All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 7, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
November 7, 2014, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings, my friends.
How are you?
It is the one and only Rush Limbaugh program on the EIB network.
We are making progress.
I actually think we're making progress.
I'll explain in just a minute.
But first it's Friday, so let's go.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny, South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited play in Open Line Friday wrapping up an amazing spectacular busy broadcast week.
So great to have you with us today.
Here is the telephone number if you want to be on the program.
800-282-2882.
The uh email address L Rushmore at EIBNet.com.
Open line Friday means that you are not constrained by the normal rules imposed on callers Monday through Thursday.
And that means that you don't have to talk about anything I particularly care about.
I mean, that's the best way to describe it.
So have at it.
Okay, uh as you know, I have um I've been trying to really emphasize, and I know I'm running the risk of of sounding repetitive, but please bear with me on this.
It's crucially important.
Um I have I have been focusing on one take in terms of defining the meaning of the election, and that was this was a vote giving the Republican Party a single mandate.
Stop Barack Obama, stop the implementation of policies authored by Democrats, Harry Reed Pelosi, Obama anywhere.
Just stop it.
Now I do not watch cable TV at night, and this is not a criticism.
I just don't.
It's it's partly it's my way of getting away and having balance in life.
There's some other reasons too, that other things I prefer to do.
It's not a criticism of anything.
But this leads to some very frustrating evenings for me sometimes.
And last night was one of them because I wasn't watching.
But I started getting email after email after email from people who all assumed that I was watching.
Therefore, they assumed that I knew what was being said about me.
And of course, I didn't because I wasn't watching.
And so these emails, you know, whenever somebody assumes a bunch of things that you already know.
This is why I say it takes six weeks of listening to this program to fully understand.
You've it takes six weeks minimum to get the context of this program so that you can tune in any day of the week and understand why what is being said is being said and what's going on.
Well, I didn't know how I was being discussed last night, and I didn't know who was discussing me, but people sending me emails were trying to warn me or to praise me or to alert me, but they all assumed that I was watching too.
And so the emails contained no information.
And it got it got to be very frustrative writing the back look, you guys, I'm not watching.
You gotta start square one.
Tell me what's happening.
And I didn't know until I got here today what what was going on.
And here, let me boil it down to you or for you.
My take, and it's the audio sound bites bear this out.
This is important.
This is not ego, folks.
Now stick with me on this.
My my analysis of the election results is all over the place.
And it's predictably being shot down in a number of places, and others are agreeing with it somewhat, but it doesn't go far enough.
Understandable in all cases.
The left, their opposition to it, this is fascinating.
They're I think two primary reasons why Democrats find it so objectionable.
And by the way, just let me to avoid being confusing to you.
Let me again ask a simple question.
What in the heck was the mandate if it wasn't to stop?
And we've got the exit polling data to prove it now, by the way.
Sixty-one percent stop Obama.
I mean, we've got the exit, there's There's no question about what else could it have been?
The Republicans didn't run on a mandate.
Individual Republican races did, but the Republican Party did not have a national brand or national identity.
What could this election have meant?
It could not have meant anything but stop Obama.
Now the left can't afford that.
Stopping Obama is stopping liberalism.
An election, and this was deep.
This was big, folks, this was a shellacking, I think, even broader and wider and deeper than 2010.
This is huge what happened on Tuesday.
It is major.
It's going to be a long time before the Democrats recover from this.
And therefore they can't afford there to be an accepted explanation for this election result that means anything like what they believe in was rejected.
They simply cannot let that stand.
So I am being assaulted and criticized and what have you in all the left-wing places that you can imagine, because that's something they just can't tolerate.
I mean, even in this moment of great despair for them, even in this moment of just total rejection, they are going to maintain the notion that the premise of every issue is liberalism.
We're just changing the degree here.
They're not going to admit, they will not allow, as as at least as far as they can go to control it, the perception that they, Obama, liberalism was rejected.
They can't afford, as you can understand, they can't afford that to happen.
They can't let that set in.
Which is another reason why it's so important to keep pounding it and reminding it.
Reminding people of it.
There could be no other conclusion.
And it is major, and and it it reassures us in so many ways.
We haven't lost the country, that the country has not been taken over by a majority of people who want a welfare state, for example.
And it wasn't just Republicans saying no.
You're like 29 Democrat senators who voted for Obamacare are gone.
Twenty-nine senators who voted for Obamacare are gone.
They either retired, died in office, there are three of those, or they were defeated in their re-election campaigns.
But all told, twenty-nine Democrat senators who voted for Obamacare are gone, Sayanara.
The majority of them were defeated.
Some retired, some died in office.
Lautenberg, Daniel in no way.
And I can't recall the third.
At any rate.
On the conservative side of things, on the on the Republican side of things, the mandate of stop Obama, some people like it, some people agree with it, some think it doesn't go far enough.
Some people reject it.
But the reason why it's being talked about everywhere, partially is because I'm the one saying it.
I mean, I'll be honest, if if take your pick, if uh let's say a Fox News analyst had said it, it would be applauded as brilliant and genius, and everybody would be agreeing with it and built because I said it, and I'm talk radio, that presents a problem, even on the right, but especially on the left.
Now the re and I think the fact that so many people are acting like stuck pigs over this is clear evidence that it's on point.
The left, again, simply cannot afford for people in this country to believe the Democrats lost because the people wanted liberalism stopped and thrown out.
Obama stopped.
Democrat Party stopped and thrown out.
They simply can't allow that to set in.
So they will continue to oppose it with their uh buddies in the media and reason is that the new routers?
Are you hooking them up right now?
1102.ac.
Cool.
It's only been how many months we've been waiting on the state-of-the-art routers.
This is gonna be even in better day than I thought.
The left simply cannot afford for the truth of the meaning of their massive defeat to settle in.
So their buddies in the media and elsewhere throughout the party are going to do everything they can to poo-poo it and try to call it something else.
You won't believe the minimum wage.
You wouldn't believe some of the excuses they're concocting.
Let's go to the audio sound bites to start with uh one of the ways this is manifesting itself on the Republican side.
Last night, and this is what I got an email about, and I didn't understand it because I wasn't watching.
My cousin Andy sent me an email about this, and I read it, and I said, I had to write it back.
What are you talking about?
I'm not he's he's assumed I was watching and I wasn't, and therefore.
So I had to come get it all today and find out what it was.
And it's Carl Rove on Hannity last night, and Hannity was asking Rove what he thinks of my take on the meaning of the election, meaning the mandate the Republican Party has is to stop Barack Obama.
Hannity said, I agree with Rush.
I think the first mandate's to stop the president because it's hurting the country.
Do you agree with that?
Yes, I do, but it's insufficient.
The country wants more than that.
They want positive, optimistic, conservative answers.
They want to see legislation that will repeal and replace Obamacare.
They want to see many of the ideas embodied in the bills passed by the U.S. House of Representatives that would spur greater economic growth, more jobs, more opportunity for all Americans.
They don't want us just simply to sit there and say, no, Mr. President, we're not going to do anything.
They want us to stop him from doing bad things, and they want us to offer up the agenda.
Before you get mad, this is progress.
This is progress, folks.
This is major, major progress.
Now, everybody who's been listening to this program knows I never said do nothing, and I never said stop.
And I am the guy who for months has been lamenting that the Republicans did not do what Rove wants them to do here.
And I'm not alone.
Countless of us, you included, thought it would be wise for the Republicans to set forth an agenda so that they would have a mandate to do these things.
On this program yesterday, it was I who suggested, and I'm not alone in this either, that the Republicans send bill after bill after bill up to Obama, knowing full well he's going to veto it.
And then what I suggested to do, be it individual bills to repeal Obamacare or whatever, do public opinion polls on every bill and find out what the majority percentage is in the American people body politic on it, and then attach that to the bill in a letter to Obama when you send it up there.
And I use as an example of medical device tax.
We're going to reveal, repeal the medical device tax.
And we send the bill up and attach to it is a letter, dear Mr. President.
Here's our bill.
We want to repeal this, and here is public opinion polling data showing that 75% of the American people agree.
That's an and then publicize it.
Release the letter, release the legislation, send it up there.
That's not doing nothing.
My, make this very clear, my pounding, the meaning of this mandate, meaning stop Obama, was rooted in something that you and I also know to be true, and that is most Republicans were running around talking about the need to compromise.
And to get along.
And to cross the aisle to shake hands, to make the system work, to fix the system, and that's what I was saying no to.
Who in the world could think I meant that?
Nobody thinks I was saying stop saying no to advance a conservative agenda.
I'm the guy that thinks one should have been the past six months.
What I was saying no to was don't compromise with these losers.
And don't treat them like winners.
There's McCain up there begging Obama not to go outside the Constitution.
Please don't.
It just wouldn't be fine.
You don't beg the loser not to do something, Senator.
Act like winners.
And that's not saying getting people's face and point fingers at of them, but you don't have to act like you're subservient or subordinate and beg the president not to do what you know he's going to do anyway.
There was this this notion of mine, and I don't mind having to say this countless times to make it clear.
That's what this is all about, is communicating this exactly as I mean it.
When I said the mandate of this election is to stop Obama, that was stated within the context of hearing so many other Republicans say we must cross the aisle.
We must compromise.
We must work together.
Or hearing Republicans say, the American people just told us in this election, they want us to work with the Democrats.
They want us to compromise.
No, no, no.
They don't want any of that.
They want you to stop Obama.
And they do want a conservative agenda, and they do want it advanced.
It's been one of the frustrating things, absent the campaign.
But we understood the thinking.
Democrats are committing suicide, so don't say anything.
Don't distract anybody from it.
Just let them continue to emulate themselves and be done with it and pick up the pieces later.
I get that.
But there was also a fear, let's be honest.
The Republican Party had a fear that put an agenda forward.
The American people would reject it because they don't have the confidence to think the American people support it, but they do.
And they know that now after the election, the exit polls and some of the data that's come in.
So I have never said do nothing.
And defining the mandate of the election as stop Obama does not equal do nothing.
What it equals is don't compromise with the losers.
Don't cross the aisle, don't do half-baked amnesty to get the Hispanic vote.
Don't do any of that.
Don't compromise on the Democrats with any of the issues that resulted in their defeat.
And if I have to, I'll go get the tape from yesterday's program, or I suggested bill after bill after bill been sent to the White House, make Obama veto him.
Further illustrate to the people of this country who is the obstructionist.
Further illustrate to the people of this country who it is is really saying no.
You send every bill up that has attached to it the results of a public opinion survey showing majority support for that bill.
You send it up there and make him veto it.
That is not doing nothing.
That is a proactive agenda, but it is incumbent that people understand that this has to stop.
What Obama and the Democrats are doing has to stop.
And the Democrats can't afford for that take to be understood.
They can't afford for that take to establish deep roots.
The left, I mean, that's it's everything for liberalism to be rejected, the American people's votes to mean they want no more liberalism.
That's panic time for them.
Have take a break.
You sit tight, we will be back and continue on this roll.
Don't go away.
Open line Friday, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being, should be allowed to have.
Here's the next Carl Roadbite.
This is Hannity again last night.
And uh Rove had the following to say it kept going.
I disagree with people who say the mandate only came to the Republicans because they said they were against Obama.
I listened carefully to what people like Tom Tillis and Tom Cotton and Corey Gardner and Jonathan said.
Stop the tape.
Now, I don't know that he's talking about me there because that's not what I said.
I did not say the mandate comes to Republicans because they said they were against Obama.
I didn't I maybe he's talking about somebody else.
I said the mandate, the reason Republicans were elected is to stop Obama.
I don't know that any Republicans ran around saying they wanted to stop Obama.
I'm saying the voters spoke up on their own.
The only way that you can honestly analyze the meaning of this election since the Republicans were not offering and did not offer a national agenda.
The Democrats were rejected.
Liberalism, Obamaism, it was rejected.
And that means people want it stopped.
I did not say that Republicans were running around campaigning on the premise they were going to stop Obama.
I, in fact, mentioned yesterday and the day before that it was Republican senatorial candidates running around making an issue out of Obamacare and repealing it.
But let's not forget the Republican establishment has been talking all along about how they're not going to repeal Obamacare.
Not this week, but prior to the election.
Context is so important here in understanding what people are talking about.
And the Republican establishment up until this week didn't seem like they were very much into stopping Obama or rejecting or repealing Obamacare, except for the candidates that were running, and they did, which I mentioned.
We do want conservatism in this country.
That's part and parcel of stopping Obama and replacing him with makes perfect sense.
I just want to make sure I'm quoted properly here.
Open Live Friday, Rush Limbaugh and the excellence in broadcasting network.
800 282-2882.
Here's Pat Roberts.
He was on Fox News channel Cavuto yesterday afternoon.
And let's see.
Let me just read it.
Go ahead.
Cavuto gets it wrong, too.
This is why, folks, I'm I'm continuingly continually discussing this.
You know, last night, last night was a classic illustration.
I actually thought about turning what happened to me last night into a teachable moment, but I figured it'd be too esoteric and too hard to understand without you being able to see the emails.
But I I mean it was frustrating as hell.
I was getting emails from people all night, assuming I knew what they knew, but I didn't.
And they were telling me what they thought of it and what I should do about it.
And I was clueless.
I had no idea.
So I wrote them back.
I said, wait a minute, I don't know what you're talking about.
I'm not watching.
Could you start at the beginning?
And some of them were able to explain it to me, some weren't.
It's a it's making yourself understood is a very, very important thing to do.
I'm a professional communicator.
And I take it very seriously, saying what I mean and being understood when I say it.
I understand satire and parody are guaranteed to be misunderstood.
That's the point.
Well, it's not the point, but when the in the the humor, the comedy is the people who get fooled by that stuff and their reaction to it.
But here's Cavuto.
He says in this Pat Roberts, Senator from Kansas.
Go ahead, bit by bit, sort of shove it back in the president's face, but not ignore the president is uh what Rush Limbaugh advocates.
Nobody's talking of did not say ignore the president.
How do you get I'm saying ignore the president from the mandate is stop Obama.
No, it's not personally frustrating.
The point here is I've been doing this 25 years.
Look, it's been six years since I said I hope he fails.
And even now, there are people who don't understand two things about that.
There are people who don't understand why I said it, and they don't understand what I mean.
In fact, let me give you I got the right stack here.
Uh an example.
It's a Peggy Noonan column.
Let me see if I can find what stack I put it in.
Peggy Noonan had a column last night that actually runs today in the uh in the Wall Street Journal.
And there's just there's one sentence in her column that illustrates what I'm talking about.
But as is the usual case here, I can't remember what stack I put it in.
So let me, while I'm looking for it, let me go to the Pat Roberts soundbite here, where Cavuto, because he misunderstands, misstates my position to Pat Roberts, and then asks Pat Roberts for his reaction to what I didn't say that Cavuto misrepresented.
Here's the bite.
Go ahead and bit by bit sort of shove it back at the president's face, but not ignore the president as some uh conservatives or maybe what people like uh Rush Limba uh advocate.
What do you think?
Well, I I don't know about shoving anything in anybody's face.
I don't think you can think of it.
Maybe you play I said it wrong, maybe you just place it before them.
We could we could put it on a plate and offer it to nobody wants to ignore Obama.
You can't.
It's impossible to ignore Obama.
Everything is still all about Obama.
But this is how these things get started and get misrepresented.
Go ahead, bit by bit, sort of shove it back in the president's face, but not ignore the president.
There's some conservatives, people like Rush Limboy.
How do you get ignore the president from the mandate of this election is stop Obama?
At any rate, so there's that.
I wish I could find this Peggy Noonan.
But what I'm looking for, let's go to the phones because it's open line Friday.
Ah, here it is.
This is classic.
And again, not a criticism.
It's it's an illustration here of communication.
Peggy Noonan's piece in the Wall Street Journal is very revealing, and this one sentence can't, you know, Peggy, she's such a nice woman.
She really hates all the fighting, and she doesn't like all the disagreeing, and she really wishes that people would get along.
And she's writing here about Obama.
It is confounding, not surprising, but stunning, unhelpful, and ill-judged that the president is instead going for antagonism, combat, and fruitless friction.
What she is reacting to here is Obama not understanding that he got skunked in this election.
She doesn't understand why Obama is going to continue to antagonize, why he wants to stay combative, and why he wants to cause this fruitless friction.
She's why can't Obama understand that he lost, take the meaning that he lost, and start working with the Republicans to make a wonderful, beautiful Mr. Rogers neighborhood country.
Now t I think Peggy would be one of those who probably disagreed profoundly when I said I hope he fails, and I to this day she may not even know why I said it.
Barack Obama was raised by a toxic blend of Marxists like Frank Marshall Davis, communists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, and anti-Americans, and among his friends were uh anti-Israeli militants, anti-Semites, racists, and other assorted bigots.
This is the people he was influenced by.
This is how he was raised.
He was raised with a chip on his shoulder about this country.
He's an angry man.
He's not cool, he's not calm, he's not collected, he's a narcissist.
He's a community organizer, and what do they do?
They agitate by definition.
That's all they do.
He's not going to slink away.
He's not going to admit defeat.
You hear what he said in his uh press conversation?
Well, I'm going to listen to the two-thirds that didn't vote.
Hey, Mr. President, two-thirds that didn't vote are the ones that walked down on you in all of your campaign public appearances the last two weeks before the election.
Well, they don't care.
I'm going to focus the two-thirds that didn't vote.
Those people so disenfranchised, so upset.
That's what I'm going to do.
So you can sit around and hope that Obama would realize he lost and worked to come up with a nice country and all.
That's not who he is.
And I point of my frustration is how six years in can people not know who Obama is now?
But if you're one who doesn't know who he is, you're not going to understand when somebody says the mandate of this election is to stop Obama.
That's needlessly harsh.
That's unnecessarily frictious.
That's we should why we need to compromise to work together and make the system work.
He's not interested in that.
He is the problem here, not us.
We've tried working with the guy.
The Republicans have been over Backwards trying to show they can cooperate and be bipartisan.
It's one of the reasons they've gotten themselves into such trouble over the years.
So just to be clear, the mandate of the election, the American people, the exit polling data now proves it.
Stop Obama.
Stop Obamaism.
Stop the implementation of policies, for example, that are doing great harm to the free enterprise economy.
Stop Obamacare and repeal it.
Stop this unnecessary wild spending.
Stop illegal immigration.
Start enforcing it.
It's all there.
Just enforce the law.
Stop Obama.
That does not mean do nothing.
It can't mean do nothing, nor did I ever say it means do nothing.
Nor did I ever say ignore Obama.
I'm simply translating for people inside the beltway what the election results meant.
I'm translating for the left so that they know what it meant.
They can't afford for this to take hold again.
Stop Obama and then pepper him with bill after bill after bill that we know he's gonna veto, but portray him as the obstructionist, portray him as the guy saying no, portray him as the guy governing against the will of the people because every bill you send up there is accompanied by a poll showing its majority support to the American people.
Now, I don't know how you get to ignore Obama from that.
I don't know how you get to that means do nothing.
None of which I said.
But in spite of all this, we still have progress because now we've got people on record saying, yep, that's right, we've got to stop Obama.
Instead of we got to compromise with him.
Remember, that was the context in which I first offered my take on what the election meant.
We had Republicans out there.
We've got to compromise.
The consultants, the meeting, we've got to work together.
We gotta get along.
We've got to fix the system.
We've got to.
No, no, no, no.
That's the people Republicans were not sent there to compromise.
We're not sent there to govern with Obama, not sent there to fix anything.
They were sent there to stop the things that are transforming and in some cases destroying the country.
Okay, your phone call's coming up.
Don't go away.
Open line Friday, Rush limbo on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
And by the way, let me I realize when I in my recent uh illustration of a sentence Peggy Noonan used in her latest column.
And I said Obama's raised by a uh a toxic blend, I called it, of Marxists, communists, various anti-Americans to one degree or another.
It's undeniable.
Reverend Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, uh Mualakah, whatever they the guy the LA Times has the tape they want release of some one of Obama's buddies bashing Israel as a fundraiser in LA.
It's Bill Ayers.
We know how Obama was raised.
We know that he doesn't want to transform the country.
This none of this is a mystery.
But the fact that people don't accept it, that's what fascinates me.
The fact that after six years, there are people that don't want to admit it or don't see it.
It just fascinates me.
But I don't want anybody to tell me that I'm insulting Obama because I'm not.
These are not insults, these are descriptors.
I'm describing him to you.
And I don't think it's confounding.
Obama doesn't confound me, and he doesn't stun me, and uh the fact that he wants friction and chaos is documented.
Why would that change now?
These next two years are going to be potentially worse than anybody is contemplating.
You don't personally insult a narcissist like the country just did in this election and and and get away with it.
I mean, there's gonna be, oh yeah, oh yeah, you think you've shown me, well, let me show you.
You don't like Amnesty, try 20 million.
I mean, who knows what can happen here.
But I'm not making this stuff up, and I'm not being incendiary.
I'm being descriptive.
It's who the guy is, it's why the country voted the way they did on Tuesday.
the sooner people figure it out.
I can't fathom not understanding it six years in, but clearly people still don't get it or don't want to admit it.
But it's time to get with the program and understand exactly what we're dealing with here.
And it's unique.
It's not the standard.
He is just the latest Democrat president.
We're the Democrats, Republicans and opposition.
This is this is far more involved than just that.
We've got the Democrat Party has become radicalized.
They're not just the usual bunch of corrupt thieves and thugs that they've always done.
There is a radical, radical, progressive element in the Democrat Party, which doesn't need to win elections in order to implement what they believe throughout the strata of this country.
That's the purpose of community organization, like Acorn.
They don't need to win elections in order to corrupt the institutions they don't like.
Obama, he doesn't, okay, so he lost the election.
Big whoop isn't gonna stop him from doing what he wants.
It's not going to stop his fellow community organizers or his fellow progressives.
I mean, they'll take election victories, yeah, hubba-hub, but they do not get stymied when they lose them.
The traditional old hat, the union typical corrupt Doug Harry Reed Pelosi wing of the they get upset when they lose.
And there's hell to pay when they lose.
Because they do everything they do legislatively.
Now they work with the new progressive wing, the community organizer wing like Obama.
They work with them like uh occupy Wall Street.
But Occupy Wall Street and the militant environmentalist wacko movement and uh and the pro-choice whack, they're all gonna continue to be agitating and causing friction and doing whatever the hell they can do to upset things, whether they win or lose.
And this is what I don't think is understood, widely understood by a lot of otherwise really smart Republicans.
Anyway, it's open line Friday, and I promise phone calls, so let's start with Brandy in St. Cloud, Florida.
Great to have you on the on the program.
You're up first today.
Hello.
Hi, Mr. Limbaugh.
I am so totally geeking out.
I absolutely love you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
You really do have talent on loan from God, and I'm really grateful for your voice, and you totally represent what what I'm thinking and what I'm feeling, and I just love you.
My question for you is why does the um Republican Party and its leadership, both in the House and the Senate, why do Boehner and McConnell automatically get to retain the leadership position instead of getting someone in there like Gowdy or Ted Cruz that can lead with with uh something other than it's it's um these guys are not anointed, they're elected.
And they have power bases like any other leadership does, and they've been doing it for a long time, and they haven't done anything that would make somebody want to oppose them who could win.
They don't have anybody that's seriously gonna oppose them, and therefore there's not a uh there's at this point in time anyway, there's simply aren't the votes anywhere to replace them.
So they have to be like voted out of their leadership position?
Yeah, they run for that office, just like anybody in politics runs for their office.
I mean, it's not an appointed position, is the point.
They have to run, they have to get elected.
McConnell has to get elected of the Republicans in the House and the Senate.
Well, why don't they get rid of them?
I'm serious.
Like, why why are we keeping people in a position like the first thing that McConnell said whenever he his acceptance speech was that he wanted to get along?
We don't want you are absolutely right.
We do not want people in there that are gonna compromise and work with the president to further his agenda, his agenda has been disastrous.
We are living his agenda and we want it repealed, we want it reversed, we want to head in a different direction.
And if these people are wanting to work with him, we want them out.
Well, he knows how you feel.
Trust me, he knows how you and everybody else who agrees with you, he knows how you feel.
But does he care?
I'm just sick of politicians.
Well, it's too soon.
Look, it's too soon to tell at this stage everything that is said is to stake out a position with one group or another.
It's it's way too soon here, Brandt.
I mean, you can you can say based on your intelligence guided by experience, your fears are justified, you think they're gonna cave, and not many people would disagree with you, but they haven't yet.
It just have to wait and see.
Uh but we're back to the old question before the that we had before the election.
I mean, this this is We've won this, and it's not time to get fatalistic yet.
Just hang on, hang in there, be tough.
We're just getting started on this.
There's other news out there today, folks.
Do you know that the Weather Channel, the Weather Channel has more viewers in the morning than MSNBC Morning Joe, and CNN.
▲
Export Selection