All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 11, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:32
September 11, 2015, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program make more sense anything anybody else out there happens to be saying.
And that's because we're involved in a daily relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth on Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Yes, sir, rebob open line Friday.
Talk about whatever is on your mind.
Always look forward to open line Friday.
The telephone numbers 800-282-2882 and the email address lrushbow at EIV net.com.
Alright, hang on here just a second.
I don't have time for this.
Okay, put it in airplane mode and try to resend it.
Okay.
You people, you would have no idea what is going on at the same time I am hosting this program.
None.
It's just incredible.
Okay.
So I saw this story out there, ladies and gentlemen.
Okay, I'm sending it now.
Story I just had for you.
Saudi Arabia offers Germany 200 mosques.
One for every 100 refugees.
It didn't work again.
Okay?
I know I've been trying to tell them for a week it doesn't work.
And they're not listening to a damn thing I am saying.
So I'm deciding to do it here.
All right, now I'll go to the next thing.
I'm gonna say, let's see if it's sent this time.
It didn't send again.
So my phone isn't working, period.
The cell connection's not working.
Problem is not me.
All right.
When I saw this story over here, Saudi Arabia offers Germany 200 mosques.
One for every 100 refugees who arrive last weekend.
It jogged my memory about something.
And I went back and I found a story here.
This is this is from February 18th.
So what?
Seven months ago.
It's the UK Daily Mail.
What are you all chuckling at in there?
It's it's in one piece.
What are you talking?
It's in one piece.
I just threw my phone up against the wall here.
What?
Yes, I of course I have SquareTrade.
But don't worry, it's over there on the floor.
It's in fine shape.
Airplane mode and send it again.
Anyway, here's the headline of the story.
Don't worry, folks, I don't get distracted here.
I do not lose my place.
ISIS threatens to send 500,000 migrants to Europe as a psychological weapon in chilling echo of Qaddafi's prophecy that the Mediterranean will become a sea of chaos.
This is seven months ago.
ISIS, I'm just read the story to you.
I've just got the, you know, the UK Daily Mail has an interesting format.
They they have four, five, six bullet points from the story, which are essentially pull quotes or highlights.
And then they do the body of the story with about a thousand pictures.
So you have to weed out the pictures, get rid of them to get to the text.
But here's how.
Well, here are the bullet points.
Under the headline, ISIS threatens to send 500,000 migrants to Europe as a psychological weapon.
Is it seven months?
It's happening.
Now, are we being led to believe it's because of war-torn strife or thirst, hunger, civil No, it is a plan.
We all understand this.
And that's why all of this is inexplicable when we look at people who ought to be alarmed at this.
They ought to be opposed to it.
They ought to be afraid of embracing it.
It doesn't make any sense.
Well, again, I need to qualify that.
There is a reason all this is happening.
We don't want to know what it really is.
That's that's why whatever answers we're given don't make any sense.
And the real truth here, we'd all know what it is.
It just doesn't make sense to us.
Well, what do you think the real truth is?
What do you what why do you why not?
You're not on the air.
You can tell me.
There's no microphone in there.
Uh uh.
Uh that's mild.
Why are you afraid of anybody hearing that?
Since our Islamic sympathies have overridden our what?
Yeah.
Islamic sympathies have overridden our national security concerns.
Okay, not that it happened to be a lot of people think, why in the world do we have sympathy?
This is what my friend, who lost his son at 9-11, doesn't understand.
He didn't understand when the State Department convened a seminar within the first month.
Why do they hate us?
What have we done to make them so mad at us?
He didn't understand.
None of that matters.
There's nothing we could have done that justified what they did, so why the hell have a seminar about it?
Okay.
Okay.
So why, why?
Sympathy.
Now, no, no.
Not talking about Obama here.
I'm talking about Angela Merkel.
I'm talking about Cameron in the UK.
I'm talking about Europe right now.
Because that's what this ISIS story.
Why sympathy?
You said sympathy.
I think it's fear.
Now there's a difference.
Jerp, I know I led the way in pointing out Germany needs workers, but that's not what they're getting.
They may need them, they may want them, and they may think that's what this is going to end up being.
And here's Saudi Arabia offering to build them 200 mosques.
How many Mercedes are built in mosques?
How many beamers?
How many Volkswagens are assembled in mosques?
Zero.
Okay, so here are the bullet points of the story.
Italian press today, remember this is February 18th this year.
Italian press today published claims that ISIS has threatened to release a huge wave of migrants to cause chaos in Europe if they are attacked, if ISIS is attacked.
Second bullet point, letters from jihadists show plans to hide terrorists among refugees.
Third bullet point, bullet point.
In 2011, Mohammed Qaddafi ominously predicted war would come to Libya.
He was deposed in a violent coup and killed in October of the same year, and Hillary was run around bragging about doing it.
And whatever you might think of Qaddafi, and I knew some women, by the way, back in the 70s that thought he was hot.
I'm not kidding.
I was in Kansas City.
I remember the Thanksgiving dinner at a friend's house.
And Qaddafi was in a newest for some reason.
It would have been, well, but it had to be between 7 and 1980.
What had to be in those three years?
And I remember the women at this party were thinking that Gaddafi was hot.
I was just perplexed.
It wasn't a long curly hair.
It was the scarred acne pineapple look face, is what it was.
It was the it was the no nonsense, not going to take any guff face.
Boy, that's out the window.
You're that kind of guy today, and then they charge you with rape just for walking on campus.
Anyway, in 2011, Islam, oh no, Islamic states executed, the ISIS executed 21 Egyptian Christians on Libyan beach this week.
This is back in February.
And crisis in Libya has led to surge in number of migrants heading for Europe.
The point is that this was all foretold.
ISIS told everybody what they were going to do.
And here it is happening.
New York Times, Obama directs administration to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees.
Let's remember every one of these refugees can then turn around and bring in their relatives.
Kind of like anchor refugees.
President Obama, this is just from yesterday.
President Obama, under increasing pressure to demonstrate that the United States is joining European nations in the effort to resettle Syrian refugees, has told his administration to take in at least 10,000 displaced Syrians over the next year.
At a briefing at La Casablanco on Thursday, the press Secretary, Josh Ernest, said the United States would accept at least 10,000 refugees in the next fiscal year, which begins October 1st.
Earlier, the Secretary of State, Jean-Francois said at a closed door meeting on Capitol Hill, the number, the total number of refugees taken in by the U.S. could rise to more than 100,000 from the current figure of seven.
It's not 10,000.
That's in addition to the numbers they've already requested be brought in.
And Jean-Francois is explaining here that the number could be 100,000, not 10.
State Department officials said that not all of the additional 30,000 would be Syrians, but many would be.
It's not the question.
How many of them are going to be terrorists?
We now know that ISIS has assured us, they have promised they are going to camouflage and hide terrorists among the migrants.
These are not irresponsible questions to ask.
And again, I remind you that any one of these refugees can then turn around and request their families be brought in.
So you can multiply these numbers by three, four, maybe.
But the press secretary, Mr. Ernest, said that members of Congress misunderstood Mr. Carey when he said the number of refugees could rise as high as 100,000 next year.
Sure they misunderstood.
Sure they did.
Mr. Ernest emphasized that the administration has no intention of relaxing the significant and lengthy criminal terrorist background vetting procedures demanded of refugee applicants.
An expensive process that can take 18 to 24, but really?
None of these people are going to be vetted.
That's the whole point.
They're not going to be vetted.
Where are we going to put them while we're vetting them?
Where are we going to put them?
Back down at Club Gidmo?
Where are we going to put 10,000 fifty?
While they're 18 to 24 months to vet them, where are we going to put them?
Sanctuary cities.
Homeland Security Chair.
Here's the next story from Breitbart.
We don't have sufficient intelligence to vet Syrian refugees.
This is from yesterday, too.
So here's Jean-Francois and Josh Ernest.
No, no, no.
It's going to be closer to 100,000, but don't sweat it.
There's an extensive vetting process.
18 to 24 months, and they're all going to be vetted before they're allowed in.
Next story.
Homeland Security Chair, that's Michael McCall, Congressman Texas.
We don't have sufficient intelligence to vet them.
Meaning we don't know who these people are.
They give us a name.
Sahib Abdullah Skyhook.
Okay, so we don't know who this is.
Abdul Sahib Skyhook is not in our database.
There's no way we can vet the guy.
There isn't going to be any vetting anywhere.
And then there's this companion story from Breitbart.
More than 90% of Middle Eastern refugees are on food stamps.
Well, of course.
More than 90% of recent refugees from Middle Eastern nations are on food stamps.
Nearly 70% receive cash assistance, according to government data.
According to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, did you know we had one of those?
Yeah.
It's called the ORR.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement in fiscal year 2013, 91.4% of Middle Eastern refugees accepted in the U.S. between 2008 and 2013 received food stamps.
73% were put on Medicaid or refugee medical assistance.
68.3% were on cash welfare.
I'm kind of surprised only 90% because I mean refugees, if that's really what they are, if that's the official classification, are immediately offered the full panoply of welfare benefits the minute they arrive.
No questions asked.
That's because of our humanitarian nature and tendencies and our policies.
Now the Office of Refugee Resettlement defines refugees.
It'd be helpful to know.
So here it is.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement defines refugees and asylees From the Middle East as being from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Welfaristan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and Yemen.
Any Welfaristan, yes, it's well known.
It's it's uh it's it's right there next to Kyrgyzstan.
You can't you can't miss it on the map.
I just got a name rush.
Are these Syrian refugees going to assimilate?
You know, I I hadn't even thought of that.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, the House of Representatives has uh voted no on the Iranian nuke deal.
Not a single Republican lawmaker voted in support of it.
That means it's been rejected.
The House on Friday rejected a resolution to approve the Iran nuclear deal, the vote underscoring how controversial the accord has been with uh President Obama's own party.
While most Democrats voted to approve it, 25 voted against it, creating a wedge that Republicans hope to use to their advantage in the 2016 elect.
What the hell does it have to?
Oh well, every Republican voted against the resolution with the exception of libertarian representative Thomas Massey, who voted present.
The uh the tally was 162 in favor, 269 opposed.
While the failure of the resolution will not prevent the nuclear deal from taking effect, the vote serves as a rebuke of Obama, who has staked.
You think Obama gives a rat's rear end, a rebuke to Obama, only maybe in a convoluted ego sense, but in terms of the deal.
Obama carabin.
You know what Obama's doing right now?
He's selling he just got away with screwing the House of He just got away with making the Congress irrelevant in the treaty process.
He's celebrating up there, however, he does it, a rebuke.
Obama he just succeeded in ignoring the Constitution yet again, with the agreement and concurrence of what should be the opposition party, at least in the Senate.
Look, uh time to get back to the phones.
We're gonna go to Scott.
Fort Wayne and Diana, glad you waited.
You're up next, sir.
Great to have you with us here.
Yeah, hi.
I want to be the bearer of bad news.
Uh Donald Trump is not a conservative.
He never has been, he's not now, and he never will be.
Okay.
I have a theory on that.
All right.
So if you listen to anything that he's ever said on any political issue up until the very recent past, he's always been to the left.
Now, all of a sudden, he's a conservative Republican.
Well, why is that?
Did he realize that he's been wrong all of this time and that he has a shift in values?
I doubt it.
You gotta understand.
Trump's one of the best businessmen of all time.
And part of being a good businessman is seeing what's going on around you before other people do has been capitalized.
So Trump has seen the anger against Obama, the Democrats, the establishment of uh politician, and what he essentially did was he capitalized on that frustration.
He went out and made himself the embodiment of America's frustration.
Trump is an extremely self-centered, egotistical man.
He wants to be the president of the U.S. for his own pride's sake.
You mean like the guy that's in office now?
Exactly.
Well, it's similar.
If you look at 2008, anybody who had a D in front of their name was going to win because the people were so fed up with Bush and with the Republican Party.
It didn't matter.
Now the winning ticket in 2016 is the Republican side.
So he's coming off as a Republican and saying, oh, I'm a conservative and I've changed my mind on abortion and blah, blah, blah.
No, he's not.
He's just saying what he has to say because he wants to be the president.
And that's all.
He's not a real conservative.
He never has been.
He's not now, and he never will be.
So you think he's hoodwinking and fooling a lot of people then?
Absolutely.
There's no doubt about it.
And the other thing I don't like about him is that he doesn't have any humility.
He doesn't have an ability to admit when he's wrong and apologize for it.
Like with Meghan Kelly or Carly Fiorina, the way he insults them.
But the thing is, see, I mean he doesn't think that he was wrong.
Tell you what I'm going to do.
I'm going to do one better than turning airplane mode on and off.
I'm going to power reboot the whole phone.
And I'm going to see if that enables.
What's happening is the phone will not send an F SMS message to an authorization center for the NFL at Mont Verizon.
That's what's not happening.
Just to clue you people in.
I have to go through this every year.
You would think once it's authorized, it'd be authorized, but some reason.
And I'm not running beta software on this phone.
So they can't be laid off on that either.
Okay, so Trump has been brought up finally today.
I didn't do it.
It took us an hour and a half.
We finally brought Trump up.
So I have a Trump stack here.
And I'm going to do this phone business while I'm doing this Trump stuff.
I multitask here.
You people would have no idea.
Even those of you watching on the Ditto Camp have no idea what actually goes on here during your program.
You would not believe it.
I mean, I don't even have any guests to lay off time on purpose.
Jim Garrity, who is uh one of our favorites at National Review Online.
He has a has his own blog there.
And I think I'm not sure it used to be called a campaign stop.
I'm not sure if it's the same name or no name, or if he just uh operates with his with his byline there.
Uh but he's got a piece today.
The words Trump doesn't use.
Okay, power reboot of the phone did not resolve the issue.
Just I'm not talking to you.
I'm I'm talking to the tech people who are trying to get this fixed.
That's what I mean by multitasking.
Trump, the words Trump doesn't use.
Now, Mr. Garedy has written frequently parroting our last caller.
Donald Trump is a conservat is not a conservative, and this troubles him greatly.
And he has been attempting to warn Trump fans who read National Review that they need to be very careful here.
Because Trump isn't a conservative, and conservatives supporting Trump run the risk of seeing their principles diluted, watered down, destroyed, what have you.
There are many in the literary field, conservatism, who are very, very alarmed at the Trump candidacy.
Very, very worried that Trump is fooling a lot of good people.
That we need on the Republican side that he's using them and taking advantage of them.
And Jim Garrity is one of those.
There are many.
And his latest effort is the words Trump doesn't use.
And here's how the piece begins.
Did you ever think you would see the day when the Republican front runner rarely uttered the words freedom and liberty?
Perhaps some Republicans can be accused of loving liberty and freedom too much, or at least using the words too much as rhetorical crutches.
But Donald Trump is not one of them.
The current Republican presidential frontrunner rarely uses the words freedom or liberty in his remarks at all.
Trump did not use the words freedom or liberty in his announcement speech.
He did not use the words in his Nashville speech on August 29th.
Nor in his Nashville rally on August 21st.
Nor his appearance at the Iowa State Fair on August 15th, or his rally and news conference in New Hampshire on August 14th, or his news conference in Birch Run, Michigan, or his press conference in Laredo, Texas on July 23rd.
He did not use the words liberty or freedom while discussing his signing of the Republican National Committee Pledge last Thursday, or in his contentious interview with Hugh Hewitt the same day.
Trump did not use the term free market once during his Meet the Press interview with F. Chuck Todd in a defense of his qualified support for affirmative action.
Well, you know you have to also go free market.
You have to go capability, you have to do a lot of things, but I'm fine with affirmative action.
The word liberty didn't even come up.
This is an unusual vocabulary for a Republican frontrunner.
It wasn't that long ago that grassroots conservatives showed up at Tea Party rallies with signs, reading, Liberty, all the stimulus we need.
The Tea Party named itself after an event organized by the Sons of Liberty, which, by the way, readers of the Rush Revere, time travel adventures with exceptional American series also.
The GOP platform declares the party was born in opposition to the denial of liberty.
Now, some of Trump's Republican presidential rivals use words like freedom and liberty more frequently than comments.
When John Harwood of CNBC asked Scott Walker about his health care plan, Walker used the word freedom six times in a 179-word answer.
In his campaign announcement speech, Ted Cruz used the word freedom twice.
And not counting references to Liberty University, which hosted the event, he used the word liberty eleven times.
Trump's lexicon is another indicator of the dramatic shift that he would represent in moving the Republican Party from a libertarian-leaning one to a populist one.
That populism thing scares them, folks, just so you know.
The populism thing really, really bugs him.
I mean, in the uh conservative corridors with power the whole.
I remember once, what year was this?
It might have been.
Well, it was one of the years Pant Buchanan ran.
He ran in 1992.
Did he run again later, Snertley?
Did he run it?
Did he put himself in the primaries at some point?
Whatever it was, might have been 92.
I referred to Buchanan as a populist as opposed to a conservative, and all hell broke loose when I did that.
And it was kind of just a throwaway comment for me.
But the way the conservative literati wrote about it, I had essentially disqualified Buchanan by calling him a populist.
It's that important a word to them.
Because, you know, I had the gravitas.
If, you know, I'm Mr. Conservative.
I had missed the big and the vast right-wing conspiracy, according to Hillary.
So when I sit here and pontificate, call Buchanan back then in the early 90s a populist.
Well, a conservative intelligent, well, that's it for Buchanan.
That's a death knell.
He called you a populist.
And Buchanan wasn't particularly happy about it, but he didn't make a big deal of it.
But they're calling Trump a populist all over the place as a way of trying to disqualify him.
As a way of diminishing him and separating him from conservatism.
Anyway, Mr. Gardy's piece goes on.
The final paragraph is this.
The man whose slogan is Make America Great Again, doesn't seem particularly worried about a Leviathan state infringing upon its citizens' liberties.
He sees a disordered society whose people are threatened by violent criminals coming across the border, undermined by poor negotiation of foreign trade and security agreements, and asked by free riding allies to shoulder way too much of the burden in a dangerous world.
That philosophy is dramatically different from the liberty-focused message Republicans have become accustomed to since the rise of the Tea Party in 2009.
At least for now it has made Trump the front runner by a wide margin.
So what's your reaction to that, folks?
I know that a lot of Trump supporters in the audience.
Does it bother you?
Did you even notice that Trump is not using the words freedom or liberty?
Did you even now that if you didn't notice it, and now that's been brought to your attention, is it causing you to rethink?
Are you saying, you know, wait a minute, wait a minute, that may be right.
That may be.
Or are you saying, not big deal.
Who cares?
The guy's talking about freedom and liberty aren't winning anything anyway.
The guy's talking about freedom and liberty, all they're doing is talking about it while agreeing with the oppressors of our time.
So what we're tired of lip service.
Is that your reaction to it?
That's that is, that's your reaction to it.
Somehow I don't associate the Tea Party with the Republican Party.
That's the one thing of Mr. Garrety here, I don't know if let me read this again.
That philosophy is dramatically different from the liberty-focused message Republicans have become accustomed to since the rise of the Tea Party.
I didn't think that the Republican Party liked the rise of the Tea Party.
I thought they hated the Tea Party or were embarrassed by the Tea Party, or the Tea Party was going to keep them from getting their chairmanships or whatever.
I just didn't think they liked the Tea Party.
Okay, so what is this liberty-focused message Republicans have become accustomed to since they rise.
Oh, maybe he's not saying he saw that Republican voters have become accustomed to hearing liberty from the Tea Party.
He's not talking about McConnell and Baehner using the word liberty.
Okay, I'm he's not talking about elected Republicans.
He's talking about Republican voters have heard Tea Party people use liberty and freedom.
Okay.
Now, contrary to popular opinion and ill or uninformed analysis, I have not gone out of my way to pump up Trump.
I've not gone out of my way not to.
I'm sitting back observing, commenting as I see.
Many people are assuming by things I say and don't say, that I am doing or not doing things.
It's the most amazing thing to me.
When in fact, it's kind of like the Perot, I've never, you know, I mentioned this a couple times.
I took phone calls during the Perot phenomenon.
And I I never heard, I I I couldn't count the number of policies Perot had supposedly endorsed and was in favor of based on what his supporters were telling me.
He hadn't said a word about 90% of what the people supporting him thought he was going to do.
They just assumed.
So they were making Pearl out to be whatever he they wanted him to be.
However, I must say, as the Mr. Big of the Vest Wing Conspiracy.
the headline, the words Trump doesn't use, in my humble, and I do have humility, Opinion misses the point about Trump.
I will admit Trump doesn't talk about liberty, but he sure as hell practices it, doesn't he?
I mean, doesn't seem to be any limits or boundaries out there.
He's not constrained by political correctness.
He has escaped the surly bonds of that.
That's liberty and freedom.
He's not constrained by onerous local state, federal laws.
He's made billions of dollars despite them.
Made millions of dollars with a reality TV show, which is the belly of the pop culture beast.
I mean he's swimming around in the bowels of it in there, folks, by doing a reality TV show.
I mean, that's like living with Jerry Springer.
He doesn't avoid the media.
He goes wherever they throw a camera and microphone in front of his face.
Rolling stone.
He'll go anywhere.
He engages when some would suggest that he head for the bunker.
I think to his supporters, and I'm not trying to be contentious here.
I think that his supporters, Trump embodies, I mean, I think a lot of people wish they had the courage and the guts and the whatever to be as free as Trump is.
Free to speak his mind, free to do what he thinks.
Not this is before people start judging it.
Newt Gingrich has weighed in on that, by the way.
He thinks he thinks Trump needs to dial it back here, but for reasons that you may not have thought of.
Trump's a doer.
He's not a talker, although he's good at it, but he doesn't gotten anywhere by speaking and doing speeches and talking and compromise and diplomacy.
Anyway, I got to take a break.
I just saw the clock way long.
Sit tight, my friends.
We'll be right back.
Don't go away.
Back to the phones we go to Orlando.
This is uh Tom.
Great to have you, sir, on Open Line Friday.
Hi.
Hey, thank you, Josh.
Um, my call is just about refugee versus immigrants.
I know that we're talking about 1,000 or 10,000 and the negotiation over that number because of the cost of the system.
But we never talk about our immigrant and the cost of the system, but uh, you know, whatever number you want to pick 10 million versus 10,000.
Uh I would I wouldn't.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
You're you're looking at this the entire wrong way.
You're exactly right.
You are you you are ignoring the contributions they make.
Tom, they they are acts of love.
They are they are not net costs, they are net benefits.
That's how we are to look at this.
So why limit the uh why limit the refugees to ten thousand?
That Obama just said, why not bring them all over?
Uh what we're not limiting them at ten thousand.
Is it as we as we learned it it's gonna be between seventy and a hundred thousand plus anchor families?
Right.
These are anchor refugees, because they can bring in two or three family members.
Right, and I guess that was my last point with the uh I think uh Bush has brought it up recently.
I was like, why don't we just take voting rights off the table if that's the big hold-up and then see what's best for America, but that's a generation, one generation.
I tried that one.
Look, I tried that once.
Tom, you you may be new to the program, or you may have missed that day.
In any case, it's good because you give me a chance to repeat this.
As you know, I am one of the leading conservative figures in America, and I'm considered one of the primary obstacles to the nation.
I mean, you people don't know the half of it.
I haven't shared with you because I respect people's requests of off the record and privacy, but I have been courted on this issue since 2006.
Hell, even longer ago than that.
I've had emissaries from White Houses come to me to try to explain this comprehensive immigration reform.
I have been invited to dinners with powerful media and congressional figures.
Uh I've had them come here.
Well, I have they have asked to come here.
Uh so I it's it's not been uh intense pressure, it hasn't been arm twisting, it has been uh a legitimate attempt to have me to get me to see their point of view on it on comprehensive immigration reform.
It goes on and on and on.
And I, of course, have uh remained my principled opposition, because I don't think that what we're talking about is immigration or reform.
I think we're dealing with an invasion here.
And I know that all it is ultimately from the Democrat side is a voter registration drive, and from the Republican side, it's it's donors who want cheap labor.
So anyway, the point is that I am known as a rock solid opponent.
But one day, I offered on this program behind this golden EIB microphone.
I offered to do a 180.
I offered to support comprehensive immigration reform, which many think would guarantee its passage.
It would actually be the end of my radio show if I did that, but I offered to support it if there was a promise that the new arrivals could not become citizens for 20 years and could not vote for 25.
And I was not taken up on my offer.
Nobody was interested in my offer.
Fastest three hours in media hosted by me, Rush Limboy, here on the cutting edge.
▲
Export Selection