All Episodes
Previous Next
March 18, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:46
March 18, 2015, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
It's great to have you with us on another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence.
Man, I can't believe this is already Wednesday.
I really can't.
I just sit here, the time is just flying by.
It really is.
It's great to be here.
And terrific to have you with us.
A telephone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882 in the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
So last night I'm sitting at home and I'm reminiscing, and I don't do this very much.
I'm always looking forward.
But last night I was reminiscing about the program yesterday, and I was examining what I thought the high points were and what the low points were and what parts I need to expand on and get better at, what parts I shouldn't have even attempted, you know, what parts did I think were boring and all that.
And I checked the email.
And I saw a bunch of emails from people who had uh emailed me from the Rush 24-7 app.
And it reminded me of two things.
I don't talk about this stuff enough.
You know, we've got we've got a Rush Limbaugh app.
We've got the the program app where you can listen to this program, you could order podcasts, uh, watch the program on the Ditto Cam if you're a subscriber of Rushlinbot.com, stream the audio of it.
And I just I just I never talk about this stuff much because as you know, I'm I'm um focused on the content of the program.
But anyway, a number of emails were very polite people say, what about the NFL?
You led off the program today, this is last night, telling us that something, a seminal moment had been reached in the NFL, and you promised you're gonna get to it, and you didn't get to it.
And they were right, I did not get to it.
It was the Chris Borland retirement story, the San Francisco Fordiners.
But it's the way that story is being dealt with by the NFL, by players, current and former, and by the media.
It could be, I mean, this it's coming, whether this is it or not.
Um the the uh there's gonna be a tipping point here, and the ultimate concern in the National Football League is always gonna be an NFL, just like there's always going to be in America.
The question is what kind of damage is going to be done to the NFL by the uh the left and the media as they try to make it better.
They try to perfect it as they try to improve it.
But if things like what Borland did quit after a year, and he's a star, he's a great player, he was injury prone uh shoulder-wise in Wisconsin.
He played with Russell Wilson, Wisconsin is a quarterback of the Seahawks.
At any rate, where it's all headed, I think, and I'm gonna get into this in more detail later, and I promise you I will, is going to be just how good is the remaining talent in the NFL.
The talent pool is the NFL, I don't know, years from now.
I don't know how long it's gonna take.
Is the National Football League going to have the absolute best talent?
Or is the best talent going to quit the best talent, not even gonna go into the game because of the fears of long-term life-lasting brain injury and other such things.
And the league is facing this, and the Borland retirement announcement yesterday is is causing everybody in the NFL to one degree or another to face this head on.
And I meant to get into all that.
Yes, this is what I meant.
I was reminiscing.
I mean, I didn't remember that I had forgotten to talk about the NFL yesterday.
It took some emails to do that.
But I was reminiscing.
There were some high points, low points, and so forth.
So anyway, I appreciate all the reminders I got.
Nobody on the staff reminded me.
I must, if it weren't for the loyal listeners, I would have, I maybe not would have forgotten it until I saw more NFL news today.
Not well, not I nobody thinks they're low points, but you know, I'm my harshest critic.
And I I uh I do have a tendency to beat myself up and be hypercritical of things that maybe nobody else would notice.
But that has always been what I've done.
So anyway, I appreciate the reminders.
We will get into this in uh great.
We have some audio soundbikes to go with it and everything.
I brought them back.
We have them ready to go.
But First, before we get into that, they did it to us again, folks.
They did it to us again, and we continue to be fooled by it.
We continue to buy into it, despite all the experience and intelligence that we bring to this.
It is just practically, it's not not impossible, but it is just it is difficult to avoid getting sucked in to the mainstream media, soap opera narrative of the day.
It's just hard.
And even I, your host, yesterday got sucked in, believing all of the pre-election news and the pre-election polling data coming out of Israel, which pretty much had Netanyahu defeated.
Netanyahu was going to lose.
Netanyahu was why was Netanyahu going to lose?
He was going to lose because he was rude.
He was extreme.
He was a right winger.
He didn't appreciate the greatness of Obama.
He disrespected Obama by coming and speaking to Congress when Obama didn't invite him and preferred that he wasn't here.
He deserved to lose because the Iranians don't like him.
And the Arabs don't like him.
He deserved to lose.
He was going to, and they had exit polls, they had polling data, they had everything.
They had it all lined up to tell us how the race was close.
It was too close to call, oh my gosh, it's going to be a disaster.
And just by portraying the race as close, one of the objectives was to try to suppress pro-Netanyahu vote turnout yesterday in Israel.
That's one of the things.
That's why it's important to always be vigilant and try to resist this stuff.
And it's hard.
It is hard to avoid getting sucked in, no matter how experienced and how much we know about how the drive-by media and the left operates worldwide.
It's still difficult to put up your hands and say stop when there the onslaught is at you.
And yet my instincts, if you were here yesterday, my instincts were all.
I was how can how can this even be close?
And it turned out not to be.
How can this even be a contest?
How can it be that an opponent of Netanyahu who will actively weaken Israel's security?
How can a candidate like that even have a chance?
And it turns out he didn't have much of a chance.
And now the drive-by media, which was so excited about what they convinced themselves and everybody else was going to be a Netanyahu defeat.
Now they're not even talking about the uh election today.
Not much.
They certainly aren't giving it the energy that they gave it yesterday and in days prior.
They are not excited about it.
It's now just your average run-of-the-mill ordinary story, yesterday's news, all because they didn't get the outcome that they wanted.
And I'm gonna tell folks, there's a lesson here.
There are many lessons here.
One of the big lessons is that conservatism can beat Barack Obama.
Scott Walker has shown that conservatism can beat Barack Obama and beat the Democrat Party and beat the left in its own backyard.
Scott Walker's case Wisconsin.
Not just once, not just twice, but three times Scott Walker won, and then after winning, implemented his agenda.
And he implemented his agenda, and it worked.
It improved things in the state of Wisconsin for the vast majority of people.
Here's Netanyahu.
There's no question Netanyahu as a conservative, particularly if you use the American definition of the ideology.
There's no question, and and look at the array of forces against Netanyahu, led by Obama campaign experts, and he still wins.
He had the socialist movements of Western Europe opposed to him.
He had the American media opposed to him.
He had most of the world media opposed.
They had him dead and buried politically.
They had the Iranian media, of course, opposed.
Barack Obama's campaign experts raising money for, spending money for, advising Netanyahu's opponents, and they still lost.
And I was thinking last night, remember shortly after Obama was immaculated, One of the first things that happened, you'll remember this, uh, Snerdley, one of the first things that happened is that Obama and Muchell and their delegation from Chicago flew into wherever, wherever the Olympic committee is, and made their bid for the what is it,
26 to 20, whatever future Olympics.
And they went in there thinking go be slammed up.
Why the guy just won the Nobel Peace Prize?
Why, let's get the Olympics for Chicago.
And they strut in there, and they were shut out.
They were shut down, and it was humiliating.
They were seen slinking out of town wherever the Olympic Committee decisions are made.
And everybody scratched their heads.
How can this be?
Barack Obama's from Chicago.
He wanted the Olympics, he just won the Nobel Peace Prize.
He was just the first African American president elected in America, and he got shut.
It can happen, is the point.
Conservatism can beat Barack Obama.
Conservatism can beat the Democrat Party.
I'll tell you who needs to realize this is the Republican Party.
What we have learned is centrism will not beat Barack Obama.
Rhinos will not beat Barack Obama.
Moderates will not beat Barack Obama.
Republican Northeastern liberal Republic Rockefeller are not going to beat Barack.
But by Obama, I mean the Democrat Party, or Hillary Clinton, throw your name in there.
But a conservative candidate will.
Scott Walker, Netanyahu, any number of other examples are readily available.
You know, I was uh uh say a little story here just to illustrate something.
It happened on a golf course recently.
I happen to be playing uh with a eh, you should say prominent uh Republican analyst, strategist, and by Republican, I mean he was not a conservative, but he's not a lib, he was a centrist, a moderate.
He's one of these guys that doesn't want anybody to think he's Tea Party because he thinks they'll think he's like Sarah Palin.
And he was telling me, you know, he said to me, he said, you know what the greatest thing could happen for us would be would be if the Democrats nominate Elizabeth Warren.
And I said, why would that be great?
Why does it matter?
They're either going to nominate Hillary or Elizabeth Warren, what does it matter?
And he said, are you listening?
This guy said to me, because if they nominate Elizabeth Warren, we could nominate a centrist candidate and look like we are the Tea Party when we're not, by comparison.
I said, you mean you wait, let me understand this.
You want them to nominate the furthest left candidate so that your moderate appears conservative in comparison.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Well, why don't you just go all in with somebody from the Tea Party?
Why don't you just go in for somebody conservative?
Ah, that isn't gonna work.
It ain't gonna work.
And I got all the predictable reasons.
Uh, you know, Tea Party's been destroyed by the media, the uh extremism and uh all this stuff, the stuff they didn't want to deal with and refuting.
All the allegations.
I thought it was quite telling.
Yeah, let's let's not let's have a Democrats nominate Elizabeth Warren because that means our centrist candidate.
We could nominate a centrist candidate who would look conservative, i.e.
Tea Party-ish by comparison.
So what does that tell you?
They still don't get it.
Conservative candidates can win.
And that is the modern and recent history, and I it it still is something that doesn't permeate.
And a Netanyahu election is just the latest example.
And make no mistake, don't tell me that Netanyahu wasn't running against Obama.
most definitely was.
Benjamin Netanyahu was running against Obama, clear as Mitt Romney did.
Obama may not have been on the ballot, but he was advising Netanyahu's opponents to Netanyahu had uh Obama had made it clear he did not want Netanyahu.
Obama and the Democrat Party and the American left made it clear that they thought anything along the lines of Netanyahu would stand in the way of a good deal on nukes with Iran.
I mean, let's be upfront and honest.
This election was about the Obama way of dealing with Iran or the Netanyahu way of dealing with Iran.
And don't you can't tell me anything different.
You want to tell me, well, he wasn't on the ballot, Obama, yes, it wasn't on the ballot, but everybody knows what this was.
The point is Barack Obama lost an election yesterday, too.
He wasn't on the ballot, but the things he stood for and the things that he tried to secure victory for went down in flames.
And it wasn't even close.
What is Netanyahu, among many other things, is fearless.
Right.
It shows you, it illustrates, there's no reason to be afraid.
There is.
Well, who?
Netanyahu?
Oh, yeah.
Well, according to the left, of course, but ignore the left, of course, a fearmonger.
He's a uh he's a uh he's a uh racist.
You would not the the things and I'm gonna go through some of it today, the media in this guy, the New York Times, man, vicious.
Now, the New York Times editorial board is made up of Jewish people, by and large, not all, but the editorial page editor is a man named Andrew Andrew Rosenthal.
And I would, I would assume uh intelligence guided by experience, Mr. Rosenthal is Jewish.
I haven't read such anti-Semitism as I read in this New York Times editorial today, anywhere in a long time.
In fact, I've had people, Rush, how can they Israel's filled with Jewish people?
How in the world is the American left and the Jewish community here so hate Netanyahu in Israel?
It's a good question.
And the answer is what it's always been.
Liberals are liberals first.
And everything else they are second.
So first, let's say you're let's say you're a uh LGBT female feminazi.
The first thing she is is a liberal.
Then the next thing she is is a feminist, then the third thing she is, LGBT, whatever.
But liberal is always the first identifier.
So a Jewish liberal is not a Jewish liberal.
It's a liberal Jewish person.
That's how it works.
So liberalism is to what they are uh loyal.
First and foremost, and that's why you can get an editorial like they got uh like we got from the New York Times today.
But it's not just them, it's the media in general.
They're so ticked off.
Some of them are now trying to pretend yesterday didn't even happen, like over at CNN.
You'd never know there's an election in Israel today compared to their coverage yesterday.
Gotta take a break, though.
I see the clock.
We'll be back.
Okay, here's the New York Times headline.
And I look, I know we talk about media bias every day.
There's nothing new here, and I know there's nothing earth-shattering, but still this is worth exploring.
The New York Times editorial and Israeli election turns ugly.
How did it turn ugly?
The only thing that happened was that Netanyahu won.
It didn't turn ugly.
What are they saying there?
Netanyahu won.
Well, they thought Herzog was going to win.
They believed all of their pre-election polls.
But folks, it is stunning when you review exactly what happened here.
It is it is almost verbatim for what happens in an American election.
The polling prior to the election had BB losing.
It was nip and tuck.
But it looked like Netanyahu was gonna go down.
The exit polling showed that Bibi, Netanyahu was tied.
The exit polling alternately back and forth said maybe, maybe Netanyahu is gonna lose.
The drive-by media was against Netanyahu.
And he won overwhelmingly.
The pre-election Polls and the pre-election coverage gave Netanyahu very little chance.
The exit polls, they were not expressed truthfully either, and not reported truthfully or not polled correctly, whichever.
Because even during the election count, oh my gosh, it looks like we're looking at an upset here.
The exit polling was totally wrong, just as it often is here.
And not only did Netanyahu win, overwhelmingly.
Lakud picked up what 36 seats?
And they were expected 30 seats expected to pick up in the low 20s.
The point is that Netanyahu won big down ticket.
Down the ballot.
His party also won big, outperforming expectation.
Exactly what has happened here in the 2010 and the 2000 14 midterms.
And the biggest loser, this is why they're so in a wad here.
The biggest loser yesterday in Israel, Barack Obama.
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back, Rush Limba, the EIB network of the Limbo Institute, advanced conservative studies is what we do here.
So again, the snark is out in the email.
Rush!
Why do you care?
It's the second date or why are you talking about what happened in Israel?
What's the big deal?
Ladies and gentlemen, the reason we're talking about what happened in Israel is because it's such a big deal to Barack Obama.
You want to know why has the drive-by media been so concerned about this election?
That's what everybody needs to be asking.
The drive-by media has been covering the campaign in Israel and the election of Benjamin Netanyahu, as though it were a domestic election.
I didn't spend much time on this election at all prior to yesterday, folks.
But every day for the past three weeks, maybe even months, the drive-by media has been doing this story left and right, up and down, all over the place.
And the reason why?
Because Obama was campaigning in it.
The drive-by media is so concerned about the Israeli election, maybe more than they've ever been before, is because Obama wanted Netanyahu to lose.
And so the drive-by media had to want Netanyahu to lose.
Even though most of the media's narrative readers couldn't pick Isaac Herzang out of a police lineup.
Most of the people watching, reading, listening to the drive-by media on this, could not even identify for you if they saw his picture, Netanyahu's opponent, Isaac Herzog.
Because it wasn't about that.
Barack Obama wanted this guy taken out.
And that's why the drive-by's cared.
Since Obama wanted Netanyahu defeated, the media wanted Netanyahu defeated.
And that's why the media has been spending out so much time.
So my friends, all I've done is be consistent here.
Essentially, what happens in this program every day is this.
I get up.
I start paying attention to the news.
I remember the stuff I saw last night, the day before, the week before, the month before.
I have a reservoir, an encyclopedia of knowledge inside my head.
And each day, when I get up, I see, I witness people that I love, things that I believe in under savage attack by the media, by the Democrat Party, and so my instinct is to come here and defend it.
Netanyahu to me is no different than you and me.
He's uh ideologically, his values, his country is an ally of ours, and they have the same Judeo-Christian ethic that we have.
They're the one lone outpost of Allied status in that region we have.
And we've got the American president and his administration trying to eliminate it, trying to defeat it.
That's worth defending to me.
Conservatism, the right things, the right values are worth defending.
I don't mean to make you think I need to make an excuse for what I've been doing.
I'm explaining it.
Get up every day and I see the drive-by media hell bent on defeating Netanyahu, and then I see that Obama sending money and a campaign team over there to do it, and then I realize what's at stake if that happens.
If Netanyahu loses, Iran gets a nuclear weapon.
And maybe they do anyway.
But Netanyahu's presence is going to make it that much harder for Obama to pull this off.
We don't want Iran with a nuclear weapon.
Nobody in that region does, except Iran and maybe Hamas and Hezbollah.
Al Qaeda, you name it, but other than that, the peace-loving people have no desire for this.
Our president seems to want the Iranians to get one.
It's a matter of grave concern.
I want to take you back to the comment I made following Netanyahu's speech earlier this month to the joint session of Congress.
This is the one of the first things I said about it.
Nothing focuses the mind and heart like moral, ethical, and legal clarity.
And today in the House of Representatives Chamber at the United States Capitol, Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu gave an historically important speech, a speech that any previous American president could have and maybe would have made.
A speech to rally and save Western civilization.
That is what it's about to me.
I believe Western civilization is under attack everywhere, particularly here.
The cultural rot that's taking place in America is the result of an attack on Western civilization.
The multicultural curricula is an attack on Western civilization.
Much of the left is attacking Western civilization in Benjamin Netanyahu is one who seeks to defend it.
So he's an ally.
He's under assault by no less than the president of the United States, and that means the entire American media, for the most part, arrayed against him.
So your real question is, why was the media covering this election so much?
Why did they care so much?
This New York Times editorial is just I I it's so filled with hatred and rage from the from the headline, and Israeli election turns ugly.
And then there are terms like desperate and craven duplicity, outrageous demagogy, demagogy, uh inflammatory, subversive, fear mongering.
Those are just some of the terms used to describe Benjamin Netanyahu.
In this New York Times editorial, as in this.
Mr. Netanyahu showed that he was desperate and craven, enough to pull out all the stops on Monday.
He promised that if his Lakud faction remained in power, he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state, thus repudiating a position he had taken in 2009.
His behavior in the past six years, aggressively building Israeli homes on land that likely would be within the bounds of a Palestinian state, and never engaging seriously in negotiations, has long convinced many people that he has no interest in a peace agreement.
No interest in a peace agreement, the only thing he cares about is peace for Israel.
That's the thing he cares about, the peace and security of the people of Israel.
And he's not going to negotiate it away.
And for this he is hated and despised.
Israel's election has done a lot to reveal the challenges facing the country and the intentions of the men who seek to lead it, says the New York Times.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's outright rejection of a Palestinian state.
And his racist rant against Israeli Arab voters on Tuesday showed that he has forfeited any claim to represent all Israelis.
And you see, my friends, just the exact opposite.
Benjamin Netanyahu is protecting the nation of Israel and all who reside there.
He is not going to give up its security.
He is not going to negotiate away its peace.
And for this he's hated and despised and called all these names by the New York Times.
And the election is characterized as uh turning ugly.
And it didn't turn ugly.
There weren't any allegations of cheating.
There weren't any allegations of vote fraud.
There didn't, you didn't have the equivalent of the new Black Panther Party at the polling place like the Democrats do in Philadelphia here.
Intimidating and frightening people away from that's how an election turns ugly.
The way the Democrat Party in this country treats polling places, that's how an election turns ugly.
That didn't happen.
The only thing that made this election ugly to the New York Times, the American left is who won it.
But what really has them soured, folks, do not doubt me on this.
This election is an Obama defeat.
It is an Obama defeat, and it is made even worse by the fact that the victor was Benjamin Netanyahu, who Obama doesn't like, personally or professionally.
And don't doubt that.
Make no mistake about it.
So this is a double whammy.
It's why in the Associated Press.
You get a headline like this.
Netanyahu's Likud surges to stunning Israeli election win.
What's stunning about it?
What really is stunning about it is that the conventional wisdom had Netanyahu defeated.
There's nothing stunning here.
Netanyahu won.
It's only stunning based on the projections that were made.
It's only stunning because of the expectations that were raised.
I could argue that this election is the most common sensible election result that we could have had.
This is a huge stamp of approval for common sense.
This is what everybody should have expected to happen, by the way.
Anybody being honest with themselves, anybody abusing their own common sense, this should have been the expected outcome.
Why in the world would the people of Israel be expected to vote against their own security and their peace?
Why would they be yet that's what the drive-by's here told us would likely happen that the Israeli people would vote against themselves.
That's what would happen if they sent Netanyahu out.
If they had elected an Obama-like leader, they are electing Iran getting nuclear weapons.
Is the common sense expectation that's what's going to happen?
Well, to the American left it is, but to reasonably intelligent, common sensible people, it is no way expected.
What happened yesterday is the expected outcome among people who think rationally.
But the drive-bys were so invested in Netanyahu's defeat because that's what Obama wanted.
And whatever Obama wants, Obama must have.
John Podorek says a great piece of the New York Post.
Pull a quote.
Something else, something entirely unexpected happened.
BB's Likud was expected to secure 20 to 22 seats in the Knesset last night.
That's what all the polls showed.
Instead, it appears like Likud won 29, maybe 30.
Not only was that shockingly good for Likud, it was a far stronger showing than in the last election.
Because in 2013, the party had merged with another election.
Another poll quote.
Bebe's path to forming a new government is clear and should be relatively easy, especially compared to last time.
He gambled his entire career and won, just as he did with the speech in front of Congress earlier this month.
This election mirrored exactly what happens here when Democrats lose big.
The polling prior to the election makes it look like the Democrats are going to win big.
The exit polling shows that the Democrats are indeed winning big.
The media prior to the election is all in for the Democrat Party.
When the votes are finally counted, it's a landslide defeat for the Democrat Party.
A landslide Defeat for the drive-by media.
Quick timeout, back with much more after this.
We're just getting revved up here, folks.
No, folks, I got I can't emphasize this enough.
The Israeli media, totally wrong.
Newspaper polls, television polls, newswire polls, completely wrong.
Exit polls completely wrong.
Obama effort to unseat Netanyahu, total failure.
Netanyahu land win.
And we start on the phones with uh with Rami in Washington, D.C. Great to have you on the program, sir.
You're up first today.
Hello.
Hey, how are you doing?
I'm very well.
Thank you.
I was uh intrigued to call you because I heard you say that Netanyahu wanted wants peace.
Yeah.
Even though he stated that there would never be a Palestinian state and then had a semi-racist rant toward the Arabs inside the Israel 48.
I was curious, first of all, how could you say that he wants peace when he obviously does not want peace, including uh continuing building settlement?
I must have a different definition of peace than you do.
What is your definition of peace?
My definition of peace is finding middle ground where everyone can live happily ever after, basically, in my opinion.
Can you tell me where on earth does that exist?
Here in the United States, you know.
Um I think there's a great mix of people all around, you know.
Um you can live with all the different kinds of people, and it's peace.
And you know, I think it's a uh important uh I don't even agree with that.
I think the people under Judaism they're they are not.
I can go to Ferguson, Missouri right now and find you an entire city population that does not think they're living in peace and does not think about it.
No, I'm not getting off subject.
I'm staying focused on it.
You have a totally skewed definition of peace.
Let me how come how come it is that every time we get close to a Palestinian state, the Palestinians are the Arabs sabotage it.
Is that how you feel?
Let me ask you a question.
What do you mean how I feel?
I'm thinking about this.
Not about how I feel.
That's absolutely your opinion.
That that's that's a perspective that you have.
That's not an actuality, that's not a truth.
You're presenting it as a truth, but that's not a truth.
Let me explain why.
You you don't you you don't even live in the real world.
You're robotic here.
You're spouting robotic things at me.
I'm trying to actually talk to you in an in and use critical thinking.
In the first place, you won't tell me what the definition of peace is.
I'll tell you what peace is.
Peace is the absence of threat and the presence of justice.
Now, peace to Al Qaeda is an entirely different thing than peace to Americans.
Peace to the Nazis was an entire and the Soviets was an entirely different thing than it is to people like you and me.
And I'm telling that peace to the Palestinians and whoever it is that's seeking this so-called two-state solution is a much different definition than the Israeli definition.
This is one of the problems.
How can you say it's peace when the people who want their own state want to use it as a staging area to wipe the Jews off the map?
How in the world can the Jews sign on to that?
Where is the peace in that?
I think this is all smoke and mirrors.
I think Netanyahu wants peace.
I think Netanyahu wants everybody to be happy.
I think everybody I think Netanyahu would be happy if Ruby just drop their grievances, live happily ever after, as you say.
But D I don't think we have people that actually want to do that.
I think there are people to whom peace is the end of their business.
We have people to whom peace is the end of their power.
People to whom peace is the end of their notoriety and fame.
So until we can even agree on a definition of peace, you just automatically conclude that a two-state solution equals peace.
It doesn't.
It's one of the most provocative things that could happen.
The root word being provoke.
And you do not have peace if at the same time somebody's being provoked.
So yours is a political dominated or oriented definition of peace, whereas mine is real.
You automatically can disqualify Netanyahu as a man of peace because he doesn't agree with your political solution to the problem.
Therefore, he's not a man of peace.
He's more a man of peace than any other name you could give me over there.
That's it, my friends.
Another exciting hour.
Broadcast Excellence is uh in the can.
Just a little bit more on this.
And then we move on to other things in the news like Obamacare.
Premiums jumped 23%.
Even with the subsidies.
Even with this is unsustainable.
And we've got more.
▲
Export Selection