All Episodes
Previous Next
June 11, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:51
June 11, 2015, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Welcome.
It is Eric Erikson here on the EIB network.
Uh thanks to Rush and the team for letting me fill in today.
The phone number 800 28282.
You can get me on Twitter or Facebook at E.W. Ericsson.
Email me, Eric at redstate.com.
I am delighted to be joined at this time by one of my favorite senators, uh, Senator Jeff Session of Alabama, who's really been doing yeoman's work on fighting this this trade agreement that no one's allowed to see in the U.S. Senate.
Senator, welcome.
Thank you, Eric.
Um, it's good to be with you.
So yeah, there are a number of stories out there.
I want to uh get your take on related to this.
There's there's one, I mean, right out of the gate, the Associated Press report, and they're giving credit to your Alabama colleague, Senator Shelby, for helping block the um blocking the request for fifty million dollars to pay for legal help for unaccompanied immigrant children.
And I I hear rumors that there may be some more amnesty related provisions in these trade deals that no one's allowed to see.
A number of uh immigration amendments uh uh being filed to the uh defense bill.
Uh what we know is that the purpose, uh one of the purposes or desires of the Trans Commission, this new commission that will be created uh will be to facilitate the movement of people.
And uh so it's gotten people on the defensive, but I believe it remains a threat that immigration law could be uh altered and certainly immigration policy absolutely could be changed by a vote of this commission.
You know, this is more than just a trade agreement dealing with tariffs and things of that nature.
This creates something that's very much like an early European Union, which each country has one vote.
There are twelve countries, uh Vietnam, Brunei, others will be a participant.
They can add countries any time they want to.
China.
China has presidents all already suggested that China might be added in the future.
So this uh is uh American people and the Congress should not advance and actually pre-approve uh this plan to do such a thing until we know every word of the agreement, every impact it will have on our sovereignty, the power of the American people to run their lives, and uh we've not gotten we've not gotten that, and it's going to expand over the years, and we'll regret it, I'm confident.
Senator, one of the things that just kind of sticks in my crawl over this one is during the Obamacare debate, Nancy Pelosi said that you you've got to pass it to be able to see it, and essentially that seems to be what some of the Republican leaders are saying that we we can't the American public can't see the deal until it is passed.
Why is that?
This is not necessary.
Uh trade deals sometimes uh need a little uh continuation of discussions, but when you're creating an entity, a world governing commission, uh at least the Pacific governing commission, that's the kind of thing that absolutely should be made public, and this the vote that may take place tomorrow would advance that to a degree uh that's um probably unstoppable.
Once once it's passed, once once you authorize the president to go out and sign the agreement, which he would do, uh it comes back here.
We've never had one turned down.
You can't amend it.
It's only on the floor for twenty hours.
So the bill would be filed, say four o'clock one afternoon, voted on noon the next day.
No amendments in the House or the Senate, no two-thirds vote that treaties require, no filibuster in the Senate.
Uh this is a a fast track all right, but it's a skid greasing plan to something far beyond we've ever used uh uh tra fast track for before.
Well, and Senator, the the folks over at Heritage Action for America, they've key voted no on on the legislation, and one of the things they point out they're they're free trade proponents, and and I'm a free trade supporter, but that a lot of the terms based on what we know has come out so far is you're gonna allow a a terrible negotiator named Barack Obama to include um provisions in some of these agreements that might be overly regulatory on the environmental front or or burdensome for free enterprise in in regard to unions and
i should we really be giving a guy who can't even negotiate a good deal with Iran powers to do these things.
I think that's very true, Eric.
For example, there's no need this bill has got to pass now.
Why don't we uh slow down?
Let the particular this whole uh living see it creates this trade commission all right, but it's considered a living agreement, words they use.
The first time that's ever been done.
And so this twelve nations can change the language of their organization at any time.
Um so is that what we want to do?
And then they can discipline the United States, the Sultan of Brunei having the same vote as the President of the United States.
Um I I think that there's no reason to rush this.
Uh and w be f to to you are trusting the president to negotiate an agreement that defends the sovereignty and the power of each individual American citizen.
And I think the American people have a right to be dubious about this president's ability and willingness to do that.
So yes, holding off would absolutely make sense.
This is Eric Erickson in for Rush, and I'm talking to Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
Senator, one of the things that strikes me about the president pushing this deal is he rarely comes to Congress anymore for anything he really wants to do.
He just does it by fiat and dares you guys to challenge him.
It seems like he's trying to make you guys take blame for part of an agreement because he's got problems with his own base.
Elizabeth Warren, for example, uh Senator for Massachusetts doesn't want to support the deal, and so in instead of doing what he usually does by fiat, now he's trying to make you guys get the blame.
Well, I think that's true, and uh the Congress uh should say no.
You know, Eric, in my view, the president is really uh not enthusiastic or cares not much about these trade deals, but I do believe this president wants to see as his legacy having created an international organization.
That's always been the dream of sort of the left, and they disrespect sovereignty, they disrespect uh the power of a U.S. citizen to elect their congressman, their senator, who they control.
And then you have an international group that's impacting people's lives, but they have no control over that.
I mean, we see this in Europe right now with resisted that.
Yes, sir.
We we see this in Europe right now with the European Union where essentially you you may have elected representatives to European Parliament, but you've got unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats who are destroying the economy of Europe that no one can stop.
That is exactly I think it's similar.
I think it puts us down that path, and the hard left has always favored these kind of uh options, and allowing the President Obama to negotiate that, someone that I don't have confidence in understands and shares the view that you and I share.
Uh I'm not for.
I I don't believe we should empower him, especially after we've seen him abuse the regulatory power to the extent that he has in so many different ways.
Now, Senator, I I want to uh pivot real quick, and I don't mean to put you on the spot on this, but I feel like I need to ask you this story g given where your passion lies in the Senate.
Uh, a couple of weeks ago the story came out about Disney uh firing American workers, um, but before letting them go, making them uh train lesser paid overseas workers to run Disney's operations, uh essentially uh off s uh offshoring Disney operations, and and the stunning irony being that they're then most of the Disney executives are Democrats going to fund Hillary Clinton's campaign to demand a fifteen dollar minimum wage.
This is uh a stunning development.
It's under the H one B program that has been sold for years as providing foreign workers where you don't have American workers.
This first came up, Eric, in California, California Edison, the big power company, uh uh closed fired everybody, uh four hundred members of their in IT department, and replaced them with foreign workers and require the the American workers to train them.
So it wasn't that they didn't have any workers to do the job, they had people in the job.
They had to train the foreign workers.
This is exactly what happened in Disney.
And it it uh is an abuse of that program.
It's an unjustified program.
It needs to be reformed.
And uh Senator Durbin, uh my Democrat colleague from um Illinois and I also have seen Senator uh Bill Nelson from Florida criticize this Disney plan.
So I think that can be a surely we can get a bipartisan effort to stop stop this abuse of the H one B uh worker program.
Yeah, i it it's always a staggering irony irony to me, Senator, that you have companies like Disney whose executives backed democratic policies, uh doing things like this uh and and then it just i they they routinely they they cut their nose to spite their face and then they do things like this that hurt American workers.
Uh they don't seem to care about it.
They're they seem like they'll just write a big check to a Democrat and put everybody on the social safety net.
Look, it it saves them that they're cutting salaries dramatically.
In California, I think it was thirty or forty thousand dollars per worker less.
That's what it was all about.
They can pretend that they care about helping poor people, but it's not accurate.
Um people have been working on at California Edison for years, as they have been in Disney, all of a sudden they're out.
Uh and and foreign workers are brought in.
Uh we've got to be careful about that, Eric.
I truly believe that this country needs to be sensitive to the pain that the average American is facing.
Uh their family members are facing, the fear they have of being laid off.
They've worked hard at a a good company like a power company, the biggest power company in California, Disney, and then they just get tossed aside.
Um I I think this is uh it's a troubling thing.
I just feel like that the government doesn't need to set salaries and do those kind of things, but we do need to create an immigration policy and a trade policy that gives our citizens a chance to prosper.
Senator Jeff Sessons, look, thanks for joining me on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
I really appreciate it.
Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
Keep up the fight, Senator.
Thank you very much.
Absolutely.
Jeff Sessions of Alabama, I'm Eric Erickson filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
We will be back.
You're a troublemaker.
Snerdley is giving me a hard time.
Every time I I fill in for Rush, I get a hard time from him on cooking.
Do you not cook at all?
Do you just go to restaurants?
Oh, okay.
Oh, okay.
All right.
I I got you now.
I listen, y I I spend all day long talking about politics.
So I I pull out my big green egg, I smoke large chunks of meat, I grill, I I even make cinnamon rolls for the kids in the morning.
I'm I'm domesticated.
I I I'm one of those those people that the left just well, they wish they could cook as good as me.
Yes, the doilies with the apron, yes.
Yes, absolutely.
Absolutely.
All right.
Snerdley's throwing me off here.
Folks, on this trade issue, the the the guys at Heritage, they they've got a lot of good information about why it's a bad deal.
Listen, I'm a free trader, full disclosure.
I am.
I believe in free trade.
I think it's the right thing to do.
I think it helps uh I certainly people have lost jobs because of free trade, but I I believe in it.
I think it's a good thing.
I think free markets are a good thing.
But I am opposed to this deal.
One, Barack Obama is the worst negotiator I think we have ever had in the White House.
I mean, he is worse than Jimmy Carter at any sort of negotiation.
And do we really want that guy to have this power?
When we also know to a degree Barack Obama is malicious to the idea of the American dream.
I mean, he believes his world view is that the United States uh the world will succeed when we are less successful.
He believes the world will be safer when the United States is less secure.
That's why he won't go over and fight ISIS.
I I got a story.
You know the guy, uh what's his name?
I hang on, I have the story in my stack of stuff here.
Keith Brunfeld uh Broomfield, he was killed fighting against ISIS in Syria.
He got so frustrated by the American government by Obama, saying that they were gonna have to take care of themselves, seeing the slaughter of the Christians over there that he went and started fighting ISIS with them.
He's he's died fighting against ISIS in Syria.
I mean, well if anything, Barack Obama has has really gotten people to bring out their individualistic streak these days because he's not doing anything for the country.
Do we really want him to have that power, the trade power for an agreement that is locked in the bowels of Congress and won't come out until they pass the deal.
That's that's the thing that gets me.
I mean, there have been multiple stories in major news organizations about how to they have to go into a room that the press is not allowed into to read the agreement.
This is what Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats did with Obamacare.
You have to pass it to find out what's in it.
I mean, that's Paul Ryan is is doing the Nancy Pelosi thing.
Just just we'll declassify the documented and let everybody see what's in it.
Once you've passed it.
That's not the way to do this.
That allows people to place their fears into the document that may be unfounded, that may not be there.
But we know given Barack Obama that given as as Senator Sessions described this organization that would be built through this agreement that they could later realize your fears.
I mean, think about the European Union.
Go to Europe.
It has become a bureaucratic Kafka-es nightmare.
It is is I mean Byzantine and the bureaucracy to wade through small businesses have found it less and less competitive.
You know where I believe the Democrats are going?
The Democrats are corporatists.
Now they deny it, they say the Republicans are.
It's just projection.
The Democrats, I mean, take Common Core, for example.
If you look at Common Core, you realize the policy principles behind Common Core are that your children do not need to be innovators, they do not need to be entrepreneurial, they do not need to be creative, they need to be cogs in the machine of a Fortune 500 company.
That's why Common Core exists.
We want everyone on the same standards, we want everyone getting the same information, we want everyone to learn how to subtract by adding.
Certainly, I don't know if you know this, but so my my nine-year-old this past year had to learn how to subtract in third grade by adding.
It was an entire explo an entire page of explanation when she could have just subtracted the regular way, but no, no, the homework assignment precluded her from doing that.
It made no sense at all.
And that's what that's the way they want her to do.
They want kids to be cogs in the machines of a corporate estate.
That's what's happening in Europe.
Small businesses, unless you're the farmer, unless you're the very small mom and pop shop who gets a government subsidy, you can't be in business anymore.
You've got to be a subsidiary of a corporate state.
That is the European view.
That's always been the European view.
And you know, the left, they idolize Europe.
They want us to eventually become like Europe, nationalized health care, uh, political correctness run amok.
Uh we we can't engage on Islamo fascism because it's racism and Islamophobia.
They want to outlaw that, they want to outlaw the church, they they don't want people to be in the town square to speak up unless they agree with the state.
That's where we head with these things.
And you know, a long time ago, I gotta tell you, I gotta be honest, listening to myself speak.
A long time ago, people would have said this is nuts, this is crazy, you're out of your mind, that this is this is the lunatic fringe.
But we see it more and more, and it is reality.
We see what's happening in Europe.
We see what's happening to the people in European states.
They they can't withdraw from the EU.
I mean, it has become I mean Orwellian, the language police, the way they describe things to keep people, they use euphemism to corrupt culture, they use euphemism to hide the dastardly deeds of the government.
How do you like that alliteration?
And that's now what they're doing here.
That they're keeping the document in the bowels of the basement in Congress, and they want us to pass it to find out what's in it.
That is what the Democrats did with Obamacare.
And more troubling to me than that, that is what John Boehner and Mitch McConnell said they would never do.
They said they would never go along for that ride.
They said they would give people time to see.
They would put things along, and yet they've been rushing things through repeatedly without honoring their pledges to shed light on their legislation, to allow people to review it, to see their big spinning plans.
And now they're in cahoots with Barack Obama because they believe this can be a good thing.
If it's so good, let the American people see it before you vote on it.
Let people understand what's in it.
Hillary Clinton may have just disqualified herself from being president in the minds of the left.
She attended a wedding that was a heterosexual wedding.
And she read from the Bible.
Not just from the Bible, but from Romans.
St. Paul's letter to the Romans, she read from it.
You know that that left wing troll site, Salon.com actually attacked Republican candidates the other day for essentially believing in the imaginary sky god Jesus, who I thought Barack Obama was a Christian, too.
They're not attacking him.
They're ridiculing Rubio Cruz and whatnot.
And here comes Hillary Clinton to a wedding where she reads from the Bible.
It was a Christian wedding.
How can this be?
You know, I'm sure there will be some liberals somewhere outraged, particularly that she read from Romans, because, you know, Romans 1.
Not allowed to talk about that.
John in Naples, Florida.
Let's go back to the phones.
John, welcome to the EIB network.
How are you?
Wonderful, Eric.
Thanks for taking my call.
Love this show.
Absolutely.
Thank you so much.
Yes, Eric.
I just want to let you know that I'm and you listeners.
I'm a black American calling from Naples, Florida.
And shame to say, uh former liberal, part of the constitution constitutional violating liberals.
And um now a big time Ted Cruz supporter and conservative as well.
The whole Friday you listen to this?
I just want to say I love Ted Cruz.
You know, I believe a Ted Cruz America is a great America.
And he also reminds me, you know, of one of the greatest presidents in history, in my opinion, Ronald Reagan.
Because, you know, when Ted Cruz take that podium, I believe he will tell America, you know, to tear on these walls that divide us.
A Ted Cruz presidency will tell this president and this liberal administration to tear down these laws of tyranny.
Tet out of the walls of racism promoted by this administration.
Tet out the walls of fascism.
A Ted Cruz America, in my opinion, will be a prosperous America.
I I urge all you've got to do.
Listen, uh John, a Ted Cruz America can't be any worse than this administration for starters, and and that's not saying much.
Of course it'd be prosperous America.
He believes in freedom and he believes in individual control.
You know, the president the other day gave this Pablum speech about how we're an individualist society of rugged individualists, but even rugged individualists, and then he created a bunch of straw men have to take care of everyone and love everyone and celebrate diversity and seeing Kumbaya and whatnot.
Cruz is an optimistic happy warrior, and and whichever Republican is the nominee's got to be an optimistic happy warrior.
Gotta be prepared to fight, gotta be willing and and able to have the street fight with the Democrats, but has to do it with a smile.
And I look, I I know and love Ted dearly, and I know he can he can throw a punch with a smile when he needs to.
He's very good at that.
John, thanks very much for the phone call.
I it you know, that is the thing.
These guys have to be willing to smile.
We we can't have angry candidates.
People then they don't want to vote for the angry candidate.
And the Democrats have become so angry, and Hillary seems so angry, and she has a hard time believably making people comfortable.
That's a key advantage.
Mike in Talladega, Alabama, going to you next.
Welcome.
How are you?
Hello there, Mr. Erickson.
How are you today?
Good.
I hear guy, so am I. Her Majesty bought me one two years ago for my birthday, and I love it.
No, say that again, you broke up.
I said, uh, I hear you're a big green egg guy.
Uh my uh my lovely bride bought me one of those two birthdays.
For for those of you who have no idea what we're talking about, it is it's a giant ceramic smoker gr it's fantastic.
I do pizzas, Boston butts, you name it.
Snerdley would love it.
Oh, they're awesome.
Um as much as you're my hero, I think you got that today.
Uh oh.
Hold my beer and watch this.
You know, you were talking about, you know, kind of making fun of the liberals, can't tell the difference between one kind of boat or another.
Well, yeah, we all know they're they're they don't know any anything of practical value.
That's why they're liberals.
Yes.
The discussion shouldn't have been whether or not Senator Rubio needs this type of boat or that type of boat.
Okay, that's liberal thinking.
Yes.
Conservatives know that nobody has any right to get a vote on what I need.
Well, except for Her Majesty, but nobody else has a right to vote on what we need as individuals.
If it's my money, if I want to take it outside and burn it, that's my uh that's my that was my my point earlier.
You might have missed that.
That that that is I I think the untold story here that I think people should focus on is what the New York Times and Hillary Clinton and David Brock's American Bridge Group are are essentially saying is that they should be the ones to tell Marco Rubio what is the highest and best use of his money.
Which is uh probably paying for a Bruce Jenner to finish the transition.
Yeah, look, Mike, look, thanks very much for the phone call.
And I agree with you on this that I and it's what I said earlier that they want to tell him, you, me, everyone how to spend their money.
You know, there's a story in Slate today.
Dare I give them credit.
How the poor make better financial decisions than the wealthy, because they can't afford to be irrational spenders.
Well, you know what we call irrational spenders in some cases?
Formerly rich people, also known as poor people, uh the bankrupt.
To appreciate the expertise, we should first come to terms with a mistake nearly everyone makes.
Consider this question, which I regularly pose to my MBA students.
Imagine you're buying a $300 tablet, but the salesman says the same tablet is available for fifty dollars less at a store twenty minutes away.
Would you travel for the discount?
Almost certainly.
Now imagine that the tablet costs a thousand dollars.
Would you travel the twenty minutes to save fifty dollars?
Now you might hesitate.
You're not alone.
Poor people, they don't have a bunch of money.
So they have to be tighter with their dollars and whatnot.
You know, this is all part of a trend.
I saw a story, and I don't think it's a coincidence.
On the exact same day the New York Times is running a story attacking Marco Rubio for daring to spend his money the way he wanted to instead of the way the New York Times wanted him to, which would have included buying a subscription to the nearly bankrupt times.
The Washington Post was running a story on how Hillary Clinton is such a tightwad, they even make their campaign staff use their own cell phones to save money.
I guarantee you that was an intentional juxtaposition in the media.
Marco Rubio's a spin thrift and Hillary Clinton's a tightwad, and we need a tightwad for president.
We need a tight fisted old grandma from New York with a with a swimming pool so big Marco Rubio's boat could sail around in it.
And now these stories that the poor make better financial maybe we should all be poor is essentially what they're saying.
We should all be poor.
And then none of us would have debt burdens.
None of us will I mean they need the rich to pay for the social safety net.
They're they're popping everybody else up with it.
I think the definition of mental illness these days is being a liberal.
Jim in Willard, Missouri.
Is it is it is Missouri, correct?
That is correct.
Excellent, Jim, how are you?
You know uh what you said a moment ago about Hillary.
I assure you it was not Romans chapter one.
No, absolutely.
A little farther down in that chapter, and it says that he gave us gives them over to a reprobate mind.
I think, you know, that's liberals.
I mean, it's like they're wired backwards.
What's right is wrong and what's right, you know.
But the reason I called, um, you know, I'm a Reagan uh Republican, and I just do not understand when I hear senators and congressmen, including my own, you know, uh Billy Long, they talk about you know Obama overstepping himself and violating the Constitution of the United States.
Why is why are they not doing anything?
We have the majority.
Why is nothing being done?
Amen and hallelujah.
Because Republicans are scared, Jim.
Republicans are scared the press won't like them.
They're they're scared of getting stink eye at the latest cocktail party held at the museum in Washington or or at Johnny's Half Shell on Capitol Hill or the monocle.
They they don't want to be get f scowled at by members of the press or talked bad about by the Democrats.
Republicans essentially have a fatal character flaw, and that is they want to be liked.
They don't want to do what's right.
This is the most amazing thing, actually, between the Democrats and Republicans.
Compare the Democrats in 2009, 2010.
They were willing to lose it all.
They were willing to go down in flames to pass Obamacare.
They were willing to lose their majority, and they did.
But Republicans are scared to death to lose their majority.
They are scared to death to be not liked.
They are scared to death to fight for any principle.
And at some point, you know, as as as Rush himself has said on more than one occasion, if the Republicans are going to offer up Democrat light, well, you can't beat the real thing.
People are going to go for real Democrats.
Jim, thanks very much for the phone call.
Eric Erikson Info Rush Limbaugh back with a few more calls.
Just as I'm about to talk about the story.
By the way, Sturdily, I will have you know that right now I'm engaged in a series of email conversations with multiple Rush Limbaugh listeners over recipes and cooking tips.
I have a vibrant audience of men who listen to this program.
Yes, there are men, men, most of them.
There are a couple ladies involved.
Folks, this just happened.
I'm not making this up.
This actually just happened.
It is suddenly a big news story.
Just a little while ago.
Caught on an open microphone.
Senator Mark Kirk, uh, the jerk from Illinois said, fellow Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is a I kid you not, he said this.
A bro with no ho.
During a Senate appropriations committee hearing on Thursday, according to CNN.com, the Illinois Senator was heard on the live microphone talking about the Republican presidential candidate.
I've been joking with Lindsay, Kirk was overheard saying he's going to have a rotating first lady.
He's a bro with no houldn't have happened to a nicer fella to get that cause.
Speaking of open mics and cameras and whatnot, have you guys heard about the story?
So I was actually in Washington the other day when this happened.
I got stuck in traffic.
Police cars started heading towards the White House.
Couldn't figure out what was going on.
I was delayed uh from meeting a friend.
And it turns out that during the middle of Tuesday's White House briefing, the Secret Service cleared the briefing room.
Uh uh bomb threat.
And they covered up the cameras.
And see, the cameras are owned by the press organizations and they're live from the press room.
They keep a live feed going.
So before they came in to inspect the room, they started either pushing the cameras down towards the floor, so that's all they could see, or covering them up.
And the press is outraged about it.
I heard about this story, and my thirst first thought was that's what it takes.
That is what it takes.
The only time the press doesn't give Barack Obama a pass is when he does something to them.
Then they get outraged at him.
The the subpoenas to reporters over who they're talking to, the harassment of people who have been giving on background reports to the press, covering up their cameras, not giving enough interviews, not doing enough press conferences, the outrage, the outrage, the outrage.
But when it comes to the IRS, oh no, no, no big deal there.
Everybody does it.
Benghazi, oh no.
Wasn't their fault.
It was a video.
You name it.
On and on and on, they are constantly willing to give this man a pass unless he directly does something to them.
It is just uh it it's petulant.
It's petulant.
Let's go back to the phones.
Tom in Madisonville, Louisiana.
Welcome to the program.
Thank you very much, sir.
I know you don't have very much time.
So I'm not sure.
Well, wait, wait, wait, wait, Tom.
Where is because I I'm from East Feliciana Parish.
Where's Madisonville?
Isn't it Covington and Mandeville?
Oh, okay.
Okay, cool.
Okay.
Uh well, listen, Eric, what I want to talk about here is that the New York Times has done us a tremendous favor.
And the reason why I say that is because uh, you know, I I worked in professional sports all my life.
And I worked over 35 years, and I learned a saying from a long time ago from a great general manager in Jim Jackson who said that if a if a puppy doesn't bite, a dog won't bite.
And here's a perfect situation where he has been basically quiet about this whole thing, and rather than rather than saying, hey, listen, you're talking about uh talking tickets, but you ignore you ignore Benghazi in the gun running.
You you uh ignore the situation where for the past eight years that a husband have been shelling out our country.
And you know, and that is tells me a little bit about that.
I mean, this is something that you wouldn't hear.
You you wouldn't hear from uh uh from a Chet Cruz or Land Paul or Rick Perry, or even the governor of of New Jersey.
You know, you would you wouldn't hear that there.
And it's the same kind of thing that you heard like that in the in the last in in the last debate, where he didn't challenge the Romney didn't challenge.
It's almost like what you heard just two weeks ago from uh from um uh from Jed Bush when Jed Bush uh was was a uh accosted by a 19-year-old plant in Reno Nevada, and all he all he could come up with was to say was we need to uh to agree to disagree.
Well, you know, it it reminds me like uh one of the the winning moments was a couple of months ago when they shoved a camera in Rand Paul's face and asked him uh about uh abortion rights question, and he said, You I'll answer your question when you get Hillary Clinton and Debbie Wasserman Schultz to tell me when they think life begins and and when you should be able to stop because uh a child feels pain, or uh Ted Cruz has done it now recently as well, that he'll answer the question when they hold Hillary accountable on similar issues.
Yes, the Republicans are gonna have to realize they got to fight back and kudos to Marco Rubio's press team for being aggressive in their pushback.
I mean, only uh let's be honest here.
Only a coke head could look at this opposition research coming out of the New York Times and think this is actually something that's gonna hurt Marco Rubio.
It's a nothing but helped him.
The the perverse irony isn't now is that I've been on email threads where people actually think that somehow or another this is Marco Rubio pushing out these stories on himself to boost himself in the press.
No.
I mean, we know where the opposition research is coming from and being funneled to the New York Times.
The fact that they think that these stories are stories that are fatal to him or will hurt him with his base or hurt him with a common man tells you all you need to know about them and how detached they are from reality on drugs or something.
They're they're these people are crazy.
Eric Erickson in for rush.
We'll be right back.
Twelve State Department employees are working full-time to vet thousands of Hillary Clinton's emails, but that's just part of a process that could cost more than a million dollars, according to National Journal.
A million dollars.
Can we not make Hillary Clinton pay?
Had she kept the government email server like she was supposed to, we wouldn't have had this problem.
But she declared herself above the uh I mean, she could sell tickets to her massive swimming pool in the backyard that again Marco Rubio's boat could fit in with room to maneuver.
She's got the money.
Just let her give a speech for 15 minutes.
She and Bill can shake down some foreign government and get a million dollars paid for this.
Why should American taxpayers be forced to pay for what Hillary Clinton did that she should not have done?
Why?
Uh that is a somebody I people need to push on this story.
A million dollars for something that should have never happened in the first place.
Uh she owes the American people that million dollars.
It's her fault.
All right, folks, it's Eric Erickson fill it in for rush.
Again, you can get me on Twitter and Facebook, E.W. Ericsson, email Eric at redstate.com.
It's been a pleasure.
Thanks to the EIB network.
Don't forget to get the limball letter for your father's father's day.
It is a great gift.
Uh been my pleasure fill it in.
▲
Export Selection