All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 30, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:28
November 30, 2015, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 Podcast.
I know bad news Rush isn't here, but good news we've got everybody else here.
What do we call this?
Northern Command, Eastern Command, where am I?
Northern Command.
I'm at the uh EIB Northern Command in New York, postnerdia is here.
The broadcast engineer Mamon is here.
I've got them all here.
Everybody but Russia's here.
So let's get going with today's program.
For those of you who don't remember me, it's been a little while.
It's been a little while.
I'm the guy from Wisconsin, as you just heard in the wonderful introduction.
Cynic though that I am, and cynic though that most of us are, after all that we've had to put up with and go through, you've got to admit that this conference in Paris is impressive.
This is remarkable.
Spine tingling.
The goosebumps.
Only a few short weeks after Paris was attacked.
Brutally, as the planetary scourge of Islamist terrorism came home and saw innocent people slaughtered.
You have the leaders of the entire world there in Paris in a show of unity.
We're going to do something about it.
Everybody's there.
Not only do you have the French President Holland there, Obama's there, Putin's there.
The Chinese leadership is there, the leadership of the EU.
The whole world is there in Paris to deal with No, I guess they're not there to deal with terrorism.
They're there to deal with a real problem.
Climate change.
Doesn't this really say it all?
You have an existential threat to the planet that is creating violence everywhere.
Not 50 years from now, not a hundred years from now, right now.
Not some vague prediction about, oh, maybe the water's gonna rise too much in Florida right now.
You have Muslim terrorists killing people.
You have them attempting to take over an entire country, Syria.
You have them operating with impunity in Libya.
You have terror cells all over the world.
You have hateful, awful rhetoric.
You have jihad advocates of jihad saying that the world will be brought down because that's what their God wants.
But does that get this kind of a response?
No, no, no, no, no.
The fact that they're doing it in Paris makes it just so perfect.
It tells you everything.
It isn't just liberalism, it's institutionalism.
Let's not deal with a problem that's serious, let's deal with a problem that we're going to pretty much invent just so that we can claim that we're doing something.
Obama himself.
He went on so long they were br there were alarm clocks going off.
There were buzzers being sounded.
It was like the Republican debate.
They literally had beeps to stop anybody from talking too long because he had all these introductory speeches by the leaders of the world.
Obama goes past his time.
That they're sending off these beeps to try to get him to sit down and shut up, but he wasn't going to stop because the president of the United States on this was engaged.
This trips his trigger.
You're never going to have to cut him off because he's going on too long about Islamic terrorism.
He can't say the words.
He's disinterested.
When there's a terrorist attack, he'll come out and give the 45 seconds of lip service and then move on.
His facial expressions tell you everything you need to know about his reaction to terrorism.
He doesn't want to be bothered with it.
He doesn't want it's an annoyance to him that he even has to comment.
But this, let me give you some quotes.
I've come here personally as the leader of the world's largest economy and the second largest emitter.
To say that the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.
He will never say that about terrorism.
Instead, he says, well, Islamic State will be defeated.
It's the JV squad.
This is a small and marginal group.
Everything he can to poo-poo it.
Climate change, however, just the opposite.
Remember old Lou Holtz when he was at Notre Dame, whoever they'd play in the following role, the greatest team he'd go on, but how about how strong and how tough it is that team is.
That's what Obama does about climate change.
Build this thing up.
It's an enormous, terrible problem.
In a speech interrupted by repeated beeps that he had exceeded his time limit, Obama said that the climate conference represented an important turning point in world history.
World history they're making right now in Paris.
Because the leaders attending the meeting now recognize the urgency of the problem.
No nation, large or small, wealthy or poor, is immune, he said.
You could of course say the exact same thing about terrorism, except he didn't.
And he has it.
He's simply ceded that responsibility to somebody else.
So in the meantime, Putin, who couldn't give three rips about climate change, he's out there now saying that he's going to be the guy that goes after ISIS.
He's going to jump into the void created by the United States in action.
So now, why are they so focused on climate change?
And why are they so unfocused on a problem like terrorism?
There's a couple of reasons for it, in my opinion.
First of all, you need to have a problem in order to do what you want to do all along.
What they want to do, of course, is attack capitalism.
They want to attack manufacturing.
They want to attack the profit-oriented global economy.
So in order to do that, you have to have some reason to do it.
You can't just go out there and confiscate wealth and shut down factories and tell everybody that they can't make things.
You gotta have a reason.
There's got to be a need to do it.
So whether or not the climate is changing or not, or whether or not man is responsible or not, that is almost irrelevant to them.
They need a problem in order to do what they intended to do all along and what they've wanted to do all along.
Terrorism doesn't trip the trigger of the president.
The media is not all that interested in it.
Because that means you have to actually, you know, create regular real world bad guys.
They've got to be there.
And this notion of saying that there are a lot of Muslims in the world who bought into this jihad business.
That's unpleasant.
But to go out and say that the capitalists of the world, they're destroying the planet, that's something they engage in.
That's the fight that they want.
Now, as for the climate I, by the way, told myself I would how long did I say I was going to spend on the climate change thing?
Two minutes.
I told Bullsnerly that I can't do anything in two minutes.
It's just yeah, the buzzer, the same buzzer that went off for Obama's gonna go off here.
I can't help myself on it, really.
On climate change.
It's a topic I really don't like doing on my local show.
I don't like doing it here because my side keeps saying the same old thing, and then they make fun of us.
You're a bunch of deniers, you're a bunch of people that are standing in the way, you don't care about the planet.
In the meantime, they refuse to wake up to the reality.
That the jihadists want to kill all of us.
Anyway, I'm going to address the issue.
Climate change.
No one knows whether climate change is going on or not because we lack perspective.
The planet has been around for a long, long, long time.
And for almost none of that time do we know what the climate was.
We can guess based on what the mountains look like and the trees look like and the landscape looks like, but we don't really know.
We were told that there were glaciers that once covered the whole northern part of our world.
We were told that at one point it was really, really, really cold.
But we don't really know.
We're working off of about 130 years of temperature data.
We don't have any idea what the temperature in the water was until about 50 or 60 years ago.
So nobody really knows if there is actual climate change going on, or if this is just another blip in the radar, something after all, caused the glaciers to recede.
I guess that was climate change.
We don't know if it's going on or not, and we certainly don't know that if it is going on, whether or not man has anything to do with it.
What we do know though is this.
They say we don't know if there's climate change, and we don't know if man is doing anything to change the climate.
People are just guessing, they're hypothesizing, they're throwing out theories because again, they want to force us to do things that they've wanted us to do all along, which is to scale back the global economy.
While we don't know whether or not the climate is changing, we do know some things.
We know that every prediction they have made since this issue first was brought about has been proven wrong.
Right now, the Antarctic ice sheet is expanding.
They say that the one on the Arctic is contracting.
Well, the one in the Antarctic, you know, the old South Pole, it's expanding.
They didn't predict that that was going to happen.
They told us, remember after Katrina, which of course was Bush's fault because he wouldn't engage in climate change.
After Katrina, they told us that we were going to be entering into a period of unusually severe hurricane activity.
Hurricane activity's almost dormant.
We've just gone through another hurricane season, it's ending about now.
Almost nothing.
They didn't predict that.
They said it was going to be the opposite.
They can't even predict what's going to happen with temperature and climate, two, three, five years right in front of them.
Yet they're telling us that if we don't reduce carbon emissions, and of all the things to focus on, of all of the chemical elements that carbon's the one they pick.
If we don't reduce carbon emissions, we're going to continue to screw up the climate of the planet, and this is going to cause terrible, terrible catastrophe.
They don't even know whether or not, if there is climate change, it will be good or bad.
How do they know it's going to be bad?
Let's suppose the climate's changing.
Let's suppose we have warbing.
How is how do they know for certain that that is going to be bad any more than anyone would have known had there been men around that the receding of the glaciers was going to be a good thing?
This is just an excuse for them to do what they've wanted to do all along.
Your time is up.
I could ignore that like Obama.
I was at the uh I was at the Republican debate in Milwaukee.
See, I'm from Milwaukee and they had a Republican debate there, so I felt it was some sort of duty for me to be there.
They had those buzzers going off.
I mean, they all just ignored them.
That went terrified.
Play that again.
Your time is up.
Does that mean I can go home?
Is Russia on vacation?
Is Russia on vacation or can we just drag him in and have him re you would never have played that for him.
Yeah, you would never the guest host is on here.
I'm gonna hear that now the whole program.
I got like 15 topics that I want to do.
No, no, no, that one's no good.
That was like that actually is something that I like to have in actual life.
I mean, imagine all the times that you just like to shut someone else up.
Anyway, my name is Mark Belling and I'm in for Rush Lib.
Mark Belling and for Rush.
I'm not quite done with this yet.
If 250,000 people die in some horrible, awful thing here in the United States in the next three years, what will it likelier be?
An act of terrorism or climate change.
What?
We're all going to have horrible cases of heat stroke or sunburn.
I mean, it is a natural human tendency to put off the things that we don't want to deal with, to address the things that we would rather deal with.
This is like the guy who's got a bad back and body ridden with cancer, going in for surgery to reduce the size of his nose, going in for a nose job or something.
Do what you feel like doing, do what you're happy doing, because you don't want to address the things that it's the same problem that we have in our government with not addressing the entitlement problem or anything else.
The things that are difficult we don't want to do, and that's why we come and we invent things like climate change.
Anyway, let's go to the let's go to the other thing that we conservatives have to talk about today, and that is the attack on the Planned Parenthood Clinic.
Everyone knows what this was.
This was a deranged, dangerous nut who decided to go and kill a few people.
That's what it was.
This is now happening sadly in America every several weeks.
Some deranged, dangerous person goes into a public place and decides to kill people.
I guess it's the new normal.
We have a lot of people like this.
After it happens, usually those of us who believe in the second amendment have to defend private gun ownership because it's used as an excuse to say that we ought to confiscate everybody's gun and crack down on this and crack down on that.
But in this instance, they've got an even higher priority.
Planned Parenthood's defenders are saying that this attack is a result of, and you'll hear these two words every time they bring up the topic now.
The incendiary rhetoric, incendiary rhetoric of the pro-lifers and the Republican Party.
Because some of us have criticized Planned Parenthood after seeing videos that showed that in violation of the law, they're out there trafficking in the body parts of aborted fetuses.
And because they've been criticized for that, somehow that means that anyone who has been critical of them is responsible for what this guy out in Colorado did.
He apparently was a loner who lived in North Carolina, moved out to Colorado, has apparently had issues for some time, but this is our fault.
If you take a stand now against Planned Parenthood, the blood from this attack is on your hands.
It's the same as what's going on in American college campuses.
They're just trying to shut us up.
Use whatever they can to say that those people who are on the right can't talk.
On college campuses, it's racist or it's hate speech.
You can't say this, you can't say that.
We have to establish safe zones.
Now, evidently, if you're a pro-lifer, you can't defend unborn children because somebody might go and do something terrible somewhere.
What the media and the left constantly do is rather than try to engage in actual argument and discussion on the issues, they just try to tell us that we can't talk.
We're a bunch of haters, we're a bunch of homophobes, we're a bunch of bigots.
In this case, we are fueling the hate and rage of people like whatever this guy was motivated by out in Colorado.
Who knows if he was a pro-lifer or not?
Who knows if he had a political motivation?
He might have just been a dangerous nut.
Regardless of that, rather than actually discuss the propriety of what Planned Parenthood was doing, they'll wait for something like this and say we can't talk about it anymore.
So what?
Is this how it works now?
One terrible person goes out and does something that no one is defending.
And this means that the rest of us who are trying to discuss the abortion issue, government funding of Planned Parenthood, what Planned Parenthood is doing in fetal part trafficking, we just have to cease our commentary.
This never works the other way.
The left is never told that they have to back down on their comments when someone does something bad.
The anti-police rhetoric that's been hurled around, the people that are critical of what happened in Baltimore with Freddie Gray.
They don't seem to have to take responsibility for the fact that Baltimore was bur virtually burned to the ground.
Where are the calls for them to tone down their rhetoric?
Are we demanding that any of the defenders of the Palestinians shut up because some people interpret those calls as a call for jihad?
We don't do that.
We simply're simply laying around waiting for something bad to happen and then using it as an excuse to tell Rush Limbaugh to shut up, tell the Republican senators to shut up, to tell me to shut up, to tell you to shut up.
If any single factor is responsible For the rise of Donald Trump and his popularity, it's that a lot of people appreciate the fact that he's the one guy that won't shut up and won't take things back.
Whatever you think about Trump.
He's earned the respect of a lot of people who look at him as somebody who's willing to say what he thinks and not back down.
They're always telling us to stuff it.
They've always got an excuse for us not to talk.
It's happening on the college campuses.
It's happening with Planned Parenthood on global warming or climate change.
They call us deniers.
The whole goal is to tell us to shut up because they can't win an argument with us.
Mark Bellingham for Rush.
Telephone number on the Rush program is the same one as in Russia's here, 1-800-28282.
And I'm going to get to the phones just a moment here.
Do want to remind you about Russia 24 7.
If you missed any portion of Russia's award-winning show this past week, you can catch up by joining the member side of the website, Rush 24-7.
That's at Rush Limboff.com.
I want to tell a story.
I don't come here much.
I want to tell my stories.
Got a story I want to tell.
It is about my alma mater, Harvard.
All right.
It is about my alma mater, the University of Wisconsin lacrosse.
The Harvard, the Harvard of the Midwest.
It's not even the University of Wisconsin, it's the University of Wisconsin Lacrosse.
It's always kind of humiliating when you've gone to a college that they have to put a dash in it.
University of Wisconsin LaCrosse, of which I am a rather proud alumnus.
Anyway, a few weeks ago, they've got a work site there.
They're building a new student union or a new student center or something.
On a work site, there was a truck parked.
Private contractor's truck on the work site.
In the window was a Confederate flag.
Your reaction probably is, so what?
But we are in the environment now of campus safe zones cracking down on hate speech.
This has created a frenzy on that campus.
First of all, somebody told the dean of students, her name is Paula Knutson about it.
She went over and she took a look herself and she saw they were correct.
Whores, there's a Confederate flag in the windshield of this truck on the work site.
It's not a university truck.
It's just a contractor's truck, and he's got a Confederate flag on it.
She gets a hold of the director of facilities.
And they did something.
The truck was either moved or the flag was taken down, but it was gone.
This was a Friday.
It's a Friday in early November.
I think it was the 13th, might have been the 6th.
Anyway.
A campus-wide email was sent out the following Monday from this dean of students, Paula Knutson, in which she explained what happened and apologized profusely.
She said that this truck was brought onto the campus without our knowledge, and we certainly didn't know that anybody was going to have a Confederate flag in the wind in the wit in the window, but the moment that we did, we sprang into action.
First of all, do you understand what it takes to get any college bureaucracy to spring into anything that would even approach action?
I mean, this is like they were an animal to be a sloth.
This though got them moving.
She then apologized for the fear and angst.
Those are quotes.
That's a quote, rather.
Fear and angst.
The legitimate fear and angst.
She put the word legitimate in there.
Apologized for the legitimate fear and angst that this Confederate flag caused.
It was a flag in the window of a truck.
Now she's either hyping this to the levels of absurdity, or she's telling the truth.
And there actually were college students.
18, 19, 20, 21-year-old, young men and women who walked by this truck, saw the Confederate flag, and were terrified.
Not only did they had fear, they had angst.
And she apologized for that.
And she then went on to apologize for the fact that they were still feeling this fear and angst days later.
The truck is gone.
The flag is gone.
But days later they are still feeling this fear and angst.
It kind of makes you wonder what would have happened had they seen the same flag in the same truck parked two blocks away off campus where they still don't have the ability to make the person take.
I think you still legally can put the Confederate flag in the window of your car, but maybe you can't anymore.
Anyway.
She apologized then for the fact that they were still feeling this fear and angst.
So you've got one of two things going on here.
We either have a generation of absolute wussies on American college campuses, whether it be Missouri or Yale, the University of Wisconsin, LaCrosse, any of the other places where we are enforcing all sorts of codes and getting people fired because they are allowing students to see things that might offend them.
Or whether or not this is just another excuse to do, we were talking about in the last segment, shutting people up.
Why we'll make sure that you don't put a Confederate flag here.
We'll make sure that you don't say anything that is inappropriate.
We'll just demon all hate speech and we'll use as our rationale.
Once again, you have to have a problem in order to come up with a solution that you want.
The solution they want is to shut conservatives up.
So the problem here is that these symbols and these this speech and comments are making students feel unsafe.
Are they really feeling unsafe?
If so, maybe that's the problem.
Here's what college is supposed to be and was pretty much everywhere until a few years ago.
College is where you went to become scared, to be challenged, to have a bunch of ideas that you had never heard before.
College is supposed to be the place that we assault the brain with theories and ideas and opinions coming from all directions.
It's how you turn into a mature thinking adult human being.
Back in my day, 850 years ago, there were debates about the Cold War.
There were debates about America's role in society.
There were debates about just about everything, and every possible opinion.
There was nothing too loony, nothing too fruitcake that it couldn't be expressed.
In fact, we encouraged it.
We told every nut that was out there to speak out that this is what creates diversity.
Isn't it interesting that it is now in the name of diversity that they're shutting everybody up?
The young person, whether it be a young African American, a young Latino, or white person who supposedly is feeling unsafe because someone is saying things.
There should be almost nothing that anyone could say that would make you afraid.
Instead, they use these speech codes, they use the labels of hate speech to counter this actual fear that is out there.
It kind of makes you wonder to try to bring this whole thing full circle.
Let's imagine that at the University of Wisconsin LaCross, it wasn't a Confederate flag that was in the window of the truck.
What if it was a flag for Islamic state?
Do they have a flag?
Does ISIS have a flag?
They do.
Yeah, it's that one.
Let's suppose it was that.
Would they have told the guy he had to move that?
Or would that have been intolerant of Muslims?
In other words, if there was a flag for an actual now, and they they claim they're a nation.
A flag for an actual nation that right now is killing people.
Something for which somebody might actually be afraid.
There are a bunch of guys from ISIS over there.
I can see somebody actually being afraid of that given the fact that we know that people in ISIS vow to kill us.
Would they have done that?
Instead, they show no fear, evidently, toward ISIS.
Obama tells us we shouldn't be worried about them, that the JVs were going to defeat them.
But we are scared to death of a flag from a country that stopped existing 150 years ago.
The Confederacy lost its war in 1865.
And without regard to whether or not you think that the Confederate flag is a symbol of hate, or if it's just something that a bunch of people put out there because they believe in Southern pride or whatever, the reality is that the Confederate flag is a flag of a nation that stopped existing when they lost the Civil War in 1865.
It's all part of the same strategy.
Shut up conservatives.
And that's the thing that's happening on our college campuses.
There are a lot of people who say, well, that's just the colleges.
Don't worry about it.
They're really doing it everywhere, but it's really scary they're doing it at college because it's where almost all of us came of age.
I think of my own experience.
I mean, I was literally just a kid.
You go to college and you meet all these people who have a lot of ideas.
You're moving into adulthood.
We argued about everything.
This was in the aftermath of Vietnam, where we praised the fact that people rose up and spoke out.
Argued about everything, talked about everything, confronted everything.
At that time, free speech was advocated by the Academy, by the establishment because it meant that radical professors could get out there and teach their radical ideas.
Believe it or not, there was a time in which the majority of economics professors were not Marxists.
We encouraged free speech to give them their opportunity to talk.
And that's how people learned how to think.
You develop an argument, you come up with a way of defending it, you know, learn how to express yourself.
Instead, right now, everybody's being told to zip it.
It happens here.
Look at the number of times that they've looked for some reason to tell Rush that he can't talk.
Why, that's hate speech.
That's awful.
I can't believe you'd advertise there.
I can't believe a radio station would carry that.
I can't believe that you would listen to that.
In other words, ostracize the speaker because you don't like the idea, to what's happening on college campuses, to almost everywhere else.
This notion that we need to protect people from ideas because they are so doggone hateful.
1-800-282-2882 is the telephone number.
My name is Mark Belling.
I'm in for Rush.
I'm Mark Belling on EIB.
Let's go to the phones, Los Angeles.
John, you're on EIB with Mark Belling.
Go ahead, John.
Yes.
Can you hear me?
I can.
Okay, I can hardly hear you, but I will make my point.
I I'm very concerned about your characterization of climate change when when you ask a question, uh, which is more probable that thousands and thousands of people will be killed in terrorist attacks, or that thousands and thousands of people will die as a result of climate change over the next few years.
I'm disturbed because there's nobody in the world that I know of that's predicting a climate change catastrophe in the next few years.
We're talking long term over the next 50 to 100 years.
It's possible that uh climate change could result in uh endangering the lives of uh millions, if not all of mankind.
And you're brushing it off as just a silly thing compared to terrorism is what I was saying.
That is what I was doing.
Well, it's very, very convenient to say that there aren't going to be any ill effects for 50 or 100 years because it means Yeah, I don't know.
We have a team.
It means that you can't be proven wrong for 50 or 100 years.
The point that I was trying to make is that we are facing a crisis now.
It is existential.
We live in a nuclear age, whatever our concern about climate change and anything horrible that could come of it, even though the planet has seemed to survive every other change that's occurred in the climate so far.
We do know that a nuclear holocaust would wipe out millions and millions of people.
We also know that the effects of radiation can last.
You talk about fifty and one hundred years well beyond that.
We live in the nucle in a nuclear age, and we have an ideology out there that has gotten to be rather pervasive among some in the Muslim community.
It is called jihad.
It is a crisis.
And the same people that are telling us that we have to stop human life from moving forward because of the fear of something bad happening in 50 or 100 years from climate change are the ones that are poo-pooing the threat of terrorism from Muslims.
Perhaps there is some sort of significant threat from climate change.
My point is that none of these people that are pushing climate change know if there's a threat or not because every prediction that they've offered so far has been wrong.
You could make the comments that they're making.
Now you could have made them 50 years ago or 100 years ago, because the climate has always been changing.
Anyway, that's my response to your point.
He's gone.
Let's yeah.
I I will note that the guest host comes in, and the very very first caller they put on is a disagreeer.
Just note that.
You're going to play that little buzzer for me to shut off again?
Yeah, okay.
Let's go to St. Louis, Missouri, and Stuart.
Stuart, you're on the Russian bar program with Mark Belling.
Yes, you're on, Stuart.
Yes.
Mark?
Yes.
Thanks for taking the call.
Sure.
I'm uh thinking that the uh comment you made earlier about stopping people from thinking badly of one thing or another that's happening.
Is the way bullies behave?
They come in and threaten you, and if you don't like it, they hurt you.
That's the way Alcohol worked.
That's the way anybody who wants to take over something works.
Well, they they have power right now on college campuses.
They have power in the media, and they're using it to stifle opinion and to shut people up.
You use the term bullying, and I think that that's a good one.
Bullying is an issue that's in vogue right now.
We're talking about it with regard to kids.
We in fact are using it for as the rationale for these speech codes that exist on campus, that people are being bullied by all the racists that are around them, that gay people are being bullied by the homophobes that are around them, and then use it to make this then this broad extension that you can't say anything that might be deemed right of center.
You can't say anything that might offend or threaten someone.
They have power in that they can control the conduct in the case of college campuses, what students say in terms of public commentary, the media is becoming the referee that's out there blowing the whistle on anything that it disapproves of.
You use the term bullying, and that's a very, very good one.
They want to use their bullying power to shut up the opinions that they disagree with.
Now, on the climate change uh issue, look at the term that they're coming up with for people that are dissenting from the orthodoxy on it.
Deniers.
Denier is the word that is used for people that take positions that are out and out, nutty, yet there are legitimate scientists who don't buy the entire climate change argument.
They're being marginalized and ridiculed.
It's like they're terrified of having an actual argument and discussion.
And this means, but if you can't, you know, descend from the climate change orthodoxy, you then can't descend from whatever solution they come up with, which of course is going to be a whole bunch of taxes and a whole bunch of regulations that will make it very, very hard for anybody in the United States to manufacture anything, which of course is the goal all along.
Mark Belling and for Rush.
Mark Bellingham for Rush.
On the climate change issue.
Here's the big problem with whatever solution that all the nations of the world decide to implement.
The only country that's going to follow the rules is probably going to be us.
Does anybody really think if there's a climate change agreement to reduce emissions and to cut down on carbon pollution, etc.?
That Vladimir Putin is going to follow it.
Give me a break.
Who thinks the Chinese are going to follow it?
Have you seen some photos of people walking around in those giant cities in China that you've never heard of?
I don't mean Beijing and Shanghai.
I mean all of the other cities of the million plus.
There are people walking Around they have those masks on.
Those surgical masks.
That's how bad the air quality is.
And how about India?
India is destitute, but it finally has some industry developing that is allowing people to rise out of poverty.
They're going to have to make the very, very real choice of cutting back on their manufacturing base and keeping their entire country dirt poor or ignoring this.
The only people who will follow the rules will be us, which is one more reason why we shouldn't buy in to any of it.
▲
Export Selection