All Episodes
Previous Next
April 1, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:40
April 1, 2016, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh.
This is the EIB network from the one and only Limbore Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It's Friday.
Let's just keep rolling.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
And you can talk about whatever you want.
It does not have to be politics.
And by the way, I shouldn't have to say this.
If you want to criticize me, you can.
You can do that any day of the week, by the way.
But if you want to do that, you know, I'm the politest host in the country.
That's been established for decades.
You have nothing to fear.
Calling this program 800 282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, I want to go through some of the other news that's out there.
Uh and hopefully, Mr. Snerdley be standing by.
I'm going to try to get the phone calls before the opening segment here ends.
Because I really, on Friday, I do try to get calls started in the first hour, and I didn't get that done.
From the NBC News, Columbus, Ohio affiliate.
I don't know if the governor is aware of this.
But a group of women from the Cleveland area suing the Ohio Department of Taxation.
They are fighting to eliminate the tax on tampons.
And mini and maxi pads.
The lawsuit states that this kind of tax is discriminatory.
State Representative Kristen Boggs agrees.
These are not luxury items, and they should not be taxed, she says.
This is another tax that women have to pay, that there's no similar association for men.
That they don't have to pay.
So you see, my friends.
Not only should contrace contraceptives be provided gratis.
But now there should be a total elimination of sales tax on tampons and pads on the basis that they're not luxury items.
Every woman needs them.
And men do not have to buy them.
There's nothing with the male equivalent.
And of course, right in there is a Democrat Party agreeing with this.
Oh, yeah, it's just more of women are victims.
And somehow of men here.
You've got a Democrat state representative agreeing with the premise here.
What do you think Kasich would do?
Oh man, he'd go out, he would go to the store, he would surround himself with tamps on tampons and pads, and he would no doubt talk about how unfair this is.
And hug whoever was there after making a speech about, well, maybe, I don't know, he could he maybe do a confetti shower with tampons instead of uh the usual confetti.
Columbus resident Carly Zuba said, I don't believe we should be taxed on something that's a necessity.
To be taxed for it, it's kind of unfair, said Kelsley Kilnartin.
Zuba and Kill Narton are not a part of the class action complaint, but they agree that taxing tampons and pads is wrong.
There's a class action lost it about this.
Yes, it's a medical need.
It's something we need just for our daily lives, says Zuba.
The state representative, Kristen Boggs, says that feminine hygiene products are not only needed for a woman's livelihood, but also so that they can participate in society like going to school or work.
I think there's a lack of understanding that they are medically necessary products, and I think that as such they should not be taxed.
I wonder if these women heard of the there's a group of women out there that does not believe in tampons.
You know that, right?
They have a name.
They actually have a it it they there shouldn't be Anything that interrupts the flow of nature.
Just like there are people out there who are dead set opposed to hearing aids.
I'm not kidding.
I encountered them when I went deaf.
They got mad at me.
I heard from them when I said I was going to get a cochlear implant.
And they were they were activists for deafness.
Hey, it happened to you.
Hey, it's natural.
You're not be screwing around with it.
Anyway, the lawsuit states that the Ohio Department of Taxation collects about eleven million dollars a year from menstruating women.
You ever heard of such that they categorize revenue based on such things.
According to Kristen Boggs, the state representative, if the court finds that this tax violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
Can you imagine Scalia with this one?
Trying to find the original intent.
Trying to find Oh, yeah, the founders clearly intended here that there not be a tax on tampons.
Many medical items in Ohio are not taxed.
The lawsuit also states that women spend on average about $70 a year on tampons and pads, and that equals about $4 in taxes annually, depending on local taxes.
Well, no, because a total here is $11 million a year.
That there must be a lot of women in Ohio to get this yearly tax total up to 11 million.
If the if it if it's four dollars in taxes a year per woman.
And this is not the first time this uh legislation was introduced last summer to ban the tax.
And of course it it didn't go anywhere, so it is uh it is back.
The Fox Business Network poll crews up in Wisconsin by 10, 42 percent.
This is Wisconsin likely Republican voters.
Trump is at 32 percent.
Kasich in third place at 19 percent.
Among just those who say they will definitely vote, Cruz's lead over Trump widens to 13 percent, 4633, and Kasich loses three points down to sixteen.
This is among people who are definitely gonna go out there and vote.
And this is what I was referring to earlier as a huge gender gap.
Women back Cruz over Trump by a 19-point margin, 46 to 27.
The two candidates are much closer among men.
Cruz gets 40 percent support for men, and Trump gets 35 percent.
This story is also at the politico headline Trump's rock bottom ratings with women.
Just how bad are Donald Trump's problems with women bad enough that roughly 70 percent of women voters in recent polls say they have a negative impression of him.
And that was before the news coverage of his threat to spill the beans about Heidi Cruz and his talk about punishing women who have abortions.
Trump is already so dangerously underwater with women voters that it raises questions about whether a GOP ticket led by the billionaire could lead to an historic gender gap and blowout defeat.
That's the opening paragraph in the political story about this.
And I've got a woman who wants to talk about this.
Well, looky here from Ohio.
This is Cindy in Ohio, it's Springfield, Ohio.
Cindy, I'm glad you waited.
It's great to have you, and you're up first today on Open Line Friday.
Hi.
Yes, thank you.
I've listened to you down through the year, so I'm glad to talk to you.
Um I did want to preface my remark with saying that I am a black Republican, and also I have been a Trump supporter, so I'm definitely minority of the minority.
Um, having some problems now.
Um he's just seen my I feel like he kind of stepped over the edge as far as the campaign manager situation.
I felt like he should have reprimanded his campaign manager.
Now the man said.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, well, hold it a minute.
Yeah.
What did I misunderstand you?
You you you I stepped over the edge?
What did I do here?
No, not you.
I was talking about.
Oh, oh, you're using the you in a in a generative generic were right.
You're talking about Trump.
Yeah, I got it.
Yes, I was talking about Donald Trump.
I was going to say, what did I do now on that?
Reprimanding his campaign manager.
Either his campaign manager has Alzheimer's, or he's being dishonest when he says he doesn't re he didn't remember, he didn't know, or whatever.
That was his original thought.
And then as far as the Heidi Cruz.
Can I wait just a second?
Wait just a second.
The Heidi Cruz in a minute.
This is my point, Mr. Snerdley.
If this Corey Lewandowski thing had happened back in August, September, uh, maybe even October, people would be marveling at it.
They'd be marveling at the way that Trump handles these things.
Some of it maybe even be laughing at it, but here we are now we're in in March when this happened.
And it's an entirely different.
There's no openness, there's no consideration and no humor.
There is uh no tolerance whatsoever.
There's no admiration in the old when Trump would double down and support his people when he would double down on an insult when criticized for it.
Uh people would marvel.
They would applaud you.
Look at this, this guy, he's so showing everybody how it's done.
This guy, they hit him and he doubles down on it.
They're not talking about Trump that way here.
And not just over to Lewandowski thing.
So that's my that's why Scott Walker has a uh point about what the results in Wisconsin could be.
Okay, the next thing you want to talk about was Heidi Cruz.
Okay, the Heidi Cruz, I feel like that I think really I think the families, the wives should be left out of it.
Obviously, uh Melania Trump was not she was probably proud of her pitchers, okay.
But the picture as far as Heidi Cruz, um, to strike out at her, I mean, in anyone can find an unflattering picture of anyone, no matter how nice looking they are.
So I just feel like just leave the wives out of it.
I I feel that Donald Trump needs to be more presidential now.
Uh, be the, you know, the grown-up in the room, so to speak.
And um, can I ask you about what you think about the Kasich?
Um, but I I want to ask you a couple of things here about your comments.
But go ahead.
Yeah, what are we asking Kasich?
Um I feel like there's something underhanded about uh the brokered and the contested convention, um, because I feel that Kasich, Governor Kasich, it just seems like he wants he's going to be president even if it has to be given to him.
And I feel like even if they go to the convention, they don't have enough delegates in vote delegates that the one that has the most, if it's Donald Trump, should get the nomination.
So I have a problem with it just being handed to someone.
That's overruling the will of the people.
Wait a minute.
That would be handing it to somebody if they don't have 1237 and you give it to them anyway, that would be handing it to them.
Well, not if you have the one that has the most.
Obviously, you have the will of the people.
The majority of the people, this is what the majority of the people want.
Yeah, but the RNC is gonna turn around.
I know this is what they're plotting.
I know this is what they want to do.
Whether they're able to pull this off or not remains to be seen.
What they want to do is if neither Cruz nor Trump gets 1237, they want to be able to make the case that both have been rejected by voters, since not enough voters thought enough of either one of them to make them a nominee.
So they're officially done, and that will free it up for the RNC to then choose the candidate they want at the convention.
That's what I'm saying.
I understand that, but don't you feel like it should really go to the majority?
What is your opinion on that?
Um the rule's the rule.
You've got to get to 1237.
If you don't get to 1237, then we start having ballots.
I think you've got to you've got a control, you've got to bend, you've got to shape, you've got a bargain, you've got to do what you can to win this thing.
I I'm not in favor of the RNC disqualifying Trump or Cruz.
But if nobody gets 1237, nobody gets twelve.
The rule's the rule.
The problem is these guys are gonna be rewriting these rules.
Um Rule 40, right now, that was written in 2012.
By the way, Rule 40 was not written for this convention.
And I don't want anybody believing I'm laboring under a misconception.
Rule 40 was written back in 2012, and it was it was designed to protect Romney from people like Ron Paul.
Rule 40 was never intended to survive for this convention, but so far it does, because the the rules have not been rewritten.
That'll happen this month.
But Rule 40, as it's written, says that no candidate can get the nomination, regardless.
What happens if he has not won a minimum majority number of delegates in eight states in the primaries?
Well, that's bye-bye Kasich.
Kasich is not even close.
It's Cyanara Kasich.
But that rule isn't going to stand.
They're going to rewrite that rule.
If they have to rewrite that rule to say that all you have to do is to have won one state that legalizes Kasich.
They can do whatever they want.
They write the rules.
They're not going to change the 1237, though.
They're going to use that as a disqualifier.
Now the party could do any number of things here.
I mean, they can they can take your advice and go for the unity and say, look, if we've got a guy, 1237 was our number, and we get somebody the closest to it is 1,100, you know, 127 short or whatever it is.
But how do you they'll have to change the rule saying that by acclamation vote, whatever, but it's not that easy because these delegates, this is a real do you know Trump is facing a potential disaster right now.
South Carolina's delegates, in order to have those delegates pledged to you, there's a rule in South Carolina that you have to pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee.
Hey.
you Well, Trump announced, answered a question recently, that he might have changed his mind about supporting the nominee based on the fact that people are not treating him fairly or what have you.
Well, now he is at risk of having violated one of the rules of the South Carolina primary.
He now faces if he actually doesn't revise this, if South Carolina wanted to, they could deny Trump the delegates that he won there.
Now they're all hell would break out if that happened, but that's it's a possibility.
And people are saying, I want did Trump even know.
This is what they're asking now.
Does Trump even have a staff that knows the rules about how all this stuff works?
He just that's my he just hired a guy and asked the RNC in that little meeting they had yesterday.
He actually asked Rince Previs, is my guy any good?
That's a news report I read.
He asked the RNC, is this guy I've hired any good at this delegate stuff?
I'm making up the words.
But the point is when you get down to delegates and how they're apportioned and how they're chosen, before I have to go to break.
Let me present one possibility.
First ballot, candidate needs 1237.
The rule is that whoever wins the state in the primary automatically gets all those delegates.
But folks, it could be in a state with 49 delegates that 40 of them hate Trump, that have to vote for him on the first ballot, that the party has chosen them specifically for a second and third ballot vote to vote against Trump.
There's all kinds of stuff going on here.
And we're not gonna know till it starts to play out who's doing what with what.
Yes, yes, yes, folks, I got it.
Women in Ohio are complaining about the unfairness of having to pay $4 a year in taxes on tampons.
That's right.
And other women uh years ago complained about having to pay $12 a month for contraception.
A lot of women complaining about a lot of expenses out there on the left.
And on the basis that it's unfair because men do not have to be.
Let me men pay.
Men, men.
Men pay in so many ways for all of this stuff.
I I can't even begin to tabulate a financial value or cost.
Anyway, Scott in Los Angeles, so I'm gonna get started with you.
We're not gonna finish before the break, but we'll get started.
How are you doing, sir?
Good, Rush.
Okay, so I was listening to some of the stuff you said earlier.
And you were talking about the most destructive force is the Democrat Party.
But at this point, I see the most destructive force is right wing talk radio.
And what we've seen is uh there there's very few places you can tune in and get an objective view without just a one side complete slant.
And what they're doing is they're spending eight months trashing and trying to convince millions of voters to vote for their guy, as opposed to trying to reach out to the one guy who's energized the party and then you maybe educate the important.
Okay, back to Scott in Los Angeles.
I really appreciate your holding to the break.
I um I thought I had more time prior to that break than we did.
But you basically, if I understand you your your problem is with what you call right wing talk radio, which is doing what again they are spending three hours in the morning show, three hours in the afternoon show, three hours in the evening show.
It is all anti Trump.
So so much so that I heard one guy in the morning the other day say that Donald Trump said that women should be put in prison.
And I listened to that interview.
Donald Trump did not say that, and then he talks about how truth lives here.
How can truth live here if you're making up lies?
But all of his supporters on his Facebook, keep going with the truth, you're doing the right thing.
You know, right wing talk radio now is more interested in stopping Trump than they are stopping ISIS, to use a line from what you said.
Yeah, yeah.
One problem that uh there are some people listening to you right now who think that there's a lot of talk radio guys in a tank for Trump.
And they say that you're one, but you realize there is a definition of in the tank for Trump.
In the tank for Trump just means you haven't joined the party of I hate Trump, I will not vote for Trump, I will campaign, I will caucus for Trump, I will influence states, influence people to get in there and vote against Trump.
You and and uh gentlemen that comes on after you are are listed as in the tank for Trump because you don't sma like I guess smear him for three hours during your show every day.
We've got eight months of three hours a day.
That's a lot of hours to be anti-Trump.
Be for your guy.
Don't be against Are you you you're a Trumpist?
I wouldn't I I'm not gonna give myself a name like that.
I support Donald Trump, but I haven't labeled myself as a Trumpist or I don't mean it as a pejorative.
I know, I just don't know what that word means, but I I do support Donald Trump because he is taking on the entire world.
Look, Ted Cruz is the absolute best debater.
Can we agree to that?
He's had eleven shots at Donald Trump, but now he needs this one-on-one debate.
Really?
You need you need another debate.
Are you gonna when when China builds into the South China Sea, are you gonna come to the media and say, you know, if I can just get one debate with the leader of China, a one-on-one debate, we can solve this.
Debating doesn't necessarily solve these problems.
Well, um you have uttered uh quite a lot here.
Um I got more.
Well, let me hear it.
Before I react to this, what else is on your mind?
What else is bothering you or got your wired what is it?
The big thing is you got one guy who is energized the party, brought a lot of people into it.
A lot of energy.
Bernie Sanders has that on his side.
There is no left-wing talk radio trashing Bernie.
It's just Bernie and Hillary.
Okay, on our side, we've got Donald Trump who is energized the party, has got crossover votes, and just got people excited that we don't have to deal with their guy this time.
And their guy is like the Carl Rose and the insiders, but now it's talk radio's guy.
It's still not we the people's guy.
And as opposed to talk radio trying to influence millions of people to hashtag never Trump, never vote for Trump, why didn't they spend eight months trying to do that?
Well, wait a minute, none of this is Donald Trump.
There have been none of this is new.
I mean, in previous campaigns, you've had uh various different talk shows uh in primaries.
The new part of this rush is the energy behind Donald Trump, not the because last time you could go with the Mitt Romney crap, and everybody trying to get on Mitt Romney and destroy Newt Gingrich.
I mean, he was the best speaker of the House we ever had, and he's labeled as the worst progressive in the world.
But what would you think if Trump chose, if Trump wins a nomination, what do you think if he chose uh Newt as his vice presidential running mate?
Man.
Where do I sign up?
You'd go for that.
I'd love that.
Newt Gingrich knows, like, that's that's the sad thing about what's going on here with Cruz is Cruz does know some inside stuff that might be helpful to to a Trump presidency.
Newt Gingrich also has that knowledge and and that experience that would be very helpful to a Trump presidency.
Well, okay.
Um, you put me in a in a in a not uncomfortable.
I just never comment on other talk shows.
It's it's a it's a matter of policy.
It's a no-win.
It is.
Well it's just a no-win.
I uh it from my standpoint position, there's nothing good that that can come from that.
So I'll just let that let that go.
Um I don't I don't know how unusual it really is.
We just have simply really feverish passions that are equally, or maybe not equally, but they're divided.
I mean, it in the last Republican primaries, there wasn't this kind of passion for anybody.
I mean, Romney never had this kind of passion.
McCain never had this kind of passion, even among his supporters and of the people that that ran and didn't lose, they didn't have uh this kind of passion.
So it's kind of it's kind of new territory.
You know, I I can explain the cruise supporters, I can explain the Trump supporters, and if I if I try to, I anger the other side of whichever side I'm speaking.
But I understand it all.
I understand every syllable of it.
I understand why Trump's people support him.
I understand why they won't abandon him.
I understand why the cruisers are totally into Cruz.
And it's interesting.
There's one thing that is common to both groups.
Both groups, the cruisers and the Trumpists, or the Trumpsters or the Trumpers, whatever you want to call them, they both think their guy is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fix what's wrong.
The Trump people think finally, Michael, we finally got somebody that's not part of the establishment and everything that means.
On the cruise side, finally, after all of these years of battling, we finally have the best damn conservative we've had since Reagan.
Somebody can do it all.
Speak it, debate it, explain it, articulate it, and the Trump people are just as passionate.
And of course, with that passion comes an equally passionate opposition to anybody else.
And a profound frustration that people don't see the passion the way the supporters feel it.
For example, the Cruz people are so into this, it's such a god opportunity.
It's it's uh it's a godsend.
It's a it's a once in everybody's lifetime opportunity to really fix this in their minds.
Infuse conservatism, somebody knows how to do it, won't back down from it, will not capitulate when he gets there, and they're frustrated that others don't see it.
And they're just as frustrated as they are excited.
The Trump people, it's the same thing.
They're just as passionate and they're just as as frustrated that opponents don't see the great opportunity here.
And this is why everybody's worried about unity when it's all over.
That it's gotten so divisive and so vitriolic and so personal that when it's over, how in the world do the people whose guy lost whoever it is just forget it and sign up with the winner.
Because the anti-passion, the cruisers, their anti-Trump passion.
It's not just, I don't like the guy.
It is profound, deep profound.
And same thing with the Trumpists.
So that's why the GOP, in its infinite wisdom, is thinking that the route here is to somehow take all this away from both sides and pick somebody from their club, the old reliable establishment.
And even if they lose, so be it.
They can work with Hillary.
She's an establishment babe.
They're part of the establishment.
They'll get to hold on to what fiefdoms they've got.
They'll be able to maintain their futures and their careers, but they can't be assured of that with either Trump or Cruz.
So that's the danger in the Republican establishment.
They'd be content to lose.
Not that they want to.
It's a difference here.
Being okay with losing is not the same as wanting to.
But they're telling themselves that it would be much better for them personally and professionally to lose to Hillary than to lose control of the party, which is how they view Cruz and Trump both.
I got to take a brief time out.
Appreciate the call, Scott.
We will be back after this.
Don't go.
It's Open Line Friday.
Rush Limbaugh.
And back to the phones.
More Los Angeles.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Hello.
Hello.
It's good.
Great to speak with you, Mr. Limbaugh.
I've been a fan for a very, very long time.
I appreciate your calling, sir.
Thank you.
I'll tell you, I've been listening to the show today.
I'm listening to the news, and with this, you know, I I I mean, I I could do it go in any direction.
My head's gonna explode.
But the this thing with Trump and this abortion comment, I absolutely agree with you that it's that it was a trap, but it really does show how just how out of control, and maybe even more so than I thought.
You know, let me jump in here.
I want to make one thing clear about this that I probably haven't.
I want to one more stab at this.
This this whole interview that Chris Matthews did with Trump.
Yes, he's asking Trump questions, and yes, he's trying to trip Trump up on abortion.
My point about that is that whole interview was essentially an attack on the Republican Party, not just Trump.
It set up a campaign narrative for the Democrats to use against the entire party, not just Trump.
It doesn't matter.
Trump's a nominee or not, they're still going to be able to use this, or they're gonna try.
That what Matthews did was establish another vein of the war on women meme and to try to keep that alive.
And it wasn't just aimed at Trump.
It was designed, once again, to caricature or characterize the entire Republican Party.
And that's why I reacted to it the way I did.
Not because I'm worried about what it did to Trump.
I'm concerned the Republican Party doesn't have an answer for this.
The Republican Party themselves doesn't know what to do with this war on women business.
And it's about time they came up with something, because it's ridiculous.
Women out there asking to be exempted from taxes for tampons for crime.
And this is gonna happen.
This is what, folks, this kind of feminism is eventually going to get what it wants.
You laugh about it.
Oh my God, look at these women in Ohio.
They don't want to pay $4 a year.
The same thing happened with contraceptives.
But Rush, but Rush, I thought you were opposed to tax.
I am opposed to taxes.
That's not what this is about.
They're dividing us.
These women are saying we shouldn't pay this tax because men don't have to pay an equivalent tax.
They're doing everything they can to drive wedges between us, between men and women, between liberals, conservatives, between races.
I can't wait to get this demographic survey that the Pew people don't want to do it the next hour.
This whole thing that Matthews did was actually aimed and designed to impugn the entire party.
And that's why when I see people jumping all over Trump for this, they better be very careful.
Because if they don't understand what the purpose of that was, they're gonna end up being ensnared in it themselves.
I'm so you you made me want to make that point.
I apologize for interrupting you, but go ahead and finish your point now.
Oh, well, the the point I was trying to make was just basically that.
And I think it was, I think you were the one who broke it down, uh, I think it was yesterday.
Just saying if if you're posed with a hypothetical question to say if if blank is made illegal and someone commits blank, should they be punished?
And you say, well, yeah, I guess so, they should be punished.
It was if it was something illegal.
I I'm I'm still kind of scratching my head, wondering, okay, what's the problem with that?
I realize what I realize the way that they're spinning it.
Um, but I I I really do feel like if people just you know took a break and just took a step back and actually listened to the tape.
Because let me tell you what's wrong with it.
You're helping me make my point.
What's wrong with it is that abortion isn't going to become illegal in this campaign or the next, and the Republican Party does not have a policy that's designed to punish women and put them in jail for it.
And that nevertheless is what Chris Matthews and the Democrat Party and the media are trying to create with that whole line of hypothetical questions.
You you can you can give your answer.
A lot of people said, Rush, what are you different Trump for?
If you really are pro-life, and if the hypothetical is presented to you, if you're pro-life, you're pro-life.
You think it's wrong, then somebody ought to be punished for it if it's a crime, right?
So you ought to have an answer for it.
The whole thing's a setup because there's nobody out there actively campaigning to make it a crime.
There, if the pro-life movement is about changing minds and hearts, it's not about putting people in jail.
Nobody, I don't know anybody talking about putting people in jail.
And asking this line of question was is not designed to find out what Trump thinks about this.
It's not what Matthews was trying to do.
He's doing the same thing that Stephanopoulos is trying to do, and that is tar and feather the entire Republican Party as a bunch of people who want to put women in jail, who want to create dual societies where women are subordinate and barefoot pregnant kitchen, whatever it is, this bias and prejudice they think we have, or that they're trying to create, they're trying to continue it and grow it and expand it.
That's why they asked it as a hypothetical.
Can anybody tell me?
Do you know of anybody?
Maybe I'm wrong.
Is there anybody in the pro-life movement who wants to put women in jail right now today, as part of making a reversing Roe versus Wade?
I I've I've never I've never heard that that was such a completely out of left field question.
I wish Trump would have been better prepared to answer that.
But like you said, it hasn't been an issue in this campaign.
And why should I mean it's like saying you should have a plan for the hypothetical zombie apocalypse, just in case, because you're going to be president, so you should know this stuff.
I I don't think you you you can expect everybody to have an answer for any kind of a hypothetical.
Wait a second.
No, no, see, but see this one is fundamental.
If the if the Republican Party does not, and I know and I by Republican Party I mean everybody, conservatives, moderates, inter liberates metal block, libertarians, whatever.
This whole issue that has become known as the war on women, there's still people on our side laughing at it.
This is so ridiculous.
Nobody's gonna fall for this.
And I hate to tell you, but the people on the left have been so ill-educated and so infused with fear, they do believe it.
That's why the question in the hypothetical was asked.
And it was an attempt to characterize and impugn the entire Republican Party conservative movement, and everybody smugly out there smugly saying, What a fool Trump made of himself.
Well, he didn't have an answer for it.
Well, neither does the Republican Party.
You can sit there and laugh and get smug that Trump embarrassed himself and hurt himself.
But if you don't understand that this is...
They don't have anything but this and the race card to play.
Their policies are abject failures.
And we don't have anybody out there talking about that either.
The Democrat Party, the leftist movement, is an absolute disaster.
Their policies have led to the messes that we are in.
The only cards they've got to play are abortion and race.
And every time they play them, after all these years, there still isn't an effective answer to nuke it and do away with it.
And they tried it again this week.
And once again, the fastest three hours in media.
It's just rolling right on.
We've got two hours now and just one more to go.
Open Line Friday featuring your phone calls today.
If people want to weigh in, your chance to do so.
800 282 2882.
▲
Export Selection