All Episodes
Previous Next
May 4, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:40
May 4, 2015, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Back at you folks, Rushland Bohr executing assigned host duties flawlessly.
There are no mistakes.
A thrill and delight to be with you.
The telephone number is 800-282-2882 and email address, lrushbo at EIBNet.com.
According to the Daily Mail, former terror suspect well known to the FBI is named as one of the two gunmen shot dead by cops after the attack on the Draw Muhammad art contest near Dallas in Garland, Texas.
The FBI has named one of the gunmen as Elton Simpson, who was convicted of lying to federal agents about traveling to Africa five years ago, but a judge ruled it couldn't be proven that he was going to join a terror group, so it was thrown out.
Elton Simpson's Phoenix, Arizona home has been surrounded and a bomb squad is carrying out a search.
Simpson, by the way, was placed on probation five years ago for his terrorist activities.
He and his roommate are the prime suspects in the attack.
And Simpson is the guy that sent the tweets before the attack claiming responsibility.
That's right.
ISIS-linked attackers, this guy, Elton Simpson, tweeted minutes before the attack that they were responsible for it.
If this guy were half as smart as he thinks he is, he would have sent out a tweet saying, I'm only doing this because Pam Geller is making me do it.
And the media would have supported the guy.
And then Allison Camerada and others could have gone to Pam Geller and say, see, see, you made him do it.
You had to do this contest on drawing the Prophet Muhammad and you know that somebody was going to come out and shoot you and he did.
If this guy was, what an idiot.
Don't claim credit for it.
Blame the people that do the convention.
Then you'll have the media in your hip pocket.
We have one more Pam Geller soundbite with CNN this morning, Allison Camerata, in which she has to explain what her conference was about.
Question.
I don't want to play a semantics game with you, but I do think that your critics have a point when they say that you paint with a broad brush stroke and it sounds like you are anti-Islam.
I am anti-jihad.
I am anti-Sharia.
You, by saying I paint with a broad brush, are saying all Muslims support jihad.
And Allison, you sound very Islamophobic.
My event was about freedom of speech, period.
Who would decide what's good and what's forbidden?
These arbitrary voices?
You, the Muslim Brotherhood?
The fact that we have to spend upwards of $50,000 in security speaks to how dangerous and how in trouble freedom of speech is in this country.
And then we have to get on these news shows and somehow we are, those that are targeted, those that were going to be slaughtered, are the ones who get attacked, speaks to how morally inverted this conversation is.
Do you see her point?
She's making the point that she's not anti-Muslim.
She's anti-jihad.
She's anti-Sharia.
Believe me, none of you want Sharia.
Well, I mean, I don't know.
But you ever, you hear the term Sharia bandied about, and it's something distant, and it's over there, and you think it's so un-American.
And it's specious to even worry about it here.
And it's nothing more than fearmongers and panic mongers are trying to get everybody worked up about it.
Well, I can give you a great example of what living under Sharia would be like.
Remember Indiana After they passed the Religious Freedom Protection Act, remember what happened there?
You had the news media joining with militant gay groups to go out and find bigots.
They wanted to find bigots.
They went door to door shopping for bigots, and they found this naive young little girl, part of a family, runs a pizzeria in some town in Indiana, 2,000 people.
And they asked her a question.
Would you cater a gay wedding with your pizzas?
No, I wouldn't.
My religious beliefs do not support gay marriage, but you saw what happened to her.
The entire news media, accompanied by militant gay groups, descended on that family, tried to put it out of business.
You've seen it with flower shops and cake shop, bakery shops, and photography students.
That's essentially what Sharia is.
You will behave.
You will conform.
You will not say what we don't want to hear.
You will obey.
And if you don't, bamo, this is what's going to happen to you.
That's what Sharia is, except with the tenants of militant Islam thrown in.
You're not given any choice in the matter.
You must conform.
You must convert.
You are going to live the way we tell you.
There is no First Amendment.
There is no freedom to assemble.
It all has to be sanctions and approved.
It has to come under the guidelines of whatever the Sharia says is permissible or isn't.
You saw just a modified little version of it.
And it's really rooted in the fact that if you behave or speak in an unacceptable way, you are going to feel the full force and brunt of the people and organizations who do not permit you, will not permit you to do or say what you were doing.
You'll be shamed for whatever.
And that's a form of it.
And I would venture to say that while not technically Sharia, you can find examples of what it would be like already happening in this country.
And Pam Geller is simply saying, I don't support Sharia.
I'm opposed to Sharia.
I'm opposed to jihad.
And I'm demonstrating something.
We live in a country with freedom of speech.
And I'm organizing a little cartoon drawing contest here.
I have the First Amendment rights to do this.
And she's illustrating this to make a point.
Look what happens to people who follow and obey the Constitution.
They get blamed.
And folks, that's, oh, you call whatever you, Stalinism, statism, Sharia.
I mean, the Sharia specific definition is not just Stalinism, but the regime comes and gets you.
If you don't comport, the regime's going to come and get you.
You're going to be blamed.
And so she's simply saying, look at here.
I had to go out and spend 50 grand for security because we knew that some people were going to come here and try to incite violence.
And what she's saying to the media, it sounds like you condone them.
You're blaming me.
I'm the peaceful purpose here.
I'm not doing anything to anybody.
We're just speaking.
We're drawing.
And you sound like, journalist, misjournalist, you sound like you think all of this is my fault.
And she's merely saying it's really, really dangerous when the people who come and try to blow things up or shoot people dead are the victims.
But in liberalism, this is how things have indeed been twisted.
By the way, if you're on hold, be patient, folks.
We've got a lot of great calls coming up.
And I'll get to you soon.
Next up is the president, former President Bill Clinton, is surfacing to defend the Clinton Crime Family Foundation because as predicted, news stories about the Clinton Foundation are scaring off the people that want to bribe the Clintons, the access buyers.
And the reason that is happening is the scam has been exposed.
The scam is that it isn't about charity.
It's about personal enrichment by selling future access and granting favors from a sitting Secretary of State for exorbitant sums of money under the guise of selflessness.
The Clintons have gone out and they've told these donors, you know, the American people love us, and especially me.
The American people love me, and I can't do anything wrong.
I mean, I have done all kinds of things and they still think I'm the biggest stud in the whole country.
So you can give me money.
And everybody's just going to assume I'm going to do great things.
I'm going to go out and help earthquake victims and tsunami victims.
And wherever there's trouble, I'm going to be there.
And nobody's going to, they're going to think you're a hero donating to our foundation.
You're going to be a great guy.
You're going to think of you great things.
And you just be patient.
Hillary gets elected president.
And that's what we'll expect to hear from you.
If you want some access now, she's Secretary of State.
This little prid quote, quid pro quo stuff went on underneath the table.
It's all been exposed now.
Including the fact that 15%, only 15% of what is donated actually goes to charitable endeavors.
And so now the donors are receiving the same scrutiny that Clintons are getting.
The donors now are being, it's almost like they're cockroaches under the sink and you've got your flashlight out trying to find them so you can wipe them out, but you can't.
Cockroaches survive everything.
But they're scattering.
So Clinton surfaces and does an interview on NBC News with Cynthia McFadden.
And he decried what he saw as a concerted effort to take down his foundation.
Said he had done nothing knowingly inappropriate.
Hey, you know, I might have done some stuff wrong, but I didn't do it knowing I was doing it.
I mean, I didn't, I mean, I thought I was above board all the way.
I've never, that's not who I am.
That's not who we are.
We don't knowingly do things inappropriate.
It just comes to light later that they were, but we didn't know it at the time.
You can trust me on that.
Speaking about accepting foreign donations while his wife was Secretary of State, there's been a very deliberate attempt here to take that foundation down.
I mean, there's almost no new fact that wasn't known the first time she ran for president.
We're going to come as close as we can during her presidential campaign to following the rules that we followed when she was Secretary of State.
Let's go to the audio soundbites here for yourself.
Cynthia McFadden on the Today Show this morning, she said to Clinton, you're proud to work on the African programs that Clinton Foundation has raised billions to help fund.
I don't think there's anything sinister in trying to get wealthy people in countries that are seriously involved in development to spend their money wisely in a way that helps poor people and lifts them up.
There has been a very deliberate attempt to take the foundation down.
And there is almost no new fact that's known now that wasn't known when she ran for president the first time.
I don't want to get into the weeds here.
I'm not responsible for anybody else's perception.
I asked Hillary about this and she said, you know, no one's ever tried to influence me by helping you.
No one has even suggested they have a shred of evidence to that effect.
Are you kidding me?
He actually said that?
He actually said.
I asked Hillary about this.
As though he had, I asked Hillary about this, and she said, You know, no one's ever tried to influence me by helping you.
Well, that's comforting to know.
So, the former president tells, you know what, I was so worried about people buying influence with us, you know, because she's Secretary of State, and I knew how it could look.
So, I asked Hillary.
I asked her about this, and she told me, she said, not to worry.
She said, no one has ever tried to influence her by helping me.
And so there's nothing to see here.
Well, what do you think I'm going to say?
That she did tell me that people tried to influence her.
Even if she told me that, I'm not going to tell you.
And I know, Cynthia, you're going to report everything I say because I, Cynthia, I know that you're one of the many who look at me and say, if only.
I just know that's the case.
It's this you're a woman.
I know how women react to me.
And that's the deal.
No one has even suggested they have a shred of evidence to that effect.
I mean, that people have sought to influence Hillary by giving money to me or paying for my speeches.
Really?
This is too good for words.
This is fabulous.
So the next question from Cynthia McFadden: you certainly didn't grow up wealthy, but you have become a one-do you notice the penetrating tough questions.
I mean, Clinton loves this.
She's basically saying, Hey, you started from nothing.
You're a small-time hit governor.
And now look at you.
You're rich.
You're running the same crowds that I do.
Barbara Walters, my buddy, and all of us.
And it's great to have you in the group, Bill.
That's the question.
Here's his answer.
I have.
Yes.
And one of the most amusing things of all is everybody's saying, well, how can Hillary possibly relate to the currents of middle-class America because now we have money?
I mean, it's laughable.
It's okay if you inherit your money, apparently, then you can help people.
I'm grateful for our success, but let me remind you: when we moved into the White House, we had the lowest net worth of any family.
I give 10% of my revenue off the top every year to the foundation.
And Hillary, in the year she was there, gave 17.
Over the last 15 years, I've taken almost no capital gains.
I was already capital gains in the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.
Well, we had capital gains.
See, I'm throwing out big financial term words there that I know nobody's going to know what I'm saying.
I'm relying on people thinking I know my stuff.
I haven't taken any capital gains in over 15 years.
There aren't any capital gains in the Cretan Crime Family Foundation.
And if there were, you wouldn't be entitled to them anyway.
That's the whole point of the foundation.
Once you put your money into it, it's gone.
It's not yours anymore.
You get a charitable write-off from it.
That's it.
That's right, Limbaugh, unless you set up so that you work for the foundation, got salaries, and travel expenses and entertainment and stuff like that.
But Hillary and I haven't asked Hillary about that.
I said, have you taken money from our foundation when you travel around and so forth?
She said, no.
She assured me that she'd never been tempted to do that.
She charged it all to Uncle Sam.
I haven't paid.
We haven't paid.
Ben pays a cent about the foundation for this kind of stuff.
You trust me on this.
Fine.
And he also assured Cynthia McFadden that he's not going to stop giving high-priced speeches, even though he did acknowledge being a wealthy man these days.
He said, Well, you know, I got to pay our bills.
And I also give a lot to the foundation every year.
I spend a couple hours a day just doing the research.
People like to hear me speak.
That's right.
You think I get $500,000 doing nothing?
I don't.
I spend at least two hours a day researching everything I'm going to say in a speech.
Is it my fault?
People like hearing me speak.
It's not my fault.
Is it my fault?
They won't pay me half a million dollars.
And I asked Hillary, I said, has anybody been paying me $500,000 expecting you to do something for me when you're Secretary of State?
She assured me no such thing has ever happened.
So there really nothing to see here.
All I'm saying is that the idea that there's one set of rules for us and another set for everybody else is true.
That's all I'm saying.
Because we're special.
By the way, the Clinton Foundation has confirmed that it paid $11 million for Clinton family travel in 2014.
They spent more than $8 million on Clinton family travel in 2013.
You think Hillary was going to pay for her own campaign trips until she absolutely had to?
There was no way.
And I suspect that $19 million for travel, $19 million for Clinton family travel in two years is probably a lot more money than they gave to the foundation over the last two years.
Probably a heck of a lot more money than they gave.
So they're taken out.
There's no question.
Let me grab a phone call here.
Moving on to Jim in Los Angeles.
Jim, I'm glad that you called.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Good morning.
How are you?
Very well.
Thanks much.
I'm calling back to comment about the shooting in Texas.
Yes, sir.
Just as an introduction, I'm a Muslim myself.
Grew up in the Middle East.
I've been here for about 26 years, but lived through the whole civil war of Beirut.
So I'm a bit familiar with these kind of people.
But first, I want to say that I'm a scholar of Islam, and I think the system that embodies the spirit of that religion the most is the founding principles of the U.S. Constitution.
The countries out there like Saudi Arabia and Iran and everybody else, they're way out there.
And everybody wants to portray them as the example of Islam and Sharia and Jihad.
And by the way, I don't think the radio shows have a good idea of what Sharia is or what jihad is, but these radical criminals are becoming like the toaster children for this, but it's not.
They're criminals.
Wait, let me help out.
No, no, no, I need to ask you.
Are you saying that the Islam of Saudi Arabia, the Islam of Iran is not really Islam in terms of what Sharia is?
No.
Number one, there's no kingdom in Islam, and Saudi Arabia is a kingdom.
There's no compelling in Islam, and these guys still follow people with a stick on Friday if they don't go to Friday prayer.
Does Sharia permit freedom of speech?
Does Sharia permit Christians to practice Christianity?
Yeah, of course.
Can I explain to you what Sharia is?
Because I don't think these radio shows understand what Sharia is.
Well, no, I do.
At least my people are expert in it.
I'm familiar with it.
But tell me what it is.
In a minute or less, less time, the better.
First of all, there's no one book that's called Sharia law that everybody, every Muslim refers to as the reference.
Sharia is basically the interpretations that came after the Prophet was died, that people had questions, and these formatted itself into several schools of thoughts, and they became known as Sharia.
Sharia is from the word Arabic word Shara, which means interpreted the law.
Here we have the Supreme Court that we all agree that, okay, that's the ultimate explainer of the Constitution.
In the Islamic world, there is no such thing.
So there is no one book that everybody can say, that's Sharia law.
And what the only radio does is Sharia.
No, that's wrong.
That's precisely the point, that there isn't a Supreme Court in Islam, and there isn't, or Sharia is, there is no interpretation.
You are or you aren't, you do or you don't, or else, you know, I don't, anyway.
Okay, so Jim said that Sharia interpretation varies between sects, such as between Sunni and Shiite.
Is that why they kill each other off?
Isn't that why?
I mean, that's because of the different interpretations of Islam.
And if disagreements within Islam result in killings, I mean, isn't Sharia what it is then?
Is it that powerful?
Failure to comport with whatever we define it as results in maybe you dying.
But anyway, Jim is right, and he said the U.S. Constitution represents Islam better than Sharia law.
If he's right, why do so many Muslims want to replace the Constitution with Sharia if the Constitution already does a great job of Sharia?
This is I mean, this is interesting.
I mean, even so-called moderates say that their ultimate goal is to live under Sharia, not the U.S. Constitution, not some other secular government.
Sharia is the objective.
Make no mistake about that.
Sharia is the objective.
I mean, in England and to some extent Canada, even today, many disputes, including those involving family law, are settled by Sharia courts and Sharia arbitrators.
And once the ruling comes down, it is what it is.
But if it's just a matter of interpretation, why are people killed for not following it?
Not in just some places, but in every place where Sharia is the law of the land.
Anyway, to say that there is nothing in the world, this is the truth, there's nothing in the world comparable to the United States Constitution.
Now, you may have, in fact, in the UK, well, what about Britain, Russia?
I mean, the freedom of this, they don't have freedom of speech, for example.
And they don't have, they got different slander and libel laws, but they don't have a Constitution in the UK.
The United States Constitution is unique in all of humanity, folks.
There isn't anything like it or better.
And if there were, the United States would not be in the crosshairs of so many other places.
If there were something better than God, they wouldn't care.
They wouldn't be threatened by it.
It's a dangerous, dangerous thing.
And when you have any number of people who refuse to stand up to it in an attempt to appease or be unnoticed, it's not good.
It's going to lead to advancement of this kind of thing.
And that's true not with just Sharia or any other religion.
That's true of political ideology.
It's true of party politics.
If you don't stand up and oppose that which you disagree with, if you don't push back on it, you're eventually going to be devoured by it.
History is replete with example after example.
Jim in Tampa, you're next.
It's great to have you, and I'm glad you waited.
I appreciate your patience.
Hello.
Hey, how are you doing?
Very well, sir.
Thank you.
Yeah, I'm probably one of your few conservative, tree hugger, movie business followers, supporters.
I'm a staunch conservative, and I've been a wildlife rehabilitator for 15 years and was in the movie business for 15 years before that.
And was calling specifically to what is a what is a wildlife rehabilitator?
We rescue injured and orphaned wildlife and nurse it back to health until it can be re-released.
Like pelicans.
Yeah, and you do it free.
I mean, you have to make enough money doing a real job in order to contribute this to society.
Nobody pays you to do it.
Really?
You have to be licensed by the state and the federal government to have the privilege to do it, but you've got to pay all the bills yourself.
No kidding.
I thought the state had people that did this.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and all that.
No, you know, and some of the things you've got to do is pay for an $800 a year rabies shot if you're going to handle carnivores like coyotes and wolves because of them.
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
And no, it's very expensive to do a favor for the community, but it's rewarding.
Well, hey, we love animals here.
I think what you do is admirable.
Well, what's amazing to me or fascinating is I think true animal lovers, you know, so often we're lumped into the tree hugger, you know, crazy, you know, global warming group.
No, no, no, no.
That's the animal, that's the PETA crowd, the animal, right?
They want to place animals on a level equal or above humanity.
That's, no, no, you're not that.
One of the things I've learned watching animals is how much they reflect society.
I mean, we can learn so much from them.
Their political world, there are so many similarities with the human world that it's almost hilarious.
Well, now, what have you learned and from which animal?
Well, I'll just give you a couple quick examples.
Here's a negative animal.
A cowbird lays more eggs than any other bird.
They lay like 77 eggs a year.
They do not mate.
Most birds, 90% of all birds, mate for life.
So if your mate dies, you don't mate anymore.
It's a lifetime commitment.
The cowbird does not.
The partnering bird provides no support.
Most birds, you know, while the female is on the nest, the male birds.
Let me guess, the partnering bird is a male.
Yes, correct.
Provides no support.
Right.
And so what the cowbird has to do, since it has no support while it's sitting on a nest, is it lays its nest in another bird's nest and lets that bird take care of its offspring, very often at the cost of life to those other birds, because the cowbird hatches faster, grows bigger, eats more, and very often this hosting bird loses its own offspring because it's raising the cowbird offspring.
Right.
So what have you learned about humanity from that?
Well, I just see it paralleling the same situations that the birds that reproduce the fastest and get the support do so at the expense of the hardworking birds that take care of each other.
I mean, you see similar things with the riots.
You can take a pack of totally domestic, wonderful, loving dogs, and if you put one crazy dog in there, that entire pack can turn vicious and killer.
It just takes one aggressive animal to trigger this vicious attack within the entire pack.
One of the things that when you were talking a minute ago that I had to chuckle about about the If you have a city that's run by a party for a long time and they have riots, they ought to be disqualified from the solution.
Right.
And wolves actually do that.
We had a pack of wolves that we raised.
And I say we, my wife and I work together.
She's a veterinarian technician, so we did this as a joint effort.
But the wolves, when I was learning how to care for them, we ended up with them kind of unexpectedly.
So it was a learning process of, you know, when they first come in, you're scared to death.
You're going to be eaten by them.
But as you watch the way they run their own society, you realize they're totally self-sufficient.
They take care of themselves.
But there's an alpha male and an alpha female that set the rules and discipline and enforced the pack entirely.
Were you able to domesticate any of them?
In the case of the wolves, half of them were tame.
I mean, you could go in the enclosure with them.
The tame ones would come up and visit.
The wild ones would disappear.
They wanted nothing to do with you.
I mean, there's only a few cases in the history of the United States where a wolf has ever killed a despite the Hollywood thing.
They're pretty much self-centered.
Yeah, Hollywood devastates wolves.
Every movie about wolves, they're just nothing but rampant.
One of them even killed Liam Neeson in a movie.
Oh, I know.
It's hilarious because, like I say, in the last 200 years, there's like, I don't know, six cases of a wolf ever killing a person.
And it's usually either a rabbit animal or in an extreme remote.
Well, I knew a guy that, one of the radio consultants in Sacramento, had a pet wolf.
He lived, called him Jack.
He had a cabin out in the woods near, I think it was Reno, and he had a wolf that lived in the house with him.
It made it sound like it was a pet within certain limits.
It wasn't totally, but he was never afraid of it.
Well, he had one that was the lowest-ranking wolf that we called the house wolf.
She was so timid.
We raised her with the dogs, and she became part of the household, used to travel with me.
She actually, I mean, one of the things about animals is if they're not in need of food and survival, they're basically, for the most part, friendly to other species.
I mean, this wolf helped us raise dozens of fawns.
She would nurse the fawn, clean it, protect it, provide all the services that the mother did because she was well-fed.
She didn't need to eat it.
So the hostility largely disappears.
Well, I say, this stuff all fascinates me.
I don't mean to sound silly here, but I've had a bunch of cats, and you feed them, you put the food in their bowl, the bowl is on a floor, and after they eat what they want, they start covering it.
They think they're covering it.
They start pawing the ground.
They're not covering anything, and nobody's going to steal their food.
Well, what is that?
That's just that's not instinct.
Well, it's, you know, animals, you've got the ones that have the cognitive ability, the ability to think ahead and to plan.
Now, in the covering, they may be trying to hide it to save for later.
A lot of animals will bury food and then come back to it.
Right.
Oh, I know that's what she's doing, but there's nobody's going to take her food, and she's not covering it.
Can she?
We had a funny thing with the wolf that lived with the dogs, because supposedly wolves are much smarter than dogs.
So we watched this wolf to try to look for signs of differences of intelligence.
And besides the fact she could open doors, windows, some door latches, door, I mean, any kind of door she could open.
When we fed the dogs, we had 12 at the time.
We put 12 dishes of food down.
We usually mix a little canned food in it, and we'd set the empty can out in the middle of the room so whichever animal was finished first, it would go lick out the can and not bother the other animals that were eating.
And for many, many weeks, the hound dog would gobble her food without chewing, run over and grab the can, and that was it.
The hound dog always got it because she just ate the fastest.
But one day the wolf left her full dish of food and went over to the empty can, and I'm thinking, that's not very smart.
You're supposed to be smarter than the dogs.
You're leaving a full dish to get the empty can.
She picked up the can, brought it back to her dish, set it in the middle of the dish, ate her dinner, and then licked the can out after her dinner was done.
Well, that's brilliant.
And she did that forever after.
None of the other dogs ever figured out they could do the same thing.
Now you just angered half the audience who think the dog is smarter than their spouse.
Yeah.
Now, look, Jim, hang on.
I have to take a break.
Jim actually called about Dr. Benjamin Carson.
Yes, folks.
So let's get to that, Jim, when we get back to you after the break here.
Okay, back to the phones ago.
And it's Jim in Tampa who actually called about Dr. Benjamin Carson.
What is it about Dr. Carson you wanted to say?
Well, I saw his announcement this morning and was extremely impressed.
I really knew nothing about him.
But one of the things he mentioned, he wanted to dispel the rumor that goes with so many Republicans that they're out to eliminate what he called safety nets in the form of welfare and support.
That what he wanted to eliminate, he said, I don't want to eliminate safety nets for people who need them.
I want to eliminate dependence of able-bodied people that can work.
And that's what got me thinking about the wildlife time because animals are the same way.
We got so many calls as wildlife rehabilitators to relocate problem animals.
And so many times it was because people were feeding them.
And then the animals become not only dependent, but demanding.
We had one story where a lady called and asked if we relocated raccoons.
And I said, yeah, when you say raccoons, you're talking a couple.
She said, 12.
And long story short, I asked her, Have you been feeding them?
And she said, yes.
And I said, we need to stop feeding them and they will stop bothering.
She said, well, we try that, but around one in the morning, they get rocks and bang on the window, so we feed them so we can get to sleep.
And I said, well, you've now trained those animals that if they bang on the windows, well, see, this is this is, I mean, I have, I remember stories of small businesses off the coast of North Carolina would take people out and basically say, we're going to show you some wildlife in the sea.
And the way they had done it, they had begun to feed various fish, and the fish came to expect it at the right place.
And these entrepreneurs just have to take the boats with people out, and the people would pay for the food as part of the admission price.
And then these fish would come out, whatever kind of exotic fish that these people had found, and it'd watch them be fed.
And it was clear they had become dependent, which in the wildlife sector is a disservice.
They have to be able to provide for themselves their toast, as you well know.
But it's interesting, you of all the things that caught your attention, even though it relates to your work, it was Dr. Carson's commenting on welfare.
I have the soundbite.
I'm going to play the soundbite here, but there's a lot to be said about this.
I find it's going to be a little tricky because I don't want to sound at all like I'm critical of Dr. Carson because I am not.
My only point is he is not the first to point this out.
Now, he may be the first you have heard say it in a way that relates to your business so that you understood it and knew that he was right and so forth.
But the intellectual, the societal, the economic arguments against welfare have been made for decades and they're all right on the money.
And yet, the number of people on welfare continues to expand.
The number of people on welfare wanting to be on welfare expands, even though everybody knows it's a dead-end street.
And I think largely this is because there's a political party that has decided to profit from it.
And that's not compassion.
A political party profiting from keeping people poor and dependent is not a party that needs to be rewarded by winning elections.
Here's what Dr. Carson said.
He was in Detroit today.
That's his hometown.
He announced that he is running for president.
We've actually got four sound bites.
We'll have time for this one on welfare.
There are many people who are critical of me because they say Carson wants to get rid of all the safety nets and welfare programs, even though he must have benefited from them.
This is a blatant lie.
I have no desire to get rid of safety nets for people who need them.
I have a strong desire to get rid of programs that create dependency in able-bodied people.
And we're not doing people a favor when we pat them on the head.
They say, there there, you poor little thing.
We're going to take care of all your needs.
You don't have to worry about anything.
You know who else says stuff like that?
Socialists.
Exactly right.
And what he said here is known and is understood by all kinds of zillions of people.
But you notice the way they go after him.
Well, who are you?
You know, you want to get rid of all safety nets, welfare programs, even though you must have benefited from them.
That's the same thing they did to Clarence Thomas in reverse.
They accused him of wanting to get rid of affirmative action, even though he benefited from it, to which he replied that he did not.
But anyway, have to take a break because of time.
Now, you want a provocative statement?
Try this.
Welfare has done more harm to the black community than police brutality ever has.
Yeah, yeah.
Think about it before you automatically knee-jerk, reject it.
And sit tight, my friends.
Broadcast excellence resumes momentarily.
▲
Export Selection