All Episodes
Previous Next
June 6, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:11
June 6, 2016, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Seventy two years since D Day.
T Day was today seventy two years ago.
Boy, I I look at our country right now, and that seems like it had to be seven hundred and twenty years ago to imagine that we would have been capable of that kind of undertaking.
I actually made comments about D Day a few years ago on the Rush program because I guest hosted once before, and Russia's very predictable.
The days that he takes off are almost always the same ones year after year, so the days that I come in here are almost the same ones year after year.
Anyway, we've been talking about Donald Trump, the conflict that many Republicans have with him, the criticism now even from some Republican supporters of Trump over his comments about the judge presiding in the case that's hearing the Trump University lawsuits.
I've suggested that Donald Trump in his own way is kind of like Muhammad Ali.
It's hard to just categorize him as either good or bad.
We've also been taking some calls on the subject of whether or not Trump really is off base in suggesting that the judge might be biased against him because of his ethnicity.
I'm going to get back to the phones in a second here, but I want to make a couple of other comments that might suggest that Trump isn't being all that unreasonable.
Do all of you remember Alberto Gonzalez?
He was the attorney general of the United States.
Alberto Gonzalez.
He was White House counsel and then United States Attorney General.
He had been suggested as a potential United States Supreme Court nominee.
He wrote a column over the weekend of the Washington Post saying that Donald Trump has every right to question whether or not Judge Gonzalo Curiel is being fair.
Alberto Gonzalez is obviously Latino.
He doesn't think Trump is necessarily off base here.
This is what Gonzalez wrote.
There may be other factors to consider in determining whether Trump's concerns about getting an impartial trial are reasonable.
Curial is reportedly a member of a group called La Raza Lawyers of San Diego.
Trump's aides, meanwhile, have indicated that they believe Curriel is a member of the National Council of La Raza, a vocal advocacy organization that has vigorously condemned Trump and his views on immigration.
The two groups are unaffiliated and Curiel is not a member of NCLR, but Trump may be concerned that the lawyers association or its members represent or support the other advocacy organization.
Coupled with that question is the fact that in 2014, when he certified the class action lawsuit against Trump, Curiel appointed the Robins Geller law firm to represent plaintiffs.
Robins Geller has paid six hundred seventy-five thousand dollars in speaking fees since two thousand nine to Trump's likely opponent Hillary Clinton and to her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Currell appointed the firm in the case before Trump had the presidential race, but again, it might not be unreasonable for a defendant in Trump's position to wonder who Curio favors in the presidential election.
These circumstances, while not necessarily conclusive, at least raise a legitimate question to be considered.
Regardless of the way Trump has gone about raising his concerns over whether he's getting a fair trial, none of us should dismiss those concerns out of hand without carefully examining how a defendant in his position might perceive them, and we certainly should not dismiss them for partisan political reasons.
Finally, some have said that Trump's criticism of the judge reflects on his qualifications to be president.
If the criticism is based solely on Curiel's race, that is something voters will take into account in deciding whether he is fit to be president.
If, however, Trump is acting from a sincere motivation to protect his constitutional right to a fair trial, his willingness to exercise his rights as an American citizen and raising the issue even in the face of severe criticism is surely also something for voters to consider.
That's Alberto Gonzalez, he's the former attorney general of the United States.
My comment.
For most of my lifetime, race and ethnicity have been introduced into both American politics and the legal system.
The argument has been made that our system, both politically and legally, is inherently biased against minorities.
If you can raise questions of bias because a judge or a jury is white, is it all that out of line to raise questions of obfuscation?
about bias?
Because the judge in this case may be a Mexican American.
I don't think Trump, initially at least, spelled this out all that eloquently.
But that doesn't mean that he's necessarily completely wrong in suggesting that the judge might be laying for him.
Because judges lay for people all the time.
Many judges have agendas.
And it's very possible that this judge is an activist who doesn't like Donald Trump.
On the larger question in front of many people like me who are trying to decide where we are with Donald Trump.
I suspect at some point I'm going to have to make a decision.
For heaven's sakes, I'm a talk show host.
I do a show every day in Milwaukee.
I'm going to have to decide whether or not I support Donald Trump or not.
The people who demanded that I do it the instant that the Indiana primary was over a month ago, okay, Ted Cruz, your guy lost, you've got to get behind Trump for crying out loud.
Give me a little bit of time here to catch my breath.
But there are a lot of things that need to be taken into consideration, and one of them is this.
Part of Donald Trump's appeal is profoundly patriotic.
I know that everybody has analyzed the Trump voters and tried to figure out where they're coming from, why they're willing to overlook the fact that he's taken rather liberal stands on some issues, why they're willing to overlook some of the things that he said that may not be presidential.
And I think the answer is this.
There are a lot of Americans who want us to still be the United States of America and maintain our national identity.
They perceive Trump as unabashedly patriotic.
They perceive him as when he talks about building a wall and throwing out illegals, enforcing a notion of Americanism.
When they hear him talking about banning Muslims temporarily or whatever from coming into the United States, they believe that he's protecting America.
For the last eight years we've had a president who's been running around the world apologizing for everything that we've done and essentially not seeming to believe in America itself.
America as a nation that is great has been under attack.
The whole concept has been criticized.
Now you see swarms of illegal immigrants coming into the United States, apparently with no desire at all to assimilate.
You take a look at that rally in San Jose, where American citizens who are walking in to see a candidate for president of the United States talk are attacked and being beaten up by in the cases of some of the people some people, people carrying a flag of another nation.
You wonder why people support Trump.
That pushes me to want to support Trump.
The areas where I have disagreed with Trump deal with what I think is a blanket kind of attitude that he has.
I'm not a hardliner on illegal immigration as many talk show hosts are, because I think many of the illegal immigrants who have come to the United States are here to work, have good family values, are religious, are doing jobs that we've had a hard time getting Americans to do.
But we undeniably, and this is where Trump is right, have many illegal immigrants who have come in here to break our laws and come in and are not attempting to assimilate into the United States.
This is not unique to America.
They just over the weekend had the election for president of Austria.
Now it's a largely ceremonial position, but the candidate from, they call it the far right, a nationalist named Hofer, almost won.
He has been very critical of the watering down of Austrian standards, and he's been critical of the number of Muslims who have been allowed to come into Europe and essentially change European nations.
In France, Marine Le Pen gets more popular every month.
Europe has Lost its way.
We have always thought about a French culture and a German culture and a Belgian culture.
Well, that culture is being threatened by Muslims who have moved into those nations and want to impose their culture.
Here in the United States, we are a melting pot.
And I am a defender of immigration.
It has made us what is great.
But if you are going to come here, you need to come here to be an American.
You can't come here and then still believe that you're from somewhere else.
If you've made the choice to come here, you should come here as an American and accept America and be proud of America.
It's not too much to ask that if you're going to come to the United States, follow the rules.
Become an American.
Support the American flag.
There are millions of people who think this way.
They think we are losing our nation.
The reason they talk about an invasion from south of the border from Mexico, the reason they are happy that Trump has addressed some of these things, is they are afraid that we are losing our national identity.
Diversity is our strength, but nationalism is also a strength.
We are a diverse nation, but that nation is still the United States of America.
Trump represents a return to the patriotism that many Americans strongly feel.
He's certainly not the perfect messenger for this.
But by eschewing all of the rules and saying things that you're not supposed to say, he's put a lot of things on the table.
In the end, though, you have to make a decision.
Life is nothing but a series of choices.
What is the alternative?
You know, during this whole talk over the weekend about Trump and his comments and the aftermath of the sickening events that occurred in San Jose, California, where a bunch of cops ignored their sworn duty to enforce the law and protect American citizens.
Hillary Clinton kept popping off about foreign policy.
And she was given, oh, she scored some hits on this.
You know, suggesting that Donald Trump can't be the person who's allowed to have his finger on the button.
What?
She is.
She's the more stable of the two candidates running for president?
There's a story, there's a book coming out by a former Secret Service agent who served in the White House when Bill Clinton was president.
He says, and this was excerpted today in the New York Post and Emily Smith's page six column.
Gary Byrne, who was the Secret Service agent, said the White House staff lived in fear of Hillary.
She was prone to remarkable temper tantrums, and that she once hit Bill Clinton.
Who really is the likeliest one to get all hacked off and put their finger on the trick?
The next time Hillary hears about Bill having some sort of a dalliance, do you want her finger near the button?
If the question is going to be raised about the instability of Trump, how about the other side?
I think all decisions in life have to be made when considering all of the factors that are out there.
So am I mortified that Donald Trump has made criticisms about the judge that's hearing his Trump U case?
No.
Was Donald Trump my first choice to be president?
No.
Do I think Donald Trump is ideally suited to be president of the United States?
No.
Look what he's running against.
And if somehow she's stopped?
Do you want to have a 75-year-old Marxist be your president?
There's been a big magnifying glass over Trump over the last several weeks, and we all know why.
I think that before people either rule him in or rule him out, the entire context of Trump needs to be considered.
In the same way that I think we need to evaluate the life of Muhammad Ali.
We're going to take some calls on Donald Trump and this issue after the break.
My name is Mark Belling, and I'm in for Rush.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
We have some breaking news today.
No criminal charges against the parents in the guerrilla death case in Ohio where the gorilla Harambe was shot after a little child got into the guerrilla enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo.
The parents will not be charged with neglect.
All right, let's take some phone calls here.
1 800 282882 is the telephone number on the Russian Limbaugh program.
Let's go to Toronto and JJ.
It's your turn on the Rush Show with Mark Belling.
Hey, Mark, how are you today?
I'm great.
Good.
I listen to you guys.
I'm from Toronto.
I'm a Canadian.
You guys can take my comment for what it's worth.
I listen to you out of Buffalo.
Um, you know what?
We've been wanting, well, I see weak as my cousins in the States.
We've been wanting this battle against the left for eight years.
We've wanted this.
We finally have someone, yeah, he talks a little crap.
He doesn't put a cherry on top when he speaks.
But we've we've got this battle, and now we've got the sword out of the sheet, and you guys are getting gun shy down there.
I don't care if you're a union guy, a libertarian, you better get some blood and get rid of the blue blood, get rid of the dress uniform, and put on the fatigue you guys.
These leftists and these Islamists, they mean they mean business.
They're tearing your country down.
You gotta toughen up, man up and unite, or you're done.
Western Europe is done.
Do you understand that?
Yeah, no, Jay, you guys do have that.
Trudeau is your own leader up there, right?
Before you get too harsh on us, it's not exact Canada isn't exactly the bastion of right wingism right now.
I understand that.
We've got a cream puff as a prime minister.
I'm telling you guys from experience.
Our globalist leftist prime minister is a fool.
He's let he's letting in Islamist extremists.
Your your point is is that the people who support Trump or those that are considering supporting Trump have to get over their concern about every little thing that he says, right?
Absolutely.
They're throwing eggs.
I think you're right about that.
And that's thank you for the call.
I think he's right about that.
And I look at myself as a perfect example of the type of conservative who's not 100% behind Donald Trump.
In fact, right now I'm not 50% behind Donald Trump.
You do at some point, though, have to decide.
People use the term lesser of two evils.
The lesser of two evils will be if you had a vote in California tomorrow for either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.
This isn't quite that, but it is a choice.
Do the shortcomings of Donald Trump and the fact that he may say things that bother you, literally Trump, what the upside here is?
My big concern is not whether or not Donald Trump is going to continue to make statements that are hard to defend.
My concern is whether or not he would truly be conservative if he becomes president of the United States.
He's given us less cause to worry about that than the alternative.
You're not going to make Trump anything other than Donald Trump.
And I don't think that you're going to stop him from saying things that bother and upset people.
I do think that some Republicans who've jumped on Trump for these comments are concerned about losing the Latino vote altogether.
You've got a number of Republicans that are in major battles for reelection to the United States Senate.
If the Hispanic vote goes even more Democrat than it has in the past, they'll be endangered.
Trump doesn't seem to have that concern.
He keeps saying that Hispanics love him, that he's doing very well with the Latino vote, that it's not an issue for him.
You've got Republicans, though, that are worried about the whole thing all the way down the ballot.
That if people stay home or if Hispanics just decide that Donald Trump and his views are the views of the Republican Party, that there's no home for them.
We even had a caller in the first hour who is Hispanic, has been a Trump supporter, and he's giving this a second thought right now.
I think what Trump's obligation here is, is to be true to all of the people who are supporting him.
And when he expresses his points of view on this stuff, to explain it better.
Now, Alberto Gonzalez, former attorney general, made a very strong case that there is reason to believe that the judge in the Trump U case is biased for a number of reasons.
Trump didn't exactly lay all of that out.
The original shot dealt with a judge that he felt wasn't giving him a fair shake, perhaps because he's Mexican to use Trump's term.
We have a right to expect Trump to explain it a little bit better than that.
What we don't have a right To expect is for Donald Trump to suddenly become a very delicate politician who says things very carefully and isn't blunt because his bluntness, his provocative nature, and the fact that he doesn't take anything back is a big reason that he is where he is.
I don't know that I'm going to come around and support Donald Trump, but the more I see him criticized, the likelier it is that I'm going to get there, and I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that.
Mark Ellingon for Rush.
I think nationalism is at the core of Donald Trump's appeal, and that's a good thing, it's not a bad thing.
Americans have always resented and resisted being told that we have to be like everybody else.
The left, on the other hand, is constantly free.
Well, wait, you know, every nation in Europe does this.
Every nation of the free world has that.
And the proper response to that is so what?
There's a reason why we're more advanced than all of those nations.
Like Copa America.
Have you been following this?
Do you even know what it is?
Do you know what Copa America is?
No.
Do you know what Copa America is?
This is this big giant soccer thing that's going on.
It's supposed to pick up a sports section of an American newspaper.
They're all over Copa America.
You can't turn on ESPN without seeing Copa America.
Sports Illustrated, this talk show host in New York, Francesa, he railed on this.
They called him a bigot for the comments that he made.
He said that he doesn't know anything about Copa America and he's sick and tired of Sports Illustrated trying to jam soccer down our throats.
There's a reason why they keep covering this Copa America thing to the extent that they do.
They are trying to force Americans to like international soccer.
One of the reasons why so many of us are resisting it is because we're tired of being told soccer's the most popular support of the sport in the world, you have to follow it.
No, I don't.
There are a lot of sports that we have here in the United States that people don't have to follow it.
Last night I'm in a restaurant.
I'm here in New York, eating like an old person, eating like at 5 30 in the afternoon because I go to bed early because I get up early when I'm going to do the show.
So I'm in there and I'm eating at 5 30 in the afternoon, which is when old people eat.
The restaurant's got one TV on, and they're showing one of the games in Copa America.
The busboy is evidently from Jamaica and Jamaica was playing, so he can't stop watching the thing.
Then it starts to pour, and the satellite picture goes out, and the manager comes over and we better get that picture back because there's no way I'm going to miss the game, the Mexico game, because Mexico apparently was going to play the game next.
And I'm thinking the United States actually has a team in this.
Do any of you actually want them to win?
So I'm reading the New York Times.
Yes, I'm doing that.
And I read about this fiasco that occurred during the game between Mexico and Uruguay, which was the second game last night.
The game was in Glendale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix.
So there was a very, very large crowd, obviously there to root on Mexico.
I don't know how large the crowd is going to be when the United States team plays.
We've got this hot coach, you know, from Germany who can't seem to win anything.
Sixty thousand people there.
Largely pro-Mexican.
They have to play the two national anthems.
It's Mexico versus Uruguay.
They play the Mexican anthem first.
Next, the Uruguay anthem is to play.
Except they played the national anthem from Chile.
Some goof grab the Chile anthem and not the Uruguay anthem, so the Uruguayan players are sitting there staring ahead, confused, wondering why they're playing this song that isn't their national anthem.
Here's one for you.
This one, if you want to find one story out of the last seven and a half years that is a perfect metaphor for the administration of Barack Obama, it is this.
I know that that sounds pretty present.
You've got the one story that sums up the whole Obama administration.
Yes.
VA proposes covering sex changes.
I'm telling you, everything you want to know about Barack Obama and his administration is in this story.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is preparing a rule to begin covering sex reassignment surgeries and other related medical treatment for transgender veterans.
So let's hop on board the politically correct trade.
Transgenderism is the cause of the year.
So the VA is now going to make sure that any veteran who wants to change genders will have that surgery accommodate.
And I'm sure there's just a huge long line of Marines who fought in Fallujah that now want to become women.
Nonetheless, we're going to do it.
The President of the United States has had seven and a half years to fix the VA.
You're a vet who has cancer, stand in line and wait six months.
But if you're a vet boy who wants to become a girl, we'll do that tomorrow.
Well so the political correctness of Obama wanting to make it clear that he is somebody who understands gender issues and is supportive of the transgender community.
We'll have the VA go to work on that, whereas it still can't fix the long waiting times.
The head of the VA is out there yapping, saying, Well, you know, so our waits are long, they're long at Disney too.
They don't keep track of how they are.
But what does the priority become?
Political correctness and symbolism trumping actual governmental performance.
Americans want the VA to work.
Do we expect that the VA is going to operate the greatest hospitals in the world?
Well, that might be a little unrealistic, but we want the high the quality of care to be decent.
We want our veterans to be treated well.
And they can't get this right.
It's been years now since the first revelations of the terrible treatment that's going on at some, not all VA hospitals, and the lengthy waits.
The President of the United States has never seemed bothered by it.
Running the actual government, and the VA as part of his government has never been a priority to him.
This, though, the transgender surgeries.
How many staffers are going to work on that now?
Where are they going to fit in the whole waiting line list?
That's the Obama administration.
Another nod to liberal political correctness.
While doing absolutely nothing to serve the functions of government that most Americans left or right think ought to be performed.
I want to take some phone calls here to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Frank.
Frank, it's your turn on the Rush Limbaugh program with Mark Belling.
Hey Mark, how are you doing?
Thanks for taking my call.
It's clear to me that Trump is a racist because he was asked a similar question about whether he could get a fair trial if uh if there was a Muslim judge, and he said no, he didn't think he could get a fair trial.
So he the man puts people in categories, and that's the way he thinks, and and that's how he'll operate as president, and I think it disqualifies him from being the leader of all people.
Well, do you think Trump's the only you think Trump's the only politician that puts people into categories?
It's just the way he thinks about people.
He puts them in a category and he makes uh radical decisions about people without the case.
Isn't that the way Barack Obama thinks what police have you know the fact that other politicians do it?
To me, I'm I'm putting my if I'm gonna put my stamp of approval on somebody and support them, I I have to live with what that person's gonna do for the next four years.
I'm fine with that.
I understand that.
I'm merely suggesting that this notion of making assumptions about someone because of their race is something that was invented by the left and not the right.
And those that have suggested that race and ethnicity are things that cause bias that comes from the left.
How many times have we been told that one of the reasons why so many police officers show brutality toward African Americans is because the police forces don't have enough blacks.
We've been told that.
How many times have we been told that the legal system doesn't give a fair shake to blacks because there are too many whites on juries, that there needs to be a black representation?
All I'm saying is that Trump is not unique in presuming that because of somebody's ethnicity or religion that they might have certain points of view.
Now, your point, though, is fair that if you're not comfortable with it, you're not going to vote for him.
My question to you then is what's the alternative?
Well, this is the this is the alternative.
The fact is in his book, he says, I play to people's fantasies, and hyperbole is okay to get a deal.
That's what a con artist does.
So I don't know what he's going to do.
I really don't.
He's a con artist.
He admits it.
He uses emotion to plan people's emotions.
He's written these in his books.
That's how he operates, and people fall for that.
Now, what happens after people get burnt by a Bernie Madoff or somebody?
They're all crying and they're all and conservatives are going to have to live with that.
The fact is he's an unknown entity as to what he's going to do.
The fact that we're not going to be able to do a fraud case.
Conservatives may have to live with something.
Suppose Trump wins.
We're going to have to live with everything he does.
Well, we're going to have to live with everything Hillary Clinton does too if she wins.
You can make your decision on the basis of, well, I can't vote for Trump, but the alternative is to vote for no one, to vote for a third party candidate, or to vote for her.
And I don't think that you can make this decision about Trump in a vacuum by pulling out here the things that you don't like about him.
And as I say, I'm I'm honest with the audience here.
I'm not a big fan of Donald Trump.
I don't think that he necessarily shares my conservative values on a lot of things.
But I'm also open-minded enough to understand that the alternative may be far worse, and that Trump is tapping into something that is very, very positive, which is nationalism, patriotism, pride and country, and standing up against the political correctness that isn't allowing people to even open their mouths and speak.
I think all those things have to be considered.
So I'll ask you, Frank, who are you going to vote for for president?
This is the first time I will not vote because I would rather sit it out and get a good candidate in their four years and watch this con artist take apart the Republican Party, and we may never get it back the party back again.
I think that's a fair point.
But your decision not your decision not to vote.
Are you not going to show up at all?
I think you're in Florida.
I believe you've got a Senate election down there.
You I'm sure you have a member of the House of Representatives, probably local office.
You're not going to show up at all?
No, I'm well, I'll vote for local politicians.
You will.
You will at least do that, though.
Yeah, of course.
Well, you say, of course, that because that is the big fear that many people have that if Republicans who sour on Trump stay home, they don't vote for anybody down ballot.
That would be the nightmare scenario, and I would encourage you and everyone else who can't, who is a Republican and can't bring themselves to come around for Trump to understand that everything else is also at stake.
You talk about going beat somebody else in four years.
If Hillary Clinton is elected president and they get the House and the Senate, we might not make the four years.
Thank you for the call, Frank.
Now he is honest about his position.
He's not comfortable with Trump.
He thinks Trump is lousy.
I'm not totally opposed to what he says.
And I think some of the things that he said about Trump are true.
But just because we're still standing after eight years of Barack Obama, doesn't mean we can handle four more years of that kind of government.
Secondly, if you are talking about fitness or unfitness, I am not going to argue that Donald Trump is less fit to be president of the United States than Hillary Clinton because that is absurd.
There's almost no one in the nation less fit to be president than her.
The guy talks about well in Trump's book, he uses hyperbole and he's he does this, that, and the other thing.
Hillary Clinton sat there with documents under subpoena from the government of the United States for four years and failed to produce them and then had them discovered sitting on a table in the White House, the Rose Law firm billing records.
She got up and she told a lie to the people of the United States while Secretary of State about a terrorist attack that claimed Americans and told people and told the families that the a terrorist attack wasn't that.
It was some sort of protest about a movie.
You can nitpick Trump to death.
But you do need to consider what the alternative is.
Life is a matter of choices.
And for some people, this isn't a great choice.
For others, it's an outstanding choice.
They love Trump.
But let's be realistic about this.
And understand that our actions or lack thereof do have consequences.
Mark Bellingham for Rush.
Mark Bellingham for Rush.
I've been talking about nationalism, national pride in the American identity.
We believe in following the rules and we believe in fair play.
That makes us rather unique.
There are a lot of people who don't like to say that, oh, you're saying Americans are better than every yeah, I am.
This story is on page one of the Wall Street Journal.
A Wall Street Journal analysis of data from more than a dozen large public universities found that in the 2014-15 school year, the schools recorded 5.1 reports of alleged cheating for every 100 international students.
That's 5% of international students cheat.
They recorded one such report per 100 domestic students.
International students at American universities five times more likely to cheat than American students.
The story continues.
Students from China were singled out by many faculty members interviewed.
Cheating among Chinese students, especially those with poor language skills, is a huge problem, said Beth Mythnick, a University of Arizona professor of geography and development.
The Chinese cheat.
Who knew?
What a shock that is.
Well, there's a reason for it.
You talk about culture.
This is a country that has encouraged the making of fake everything.
There's a crisis of counterfeit products of every possible brand, type flooding the international market.
American coins counterfeited from China, TVs, counterfeited from China.
Everything that you have in the world in which people are suspecting counterfeit right now is coming from China.
I contend that there's a reason for this.
It is a nation that is not based on ethics.
It's a nation that's not based on right and wrong, and it's a nation that is outlawed religion.
You can't worship your God in China.
Is it any surprise that that type of nation would produce a bunch of people who come over to the United States who cheat and are then surprised that our country isn't tolerant of cheating.
The story continues.
At Ohio State University, a Chinese student took tests for Chinese classmates for cash last year, guaranteeing an A. At the University of California Urbine, some international students used the lost ID card ruse to let impersonators take exams in places of other in place of others.
At the University of Arizona, a professor told of Chinese students handing in multiple copies of the same incorrect test answers.
International students cheat at a rate five times higher than American students.
When you think about that, and you think about the pressures of college, and you understand that cheating is a problem everywhere.
Still, you see that an American student is far less likely to cheat.
There's got to be a reason for that.
And it's the same reason I think that many people resent illegal immigration while being open to legal immigration.
There are characteristics about the United States of America that are great.
And Trump's willingness to embrace that and say make America great again is a powerful and a positive message.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Mohammed Ali, of course, died, I believe, Friday night.
The story's been covered, and it seems like just about everything that could be said about Mohammed Ali was said in the overwhelming amount of coverage over the weekend, but I think the Rush audience ought to weigh in on the life and times of Mohammed Ali.
He was a remarkable American figure.
People say polarizing for me, he wasn't polarizing because polarizing implies you either loved him or hated him.
There are things about Mohammed Ali that are indefensible.
But there are also things about Mohammed Ali that are not only admirable but extraordinary.
So I'm going to try to put his life and times in context and talk about why he was as large a figure as he was and your thoughts in general about him.
So that'll be a portion of the final hour today of the program.
▲
Export Selection