All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 6, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:25
January 6, 2016, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rushlyn boy here, The Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email address.com.
I have just been made aware of something I want to share with you here, but I can't find the remote control for the ditto cam, so I cannot zoom in on this.
So, but I'm still going to show it to you anyway, because speaking of Ted Cruz, and you know, I made it in the last last hour about how much the media hates Cruz, how much they hate Trump, how they hope Trump takes Cruz out, vice versa, how they hope talk radio takes Trump out.
They've tried, they've failed.
In fact, they have done everything they can to destroy the reputations of every Republican and particularly Republican conservative they can.
And it's ongoing and never ending.
And just to show you, just to illustrate how much the mainstream media hate Ted Cruz.
A Newsweek reporter has tweeted that Ted Cruz has a strong ground game in Iowa.
And he included a photo to illustrate the strong ground game that Ted Cruz has in Iowa.
And I want to show it.
His name is Alexander Nazarian.
Alexander Nazarian, a newsweek reporter.
I can't zoom in.
I'm sorry, but we can't find a remote control.
It's the usual excuse, the cleaning crew did something with it.
Let me hold it up there for you.
What you're looking at is a Nazi parade with swastika Nazi flags.
I'm sorry, I can't maybe lean in a little closer like this.
That is what was tweeted.
For those of you who don't have a ditto cam, we'll uh put this up at RushLebo.com uh as its own post, and you'll be able to see it there.
Ted Cruz has a strong ground game in Iowa.
The tweet says complete with a picture of a Nazi parade, a couple of Nazi flags leading the parade.
Now, the tweet has since been deleted.
Called back.
Sorry.
We've cashed it.
We know it.
We've maintained it.
Kept a copy of it here.
Because this.
You know, why Mr. Nazarian take it down?
What's the point of it?
What kind of apology are we going to get?
I'm sorry if it offended anybody.
I didn't mean to offend anybody.
Or is it going to be it's not who I am?
I am terribly sorry.
It was a really weak attempt at humor or whatever blah blah apology.
But whatever apology we get is transparent and phony.
This is what they think.
And this is a shining example of if you call it bias, prejudice, whatever.
This is what they think.
This is this is who they think Ted Cruz and his supporters are.
They really do.
They think they're trying to be funny with this.
But there will not be any punishment.
There will not be any admonition.
I mean, Newsweek myself, we're we're some statement here that they're gonna regret that it happened, but nothing's gonna happen to Mr. Nazarian.
And privately he's gonna be hailed and applauded and fetted and celebrated for having the guts to show everybody what Cruz is really all about.
Privately, he'll receive accolades and pants on the back for having the courage to do this.
Because this is what they think.
Here, let me show it to you again.
That tweet, since Tern's deleted, since recalled by the tweeter to Newsweek reporter with a Nazi parade, a couple of Nazi flags, Ted Cruz, strong ground game in Iowa.
Hillary Clinton, I mentioned earlier that in the previous hour that she was stumped when asked to explain the difference between Democrats and socialists.
It happened actually last night, where Hillary was unable to explain the difference between Democrats and Socialists.
She said, uh, you know, um, you you'd you you'd have to ask.
Uh I'm not one.
She was this is happening on PMSNBC was Chris Matthews asking her what the difference in a Democrat and a socialist is, and whether or not she identified as a socialist.
And he said, No, no, no, no, I'm not a socialist.
You'd have to go ask what.
I don't know what a socialist is.
I'm uh I'm a Democrat.
So she's fumbling the question.
I mean, you would think somebody who is the presumptive Democrat nominee, smartest woman in the world, would have some kind of a retort, some kind of a quip, some kind of a response to this, some ability to think on her feet.
Like Trump said yesterday, she needs the biggest teleprompter in the world when she goes out.
She's worse than Obama at this stuff.
She can't speak off the cuff.
She doesn't have natural political skills.
Hillary's political skills are only useful when she's out of sight, behind the scenes, manipulating things.
But her public political talents are non-existent.
In fact, the only reason Hillary Clinton is even in politics today is because her last name is Clinton, and the Democrat Party thinks they owe her.
But just her own resume, her own existence, her own talents, there's nothing that says this woman is destined to be president.
There's nothing that says this woman's a cut and above others.
There's nothing that says this woman's smart, experienced, brilliant.
None of that.
I mean, this is anything but justified talent on display.
So she's sitting there, she fumbling the question.
And Chris Matthews even gave her announcements.
Look, I'd say, Hillary, you're pretty typical Democrat.
But is that a question you want to answer?
Would you rather not?
She said, Well, I can tell you what I am.
I'm a progressive Democrat who likes to get things done and who believes that we're better off in this country when we're trying to solve problems together.
Getting people to work together.
That's not what she's about.
There isn't a Democrat in the world about that.
This is exactly what I was talking about in the first hour.
This is the kind of spin that masks who they really are.
They're not interested in cooperation.
They don't believe in working together.
They don't even believe that their opposition is legitimate.
And their objective is to eliminate opposition, not cooperate with it, not recognize that it exists.
There is no other point of view that's legitimate.
There is no other way.
All there is is a bunch of people standing in the way who have to be eliminated, in a political sense, of course.
She says there will always be strong feelings, and I respect that from the far right and the far left, the libertarians, whoever they might be.
We gotta get people working together.
We we gotta get the economy fixed.
We gotta get all our problems really tackled.
What the hell have you been doing the last seven years?
You know, it's another thing here that always fascinates me when we have seven years of a Democrat regime under the belt.
Here comes the next Democrat that wants to be president, and they have to criticize what's gone on here.
And when they do, there is nothing said about it.
What is it?
What does she mean we gotta get the economy fixed?
Why isn't it fixed?
We've had seven years of what Hillary believes in.
We've had seven years of deficit spending.
We've had seven years of the most irresponsible.
We've had seven years of utopia.
We've had seven years of the Democrats unstoppable.
We've had seven years of the Democrats practically unopposed to do whatever they want to do.
There should be this promised land by now, or there should be Some sign of it.
There should be utopia, at least it ought to be out there on the horizon.
We ought to be getting close to it here, seven years unfettered, seven years unopposed, seven years unstopped.
Where is it?
Why does she need to fix anything?
What in the world has gone wrong and why?
To me, those are valid questions that disqualify her and disqualify any other Democrat that wants to be president.
If if if what they believe in, and I'm serious about this, if what they believe in is the catch meow?
If the things they believe in are the things that they have been doing the past seven years, her entire campaign ought to be elected me so we can keep doing what we're doing.
We've had the first African American president elected, it's historic.
We've had the first national health care system impaneled, we've had the first nuclear deal for the Iranians, we've had the first of a whole bunch of stuff.
The border is wide open.
What's wrong?
Why doesn't she run promising to be Obama's third term?
Why doesn't she promise that she's going to continue everything that's happened because it's so superior to anything else we've ever done?
Why does she feel compelled to admit things have gone wrong?
Why does anything need to be fixed?
Isn't that what Obama did?
Didn't Obama fix 200 plus years of mistakes?
200 plus years of misery?
Didn't Obama begin to transform 200 years of racism, bigotry, sexism, homophobia, and all of that?
So what needs to be fixed?
Furthermore, why is she the one to do it?
Why aren't people working together?
Obama was going to be the great uniter.
The world was going to once again love the United States.
And for you liberals out there, don't start shouting Republicans, Republicans, Republicans have not even raised their hand to try to stop any of this when you get right of the brass tax.
The first two years the Democrats had every vote.
The Republicans didn't have a vote to stop anything, which is another point.
If Obama really wanted to attack the Second Amendment, why'd he do it when he had the votes that could not be stopped?
Why didn't he do everything the first two years?
Why didn't he ram through all this stuff the first two years when the Republicans did not have the votes to stop?
When the Republicans won the House and then won the Senate, there still hasn't been any pushback.
There still hasn't been any significant opposition.
You realize there's another vote in the House today on repealing Obamacare that does contain in it a provision to defund Planned Parenthood.
Do you realize this is going to be the first repeal Obamacare vote that wins?
Seven years in, we're into the eighth year now, folks.
And there have been, I don't know how many repeal Obamacare votes.
The one today is the first one that's going to pass in the House.
Now it's going to get vetoed, don't misunderstand, but this is the first time now into our eighth year that there has actually been an expression of opposition to this.
So my point here is, what in the world, Mrs. Clinton has gone wrong?
There hasn't been any opposition to what Obama's tried to do.
There hasn't been any pushback.
Not really.
I mean, you've had some Republicans out there voicing opposition, but when it comes time to put action to the voice, there hasn't been much.
I mean, you people on the Democrat side have had an open road and a free free rail here.
You haven't had anybody move in seriously try to stop you.
So what's gone wrong?
Why isn't she promising Obama's third term?
Why isn't she saying we've we've begun to equalize things in the world?
The Iranians are going to soon have a nuclear weapon up next.
We want to make sure that Basher Assad gets well.
Why not continue what's been started here?
Why not promise to open the northern border the same way they've opened the southern border?
Why not promise to open New York City as a as a point of immigration for illegals just like they have the southern border?
If it's all so wonderful, why not promise more of it?
Well, Mr. Limbaugh, you can see that the presidential polling daily shows that uh many people think that we're on the wrong track.
Many people not satisfied the direction the country's going, the Obama approval number is in the f So what?
That never stopped them before.
Why all of a sudden the American people know what's going on?
Why all of a sudden the Democrats want to start listening to American people?
American people are a bunch of Nimrods at all times.
The American people are to are to be governed against when necessary.
Why all of a sudden start paying attention to public opinion?
Why not say public opinion's rooted in racism?
People just don't like Obama because he's African American and just keep doing what we're doing.
Bernie Sanders is.
Bernie Sanders, you know his campaign?
Bernie Sanders is saying, look, we got a good start on this.
We're not going nearly fast enough as we move to the left.
And Bernie Sanders is doing well out there.
Much better than the drive-by's are telling you.
Bernie Sanders is actually competitive in New Hampshire and Iowa right now.
And they're not reporting that because that's that's nobody's supposed to know that.
The picture is supposed to be Hillary Clinton and nobody else even interested in running on the Democrat side.
So she can't explain the difference in a Democrat and a socialist.
And the reason she can't is that there isn't one.
Not today.
This is not the Democrat Party of JFK or even LBJ.
This is the Democrat Party of the Politburo.
And it is no different than socialism.
You know, I watch, I think I mentioned this on Monday.
And it's it's look, it's purely an academic uh talking point here.
But why even bother to collect taxes in terms of budgeting?
We're 20 trillion dollars in debt.
Every day Obama's announcing spending on this and spending on that as though we have the money, and we don't.
The fact that we don't have any money offers no limitation of what we spend at all.
The fact that we don't have any the fact that we 20 trillion dollars in debt and every year have a massive budget deficit.
We don't have the money for what we're spending it on.
That doesn't stop them.
So why even go to the pretense of collecting taxes?
I mean, if you collect taxes to generate revenue in order to run the government, clearly these people don't care about revenue to run.
They'll spend it when we don't have it, no matter where we don't have it, no matter how we don't get it.
The amount of money raised in taxes is astronomically high.
But it's a drop in a barrel compared to what we spend.
Anyway, I take a break here, folks.
Hang in there, be tough.
We will continue, and as promised, we'll come back and get started on the phones.
Don't go away.
Okay, Cruz has oh, by the way, I was just told I said MSNBC just did a segment on how I did not jump down Trump's throat for going after Cruz on the citizenship thing.
I told you, they're sitting around here, they're waiting for us to take Trump out since they've failed.
And they believe that we're gonna take Trump out any time he goes after Cruz because of what happened the last time.
They've forgotten why we went after.
I'm just speaking for they forgot why I went after and cautioned Trump the first time he hit Cruz.
It wasn't because he hit Cruz or criticized him, it's because how he did it.
Just trying to protect Trump on this, but they don't, they're not nuanced or even informed enough to understand.
Even when they hear it, they don't understand what's going on.
It's a mind-boggling thing to me.
Anyway, Cruz has reacted here.
Rack, I'm sorry, Rock Rapids, Iowa.
Here's a portion of what he said, mounting a defense on the citizenship attack of Trump's.
As a legal matter, the question is quite straightforward and settled law.
That the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural-born citizen.
People will continue to make political noise about it, but as a legal matter, it's quite straightforward.
I would note that it has occurred many times in history.
John McCain was born in Panama, but he was a natural-born citizen because his parents were U.S. citizens.
George Romney Mitsad was born in Mexico when his parents were Mormon missionaries, but he was a natural born citizen because his parents were citizens.
Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before Arizona was a state.
And yet he was a natural born citizen because his parents were citizens.
Okay, and uh and then he he he wasn't done with that.
He says as a legal matter, the question is quite straightforward.
And listen, as last night's events demonstrated, I think there's serious issues facing the American people, serious issues to be decided in this election, and that's where our focus is going to stay on the real issues that matter to the men and women in the country.
So he's saying, look, it I I've I've responded to it, it's the way it is, and now let's not get distracted anymore, stick to the issues, so to speak.
Ted Cruz back in a sec.
Okay, I'm gonna get to the phones here in just a second.
I just have to remind you of something.
Uh, you heard Ted Cruz there say that Barry Goldw McCain was alleged to not be a citizen, that he was born in Arizona before it became a state.
I mean, it should give you some idea how old McCain is.
But the point here is that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign that brought that up.
It was the Hillary Clinton campaign that brought up McCain's birthplace relationship to his citizenship until they were slamped down.
It was also Hillary's camp that brought up Obama's birthplace.
The original birther was Hillary Clinton and her campaign.
When it comes to Obama and whether or not he was actually born in the U.S., whether or not they faked the birth certificate in Hawaii, it's all started by the Clintons, folks.
All started by the Hillary Clinton campaign back in 2007-2008.
Hillary Clinton gave birth to the birther movement.
I mean, don't take my word for it.
Look it up, but I got no reason to lie to you about it.
Why about anything anyway?
But I'm sure it jogs your memory.
You've heard her before.
So the point is that if it's happened before, it can happen again.
And if Cruz is a nominee, you can make book on the fact that Trump is right about one thing that Hillary's going to raise it.
Hillary will do anything, just like Obama would to disqualify the opposition to sweep them off the field.
So I wouldn't doubt that Trump's right that uh the Democrats might bring up Trump's or Cruz's uh citizenship aspect, may even challenge it in court because they've done it before.
John McCain and Barack Obama.
Okay, Sandra in Atlanta.
You're up first as we hit the phones.
I really, really appreciate your patience.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
Hey.
Thank you for taking my call.
You bet.
I'm a longtime listener, first-time caller, so I'm a little nervous.
No need to be nervous.
I appreciate it.
Thank you for all you do to broadcast truth to the American people.
And uh in uh the past few days I've been listening to um, you know, the uh uh Obama's uh gun control legislation or his actions that he's executive actions, that's right.
There isn't any legislation.
Okay, no legislative, okay.
So it seems to me that for boosting Obama's gun control support, it occurred to me that he would get more traction if he would approach his Hollywood producer buddies to make no more movies with guys.
Wonder how popular that would be.
And they could be the very ones to step up and set the standard for propagandizing the masses who watch their movies.
Maybe it would eventually come.
You know, hang on, that's an interesting thought.
I would take it in a little different direction than you were thinking.
Let's first look at smoking.
We know that smoking is now universally opposed.
People think that it's filthy, rotten, dirty, and deadly.
There is no pro-smoking lobby out there.
Everybody hates it.
Everybody's been convinced it's the worst rotten thing.
Even e-cigarettes, which are nothing but water vapor.
You can cause people to have a literal panic when they see one.
Where in our culture is smoking portrayed in a positive, cool, sexy, exciting way?
Movies.
Everybody smokes in the movies.
Everybody.
It's incredible when you pay attention.
Do a Hollywood movie or a TV show.
The number of characters who smoke.
Look at madmen.
Now I know it was a period show, but everybody smoked constantly.
By the way, they used herbal cigarettes.
They were props.
I think.
I mean, maybe some actually smoked.
Point is here's Hollywood that obviously is very influential in the pop culture, promoting smoking.
Why do they do it?
These are good liberals.
These are good progressives, supposedly aware of public health, very conscious about it, want everybody to be healthy, don't want anybody to do anything to damage this.
Why are they doing?
Because it looks sexy.
It sounds sexy.
The whole process of lighting a cigarette, zooming in on the flame of the lighter, the first wisps of smoke from the first puff.
And then if it's a woman, shapely woman with the cigarette in her hand, she takes it away.
It's just, it looks sexy.
It looks cool.
It's one of the allures of it.
Now you would think that if Hollywood was really serious about a bunch of progressive, a bunch of liberals interested in public health, that they would not make any movies with anybody smoking.
So what's up?
Why are they out there promoting?
They hate big tobacco.
The left despises big tobacco, and there they are giving away advertisement for cigarettes.
Why?
Why are they doing it?
By the same token, look at all of the gun violence in movies today.
And not only at the gun violence, look and this thing that's on Netflix, making of a murderer.
There is something that's been going on in the movies for more than a generation.
Subtly, the bad guys have become the heroes.
The bad guys have become the good guys.
The good guys, the cops, they're the bad guys now.
Not just law enforcement, but decent moral, the the the good guys, the characters that you end up liking and identifying with and rooting for, they're the bad guys in the movies.
Good fellows.
Everybody loved what happened at Goodfellas.
They want a bloodiest, goriest movies to come down a pike.
And every one of those characters is murderous, thug using a gun, and they were beloved.
So if Hollywood wanted to get in on this and say, discourage gun use, seems they could do two things.
They can make movies without guns, which would eliminate 90% of the movies made.
90% of the movies made are dramatic dramatic violent movies that feature guns.
So you have to make a movie with no gun.
Or, or you could portray gun users as absolute scum.
You could portray them as the most vile, despicable, hateful people in our country.
If you wanted to influence people, moviegoers, if you wanted to try to influence them to either give up their guns or to drop their support of the NRA.
But it is interesting because no matter where you look in with you, smoking guns or any other number for free wanton anytime anywhere sex.
Where it's all okay and where it's all made sexy and where it's all made cool is Hollywood.
Populated by a bunch of progressives who claim to be supporters of the exact opposite of the kind of stuff that they put out.
Which leads to another question.
So if they did movies where they changed it around and made the people that use guns the hated, despised antagonists.
Would it bleed over and influence people to hate guns and not want to use guns and want to get rid of their guns?
Could Hollywood stigmatize guns and gun owners to the point that people would want to give them up?
Or that public opinion could be shifted.
Well, remember now, whenever Hollywood is criticized for its role, say in in in mass shootings.
Said to have been influential to the Columbine shooters.
Whenever that's a Hollywood, no, no, no, no, no.
You can't blame us, you can't blame us, you can't blame video games.
That's crazy.
We're not we're just it's just entertainment.
We're not inspiring anybody.
So when bad things happen because what's on the screen, Hollywood and everybody says, no, no, no, no, not us.
But when it comes to abortion, I mean Hollywood will do anything and everything you can to normalize it, promote it, make it look normal and healthy, and make pregnancy look like the disease.
So it is curious.
The way they promote smoking and gun violence.
Quick time out, my friends.
It's just more hypocrisy at the very least, and the worst is much more than that.
Back in a sec.
Folks, I uh I misspoke up in there.
It was not it was McCain that was born in Panama, and that the Clinton campaign, whatever Goldwater born in Arizona before it became a state.
I I just got him confused out there.
I'd forgot.
Uh that I was not trying to insult McCain by claiming he's so old that he was born before Arizona became a state.
It was Goldwater.
McCain born in in Panama.
The point is the Clinton campaign went after both McCain and Obama on this berther business.
And they would likely do it again on Cruz.
Here's Terry in Naperville, Illinois, uh, which is a great, great town.
We own Naperville.
We've been big in Aperville ever since we started there.
It's great to have you, Terry.
Hi.
Thanks, Rascal.
Thanks for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
Hey, listen, Rush, you had mentioned something earlier uh about how uh Donald Trump cut a commercial and that all the media has played that commercial for free, and that he's a master manipulator of the media.
Right.
And that got me thinking kind of something that's irritated me about your show over the last several weeks, and it's that you utter the word Trump more than he does, and that's no small feat.
And I understand your audience, you've got to walk a line, half your audience are Trump supporters, half of them are somebody else.
But I don't understand why you give so much free airtime in the defense of a non-conservative.
You've said Trump is a non-conservative, so I understand defending them against left-wing attacks, that makes sense to me.
But every time some nobody throws an attack at Donald Trump, you spend a good portion of your show, you know, knocking it down, and I just don't understand that.
There's, you know, a real conservative in this race.
Well, there's a more than one.
Are you thinking of Ted Cruz?
Well, you've said that Ted Cruz is the most bona fide uh conservative in this race.
Well, you said who who said conservative.
Wait, wait, wait, and his wife.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Who said that?
Who who said that?
You did.
I did.
You said that Ted Cruz is the most staunch conservative in this race.
Did I get it?
But I thought I wasn't extolling the virtues of Cruz enough.
No, no, you said that one time.
You've said Donald Trump is fantastic.
You haven't said he's fantastic, but you've defended him a thousand times the every one time you mentioned Cruz.
And I understand this isn't about you supporting Cruz.
I don't I don't expect you to do that.
You have to walk a line.
I get that.
I just don't understand the constant.
You know, I listen to a show three hours a day, you know, 15 hours a week, and it's Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump.
Even when it really isn't about Donald Trump, it's Donald Trump.
And you know, as when you say the uh when you go to break, you say uh an obscene profit time out.
And that's because you know what the value of your airtime is worth.
And you're just giving this to a candidate who frankly needs it the least.
I don't get that.
Um, A. I appreciate you listening as often as you do.
I really do.
And I love you.
I and I can't tell you how much I appreciate that.
Um, this is that I do hear today, what I've always done, and that it's that is arrive here and take a look at the things and people I believe in being under attack and when necessary to defend them.
The same token.
You know, I I've been open about what I think the value of Donald Trump in this campaign is from day one.
And I think Ted Cruz is coming as close to anybody as emulating what Trump is demonstrating.
Trump is demonstrating that every one of these things the Republicans have been frightened into silence over are unnecessary to be frightened of.
You don't need to be frightened of the media, you don't need to be frightened of political correctness.
You don't need to be frightened of being conservative, you don't need to be frightened of being anything.
You can go out and say what you actually believe, and you can get away with it, and you can triumph.
For seven years we've had to sit here and listen to Republican Party stand mute, afraid to say anything for fear of what the media is going to say about him or what the president's gonna say about him or what anybody else is gonna say about him.
There hasn't been any opposition whatsoever from the Republican Party leadership to what has been happening in this country seven years.
Along comes somebody who is voicing opposition to it and promising to do something about it.
His name happens to be Trump.
I can't ignore it.
I'm cheering what he's doing.
I'm cheering what Ted Cruz is doing.
This is this is nutcracking time as far as I'm concerned.
Mrs. Clinton cannot win this election in November.
The Democrat Party cannot win this election.
If they do, well, I don't even want to think about it.
So this transcends ideology for me right now.
I haven't abandoned mine.
I never will abandon mine.
I am not going to be fooled into voting or supporting somebody who is a closet liberal, making himself look like something that he's not.
If that's that do not do not worry about that.
But I think at the at the at this stage where we are, the the Democrats have to lose.
And the people supporting them have got to be stopped.
These political wins that they're having, victories that they're having each and every day.
The attack on the Constitution has got to stop.
Immigration, it's got to stop.
There has to be a re-imposition of common sense application of existing law on so many things.
The Constitution is being rendered irrelevant.
It's got to stop.
And if it's not stopped at this next opportunity to stop it, then it's going to be another four years.
Who I mean to try to stop it.
So the the objective on this program has not changed.
It's exactly what it's been since the first day of this program.
And that's to educate and inform people about liberalism and promote conservatism in the opposite way of doing things.
And until somebody comes along and tells me that Donald Trump is actually a Democrat running a stealth campaign to actually get Hillary Clinton elected and can make me believe it.
There's no evidence of that.
There's no evidence that Trump is not what he is.
And don't forget, I know him.
I have spent a lot of time with Trump.
And by this, I mean I know a little bit about him.
Not that I'm afraid to be critical of him, but I know a little bit about him.
And he's not a Democrat.
He is not a liberal.
He may not even think in those terms.
In terms of ideology.
But whatever's happening here, folks, has not changed focus at all.
I'm the one constant in the last 27 years in American politics, if you ask me.
Be back after this.
Don't go.
Fastest three hours in media.
Two of them are completed in the can, as we say.
Our final hour is coming right up.
Hang in there, be tough, folks.
▲
Export Selection