the individual mandate fully kicks in 2016, only four million of the 30 million who are expected to be uninsured will pay a fine.
A total of 23 million will fall under the mandates, hardship and other exemptions.
So between those that are lying about their income in order to get the subsidies, and those who are eligible for one exemption or another, the individual mandate, which was part of the legal challenge to Obamacare, is barely going to be paid by anyone.
So let's examine what all this means.
If there are 30 million people who will remain uninsured, and we're telling them that almost none of them are going to be fined, why will they get health insurance?
What's the whole point of Obamacare?
Didn't they tell us when they were selling us this thing that the goal was to get more Americans insured?
We had this crisis.
People don't have access to health care.
They still don't have access to health care.
And the ones that refuse to sign up for Obamacare and don't have it through work or refuse to get it through work, hardly any of them are going to be fined.
Now, I don't believe in the individual mandate.
I don't believe in any of Obamacare.
Still, if virtually no one who isn't buying insurance is going to get a fine, that means that the numbers of individuals who don't have the insurance is never going to change.
We created Obamacare, which for a lot of people drove up the cost of their care, made them dump their doctors, dump their plans, all because we supposedly had this huge grand scheme to be able to come up with a way to insure those who didn't have it.
Now there's still going to be 30 million of them.
They're not going to be fined, and nothing will have changed.
Why are we doing this?
Even for you lefties who still say you support Obamacare, was it your goal to insure people?
We're not doing anything to address what the stated problem was.
So we've been exercising ourselves over whether or not the government should have the right to be able to mandate that people buy a product.
John Roberts had to come up with this tortured, preposterous opinion that this was actually a tax after Obama had argued forever that it wasn't a tax, that allowed him to cast the deciding vote that said Obamacare is still legal.
Now we find out that the individual mandate, which was so controversial, isn't even going to be enforced with a fine for all but a fraction of the people who don't buy health insurance.
So what's the point of all of this?
You lefties who told us that we had to have this.
You said that we conservatives are lying about it and demonizing it.
What have you really accomplished?
If the fine isn't going to be handed down to hardly any of the people who don't buy health insurance, they're still not going to buy health insurance, and we have the exact same problem we had before of the uninsured.
In the meantime, we've totally screwed up the American insurance system, driven up costs, thrown people away from their doctors, created problems with the quality of care, for what?
That number shocked me.
I heard it was going to be like a third would end up having to pay the fine.
Now it's down to four million, and that's presuming that they catch any of them.
Hey, it's open line Friday, 1-800-282-2882.
Reggie, who is a trucker somewhere in Kansas, you're on EIV with Mark Belling.
Mark, it's a pleasure.
Thank you for having me on.
Thank you.
This would have been this would have been a great segue had you got me on prior to your caller before, because I'm kind of want to touch on exactly what what uh what you guys you were talking about, I'm sorry, uh the public in respect to uh the Republican uh party and uh its uh its viewpoints or how it's perceived by other uh people in uh in America or how they view uh people of color and uh pretty much um what I feel is that the uh Republicans,
the conservatives in general have lost touch with what the primary responsibility is to uh start with the first thing, which is then uh a fundamental uh idea of God and uh the belief in God and um the the idea that um we are hypothetic and sympathetic toward our fellow men,
but I don't think the Conservative Party does a very good job of uh showing that they appear to be, and it and it's not just you know, with them, it's the Democrats do it as well.
But we're supposed to be the party of God, the party that believes and has faith.
So we're supposed to be an example uh for those that are around us, and I think we do a horrible job because it really appears to be all about money.
Um and it seems like uh that party, uh conservative or the Republican Party, is uh all exclusive party that is primarily made up of white males uh with money.
Um I mean, i if your argument is that the Republicans haven't packaged their message well, I think you're probably right about that.
Now there are excuses and they're legitimate ones.
We don't control the means of communication.
The mainstream media still is the one that presents the argument.
The Republicans, though, do need to do a better job of presenting their point.
I did on yesterday's program filling in here for Rush make the strong case that Republicans can't opt out of the class warfare that the Democrats wage.
The Democrats keep saying the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poor, and the Republicans only care about the rich.
You can't let them continue to get away with that.
Conservatives have got to be able to make the case that conservative policies work for all Americans, that the good old American dream is still possible, that by cre allowing individuals to create wealth and opportunity, there's a chance for everyone to get ahead.
And this notion of long-term subsistence being on the dole from cradle to grave is a pathway to nowhere.
What the left has been selling forever is the expansion of government for the purpose of handing out programs.
Those programs are funded by taking more and more and more out of people who are productive, and you see the result of it.
The unemployment report out today.
Okay, we created a few new jobs, but the labor market participation rate is the same miserable thing that it was before.
You've got an entire class of people who only know one type of Democrat, and that is the kind of Democrat who just promises and promises and promises.
And what have we gotten in response for that?
The argument you make about how the Republican Party looks, that's a message of image and selling.
And I've got to acknowledge, when you have Republicans like Mitt Romney get up, and admittedly he didn't know that the comments were going to be put out there for public consumption, saying they well, I can't get 46% of the people because they're people that are on the dole forever, and I can't reach them.
You can't just sacrifice people away.
You still have huge segments of America that are winnable.
You've got a lot of people in the middle because they don't know what their ideology is.
Well, sell them on what you believe in.
I don't think it's impossible.
Were it impossible, you wouldn't have this map of the United States.
Whenever you see the red and blue maps that indicate which precincts went Republican and which went demorating, the whole country is red.
It's just the places on the coast that you see a lot of blue in where the population tends to be concentrated.
I do believe conservatives need to do a better job of making it clear why their policies are good for everyone in America.
You also mentioned the God point.
We have an assault on fundamental values in our country, and people who dare to suggest that their religious beliefs guide them at all are being slapped down and called bigots.
I do think a stronger defense of them would be a good idea.
The gay marriage argument has been lost, but it's primarily been lost because one side stopped making it.
I think that Republicans do need to do a better job of presenting their ideas.
They knew to do need to do a better job of framing the debate, but that usually is a function of the personality of the individual candidate.
You can't keep waiting for the next Ronald Reagan to come around.
But there are Republicans and a lot of them right now, the new generation of Republicans who've done a really good job of communicating and selling a message.
So no, I don't think it's a lost cause.
Thank you for the call, Reggie.
I'm Mark Belling filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
Mark Belling filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
You know, I sometimes make fun of sports that are easy to make fun of, like, say outdoor soccer.
Well, I'm nobody to throw rocks because I'm a huge fan of horse racing and you're talking about a sport that is dying in terms of losing it.
You go to the racetrack, and other than a handful of them, they're all geezers and we're dragging our racing forms along, and we just we seem like dinosaurs sometimes.
You go to an OTB and the average age is like cemetery.
You get every now and then, though, the American public interested.
Everybody pays attention to the Kentucky Derby because people have their derby parties and their derby pools.
And then if a horse somehow manages to win the Derby in the preakness, they contend for the triple crown and it becomes a big deal.
And NBC's turned it into a big deal.
All sorts of people are now asking me about this horse California chrome, who never ask me anything about horse racing because they're bored to tears, otherwise buy it.
For those of you who don't know me, I've been involved in owning racehorses for 20 years in partnership and big fan of the sport, and I like it.
We're a sport that has a lot of issues, including with excessive use of therapeutic and illegal drugs, trainers cheating, not enough horses, horses that are not able to withstand the rigors of training and be as stout and hardy as they used to be, a lot of those issues.
But when you get a horse that's on the verge of doing something that has hardly ever been done, there's a drama to it.
The Triple Crown has not been won since affirmed it did it in 1978.
Twelve horses since then have won both the Derby and the Preakness, but failed to win the Belmont Stakes, including some that seem to have been cinches.
Most people seem to think the California Crome, because he is clearly the best horse, he won the Derby easily and the Preakness easily, and is five for five this year will win the Belmont Stakes.
All right, here I am, the crab that's gonna rain in everybody's praise.
I don't think he's going to win.
First of all, twelve in a row have been to this point and didn't win.
The odds are Against him.
Why is it so hard?
Well, here's why.
It used to be that horses ran more frequently than they do now, and they used to be bred more for distance than they are now.
They are bred for speed.
So these distance races tend to take a lot out of the horses.
In the days in which the triple crown was more common, the horse that won the derby, the real challenge would be to come back and win the preakness, because most of the good contenders in the derby would come right back at him and fire two weeks later in the preakness.
Now, given the way horses are trained, unless you won the derby, nobody wants to run their horse back in two weeks in the preakness because they don't think that they're going to be able to thrive on that situation.
The Derby winner, of course, has to run in the preakness because how else do you win the triple crown?
So several of the main contenders in the Belmont Stakes tomorrow are horses that ran and ran well in the Kentucky Derby, but then skip the preakness.
They now have five weeks without racing.
They are fresh.
In the meantime, California Chrome was in full training, had the tough race last time around, and by the time you get to this last one, which is the longest at a mile and a half, the horses are just worn down.
They're not worn down to the point that they're in pain.
They're just horses that are not primed, I think, for their optimal performance.
When triple crowns have been won in the past, the horses were running against small fields.
Secretariat only had to beat, I think it was four horses when he won in 1973.
I don't believe any horse that's won the triple crown has had to beat more than seven in the Belmont Stakes.
Usually it's a four it was in the past it had often been a foregone conclusion.
Derby winner, Preakness winner, nobody can beat him.
Why even bother to try in the Belmont?
Now, the Belmont is the one that everybody takes their shot at, and it is the most difficult.
Some think therefore that you need to change the system and spread the time between races and so on.
The fact that it is so hard is what makes it special.
My own prediction is that a horse named Wicked Strong, who finished, I think fourth in the Kentucky Derby is going to win the Belmont Stakes.
I also like Metal Count and Commissioners my long shot.
I think California Chrome's probably going to run third or fourth.
If, however, I'm wrong.
And he wins, I probably won't make any money with my betting.
But the horse will have earned it because he will have done something that for all of the reasons that I've just mentioned is very, very hard to do.
His owners are two regular old guys who put in a little bit of money and bred their own horse, and they're doing something that millionaires and billionaires have tried to do and are in a position that a lot of people with greater wealth than them haven't been in, so I wish them all the best, and a good part of me hopes that it happens because the horse is a deserving horse and the people involved behind him are really good, but I don't think it's going to happen.
And if I'm right and he doesn't win, I've got a chance to make a lot of money.
So anyway, that's why I think it's going to be difficult for California Chrome to win, but a good part of me is my heart at least is going to hope that he does well, even though my pocketbook will be elsewhere.
Mark Billing filling in for Rush Lib.
I'd like to thank the staff.
I would like to thank the Rush Limbaugh staff for assisting me in the last couple of days in doing the program and an open line Friday and the website staff had thank the callers who called in.
And even those of you who criticize me and try to take advantage of the fact that Rush isn't here to sneak your shots in, and I know when they're our guest hosts, that's when the the negative people are likelier to come out because they think that we are softer touches.
One final thought on the Belmont stakes.
The thing that's kind of cool about a horse go running for the triple crown is is that you have everybody kind of pulling for the horse and hoping it can happen happen so that they can see history.
As I say financially, it's a good idea to try to bet against him.
But there is something inspiring about a humble horse carrying the dreams of a nation.
All that junk.
See ya.
▲
Export Selection