All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 19, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:30
February 19, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, so I always do this.
I checked the email during the break.
And I had some interesting questions.
Hey, Rush, we we get all this.
What do you what are you spending time telling us what Obama thinks about ISIS and this stuff?
And I'm I always look at these email questions as helpful to me and instructive.
Sometimes I assume you know why I'm doing things.
I just assume that you're up to speed and have the program in context.
The reason I'm focusing on this is we're not getting the truth about this, and it matters.
And not only are we not getting the truth about this, we're being told some things that aren't true.
This is a legitimate threat that exists to free people all over the world.
This is a gigantic movement on the march, and if we're not even going to properly identify it and properly defend against it, and if we're not even going to go on offense against it, then we've we've got a problem here.
And people need to know.
My estimation is people need to be fully up to speed and aware of exactly why their country is approaching this the way it is.
And I think the explanations that we're getting are half baked and are designed for some purpose that has nothing to do with defeating terrorism.
And I think this will reveal itself as we continue to explore this today.
Some of these uh audio sound bites coming up.
Anyway, great to have you as always.
800-282-2882 is the number if you want to be on the program and your calls are coming up.
And if you want to send an email, I read them, I check them.
Don't always read them back verbatim here, but I do check them and react to them.
It's Zellrushbow at EIB net.
There's a there's a all kinds of hypocrisy and contradictions coming from for the president wrote in his LA Times Up Ed, we made significant gains against terrorism.
We've decimated the core of Al-Qaeda leadership.
Okay, fine.
He wants to make that claim, but yet we're told by his own State Department this week that we can't do that.
We can't defeat terrorism.
We can't kill our way out of this.
Well, what did we do to defeat Al Qaeda?
Does anybody know?
I mean, really, how did we vanquish Al-Qaeda?
What did we do?
Where's the jobs program that we created that made al-Qaeda shrink and become less of a terror factor?
Marie Harf earlier this week, two days in a row, goes out and says on TV, we cannot kill these people.
We cannot kill our way out of this war.
We have to find them jobs.
Well, the same day that she was saying that, Obama has an op-ed published in the LA Times claiming that we decimated the core of Al-Qaeda.
Well, I think we did launch a military operation against bin Laden, and I think that's probably what he means.
We took out bin Laden, that means we've decimated Al Qaeda, because I don't believe that either.
I think that's a phony argument.
And it's how Obama is intempting to enrich his reputation as a as a as a hawker as a terrorist fighter, but at the same time we're told we can't do that with ISIS.
Why?
Why can't we take out the leader of ISIS and decimate them?
Just like we took out bin Laden and decimated Al Qaeda.
Why now do we have to find them jobs?
And look at all of the different explanations that we've had over the years.
The reasons we've been given for the existence of terrorists.
And all of the reasons that we've been given ultimately blame us.
The United States, our policies under Republican presidents always, are the reason that there is terrorism, or the reason there are terrorists.
The war on terror, that was a recruitment.
If we after 9-11, if we would have sought negotiation, if we would have sought rapprochement, if we would have sought peace, then we wouldn't have any of this going on.
They sent us a warning signal, and we should have recognized the grievances that led to 9-11.
Instead, what did we do?
We launched a non-necessary war in Iraq.
And we Insulted everybody by saying it was a war on terror.
And everybody knows Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq, although they did, but everybody knows that they didn't.
And so it was spread that Bush lied.
Iraq was unnecessary.
The war on terror was never as big as it actually was, and that's why Obama has to downplay it.
So Iraq was a recruitment tool.
And then while we were in Iraq, we had the Abu Grab episode with the prison in the pictures, and that made them mad, and that recruited terrorists.
And then we opened the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Club Gitmo.
And then we found out we were flushing Korans down the toilet, which we weren't.
And we found out we were committing other atrocities against these brave freedom fighters in our prison in Guantanamo Bay, which we weren't.
That was said to be a big recruiting tool.
All of this happening during a Republican administration.
All of this ultimately is aimed at wiping out the Democrat Party.
Opposition.
That's what this is about.
This is not about fighting terror.
This is nothing more than Obama's domestic program of eliminating all opposition to the Democrat Party.
That's what all of this really is.
It's not about fighting terror.
All of it is discrediting as much as he can get away with.
And with the assistance of the media.
Conservatism and the Republican Party.
Look at all these excuses for why there are terrorists.
We went to Iraq.
Bush lied.
Unnecessary.
Then after Bush lied and sent us to Iraq, we opened Guantanamo Bay, and we imprisoned a bunch of people we had no business in prison.
We renditioned them and we torture them.
Oh my God!
Oh my God, forgot we tortured them, folks.
Oh gee, we waterboard, oh gee, my God, we're so horrible.
Look what we did.
That's why there's terrorism.
And now, after all of that, now we're finding out they're terrorists because they don't have jobs.
They don't have an economy to speak of.
So look at all of the reasons over the years we've been given to explain why there is terrorism, and not once from the mouths of anybody in the Democrat Party are there terrorists because there are evil people.
Obama will not go there.
He will not countenance going there, he will not counsel any characterization of the terrorists themselves.
It's always somebody else's fault that they're doing what they're doing.
And in many cases, these past recent years, it's been the fault of Republican presidents.
Well, one, George Bush.
I can't believe how much they have been able to successfully milk the Bush administration as the reason for everything going wrong in this country in the modern era, but they've done it.
The Bush administration didn't fight back on any of it, didn't refute any of it, and it was allowed to just sit there and fester and soak in the public memory.
So now you hear Obama, we can't, don't you dare call that Islam.
Don't you dare call them Muslims.
Don't you dare even call it terrorism.
This is extremism.
In the name of Islam, these poor Muslims are being used and taken advantage of by these extremists, and these extremists are doing what they did because of what Bush did.
And because they don't have any jobs.
You see how this is shaping up.
You see where this is all going.
And that's why I'm spending all this time on it.
I want people to understand what is really going on here with a summit on violent extremism.
A White House summit on violent extremism of the State Department is not about that.
You listen carefully to what Obama's saying, and it all boils down to all of this is happening because he hadn't been on the scene sooner.
It's all happening because of mistakes made during the Bush administration.
It's all happening because the United States did this, that, or whatever wrong.
Meanwhile, it's gotten worse under his administration.
It's gotten worse, it's become more widespread, it's become even more violent, it's become even more gruesome, it has become even more vicious, and it's become More widespread during his administration while he's trying to convince everybody he's fixing it.
He's solving it.
He understands it.
Don't you dare mischaracterize it.
Don't you dare mischaracterize our dear friend terrorists.
It's not their fault.
They have grievances.
They have justifiable reasons.
Some of this is very subtle, but it feeds an established meme or narrative, if you will, that it's the Republican Party when they run the country that causes all of this evil to happen.
Causes all of these horrible things to happen.
Because the Republican Party is judgmental and it's not understanding and it's not compassionate and doesn't try to help people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
That's why I'm spending all this time trying to put this in proper context.
I want to take you back to this program, January 7th, over a month ago.
This grievance industry, which has at its root, the United States has misbehaved since its founding.
The United States has had a much bigger footprint all over the world than we ever deserve to have.
We've run her over to world trampling everybody and everything.
We've stolen, we have appropriated, and that's why we're a superpower and it's illegitimate and it's unjustified.
So this stuff, plus our relationship with Israel, all of that has combined to create at the highest levels of our leadership this idea that there is some evidence that the United States is responsible for this to an extent, I don't know to what extent, but that we certainly have some guilt about this.
That's what the whole grievance industry is about.
And clearly ISIS has a grievance with us, clearly Al Qaeda does, clearly militant Islam does.
All right, that was setting the table, my earliest attempts at explaining this whole grievance business.
And let's continue now with the Obama soundbites.
This is from late yesterday afternoon, the Eisenhower executive office beliefs during the second day of the White House summit on countering the violent, don't call it Islamic extremism.
There's a strain of thought that doesn't embrace ISIL's tactics, doesn't embrace violence, but does buy into the notion that the Muslim world has suffered historic grievances.
Sometimes that's accurate.
Does buy into the belief that so many of the ills in the Middle East flow from a history of colonialism or conspiracy, does buy into the idea that Islam is incompatible with modernity or tolerance, or that uh it's been polluted by Western values.
Do you understand that, folks?
I'm uh I I don't I look, I don't mean to be insulting when I ask, but this is profound what you just heard here.
This is unbelievably profound what you just heard here.
There's a strain of thought that does not embrace ISIL's tactics, doesn't embrace violence, but does buy into the notion the Muslim world has suffered grievances, historic.
That's accurate sometimes.
And it does buy into the belief that so many of the ills in the Middle East flow from a history of colonialism or conspiracy.
That's us and the Brits.
And it does buy into the idea that Islam is compatible with modernity or tolerance, or that it's been polluted by Western values.
He's justifying it.
It's exactly my point.
He's justifying what they're doing in a way by saying they have a grievance.
A legitimate grievance, just like every left-wing group in this country has a legitimate grievance against the United States about something that happened in his past.
These people have a grievance against colonialism, they have a grievance against the uh the attempt to impose Western values in the Muslim world.
We've got to understand this.
And that's why I'm spending maybe an inordinate amount of time on this, trying to get people to understand Obama is trying the reason why doing this summit, Obama is desperately trying to convince as many people that these people committing acts of terror.
We we may not support it, but by God, we better understand it that they may have an excuse or two.
Not that we would ever support it.
Not that we would ever encourage it.
But they may have justifiable grievances.
You throw that in with the Secretary of State spokesman saying we don't have jobs programmed for these people.
We can't kill our way out of it.
This is this is seriously.
You throw this in with all the times this man's run around the world apologizing for this country.
Can you imagine any other president in your lifetime, or at any time?
Can you imagine any other president during a time of declared hostilities like this?
Telling you that our enemies have grievances, justified grievances, we better understand why they're mad at us.
And almost to the point of, hey, you know what?
They've got a reason for doing this.
You know, we we we're gonna we're not innocent in this.
Here's one more bite before we go to the break.
Al Qaeda and ISIL and groups like it are desperate for legitimacy.
They try to portray themselves as religious leaders, holy warriors in defense of Islam.
ISIL presumes to declare itself the Islamic state.
And they propagate the notion that America and the West generally is at war with Islam.
We must never accept the premise that they put forward, because it is a lie.
Nor should we grant these terrorists the religious legitimacy that they seek.
They are not religious leaders, they're terrorists.
And we are not at war with Islam.
We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.
Well, nobody's ever said we're at war with Islam.
That's another.
That's a second day in a row, maybe more than that, that he's created this straw man.
Nobody's out there saying that we are at war with Islam.
And nobody is saying these guys are religious leaders.
They are Muslims.
They are Islamists.
That's all anybody's saying.
He won't allow that to be said.
So you figured out, put two or two together.
There's more of this, but I gotta take another brief time out obscene profit break time on the EIB network.
We will be right back.
Don't go away.
You don't remember that?
I do.
You don't you don't remember FDR defending Japan?
Well, you don't you don't you don't remember that?
You don't remember FDR.
I mean FDR won the I I've I FDR.
Uh why he defended Japan almost as much as he defended a Democrat Party.
Am I wrong about you?
FDR never defended Japan.
He FDR never went out of his way to explain Japan that I wasn't alive, then I maybe I've been misinformed.
FDR did not go out of his way to tell people what uh uh that we're misunderstanding Japan.
He didn't.
F the FDR never said that the Japanese had legitimate grievances against us.
He didn't.
FDR never did that.
Uh uh see to uh what I well I I know George Bush did, but but Ted Kennedy, I remember Ted Kennedy when when when Reagan became president, Ted Kennedy called the Soviets and said, hey, look, just be patient.
We'll try to get rid of this guy after one term.
So but really FDR was not.
I just thought Obama was continuing in the tradition of great Democrat presidents here.
Uh one more audio soundbite.
This is embarrassing.
Well, it ought to be.
This is Wolf Blitzer last night, situation room on CNN, and he's talking to Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst.
He's a reporter.
And Wolf Blitzer said, okay, how are all these various terrorist groups likely to react to what the president of the United States just said after day two of the summit.
The same way they've reacted to every American president going back to Bill Clinton.
They used to use pictures of Bill Clinton in Afghanistan for target practice.
So it's not like the speech is not going to be persuasive to ISIS and AQAP.
They will just be met with the typical contempt they show to all American leaders.
In other words, they're not going to be scared.
They're not going to say to themselves, we better stop this.
Is that what you're saying?
No.
Are you kidding me?
The Wolf Blitzer actually think that's gonna be the ISIS reaction.
Will the terrorists be scared by this speech?
He wanted the reporter to say yeah?
Did you hear that?
Because the reporter said, eh, yeah, speech is not going to be persuasive to ISIS.
It'll just be met with the typical contempt they show to all American leaders.
And Wolf Blitzer kind of disappointed.
You mean in other words, they're not gonna be scared?
They're not gonna say to themselves we better stop this.
Is that what you're saying?
Wolf White why?
Why would I?
Marie Harf Monday and Tuesday.
We can't kill these people.
We can't kill our way out of this.
We can't we can't defeat these people in traditional war.
The problem is that they don't have jobs.
Why in the world would they be scared?
Wolf actually was hoping he'd have a reporter say that ISIS was now feeling put on notice because of Obama's husky speeches.
This is not a world governed by speeches.
It's governed by the aggressive use of force, Wolf.
Okay, let's hit the phones.
It's it's time.
Here's Mike in St. Louis.
Great to have you, sir, and I'm really glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Thanks, Rush.
Um, can we start referring to Barack Obama as an Islamic terrorism denier?
Uh you're feel free if if you if if you would like to uh call us climate change deniers.
Islamic terrorism denier.
It works for me.
If you mean your caller, we have First Amendment here, and if that's how you wish to refer to him, uh I'm not gonna ruin Juliana you.
Thanks, I appreciate that.
You bet.
That's my comment.
Oh, that's it.
Yeah, that's it.
I got a lot of other things I could say, but let's keep it brief.
Well, okay, all right.
That's good.
Call back with those other.
Let's stop while we're ahead.
That's that's that's that's really uh brevity, the soul of wit, you nailed it.
Everybody gets the point.
Appreciate it.
Mandy, Jacksonville, Florida.
Welcome to the program.
Hi.
Hi.
Uh, listening to the president's speech yesterday and his remarks about winning the hearts and minds and giving them jobs and stuff.
Did it ever cross your mind that maybe he's opening the door toward uh kind of um Muslim sensitivity training, like in indoctrination, like bringing it to public schools?
Like eventually they would start teaching our kids to be sensitive to it on a larger scale.
Almost like how liberalism worked, where they put their people in strategic places so they could start teaching the young ones, and all of a sudden it's the okay thing because of the city.
Well, you know, it's an interesting uh it's an interesting observation that you have there.
Because I was just I was just telling uh I was just telling Mr. Snerdley.
Um I was trying to think back to all those times like Bill Clinton telling us we needed to understand Timothy McVeigh.
Remember those times?
You remember those days when Bill Clinton said we gotta be very careful.
McVay has a legitimate grievance.
It's called Ruby Ridge and uh and and Waco, Texas, uh the branch Davidian company.
What Clinton didn't do that.
Well, I could have sworn that Clinton asked for understanding for McVeigh.
I could have sworn, oh, that's right, he blamed me.
I forgot he blamed me for the Oklahoma City.
Sorry.
Exactly right.
And you remember the time where uh Clinton Clinton asked for uh uh understanding for Saddam Hussein.
Yeah, we must and when we when we bombed the aspirin factory in Sudan, remember that?
It didn't happen.
That's why uh and you tell me that FDR never told us that we had to try to understand the Japanese and Germans.
He did.
F F the FDR said we had to defeat the Japanese?
How?
Killing them?
FDR who are you kidding me?
Oh, wow.
So FDR never did do a series of summits or anything, uh attempting to raise consciousness to the grievances of the imperial government of Japan.
Well, you you have a point.
We killed our way out of World War II.
We actually did was it with a couple of uh nuclear bombs and Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Yeah, I wonder why why am I getting confused here?
And why do I think that Clinton told us we needed to have a measure of understanding uh the grievances of McVeigh?
And and remember the Michigan militia.
Uh they were they were being creamed the media was ribbing them to I remember Clinton at a number one of his uh speeches seminars told us we we we must not jump to the conclusion.
These are legitimate Americas, legitimate grievances, and we must he didn't do that either.
Wow.
Well I was telling Snurtley.
I have never and I've been sitting here trying to think, correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't recall.
I I I uh really don't recall Obama being so passionate about anything is this defending Islam.
I d uh the I I just don't remember it.
Maybe maybe he has been passionate in defending other things.
But I think our caller from Jacksonville, she's worried that could this be the beginning of sensitivity training toward Muslims and Islam in the schools.
Uh if I'm not mistaken, that kind of already happens in an unofficial way, but Obama's doing it himself.
Who needs a classroom?
That's what Obama's actually doing here is sensitivity training on a on a nationwide uh nationwide basis.
Well see, who's next?
Let me uh Melanie in Williamstown, Kentucky.
Great to have you on the EIB network, right?
Targeted and uh, you know, um and also my other point was Wait a minute, wait a minute.
If you wait a minute.
You you you need to start the beginning.
You've you've thought you were on the air for five minutes and you weren't.
Islamic religion to terrorism.
And the reason he's doing that is because if Islamic religion equals terrorism, then freedom of religion, if it if it's not religion, then it freedom of religion or separation of religion wouldn't apply to them, in a way, too.
See what I mean?
No, because I missed the first two minutes of what you said.
You you've been you've been speaking obviously as though you've thought you were on the air when you had Snerdley must have you must have misunderstood Snerdley when he told you he was telling you to hang on and you thought it let go.
Oh.
So you you've been talking to nobody there.
And when I said Melanie, you're up, you were in the middle of a sentence.
Yes.
I think that his passion is because he is a Muslim.
He had a a Muslim father, a Muslim stepdad, and what I would call him is a imposter.
But my what I thought, and I don't know if this came over because I didn't know that I was on, is about the Islam he he kept being reluctant to equate the religion, Islamic religion to terrorism.
And if the if Islamic religion isn't terrorism, then there's a fine line about freedom of religion and their freedom in America if their religion is equals terrorism.
Yeah, so you I think I understand what you're saying.
Uh you you think the president's a Muslim, and we'll leave that over there.
We have a lot of callers that think that.
But aside that you you uh are you trying to make the point that no matter how he how hard he tries to define it or deny it, whether Islam is a religion of terror or not, that all of the terrorists are Islamic, is that your point?
Um well a lot of the yeah, terrorists are Islamic, and it's the religion.
It's that's the religion.
And so how is that going to be a bigger one?
No, but it's Obama's saying it isn't.
No, Obama say it's not the religion.
That these people are they're perverting the religion.
He also mentioned surveillance in his speech yesterday.
So, yes, I think that out of this summit, changing the subject, it's gonna be um that he's coming out of this summit with policy that are pro-Muslim, that are that are um about surveillance, about being racist, about them being targeted.
So that's all I wanted to say that those two points that me take over here because I I I I for the here's the best I can do with this, folks.
I guess trying to understand Obama look at this woman here as confused as she can be.
And if she's not, we are.
So wherever you look, there's confusion.
And I think a lot of people are confused, trying to understand exactly what all this is and what it isn't, and what we're not supposed to say, what we're not supposed to think, and what we are supposed to say and think.
And I try to stay current for the life of me.
I try to learn everything as best I can so that I can do one of the things that I do best, make the complex understandable.
But for the life of me, I do not know what strategic patience means, for example.
And that is a name recently given to our foreign policy.
I don't know, and I'm being dead straight honest here, I don't know where this president thinks the fight is.
I don't know what the president is thinking beyond arguing with straw men at war with Islam.
Nobody is saying, and nobody ever has said we are at war with Islam.
Everybody has been over backwards not to say that, and yet he's acting as though it's said constantly by everybody.
What confuses me is we're told that Islam is not a religion of violence and terror, it's a religion of peace, and yet the terrorism that is happening in the world today is happening in honor of or in association with, and according to the people committing the acts of violence, a specific religion.
And so when that is said, when that conclusion is drawn, here comes Obama not so fast.
Remember the crusades?
Not so fast.
Remember the Jews, not so fast.
Remember the Hindus, not so fast.
So there's a moral equivalence here that the president is hellbent on making sure everybody understands.
But I don't know who in this country ever said we are at war with Islam.
But I think what here's this is classic.
This is this is the reason people like David Brooks and and others in the conservative media complex think that Obama's brilliant.
He's just because he speaks like an intellectual, he speaks like they do, and he's articulate and he pauses at the right time to make you think he's in deep, deep thought, and never says anything that isn't carefully considered, and that's the mark of a brilliant intellectual.
Well, I'm sorry, but I think it's incoherent.
He talks about jobs, he talks about poverty, he talks about extremists, and while all that's going on, he doesn't talk about Jews being murdered in Europe.
He is not talking about Christians being beheaded in droves in Egypt.
He doesn't talk about others being beheaded in Syria.
He does not talk about people being burned alive in Iraq.
He snubs the Prime Minister of Israel's speech and yet lectures us to be tolerant of all faiths.
And yet let Benjamin Netanyahu come to the United States to speak to a joint session of Congress and gets a cold shoulder from Obama.
The President says that that Muslims in the United States feel targeted.
And so far there's no evidence of that.
But he says not a word how Jews and Christians must feel.
As news floods in of Jews and Christians shot, beheaded and burned alive.
And Muslims are targeted, but not in the United States.
They're targeted elsewhere by other Muslims, but not in this country.
They're being targeted by fellow Muslims overseas.
And in the midst of all this incoherence and reluctance to talk about certain people and the gruesome ends they are encountering, he wants us to look for root causes of barbarity towards Muslims.
But he refuses to admit what it is.
He tells us to look for root causes and then denies the root causes that are right in front of everybody's faces and makes them up.
Lack of jobs, poverty, all of these things easily dispelled, easily refuted.
And while all this is going on, the president has opened America's borders, giving American jobs to illegal immigrants.
And now he wants to find jobs for radical Islamists.
Where did he learn all of this?
But far from being brilliantly intellectually conceived and executed, this is incoherence.
And how in the world can you have a summit where you focus on ending violent extremism and not talk about the Christians being beheaded, the Iraqis being burned alive, the Jews being murdered just because they're Jews in Paris?
How can you not bring that up?
Obama tells the world, not just one faith has been responsible, that Christians have blood on their hands.
And he thinks the Israeli Jews have blood on their hands.
And he thinks we don't see how twisted this is.
And then to top it all off, he talks about legitimate grievances by terrorists for crime.
What the hell is that?
They're the ones that have grievances.
Is he playing with a full deck?
Did he get hit by a golf ball in the head playing with Tiger Woods that time?
Or has he got Jeremiah Wright's sermons going through his mind when he goes to these seminars?
I don't know.
No, no, no, folks, let me just look.
We've got this massive summit, right?
And understanding and stopping or whatever the hell it is, uh countering violent extremism.
Who is the enemy?
Christians?
Jews?
Everyone, no one.
Why isn't the commander-in-chief willing to command all the assets at his disposal to fight a significant destabilizing army in the Middle East with designs on Europe, Africa, and beyond?
Why is there not a focus on stopping this?
Instead of telling us we must understand it, and telling us about the legitimate grievances that they have.
Is he not aware of what's going on in Libya?
What war does he think he's winning?
Or better yet, what war does he think he can't win by going to war?
He talks of being flexible with Vladimir Putin after his re-election in 2012.
He is standing in the way.
It appears, I mean, it's just a casual observers.
It looks like he's he's he's doing his damnedest to help Iran become a nuclear power because who are we to say that they can't?
I don't know.
It's Ted Cruz, Ted Cruz, if they say he's an apologist for radical Islamic extreme terrorists, and that's exactly what it sounded like in these speeches he gave over these two days of this summit of the three days.
Ted Cruz, Obama and apologist for radical Islamic terrorists.
Anyway, here's Chuck in uh in Plymouth, Nebraska.
Chuck, I'm glad you waited.
You're next on an EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, good talk to you.
Thank you.
Thank you much.
Yeah, just a real quick comment.
You know, it's really ironic or incredulous, I think would be the better word, where the White House is saying that, you know, for these Islamic terrorist groups, you know, to really combat all this is to go out and create jobs And give these young people something better to do with their time.
I think it's it's crazy with that kind of mindset.
I mean, what's happening here in America then is the fact that, you know, he's eliminating all of our jobs.
What's that gonna do with our young people here in America then?
Well, what do you mean?
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Eliminating our jobs.
What do you mean by that?
Well, cutting jobs, you know, I mean, just doing all they can to get rid of jobs in America.
Well, you mean Obamacare, the converting of part-time to full-time or full-time to part-time is the other part of it.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, I know we're no, no, we're we're different.
We've got a big welfare state, and we've got a very compassionate Democrat Party, and and we can take care of people who don't work.
And we don't have terrorists.
We don't I don't know.
I really you're asking me to explain this guy.
I know I've taken on that responsibility is my job.
Um, anyway, not through, but we got to take a break again.
Time is just zipping by here, folks.
Back in a minute.
So there's a group out there that says young women on college camp eye need guns.
They need to be armed.
And why?
Well, to counter all of the predatory males out there that have made this rape culture, and the left is beside itself over this idea.
We have details on that, and uh the latest on Rudy Giuliani and his comments coming up.
▲
Export Selection