All Episodes
Previous Next
July 4, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:18
July 4, 2016, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, folks, and welcome back.
Great to have you as always.
Really appreciate your being here each and every day.
Never ever take that for granted.
And I know you feel the same about me showing up here each and every day.
800-282-2882 if you want to be on the EIB network.
And we're going to be getting the phone soon in this hour.
Once again, I intended to in the previous hour, but I didn't make it.
Oh no, what happened to the guy?
Oh, for crying out, did you get his number?
Ah.
You know, we had a guy.
I could I uh this is why I wanted to get the calls the first time.
We had a guy claims to be a 20-year listener, is a hardcore leftist but loves the program.
He says he hears things, news things, stories that he doesn't hear anywhere else.
That's why he listens.
Uh he he well he doesn't get mad, he appreciates the passion I bring, and he thinks that I'd be a great guy to have a sit-down face-to-face conversation with.
Is that what he was going to say?
And I was gonna, how can you be a twenty-year listener here and still remain a liberal?
I mean, that's what liberals are afraid of.
You remember when Tom Dashl, 2002?
2002 was such a watershed year, because 2002, the midterm elections, that was the year Paul Wellstone died, and they had that big memorial for him in Minnesota, where Republican colleagues of Wellstones in the Senate showed up and were booed out of the building.
Where they memorial, and it turned out it was not a memorial.
It turned into a giant progressive, just uber leftist political rally.
And it was just filled with with hate-filled comments about Republicans and others, and one of the speakers was Tom Harkin.
And they were feeling their oats.
They thought that they had successfully destroyed Bush.
Even though Bush was in office, the Florida recount had been divisive and impassioned.
They were fit to be tied.
They think the Supreme Court, they thought the Supreme Court stole the presidency from them by shutting down the 18th recount or whatever it was.
And they were just loaded for bear.
And in 9-11, of course, happened, and they gave Bush a couple weeks and then they launched.
And they thought that the standard operating procedure in the political playbook was going to happen.
That in off-year elections, the out-of-power party wins big in congressional and senate races.
And they were loaded.
They thought they were gonna reclaim the House in 2002.
Well, it didn't happen.
It turned out that the Republicans gained seats.
I'll never forget.
I was doing election night coverage with Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw that night on NBC, and and Brokaw was was clearly uh unnerved by it.
He was he was surprised.
All the political professionals were.
This wasn't supposed to happen.
Bush was supposed to be already universally reviled.
The Republicans were supposed to have been thoroughly identified as cheaters, having stolen the election from Al Gore, and in the Wellstone Memorial, they thought was going to be a great rallying point for uh Democrat vote turnout, and then they end up losing seats, and they were beside themselves.
And they didn't know, and and shortly after that, Tom Dashell, who at the time was the Senate majority leader.
I remember Dashel came out of a meeting post-midterms.
Remember this startly?
He came out of a meeting that Democrat leaders had had, and he expressed shock, surprise, and disappointment.
He said their research, their research, their expert research had shown not only were Democrats listening to Rush Limbaugh, but they were changing their party affiliation.
And they didn't think they had the completely opposite idea.
They thought that I was Driving people away from the Republican Party.
They thought that I was creating Democrats with my daily extremism.
And their own research showed the exact opposite was happening.
Then they combined that with the exit polling data from the midterms, and they found out that values voters were the primary reason that the Republicans gained seats.
And the Democrats were confused because they couldn't remember any values issues.
And I had to remind them, you demonstrated where your values aren't with that Wellstone Memorial.
You people, you don't understand how that hurt you.
You don't understand how that are.
You thought that was one of the biggest political rallies you'd ever conducted, and it was all positive.
You have no idea that it was suicidal.
Near suicidal for you.
So anyway, it's a long story, but it's I tell it because I how can somebody be a liberal listening for 20 years and remain one?
I mean, and like the program.
I would really like to have asked the guy that.
But Snerdley tells me he had to hang up because his lunch hour was if you'd have told me that he had a limited amount of time for his lunch hour, I would have stopped everything and taken the call.
Well, Yagi is going to call back, but when's he gonna get through?
August?
November?
Sure he can call big.
He may be calling back right now.
You know how long it's some people it's taken him twenty-two years to get into this program.
Then when he gets back in, how long you're gonna keep him on hold?
Another hour.
Okay, all right.
Now I happen to mention before the end of the previous hour that Obama has a history of stuttering and stammering when the teleprompter's not around.
And just as the media in the 90s published a number of pieces along the lines of saying white lies are good, telling lies here and there, it actually, it's actually very nice to lie.
It spares people feelings, and it it it it it it's it it causes people uh to be able to avoid anxiety, because Clinton, of course, was a serial liar, and it was a negative thing, and so they had to come out with these pieces.
Well, a columnist by the name of Megan Daum back in May of 2011, published a piece in the Los Angeles Times, and I want to read to you just a short little excerpt.
It's not that Obama can't speak clearly, of course not.
It's that Obama employs the intellectual stammer.
Grab audio soundbite three.
Let me precede this.
For those of you uh you welfare queens just getting out of bed, you takers just getting out of bed, uh, maybe not have heard the first hour.
Play audio soundbite number three so I you know what it is we're discussing.
If we turn against each other based on divisions of race or religion, it if if if if if we if we fall for you know a bunch of oaky doke just because it you know it it uh you know it it sounds funny or the tweets are provocative,
then we're not gonna build on the progress that we started.
Okay, LA Times.
It's not that Obama can't speak clearly, of course not.
No, no.
It's that Obama employs the intellectual stammer.
Not to be confused with a stutter.
No, no, no, no.
We're not talking stuttering here, which the president decidedly does not do.
President Obama does not stutter.
The intellectual stammer signals a brain that's moving so fast the mouth can't keep up.
The stammer is commonly found among university professors, characters in Woody Allen movies, and public thinkers of the sort that might appear on C-SPAN, but not CNN.
And but this is not a parody piece.
This woman is dead serious.
If you're a member or a fan of that subset, chances are the president's stammer doesn't bother you.
In fact, you might even love him for it.
He sounds just like your grad School roommate, especially when he drank too much scotch and attempted to expound on the Hegadian dialect.
Right.
Okay, so here's this cover-up piece.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
That's the intellectual stammer.
He's not stuttering.
And it happens because Obama's so smart.
Oh my god, we can't even comprend.
He's so, so smart that his mouth just can't keep up with his mane, his brain.
It's just, it's that simple.
It's kind of like people you see on C SPAN, but you would never see them on CNN.
So it's classic.
Here you have the media covering up for Obama when he doesn't have his prompter.
Now I've demonstrated the intellectual stammer to you over the course of this program, and there is such a thing, by the way.
The intellectual stammer is an actual rehearsed and practiced art of speech in the intellectual world.
It is done purposely, and the purpose of it is to convey serious deep ponderances.
incredibly deep thoughts.
The intellectual stammer is designed as a signature in a way to set the intellectual way, way, way apart and And above you.
The intellectual stammer, as I say, is a practiced and honed speech pattern.
I have recognized it.
I have been able to learn it and mock it and imitate it.
I've seen it frequently.
Many intellectual stammerers were regular guests on William F. Buckley's firing line.
In fact, this LA Times piece goes on to say that Buckley himself was one who engaged in the intellectual stammer.
Nobody would a scammer, nobody would ever think that Buckley stuttered.
No, no, no, no.
And so if nobody would ever think that William F. Buckley stuttered, nobody should ever think that Obama would stutter, even though he clearly does.
What Obama did is not the intellectual scam uh stammer.
Obama didn't even get close to the intellectual stammer.
The intellectual stammer does not happen at nearly the rapid pace that Obama was stuttering in that sound bite.
The intellectual stammer goes something like this.
Imagine you're watching C-SPAN and some host has an intellectual on.
The intellectual is dressed in a coat and ties, an Oxford button-down shirt.
Intellectuals never wear collars that are not buttoned down.
I mean, if they wear coats and ties these days, the collar always has buttons.
It's never just a standard point collar.
Always.
Buttons are required.
And in some cases, the shirt will be a light blue or a white.
The tie will be a skew.
The knot in the tie will be unbalanced and never closed all the way to the top of the collar on the shirt.
It'll be a little loose, top button buttoned, and a little off-center, and the knot will be unbalanced.
This is to convey the intellectual is so important he didn't have time to worry about such mundane things as appearance.
The hair, intellectual hair is rarely in place.
It looks windswept and slept on.
Hair helmet hair from pillow hair.
It is stringy.
In some cases, bald spots are a positive.
The jacket will never match the slacks.
You never see that if they're seated somewhere on C-SPAN.
But there's a look.
The intellectuals have a look.
They have a uniform, they have a look, they have a speech pattern.
So you've got the picture here.
Sometimes the intellectual have rotten teeth.
They don't even have time to brush their teeth.
They're so brilliant, they're so constantly focused that mundane things that take up time that's considered a waste of time.
So you the the appearance is classic.
You must notice uh some or all of these characteristics.
In order to be able just visually to spot uh an intellectual.
There must be glasses.
The glasses will either be worn at the bridge of the nose or on the forehead or the top of the head, or they will actually be uh worn near the eyes as though they're being used, but they are props as well.
The intellectual always have something in his right hand, a pen or a pointer or something.
Madonna used this trick.
Every press comment.
Madonna, when sitting down, always had a pen in her hand.
It conveys intelligence, it conveys that you're writing, it conveys substance.
And then, of course, the host begins the questioning of the intellectual.
Uh tell us, tell us, uh, Professor.
Uh uh what what precisely should we conclude from your association in your fourth paragraph of the monograph that you have submitted to your publisher on three fortnights ago.
What shall we conclude from your assertion that the mating habits of the Australian rabbit bat are random and not programmatic?
The intellectual pause and smile, look condescendingly at the interviewer.
Well, um you see, uh when exploring the the the the proposition uh that the mating habits of the uh Australian rabbit that's the intellectual stammer.
The intellectual stammer is not the intellectual stammer is a considered slow pondering deep in thought stammer, and it only occurs so the intellectual can take the needed time to properly put together and assemble his brilliant answer.
It's to convey deep thought happening while speaking two things at the same time.
Well, you see, the amazing habits of the Australian rabbit bed, yes, uh well uh uh uh I I think if you if you've deeply examine the proposition, the Australian rabbit, whether or not we're talking random uh ribbidity, rather talking about programmatic problem, nevertheless we means how do we know?
And you're supposed to go, whoa, my God, I can't believe I'm in the presence of such brilliance.
Ohio Obamacare Exchange collapses.
The co-op is collapsed.
Ohio's Obamacare Plan has closed up shop, making thirteen out of twenty-three consumer-oriented and operated plans to shutter.
Over half of them have closed down.
In-health mutual in Ohio will shut down, will force more than 20,000 people to choose new plans.
They'll have 60 days to find a new plan.
Ohio's insurance regulator said today that it had to take control of the co-op because of major losses.
This, by the way, is mission accomplished.
This is designed.
No, no.
The regime would never admit this.
No, no, no, no.
I'm telling you it's mission accomplished.
This is the purpose.
You're supposed to be, you people in Ohio not supposed to be unnerved.
You're supposed to be put out, you're supposed to be frustrated, you followed the rules, you went out and made Obamacare, you got your you got your policy, and now that now the damn co-op's closing down, so you can blame the insurance company now.
That's what you're supposed to do.
Blame the private sector.
And then, in frustration, you're supposed to beg Obama to fix it.
You're supposed to beg to go, come on, I need my health insurance.
I can't get out of bed without it.
Fix it.
And you'll let the government come in, and that's how we're going to get single payer.
Mission accomplished.
Here's Chris in Charleston, South Carolina.
Great to have you on the program.
You're up first today, sir.
Hi.
Thanks, Rush.
My comment is about the president's speech.
I remember when George W. Bush used to speak, people would constantly bash him for his Stammering or his inability to articulate his thoughts, but I would always defend him and tell people when George W. Bush was speaking, he was speaking in front of the media.
That's basically like speaking in front of the enemy who are looking for any reason to rip him.
It would be very difficult to focus and articulate if you know that your audience literally basically is looking for you to fail.
Obama's always had a smooth ride when it comes to speaking to the media or its hand-picked crowds, but I think what we saw was a meltdown because if he's looking out over this crowd, they're not buying his applause lines.
They're looking at seven years of his of his past presidency and his blaming others for his failures.
It's just not selling anymore.
And it's almost like he was looking out over a crowd that was seeing that the emperor literally has no clothes.
I think you're exactly right.
I I think that's what happens when Obama shows up before what turns out to be an unfriendly or unreceptive crowd that doesn't respond as the narcissist expects.
There isn't the concert adulation, the applause lines were missed.
You are you are exactly right.
and he was frustrated and he didn't know what to do.
He didn't have the prompter and people weren't reacting so he had to vamp, trying to be funny.
And to really understand I think emphasize your point, Gwen Eifel, PBS news hour host, took a few digs at the people of Elkart, Indiana.
And she took she she really criticized the people that showed up at Obama's event for not giving him any credit for the drop in unemployment.
For not being enthusiastic for crying out loud, Barack Obama came to Elkart.
Couldn't you at least show some enthusiasm?
What gives?
That's exactly almost exactly what she said.
Get this, folks, a a hassrel in uh Plano, Texas.
That's in the um Dallas Metroplex.
A hash scroll in Plano, Texas, is denying National Honor Society members the right to wear the National Honor Society emblem on white stoles for graduation.
The reason given says that one mother.
Graduates may not wear any club or organizational regalia, and they cannot single out students.
One mother complained.
Her child is not a National Honor Society.
Uh what do you call it?
Member?
I mean, National Honor Society is something they Yeah, you they put you in there.
I mean, every when I went to school, every parent wanted their kid to be in it.
Not every parent was happy, not every kid got in.
And the National Honor Society electees, whatever they were called, I forget.
They were recognized and they were given this emblem to wear around that denoted they had achieved this great honor.
But Texas students who have been inducted are not going to be allowed to let anybody know.
Kelly Ann Frederick says that she was told by National Honor Society sponsor that scrubal officials wanted everybody to feel included on graduation day.
She was told it school administrators didn't want to single out any students.
Her son has worked for many years for the right to be recognized of the National Honor Society, but her son Garrett Frederick will not be able to wear the NHS stoles.
Kind of like a sash that goes over your gown.
ABC TV station KVUE reported that he said, I'm not just an honor student, I am an NHS student.
I worked hard.
I put in the hours.
The young man explained that in addition to achieving good grades, he performed 20 hours of community service every semester, and he had an excellent attendance record.
You can't skip too many classes and get into NHS.
I happen to know that's why I never had a prayer.
But anyway, it's just more of the same.
Everybody, just like everybody else, nobody's allowed to stand out.
Certainly nobody allowed to stand out above anybody else.
No recognition of superior achievement will happen.
We're not going to permit it.
It's humiliating, it's demeaning, it's divisive, it's not inclusive, it's all this other Nambi pamby leftist.
BS.
Nobody works hard.
Hard work doesn't distinguish you from anybody else.
You're just the same as everybody else.
We're all equal.
We're all vanilla, and it doesn't matter what you do or how hard you work, you are not going to be recognized.
And of course, this movement isn't new.
Here's uh here's Jay and Hyannisport, Massachusetts.
Thank you, sir.
You're next.
Great to have you with us.
Mr. Rush.
Hey.
I don't mind being put on hold because your commercials are simply outrageous.
And kudos to Snerdley, your astute adjutant.
He's uh you guys have your fingerprint all over that.
Anyway, uh I just want to talk about the NBC and the ABC news stations who are really zeroing in on critical issues.
Like Trump University and funding for Ventritz and Donald Trump's underwear preference and eyeball socket size, what have you.
Uh I realize that they have to scrutinize the the highest office in the land.
But I think Donald Trump has really thin skin.
And he gets sidetracked when these clowns talk about issues that really don't matter.
Now the issues that matter to me are balancing the budget, ISIS, illegal immigrants, and heroin epidemics, stuff like that.
And I think Trump should really deflect these people, the media, when they when they constantly zero in on things that don't really matter.
Well wait, you know, you this is a uh as a recipient of some of this stuff.
I I have to admit that the subject that you have brought up here is of particular interest to me.
And I I don't want to offend you here, but I I don't know if you've ever been victimized by this kind of malignment, defamation, lies or what have you.
But it's really hard to say, you know what, I don't care.
It doesn't matter.
I'm gonna stick to the issues.
Now I hear you.
It's really, really hard.
And and and there are many schools of thought, Jay, on how to deal with this.
And I have found that there isn't one tried and true what tried and true way to deal with this.
Now I know how Trump deals with it.
I don't think Trump has thin skin.
He may, but I I don't think that's what you're seeing.
I think what you're seeing is a philosophy.
Um Donald Trump has been a public figure for a long time.
As such, there have been many things that he considered wrong, damaging, lies, harmful, written and said about him.
And at some point, he devised a personal strategy for dealing with it.
And we're seeing it in action.
Whenever anybody takes a shot, he fires right back at him.
He doesn't care what it is.
It if other people see it as Trump successfully being distracted, which is what I think you're saying.
You're thinking these people are going after Trump on his surface stuff, it nobody cares about it, it doesn't matter, and he's wasting valuable time responding to it, and he ought to still be talking about kicking ISIS all over the map and so forth.
Uh but Trump has this uh philosophy that he's not gonna leave it up to the decency and goodness of people to wade through the BS and conclude the media is telling falsehoods.
He is going to tell them that's what it is.
He's not gonna rely on people to figure it out.
His strategy is whenever anybody takes a shot, he's gonna fire right back at them.
It doesn't care.
D doesn't care what it is, what it's about, he's going to launch.
Because he's gonna shut it down.
He's gonna do his best to discredit the people making the charge.
He's going to do his best to tell people his supporters that this is nothing more than a an effort to derail him and so forth.
He's gonna point out that others are not getting this kind of scrutiny, others are not getting this kind of investigation, and it is exactly what it's about.
It depends on the person, the public figure as to as to how you want to uh deal with it.
Uh and it depends on the actual substance of of the issue, in this case Trump you.
You know, if if there was no fraud and he knows there was no fraud, then he's gonna go as far as he has to to convince as many people as he can that all this is being made up and lied about and so forth.
Uh so I understand the strategy.
The there's another strategy is ignore it.
The more you ignore it and it'll eventually go away, people forget about it.
The point the problem with that is uh the the people that most famously had that strategy, George W. Bush and Carl Rove.
They didn't respond to a single thing.
And as a s as a result, the the media and the Democrat Party were able to destroy the Bush second term.
They were able to destroy the war on terror.
They were able to destroy the Iraq war and the purpose for it.
Not saying that Bush didn't have a role in it, but the fact that he didn't engage.
I've got a soundbite about this.
Let me let me find this.
It's day two, by the way, of the media reacting to what I said about Trump's press conference, the way calling the media sleaze.
Grab sound bites four and five.
This this'll illustrate my point here to you, folks.
Well, it it illustrate one side of the strategy that I'm talking about.
First up is Kimberly Gilfoyle.
This on the five yesterday, and they are talking about me and my comments that praised Trump the way he handled his press conference, challenging reporters, calling them dishonest and this kind of thing.
And Kimberly Gilfoyle commented on it, played the portion of the audio of me, and then and then said this.
Trump won praise from Rush Limbaugh for talking tough with reporters.
Let's listen to this.
That was a kind of press conference.
Republican voters have been dying to see for who knows how many years.
How many years have people been begging for a Republican to just once take on the media the way Trump did.
All the way from the premise to the details to the motivation.
He took them all on.
By the way, that's very important.
What I said is very important.
He took he he tackled their premise.
He tackled uh the details, the substance of their allegations, and explained to people why.
He he obliterated them on all three aspects of what they were doing.
Now let's go to Dana Perino.
Dana Perino at the five was a White House press spokesman for George W. Bush.
She followed Tony Snow.
And so Gilfoyle says, so Dana, what what is your reaction to all of this?
What Rush was saying is true.
There is a desire and a demand for Republicans to take on the press more like that.
I've been criticized, saying that I didn't do enough to push back against the media, and I should have done more, and I should have fought more.
My answer to that is that that's easy to say.
Trump gets away with it because he's skilled at it.
He doesn't care what they say about him.
And I just felt that as the press secretary to the United States of America, I had a responsibility to answer the questions to the press.
They have a job to do.
One of the things our country does, great, is to have our First Amendment, the freedom of the press, to ask questions to hold the government accountable.
Okay, now that's perfectly fine, but what does it mean?
Dana Perino, and I think she's speaking for many in the Bush administration here, is saying that she thought that it was her responsibility to answer the questions the press asked.
It was her responsibility.
It was it and as such, Dana Perino and the Bush administration, it's almost as though they saw themselves as mere public servants.
And the press was this constitutionally comprised group of people that are asking us questions, and we are duty-bound as public servants to answer them.
They did not see themselves as gladiators.
They did not see themselves as combatants in the blood sport of politics.
They saw themselves as public servants.
And they thought that that would be applauded and appreciated by the general public.
That they were staying above the fray, that they were answering the questions, and they were not combative with the press, and they were not challenging the press.
They were being respectful of the press, realizing the press had their job to do.
We have our job to do, is do our best to answer their questions.
The fact that the press was actually trying to destroy George W. Well, I mean, that's part and parcel here, but our job was to answer their questions.
Well, Trump doesn't look at it that way.
Trump believes in exposing the fraud behind the question or the faulty, phony premise behind the question.
Trump believes in exposing the duality of purpose.
Believes in exposing, okay, you want to, you want to, you want to examine my claims.
Are you gonna examine Hillary's claims?
Are you gonna ask her these kind of questions?
Are you going to, you know, every day you interview my daughter, you ask my daughter about my sex life.
Are you gonna ever ask Chelsea Clinton about her dad's sex life?
Because they never do.
But whenever they talk to Ivanka Trump, Trump's daughter, almost every time they ask her about her dad's Playboy past or related matters, but you're not gonna get one question of Chelsea Clinton in that regard.
All Trump is saying, you know, I'm not gonna be your punching bag.
I'm just not gonna.
That's his strategy.
And if you come after me, if you wound me, you're gonna pay a price.
As I say, there are many different strategies for dealing this, this this kind of uh attack.
But if if it's never happened to you, and I I don't it it can be even in your local community.
I mean, if there are controversial things that happen in in small towns and major cities all over the country.
Uh if if you've been in the middle of one of those, then you you're gonna obviously gonna have a different perspective of somebody who hasn't.
And it's it's easy for people who have never been to fame, never been lied about, never been challenged, never been attempted to be destroyed.
It's easy for people like that to think they know what they would do or what the people under assault should do.
But until it happens to you, it's well, when it happens, you'll have an entirely different perspective on on how to deal with it.
Because most people are unable.
Most people, Dana Perino said Trump doesn't care.
Well, he does, but for different reasons.
Most people care desperately what other people think of them.
Most people live and die based on what other people think of them.
Most people go through life on the verge of being embarrassed every day if somebody learns something about them and they'll do anything to make sure it doesn't happen.
They'll read about gossip on everybody else and they'll eat it up and they'll laugh and like it, but boy, if it ever happens to them, then they get so concerned what people think about them.
And uh it's really hard not to.
It's really hard not to care what people think about you.
And in certain certain areas of life, you have to have that attitude if you're gonna be able to endure it.
Did you hear that the PGA has moved Trump's the the World Golf Championships match play event, I think it's match play.
No, it's not match play.
The one at Trump Durrell uh every spring.
They're moving it.
The PGA is grab soundbite number eight.
They're moving the tournament.
Cadillac pulled out as a sponsor.
They're moving the World Golf Championship at Trump Durell, which is down to Miami to Mexico.
They're moving it to Meiko City.
Tim Fincham, the commissioner PGA made the announcement at the memorial, which Jack Nicholas's tournament in Ohio.
And Trump was in my adopted hometown of Sacramento yesterday and had these comments about.
They moved the world golf championships from Miami to Mexico City.
Can you believe it?
Can you believe it?
They moved the PGA Tour, moved the World Golf Championships from Miami where they're furious to Mexico City.
Not good.
But that's okay.
Folks, it's all gonna be settled.
You vote for Donald Trump as president.
If I become your president, this stuff is all gonna stop.
It's all gonna get settled.
Other people, oh my God, he's a dictator.
He's an authoritarian.
You hear that?
Trump says he's gonna do it.
What does it mean?
Is he gonna put Fensterman in jail?
That's what he means, right?
Trump's gonna put Fensterman jail.
No, folks, lighten up.
In fact, Trump was being interviewed about this.
That's from an actual appearance in my adopted hometown of Sacramento.
I'm sure Trump mentioned that.
When he was on the radio talking about this, that this this is this is this is Trump's natural born comedic instincts with his New York joke telling timing.
He just happened to throw in in his answer, I hope they've got kidnapping insurance.
Hope they remember the kidnapping insurance.
Gonna put it in Mexico City.
Can you believe it?
And of course, the PGA said that's just totally coincidental.
The fact that the tournament has been at Durell since 1962.
That's how long a tournament.
It's been called different things, but it's been at in Miami at Duralph since 1962.
And they're moving into Mexico City.
And it's all because of what Trump said way back in July when he got into the campaign.
Now, don't anybody misunderstand.
I was not saying Tony Snow was a pushover when he was Bush pressed.
In fact, Tony Snow routinely corrected the premise of some of the.
No, Tony Snow battled him.
He was he was uh good at at that job.
Uh and he he went after the press in in unique ways.
He was he was not a pushover.
Don't I was not saying that really about Tony Snow.
I don't know.
▲
Export Selection