Unofficial Summary of the Rush Limbaugh Show

for Friday, September 30, 1994

by John Switzer

This unofficial summary is copyright (c) 1994 by John Switzer.
All Rights Reserved. These summaries are distributed on
CompuServe and the Internet, and archived on CompuServe (DL9 of
the ISSUES forum) and Internet (cathouse.org and
grind.isca.uiowa.edu). The /pub/jrs directory at ftp.netcom.com
contains the summaries for the past 30 days. Distribution to
other electronic forums and bulletin boards is highly encouraged.
Spelling and other corrections gratefully received.

Please read the standard disclaimer which was included with the
first summary for this month. In particular, please note that
this summary is not approved or sanctioned by Rush Limbaugh or
the EIB network, nor do I have any connection with them other
than as a daily listener.

*************************************************************

September 30, 1994

BRIEF SUMMARY OF TOPICS: Democrats attack wife of Republican
Michael Huffington; Rush suggests how U.S. could regain
Japanese's good favor; Hillary Clinton attacks Rush, saying she
regrets making him rich; WSJ reporter does her best to cover up
how Hillary deceived the nation last April about Whitewater;
Hillary agrees with Eleanor Roosevelt that "a woman is like a tea
bag - when she gets into hot water, she just gets stronger"; U.S.
now has 19,000 troops in Haiti, more than expected but grenade
bombings still go on; White House Car Talk panel is considering
rationing cars, limiting the right of the elderly to drive,
increasing fuel taxes, requiring higher ages for driver licenses,
and alternative days for commuters so as to curb pollution; Rush
is not worried for his job when liberals are voted out of office;
liberals first claimed that Clinton's election would doom Rush
and his show, but now are claiming Rush won't have anything to
talk about when Clinton leaves office; caller doesn't think
Hillary is as powerful as Rush thinks; caller is worried about
increasing anti-smoking attitude in New York City; Cardinal John
O'Connor notes that Americans are demanding a right to an
abortion, but are opposing the right and choice to smoke; caller
points out that people don't complain about car insurance but
they do complain about health care insurance; caller thinks Rush
sometimes is defensive, and takes advantage of his callers by
"running" with their ideas; conservative Democrat caller begs
Rush not to use `liberal' and `Democrat' as synonyms; Senator
Carl Levin (D-MI) talks to Rush about S.349, the Lobby Reform and
Disclosure Act; Rush reads sections 3.8 (a), (b), and (c) of
Lobby Reform and Disclosure Act; Rush talks with Rep. Ernest
Istook (R-OK) about the Lobby Reform and Disclosure Act; lobby
reform bill is so vague that different people have widely
different interpretations of it; caller thinks Rush's next book
should be on the Constitution; caller was pleasantly surprised to
find his college professor wasn't ultra-liberal; NHL announces
lockout, delaying games for at least two weeks; Rush describes
how he's a uniform freak who went to unbelievably great lengths
to get a real Pittsburgh Steelers jersey in 1980; Bill Clinton
tells radio talk show host that Congress has to stop Americans
and lobbying groups from going directly to the people and buying
media time, "going around Congress"; lobby reform act would have
chilling effect on anyone who might encourage others to call or
contact members of Congress; Clintons aren't going to blame
themselves for the defeat of their health care plan, but rather
their opponents; Tom Foley could become first incumbent Speaker
of the House thrown out of office; caller wonders if Democratic
movers and shakers were responsible for Carter's going to Haiti;
CNN reporter seemed astounded that Haitians were looting; Rush
used to choose his own bumper music, but now lets his staff do
that job.

LIMBAUGH WATCH

September 30, 1994 - It's now day 619 (day 638 for the rich and
the dead, and 39 days until the November elections) of "America
Held Hostage" (aka the "Raw Deal" which has 843 days left) and
682 days after Bill Clinton's election, but Rush is still on the
air with 659 radio affiliates (with more than 20 million
listeners weekly world-wide), 250 TV affiliates (with a national
rating of 3.7), and a newsletter with nearly 500,000 subscribers.

His first book was on the NY Times hardback non-fiction
best-seller list for 54 consecutive weeks, with 2.6 million
copies sold, but fell off the list after Simon and Schuster
stopped printing it. The paperback version of "The Way Things
Ought To Be" was on the NY Times paperback non-fiction
best-seller list for 28 weeks. Rush's second book, "See, I Told
You So," was on the NY Times best-seller list for 16 weeks and
has sold over 2.45 million copies.

NEWS

o	Although in the 1992 Presidential campaign, Democrats attacked
anyone who questioned Hillary Clinton's policies, beliefs, or
motives, claiming that such "attacks on a wife" were
unconscionable, California Democrats have made the wife of Rep.
Michael Huffington (R-CA) a campaign issue.

Huffington, who's challenging Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) for
her Senate seat, has erased a 10-point deficit in the polls and
is now virtually tied with Feinstein. Democrats have responded to
Huffington's gains by attacking his wife, Arianna Stassinopoulos
Huffington, trying to raise fears about her prior involvement
with the Church of the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness, a
church founded by John-Roger Hinkins.

California Democratic party chairman Bill Press has demanded that
Huffington release his tax returns so as to prove his wife's
contention that she is no longer a member of the group and has
not donated any money to them since she left in 1986 before
marrying Huffington. "She said they haven't given money to
John-Roger," Press told a San Francisco radio talk show host.
"How do we know that? The only answer is for Michael Huffington
to release his tax returns. What does he have to hide?"

Press cited a book by former church member Peter McWilliams who
alleges that "Arianna's mind is controlled by John-Roger." A
spokesman for Mrs. Huffington, though, denounced McWilliams'
charges as a cynical ploy to boost book sales, and she denied
that Arianna Huffington was still a member of the church.

LEST WE FORGET

The following are from the Rush Limbaugh show on Friday, October
2, 1992:

o	Vice President Dan Quayle was visiting Rush's hometown of Cape
Girardeau, MO, and having met Rush's mom, brother, and
sister-in-law, the Vice President decided to call Rush to say he
was glad to be in "Rush Limbaugh territory."

Quayle reported that he had just agreed to debate Senator Gore on
October 13th, and since this debate would have only one
moderator, Quayle suggested Rush be it. "I think that would be
great," Quayle remarked, "and I'm sure that Al Gore would welcome
that, too."

Rush said he would be happy and honored to serve as moderator,
especially on October 13th, which was his mother's birthday.
Quayle promised to relay the news to Senator Gore, adding "I'm
sure that he'll be thrilled with that, as I am, and so will all
your listeners because you'll keep the debate going, you'll put
the questions out there, and we're really looking forward to it.
This is what the media's been wanting - they've wanted a good,
solid, objective moderator to keep the discussion going. We have
a lot of issues on the table, and you're the man."

As to family values, Quayle noted that when the left pounced all
over him for his mention of this topic in San Francisco in May,
they ignored the "values" part and concentrated on what they
thought "family" meant. The left also focused solely on his
mention of Murphy Brown and single mothers, although he had also
mentioned the missing fathers.

o	Thomas Sowell, a brilliant economist at the Hoover Institute, a
conservative think-tank at Stanford, wrote a column about family
values and the cultural war that was going on in America:

"No one seems to have a harder time figuring out who the cultural
elite are than the cultural elite themselves. No one seems to
have a harder time figuring out what the values issue is all
about than those who have been working overtime to undermine the
values traditional in American society. All across the country,
the undermining and destruction of the values that children were
taught at home is going on in public schools.

"One of the first things that a family tries to teach its
children is the difference between right and wrong. One of the
first things our schools try to destroy is that distinction. This
destruction is called `values clarification.' The up-to-date way
to carry on the destruction of traditional values is to claim to
be solving some social problem like drugs, AIDS, or teen
pregnancy.

"Only those few people who have the time to research what is
actually being done in drug education, sex education, or death
education know what an utter fraud these labels are. For these
are courses are about how right and wrong are outmoded notions,
about how your parents' ideas are no guide for you, and about how
each person must start from scratch to develop his or her own way
of behaving.

"And schools are only one of the battlegrounds. All across the
country children are going to and from school and they must pass
racks of dirty newspapers on display. They dare not enter many of
the urban parks where every form of degeneracy flourishes.

"All this happens, and not because the Constitution requires that
we permit it, not because the American people have voted to
permit it, but because judges, responsive to the media's values
and preferences, choose to lie about the Constitution and say
that it requires that we suffer what untold generations of
Americans before us refused to suffer, though living under the
very same Constitution."

o	The NY Post had a story about Fred Malloc, one of Bush's
campaign aides, who was also on the Board of Directors for
Northwest Airlines, in the news because it was laying off a
number of workers. The Post's headline for the story was "Jobs
Lost at Bush Aide's Airline." Rush wondered how many times the
media had done a story about failing Arkansas businesses, such as
Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, with similar headlines
blasting Clinton, and he bet the answer was none.

o	Tim from Chicago, IL travelled a lot around the Midwest, and he
had noticed a distinct difference between the Clinton commercials
being run in Wisconsin and those run in major cities. In cities
experiencing high unemployment, Clinton's commercials basically
said "things are bad, vote for me." In a place like Madison,
though, which had a better economy, Clinton was running a "get
the deadbeats off welfare" style of commercial.

Rush thought Tim had "nailed it" - the new logo for Clinton
should be a giant panda bear since he continually pandered. It
was impossible to know what Clinton really stood for.

o	Researchers in Utah were trying to figure out why cows would
eat Ponderosa pine needles which caused the abortion of calves.
Rush asked if this meant researchers had found "feminazi cows."
He pointed out that the difference between human feminazis and
bovine feminazis was about 10 pounds and a flannel shirt. After
prompting from his staff, he decided to explain it was the
feminazi cow which weighed less and which didn't have to wear the
flannel shirt.

o	Perry from Providence, RI read the book "The Child Abuse
Industry" by Mary Pride, which exposed the myth of the child
advocacy groups in America. Just as homeless advocates had
exaggerated the problem, Pride showed that this was happening in
child abuse as well.

Pride noted that statistics allegedly showed that one out of
every four female children was sexually abused before she was 18,
and that only 10% of these crimes were reported. Pride called
this "marshmallow land" - if the statistics showed that one
quarter of the female population was "unwillingly defiled" before
the age of 18, but only one-tenth of the cases were reported,
then the number of reported cases meant that 200% of the female
population were victims of sexual abuse.

o	The bias of the mainstream media against Bush was making the
news; even Mike McAlary of the NY Post noted that the NY Times
had nothing but positive things to say about Bill Clinton. When
ABC anchor Brit Hume was interviewed by a Chattanooga, TN
reporter about this bias of the national media, he replied that
Bush had a legitimate complaint because the press had been openly
admiring Clinton, but Hume thought this was changing.

o	A Santa Barbara, CA man, Allen Hatch, was waging a one-man
campaign to stop "doggy discrimination" against his pet miniature
Chihuahua, Gomez. Hatch was putting up signs asking "Where is
Gomez?" because he didn't think it was right that he couldn't
bring his dog into clothing stores and other non-food
establishments.

o	The 6th Annual Santa Barbara Beachfront Festival featured
sculptures from students at nearby Santa Barbara City College.
The day-long fair was "done in harmony with nature," but not all
of the artistic works cooperated with their creators.

One three-foot square bird cage was mounted on a pole that was
attached to a raft designed to float in the ocean. The
sculpture's four creators placed food inside the cage in the hope
that seagulls would enter it, so the art would become a work of
living art in which free birds sought to be caged, a contrast to
the more common metaphor of caged birds trying to get free.

However, once the raft was anchored and set afloat, not one
seagull entered the cage to get the food. The seagulls continued
to ignore the cage until strong waves knocked the raft down,
spilling the food out into the ocean. The seagulls then rapidly
descended to eat the bounty that nature had provided for them.

The most interesting of the student works was a sculpture of a
crucified mermaid that symbolized the "deplorable state of the
ocean." Student artist Mark Failla said that he did the life-size
sculpture because "the ocean is dead."

According to the college's student newspaper, The Channels, the
mermaid sculpture was "the overall winner for the many children
at the festival. One could frequently hear the excited little
voices of children announcing `a mermaid, a mermaid!' " However,
young art lovers expecting to see a replica of the "Little
Mermaid" were disappointed - this mermaid had its arms and
flipper nailed to the wood of her 12-foot tall cross.

********

MORNING UPDATE

Tonight at midnight is the Clinton administration's deadline for
coming to a trade agreement with the Japanese, and should it
expire, a trade war could be in the offing. Treasury Secretary
Lloyd "Lord" Bentsen doesn't think this is likely, but Rush still
thinks it would be wise to seek as much good will with the
Japanese as possible. He thus has a suggestion to make.

The Japanese Labor Ministry has just completed a two-year study
of its broadcasting and financial institutions, and the study
reveals that there are wide-spread violations of Japanese laws
requiring that women be treated equally in the workplace. For
example, many women are denied promotions solely because of their
gender, while others are forced to resign when they get married.
Young female college graduates, if not rejected outright by
potential employers, are asked embarrassing questions such as
"are you a virgin?"

Rush thus thinks the U.S. should help the Japanese, thereby
showing them that America is friendly, reducing the strains
between our two great nations. The best way to do this would be
to help them learn how to treat their women properly. President
Clinton should therefore immediately send over a high-level
delegation to Japan, leaving them there as long as it takes.

Rush would further suggest that Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-CO)
lead this all-important delegation, with NOW President Patricia
Ireland following close behind. Eleanor Smeal and Catharine
MacKinnon would be indispensable members of this group, as would
Gloria Steinem and a host of other American women. This move
would surely benefit both countries (especially America).

FIRST HOUR

Items

o	Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) has requested time on today's show to
correct the "alleged misinformation" which he thinks Rush gave
out yesterday about the Lobby Reform and Disclosure Act. Rush
will therefore be talking to him at the top of the second hour.

o	Hillary Clinton has taken yet another shot at Rush. In today's
Wall Street Journal, she again attacks Rush for giving "marching
orders" not just to all conservatives but to all other
conservative talk show hosts.

The interview of the First Lady by Hillary Stout is so favorable
that it could have been written by the White House PR office, and
it reminds Rush how during the 1992 campaign Hillary said the
following about Rush in a Cleveland interview aired on EIB
affiliate WWWE:

"You know, Rush Limbaugh has this great racket going where he
says whatever he wants to say regardless of the facts, because
it, you know, it makes news and it's controversial. I mean that's
how he makes his living. <<Hillary cackles>>"

Hillary always seems to focus on money when she attacks her
critics, as if she had some resentment towards anyone who makes a
lot of money. The drug companies, the insurance companies, Rush,
etc. are all rotten in her eyes because of the money they have
made. In the Wall Street Journal interview, Hillary continues
this theme by remarking about Rush "he has a product to sell. I
regret that I am helping to make him rich."

She also makes the mandatory digs at conservatives and talk show
hosts, accusing them of getting things wrong and of being afraid
of powerful women. Rush has said many times, though, he is not
scared about powerful women, but he does have a problem with
those who are unelected and unaccountable for the power they do
wield, such as Hillary.

Furthermore, Rush has a lot of problems with Hillary's ideas, and
that's why he opposes her. While those on the left insist that
Hillary is a "transition figure" between generations, redefining
the role of the First Lady, the fact is Hillary is encountering
opposition because of what she wants to do.

Rush is amazed, though, at Hillary's arrogance in thinking she,
of all people, is helping Rush get rich, not to mention she
thinks Rush is doing it all to "sell a product." Yet it's not
just people on the radio who dislike Hillary's ideas.

The WSJ interview also shows how clever the media can be in its
support of the administration:

"Even in a televised news conference in April, when Mrs. Clinton
tried to clear the air about the Whitewater real estate matter,
she gave an answer that, to some, appears deceitful in
retrospect."

This refers to how Hillary was asked in her "pretty in pink" new
conference last April about how her chief of staff, Maggie
Williams, took documents that had been removed from Vincent
Foster's office and stored them in the Clintons' residence at the
White House. Hillary back in April said "I don't think she did
remove any documents."

However, during the Whitewater hearings, Williams acknowledged
that while she hadn't removed the documents from Foster's office,
she did come into possession of them, did talk to Hillary about
them, and did put them in the White House residence.

Hillary, though, gave a very deceitful answer about all this in
April, clearly trying to mislead people about what happened with
those documents. Stout, though, cleverly writes that Hillary's
answer appeared deceitful only "to some."

In truth, though, Hillary gave a deceitful answer, not just in
retrospect, and not just to some - Hillary gave a deceitful
answer, but the Clintons' willing accomplices in the press are
more than happy to help them sidestep such things. Rush, however,
doubts that the press would be willing to say anything other than
"Limbaugh lied" should he try this trick himself some time.

Hillary also makes a point in the interview of recounting her
love for Eleanor Roosevelt, saying her favorite Eleanor saying is
"a woman is like a tea bag - when she gets into hot water, she
just gets stronger." Rush, though, would think a better aphorism
for Hillary would be "when tea bags are used too often, they go
flat."

o	Rush remarks on all the "peace" going on in Haiti - the riots,
the looting, hand grenade bombings, deaths - all with U.S.
soldiers right in the middle of it. There are now 19,000 troops
in Haiti, 4,000 more than originally scheduled, with the
possibility of more being sent. And of these troops, the
"Caribbean superpowers" have sent only 24 troops to aid the U.S.

o	The White House Car Talk panel is considering a variety of
options to cut pollution, including car rationing which would
tell families how many cars they could own, and elderly drives
might be forced to give up their licenses. The panel includes
members of the administration, environmentalists, car industry
execs, and others.

A Clinton aide has admitted that the above ideas are among the
"wilder" ones mentioned, but the group is expected to eventually
come out with policy recommendations that the administration will
act upon. Among the likely recommendations are higher gas and
fuel taxes, higher ages for driver licenses, and alternative
driving days for commuters.

Rush notes that Algore made the claim in his book "Earth in the
Balance" that the automobile is the greatest threat mankind
faces. Rush is also astounded how every day this administration
proposes more and more limits on Americans.

*BREAK*

Phone	An unknown caller from OR

The caller enjoys the musical parodies of Rush's show, and while
he knows that EIB probably won't ever be able to sell a CD of
them, he wishes Rush would let people know about them in advance,
so that they could get set up to record them. Rush notes that it
was only two weeks ago that EIB did its Annual Music Awards, and
the caller admits he missed that glorious event.

The caller also jokingly asks what Rush will do for a job when
liberals will be out of power. Rush says he's not worried because
liberals will always be around; Rush notes he's always said that
there should always be at least two liberals on each and every
college campus, just so America never forgets what liberals and
liberalism really are.

As to the caller's question, Rush notes that Hillary obviously
thinks she is responsible for his success, but in reality his
program grew from 60 stations to more than 500 during a
Republican administration, starting from about 250,000 listeners
to more than 15 million. Rush's success does not depend on
winning elections, and Rush's book, in fact, makes a point about
how his success is not dependent on who wins elections.

Phone	Bob from Columbus, OH

Bob is upset that anyone would think Rush is successful because
Bill Clinton is in office. Bob has been listening since 1989,
when Bush was in office and when Rush was adding stations by the
handful. It's upsetting that the liberals would think Rush's
success is dependent on anything other than the fact that he
works hard and is the best at what he does.

Rush thanks Bob for saying this, and notes that his show is
always based on the events of the day, and there will always be
events of the day, because this is what events do. Besides, it's
when liberals are out of power that they become funny and
entertaining; it's when liberals are in power that they become
dangerous; for example, they are suing people because they
complain about government, they talk about rationing cars, etc.

Since there will always be liberals, Rush's show will always have
enough fodder for three hours a day. When Clinton was elected,
the liberals insisted Rush was on his way out and that
conservatism was a dying breed; yet now, Hillary and her
supporters are claiming that they are responsible for Rush's
success, showing that they have no idea about why Rush is doing
well and will continue to do well. Rush is more than happy,
though, to allow liberals to continue in their ignorance.

*BREAK*

Phone	Dave from Manalipan, NJ

Dave disagrees with Rush about Hillary's unaccountability and
unelected power because Rush reaches far more people than she
does; after all, Rush reaches some 20 million people a week. Rush
notes he doesn't have any power - people can turn him off if they
want, but Hillary has the power to convene a secret health care
task force, she wrote a 1400-page health care plan with this
secret health care task force, she can't be compelled to testify
before Congress, and she has all sorts of power to appoint
members of her husband's administration, the Washington
bureaucracy, and to affect legislation. People can turn Rush off,
but they can't tune to another administration.

Dave notes that Hillary's power obviously isn't working because
her health care plan was quashed. He notes that his health care
plan for his family costs him an outrageous $5500 a year, and
that's for an HMO. He even has to get his HMO's permission before
he can take one of his kids to the hospital for an emergency. He
thinks there are obviously things wrong with the health care
system.

Rush agrees, but one of the major reasons for these problems is
that there is no cost competition in this industry. Dave agrees,
and thinks this is what should be addressed, not the 15% or so of
uninsured Americans.

Dave is also a cigar smoker and is therefore concerned about the
attempt in New York to ban smoking from all restaurants, bars,
hotels, etc. He thinks the anti-smoking crowd is getting carried
away, infringing upon his rights. He has no problem with no
smoking sections, but if you ban smoking in the city, the city
will start losing major business from conventions, etc.

Rush says it appears liberals don't care about the loss of
business; they care more about their politically correct
concerns. Dan hopes that Rush gets involved in this because NYC
is getting out of hand.

Dan notes that Rush is right about how cigar smoking is different
from cigarette smoking, and he was encouraged that at a recent
smoker he attended, a third of the smokers were women. Rush notes
that his wife Marta also smokes small cigars every once in a
while.

Rush adds that Cardinal John O'Connor, a former smoker, has
weighed in on this subject - he's quoted in today's NY Post as
saying "I find it incredible that people are out in this country
demanding a right to abortion, while the same people are
restricting the right to smoke." Rush loves the idea of making
smoking a "pro-choice" decision, and Dan agrees totally with
that.

Rush bets that if the fools in the NYC city council do ban
smoking, Philip-Morris will move its headquarters elsewhere,
causing a great loss, not just in jobs and tax moneys but also in
prestige to the city. In addition, a number of restaurants will
undoubtedly become "private clubs" with nominal fees so as to
allow its patrons to smoke.

Rush remarks that he might even start such a club, and if he
does, it'll be smokers only, except for a small non-smoking area
near the kitchen. Dan pledges he'll patronize such a fine dining
establishment.

Phone	Dean from San Diego, CA

Dean is a credit analyst who is very much aware of what people
spend their money on. For example, the previous caller complained
about having to spend $5500 for health insurance, but Dean
wonders how much he spends on car insurance. What kind of car
does he own?

Dean finds it strange how people are more than willing to spend
$3,000 a year or more for car insurance, but they then insist
they shouldn't have to spend even that much on health insurance -
and cars die after only five or ten years. Dean is self-employed,
so he spends about $250 a month, or $3,000 a year, for health
insurance, which he thinks is a worthwhile amount for
catastrophic care; he'll take care of regular doctors' fees
himself, with out of pocket payments.

Rush agrees that people have to set priorities as to what is
important, but there is a cost problem with health care. Dean
agrees, but people could spend the rest of their lives resenting
the cost of everything: cars, lawyers, accountants, mortgage
lending, etc.

Rush notes he doesn't take the usual "fill-in-the-blank costs too
much" type of calls, simply because everyone always thinks
everything costs too much. Yet people have their priorities about
this - nobody ever talks about how they screwed the realtor when
they bought their house, but they love to talk about how they
shafted the car salesman.

Rush asks Dean how he, as a self-employed businessman, feels
about using after-tax dollars to buy health insurance, while
those who get paid a salary actually get their health insurance
with pre-tax dollars. Dean agrees, but he notes that he also
sends his children to private schools or homeschools them. Thus,
there are benefits to being self-employed, regardless of the
costs.

*BREAK*

Phone	Charles from Chicago, IL

Charles has a couple of criticisms of Rush; in particular, Rush
sounds a bit defensive at times, although his audience depends on
Rush to be on the offensive, fighting for them. In addition, Rush
often cuts his callers short and then runs with their ideas.
Also, Rush calls himself "the Great One," but Charles doesn't
know whether this refers to Rush's girth, ego, or ratings.

Charles, continuing to reading from his list of complaints, says
that Rush makes fun of other people's names, such as Jesse
Jackson and Robert B. Reich, but these men didn't have any choice
as to their names. Plus, someone could easily make fun of Rush's
name, such as how you could get a "rush from drugs."

Charles also thinks Rush repeatedly says his listeners should
"parrot" what he says, yet Rush uses the resources of the people
who call him, running with their ideas after hanging up on them.
However, conservatives call Rush only because he and Paul Harvey
are the only ones out there who speak for them. Charles, though,
is glad that Rush is there and gives megadittos, hoping that Rush
can take these criticisms.

Rush hopes Charles has finished reading, and Charles says he's
been keeping all these things inside for two weeks, so he was
ready to go with them. Rush isn't sure, though, what Charles
means about how his listeners "parrot" him.

Charles says that this was in reference to how Rush a week or two
ago said that his callers shouldn't repeat what he says. What he
actually said was that he didn't want to talk about either Haiti
or health care until he had taken some calls about those topics,
because, after all, "once I say something, what else is there to
be said?"

Charles adds that Rush's book admits that his listeners are his
greatest resource, and that sometimes the callers help him to get
pumped up. Rush notes that he appreciates his listeners and is
grateful for them, but listeners and callers are not the same.

Charles says this is only because only a few of the Great
Majority can get through. Rush says this is true, but he adds
that he has never said that his listeners parrot him, but rather
that members of his audience feel validated by what he says- what
he says on the national airwaves is what they are already
thinking and feeling. Rush has repeatedly said all the things
that Charles seems to want him to say, so he doesn't know what
the point of Charles' complaint is.

Charles thanks Rush and then hangs up. Rush thanks Charles for
calling, still a bit mystified by his call.

*BREAK*

Phone	Ted from Linden, NJ

Ted gives "dittimus ad infinitum from the law officers of New
Jersey," and makes the point that Rush uses the words Democrat
and liberal as if they were synonyms. Ted, though, is a
conservative Democrat who supported George Wallace precisely
because he was a conservative, so he'd like Rush to address this.

Rush admits that he does use these two terms interchangeably,
sometimes flippantly, but he does think that there are a lot of
liberal Democrats, and even those Democrats who aren't liberal
themselves tend to vote that way, so there is some justification
for thinking liberal and Democrat are one and the same.

However, Ted is correct in saying that there are a lot of
conservative Democrats; in fact, there were enough of them in
1980 and 1984 to give Ronald Reagan his landslide victories.
Ted's point is a good one, and Rush thanks him for calling to
make it.

*BREAK*

SECOND HOUR

Phone	Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) from Washington, DC

Rush welcomes Senator Levin to the show, noting that the Senator
wanted to call to correct some alleged misstatements Rush made
yesterday when discussing S.349, the Lobby Reform and Disclosure
Act. Senator Levin thanks Rush for taking his call and giving him
the opportunity to correct the record.

Senator Levin first states that this bill started out as a
bipartisan bill, has always been a bipartisan bill, and still is
a bipartisan bill, and he stresses this is "very important these
days." He also says this bill would not require anyone who simply
contacts their local representative to register with the federal
government, nor would churches and other religious organizations
have to register.

"The only people," states Senator Levin, "required to register -
they're supposed to under the current law but because of the
loopholes they don't - the only people who are required to
register under this bipartisan bill are the paid, professional
lobbyists. Nobody else, just paid, professional lobbyists.
Anybody who's lobbying to express their own personal view is not
affected in any way."

Senator Levin adds that the current laws have been ignored by
three-quarters of the paid lobbyists because of the various
loopholes - for example, lawyers don't have to register, and bill
S.349 would correct these things. Rush says he doesn't doubt that
there are good things in this bill, and Senator Levin says these
are the things he'd prefer to focus on.

Senator Levin also states that the people's voice has been
drowned out for far too long by the special interests who can
afford highly paid professional lobbyists. He thinks his bill
will just "put some sunshine on it," adding "and frankly we've
got a lot of bipartisan support for it, and we want to try to
keep this bipartisan."

Senator Levin also notes that this bill would finally do
something about the gifts that these paid professional lobbyists
are giving members of Congress: dinners, tickets to professional
sporting events, travel, etc. "We're stopping it!" Senator Levin
demands, "and that's what this bill is all about."

Rush notes that his show yesterday discussed mainly the "grass
roots communications" section of the bill, section 3.8, which
reads in part:

"(8) GRASS ROOTS LOBBYING COMMUNICATIONS.--The term "grass roots
lobbying communications" means--

"(A) any communication that attempts to influence a matter
described in clause (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv) of section
103(10)(A) through an attempt to affect the opinions of the
general public or any segment thereof."

However, Rush notes that Senator Levin claimed in his note that
grass roots lobbying is covered only if a person is paid to lobby
and spends more than 10% of their professional, not personal
time. Such a person has to disclose the amount of money they are
paid and spend.

The key, though, is that no national grass roots group can exist
without having at least one person spend 10% of their time doing
it. Thus, any such group will have to register with the federal
government, supplying lists of expenditures, etc. Doesn't this
mean that everyone also associated with this group would have
their name and address on file with the group?

Senator Levin says this is not the case, and says the bill isn't
vague about this. The only people who need to register are the
same people who are supposed to register now, but don't because
of loopholes: paid, professional lobbyists. They are the only
ones who register and are the only ones who have to spend on
their lobbying expenditures.

"None of the folks you just mentioned," Senator Levin insists,
"who call as a result of a grass roots effort, who aren't paid
professional lobbyists, have their name on any record with any
governmental agency."

Rush, though, still has problems with how grass roots
communications is defined - it seems that the registration
requirements would rapidly be expanded by this bill. Senator
Levin, though, says the bill requires only the registration of
those people who are paid to lobby.

Senator Levin notes that he is one of the "bipartisan cosponsors"
of this bill, so he should know about this - the only people who
have to register are paid professional lobbyists, but nobody
else. It is only these people who have to list their
expenditures, and nobody else's name is listed anyway.

Rush asks if this means that someone who starts a grass roots
organization and spends more than 10% of his time doing so won't
have to register, as long as they aren't being paid. Senator
Levin says this is true - as long as they aren't being paid they
don't have to register.

Rush notes that this seems very confusing and vague, especially
since members of Congress seem sick and tired of hearing from
their constituents. Senator Levin says this is exactly backwards
- members of Congress want to hear from their constituents, and
would prefer hearing from them than from the paid, professional
lobbyists and special interests who bombard Congress.

"We want the voice of the people coming through to us," he
insists. This is why this bill would require the paid,
professional lobbyists to disclosure just who is paying them.
This will allow more of the voice of the people to come through,
and will reduce the power and influence of the lobbyists.

Rush asks why the bill would set up a new agency that reports
only to the President and which can fine lobbyists up to $200,000
on its own. Rush thinks that a net effect of this will be that
those who might want to do grass roots lobbying would be
intimidated and scared away.

Senator Levin says that there has to be some place that paid
professional lobbyists have to register, and this office would
not report to the President but via public reports. Rush says
this is not true - the bill clearly states that this agency
reports directly to the President, which would give the
President, whether Republican or Democrat, a clear opportunity to
abuse this power.

Senator Levin says the head of this office would file an annual
report to the public, not to the President, and the head of the
office is removable "only for cause" - the President can't just
oust them and put in his own guy. Rush, though, still says that
the President is in the lobbying loop.

Senator Levin disagrees - there has to be an office to register
the lobbyists, but you don't want the head of this office to be
appointed by Congress. This office is really one of public
disclosure, and it will tell the people who is paying these
lobbyists, which is what most people want. The only way to get
this is if true and bipartisan reforms are implemented.

Senator Levin admits that the head of this office is appointed by
the President, with confirmation by the Senate, but this person
is removable only by cause. He notes that Congress has been
trying to close the loopholes with lobbyists for 30 years, "but
we have never been able to overcome the paid, professional
lobbyists' opposition."

Senator Levin thinks the public will support this bill, if only
they understand what it really is about. "It's an important
bipartisan cause," he adds.

Rush asks if there's anything in this bill that would have a
chilling effect on those Americans who might want to protest the
policies of the government. Senator Levin says that there is
nothing in the bill like this; in fact, this bill's purpose is to
make it more possible for ordinary citizens to get through the
special interest lobbying.

"There's absolutely nothing in this bill that requires
registration - quite the opposite, we make sure there is no
registration by anybody other than these paid, professional
lobbyists," he adds. Rush notes that Senator Levin keeps
emphasizing the "paid" aspects of this, but section 3.8(A) says
nothing about this; it describes grass roots communications in
such terms that it could very well force those who follow
registered lobbyists to register themselves.

Senator Levin says the law is very clear - only paid,
professionals have to register. The bill itself is very clear,
and the section Rush mentioned refers back to some earlier
definitions which make it clear that only paid, professionals are
required to register.

Rush asks how "paid" is defined - would a free lunch make someone
paid? Senator Levin says that the definition is clear - someone
who's hired or retained for financial compensation and who spends
more than 10% of their professional time lobbying. He again
states that only paid professionals who spend more than 10% of
their time have to register. Those who are influenced by these
paid professional lobbyists to contact their members of Congress
do not have to register in any way.

Rush thanks Senator Levin for calling, and notes that there are
some clear disagreements between members of Congress about this.

*BREAK*

Rush says the "waters seem murkier" than before, and as he looks
at the bill itself, he notes that section 3.8 contains three
paragraphs, and paragraphs 3.8(b) and (c) state the following:

"[The term `grass roots lobbying communications' means] any
communication between an organization and any bona fide member of
such an organization to directly encourage any such member to
make a communication to a covered executive branch official or to
a covered legislative branch official with regards to a matter
described in clause (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv) of (10)(A) of
section 3; and

"any communication between an organization and any bona fide
member of such organization to directly encourage such member to
urge persons other than members to communicate as provided in
either subparagraph (A) or subparagraph (B)."

Plus, there are a number of members of Congress who do not agree
with Senator Levin that this bill would not have a chilling
effect on the general public as to their ability to communicate
with their representatives or to demonstrate about the issues.

*BREAK*

Phone	Rep. Ernest Istook (R-OK) from Washington, DC

Rep. Istook would like to respond to Senator Levin's call, in
particular by noting that there is a big difference between what
Senator Levin says and what the bill says. While those who belong
to grass roots lobbying groups might not have to register
themselves, their names and addresses will end up being listed in
the federal office.

Rush asks Rep. Istook, who's in stark opposition to this bill, if
he believes it will have a chilling effect on the participation
of ordinary Americans with their government; will this bill
result in average Americans deciding to just shut up, so that
their names don't appear on some government list, and possibly be
fined or worse?

Rep. Istook thinks this bill is indeed an attempt to stifle grass
roots participation in America - grass roots efforts have never
been as effective as they have been in the past two years, and it
is because of these efforts that Clinton's health care plan was
defeated. Rush says a lot of those who protested the Health
Security Express bus tour just happened to decide to show up to
protest the plan, after having heard about the tour on the radio,
TV, from a neighbor, etc. If the person organizing such events is
a "paid" lobbyist, would he have to list all these people showing
up?

Rep. Istook says this would be the case because the bill says
anyone that's involved in any communication between an
organization and a member of a grass roots group, or suggests to
another that they write their congressman, then that person is a
"grass roots lobbyist." It doesn't matter whether everyone is
paid or spends more than their time doing lobbying - as long as
at least one member of the group is paid and spends more than 10%
of their time lobbying, the organization has to register, and
this process includes filing lists of all the people they have
been involved with.

Rush says Senator Levin left the impression that only those who
are paid lobbyists have to register, but he didn't say anything
about how all these other people, although they might not have to
register, would have to be listed by those who have registered.
Rep. Istook says this is true - section 104(b) lists what the
person who registers has to file with the new federal office:
"the name, address, and principal place of business of any person
or entity retained by the registrant to conduct grass roots
lobbying, either on behalf of the registrant [lobbyist] or the
client [the whole organization]."

Thus, if someone even mentions to their neighbor "you should
write their congressman," then they fall under the definition of
"grass roots communications." Rush asks if Rep. Istook thinks
this is the intent of the bill, or just a side effect.

Rep. Istook says it's clearly deliberate - whenever you have a
bill that is this confusing to people, precisely because it's
been deliberately drafted to be that confusing, then obviously
there is a reason for obfuscation. This bill has been designed to
stifle citizens' grass roots efforts, and Rep. Istook can only
hope that the people will remember what Congress has forgotten:
the First Amendment which states "Congress shall make no law
abridging the right of the people to petition the government for
a redress of grievances." This, though, is precisely what this
bill does.

Rush says that Senator Levin would undoubtedly disagree with
this, but Rep. Istook says the burden of proof is on Levin - if
he wants something to be clear and unambiguous, then he should
write it that way. This is part of the problem with Congress -
legislation is not user-friendly; if someone has to hire a lawyer
to read a bill to them, then there's a problem.

However, this is how Congress works - it writes legislation in
ways to fool the people, so that they don't realize what has
really been done until months afterwards, if then. Legislation is
written precisely so that it is obscure.

Rush asks Rep. Istook to explain the House vote on this bill
yesterday; there was a close vote on the procedural rule, then
another close vote on whether to send the bill back to
conference, and finally a last vote on the bill itself. The last
vote, though, was nowhere near as close as the previous two.

Rep. Istook says that this bill has more than one topic - in
addition to the grass roots part of the bill, there are some
genuine reforms. However, even reforms such as the restrictions
on gifts from lobbyists add all sorts of new exceptions and
loopholes, so the reforms aren't as genuine as members of
Congress want the people to believe.

Members of Congress therefore feared that if they voted against
this bill, they would be accused by their opponents and by the
media as wanting to continue the gift-giving by lobbyists. A lot
of the coverage given to this bill has focused on the gift bans
and the lobbying reforms, without mentioning the restrictions
that placed on grass roots lobbying.

Rep. Istook notes that he voted for this bill the first time it
came through, but he now opposes it because of the all the
language about grass roots lobbying that was added in conference.
He doesn't know how the bill will fare in the Senate, however; it
will depend on how much pressure the people can bear on their
Senators. In short, grass roots lobbying would help.

Rep. Istook points out that the thing to do is to fix this bill -
keep the genuine reforms, while excising the grass roots
restrictions, which means the bill has to be sent back to
conference. Rush thinks this is typical of legislation - there
will be a lot of good things, but hidden in them will be some
sneaky, little things that have to be kept quiet.

Rep. Istook says this is exactly right, and a good analogy would
be to give a starving man a plate full of delicious food;
however, just one part of the food is poisoned. Will the man eat
it, especially if he doesn't know which part is poisoned? There
are a lot of poisoned pills in legislation, such as the one in
S.349.

Rush notes he first heard about the grass roots additions to
S.349 late Wednesday, and Rep. Istook says he heard about these
provisions only a few hours before Rush did. This is what happens
in the late days of a legislative session - things are rushed
through, and members of Congress are told don't worry, just sign
it, you don't have to read everything.

Rush thanks Rep. Istook for calling with his views on the Lobby
Reform and Disclosure Act of 1994. He notes that there are
obviously two divergent sides on this issue, which means it's up
to the people to think and come to their own decisions.

The people have to decide whom they're going to believe - Senator
Levin or Rep. Istook - about this bill, which means people should
probably examine how Congress has behaved in recent years, and
whether there have been any other attempts to stifle the public's
voice recently, such as happened with HUD.

It's very telling that there are two totally different
interpretations of this bill - why should a bill be written in
such a manner? Why would anyone want to write legislation that
can be interpreted so differently?

*BREAK*

Phone	Paul from Cleveland, OH

Paul is glad that Rush is around because he doubts the people
would be informed about things like this bill and other "fast
ones" being performed by the liberals. Rush notes that there are
clearly members of Congress who are convinced this bill has a
hidden intent. One of his staff just pointed out during the break
that Senator Levin's main point was that "you had to be paid,"
but what does it mean "to be paid"?

This bill is so vague that you can have two different people with
totally different interpretations. This is why the people have to
think about such things. Paul agrees, and this is why he thinks
Rush's next book should deal with the American Constitution as
being "an endangered species" - you have the Brady Bill 2,
attempts to ban smoking, Robert Reich trying to take over
factories, and HUD trying to silence its critics via lawsuits and
fines.

Rush notes that the factory Reich tried to shut down in a
grandstand play was in Rep. Istook's district. He likes Paul's
idea for the next book, though, and will be glad to think about
it some more.

Rush adds that if decides to use Paul's suggestion, then he'll
also feel free to rip it off wholesale from Paul, using it
without compensating Paul in any way, "running with it" as
Charles from Chicago said Rush always does. He thanks Paul for
calling and for letting Rush use him as a "resource."

*BREAK*

Phone	Tom from Manasquan, NJ

Tom was at Rush's TV show the other night when he "buried" health
care, and he thinks Bo was right in saying that Rush deserved a
lot of credit. Rush appreciates that, but again notes it doesn't
take much to read Clinton's plan, which is all he really did - it
just takes guts.

Tom says he's a 35-year-old commodity broker who had to look for
a new career because of some injuries. He's thus gone back to
college to get a master's degree, and was pleasantly surprised to
find that the teacher in his media class was anything but a
liberal.

And when Tom pointed how the media was manipulating the people
with its coverage of the Haiti invasion, almost everyone in the
class agreed with him. And when Rush's name came up and someone
made a disparaging remark, the professor urged the class to
attack the ideas not the person.

Rush notes that typically when people attack the person, it's a
sign that they've run out of ideas. Hillary Clinton, in
particular, is flattering herself if she thinks the dissent
against her is only because she's a "powerful woman." These
criticisms are based on her liberal ideas and policies and they
exist because people disagree with what she wants to do.

Tom admits that he was a bit disappointed to find out that his
teachers aren't liberal because he was just waiting for some good
arguments. However, he's sort of gratified to find out that
schools aren't the liberal bastions he thought they would be.

Rush asks what college this is, and Tom replies that it's
Brookdale Community College. Rush is not surprised to hear it's a
community college because the closer you get to the grass roots,
the more conservative you get. However, it's only a matter of
time before conservatism will climb all the way up the
educational vine. He thanks Tom for calling and congratulates him
on his efforts to create a new life.

*BREAK*

THIRD HOUR

The National Hockey League has announced a lockout, which will
delay season opening games until October 15th at the earliest.
The NHL commissioner said he hopes for progress in the ongoing
talks. Meanwhile, of course, football is still out there playing
hard.

Rush admits, though, that he's a bit disappointed by this
weekend's line-up because there's nothing hot. As he looks at the
schedule, he just doesn't see any games he's interested in
watching. The old rivalries are long gone, and it's almost as if
the NFL were back to "parity," with the goal being for each team
to win 8 games and to lose 8 games.

The EIB staff ask if Rush is at least enjoying the old uniforms,
and he admits he is a "uniform freak." He recalls that in 1980
when he worked for the Kansas City Royals, he was the most rabid
Pittsburgh Steelers fan in Kansas City, and because he was a
uniform freak he was desperate to get a real Steelers jersey. Now
you can buy the real things, but in 1980 all you could buy was a
cheap replica.

Rush, though, was craving to own real Pittsburgh Steelers home
and road jerseys, and he wrote nearly everyone at Pittsburgh in
the hope of finding someone who could help. He even asked the
Kansas City Royals' groundskeeper, who had friends with the
Steelers, to see if he could pull any strings. However, the best
Rush could get was a Steelers T-shirt. Not even Ken Brett, George
Brett's brother who knew the Steelers' equipment manager, could
acquire a genuine jersey.

Rush thus went and found out who manufactured these things,
Medalist Sandnit of Berlin, NJ. The Steelers were the only team
in the league back then who weren't using meshed jerseys, and
Rush wrote the company to see if he could buy the. However, the
company told Rush that they could sell the jerseys only to the
Steelers.

The baseball season soon ended, and Rush, along with the rest of
the Royals' marketing team, went to the annual baseball marketing
meeting in Arizona. This was around the middle of October, and
there was a convention of the licensed manufacturers of baseball
memorabilia. Since Medalist Sandnit was there, Rush zeroed in on
their representative, nearly shaking in anticipating of getting a
coveted jersey.

Rush tentatively broached the subject with the guy, who told Rush
he thought he could work something out. He asked Rush's size, and
Rush told him he'd love to get size 44 jerseys, and was more than
willing to pay for them. The guy asked if Rush wanted his name on
the back, which was more than Rush could hope for; he was
hesitant to ask for his name on the jerseys because it might have
caused some hassles at the factory.

The guy assured Rush everything would be fine, so Rush paid the
$80 each for the two jerseys; he notes that he was so desperate
to get the jerseys that he would have gone without food to buy
them. So he ordered the jerseys, hoping they would get sent
quickly. However, Thanksgiving came and went, and no jerseys
showed up.

Rush called and was told that the jerseys were "in the pipeline,"
and he had to be patient. Rush sighed and went back to waiting,
but by the middle of December he still hadn't seen them.

Thus, when Christmas vacation came, Rush packed up and headed for
Cape Girardeau, without the jerseys. The day he arrived back in
his hometown he got a message from his secretary saying the
jerseys had just arrived; fortunately, she knew someone heading
to Cape Girardeau, and she gave the jerseys to him to take to
Rush the next day, Christmas Eve.

Rush couldn't sleep that night because of the anticipation of
getting the jerseys, worried about whether they would arrive,
whether they would be the real things. He got up the next morning
and just sat by the window, waiting for this guy to arrive; he
eventually did and handed Rush a tiny, little box, and folded
inside were his jerseys.

Rush, who was 29 or 30 at the time, put both jerseys on at once
to try them out, looking at himself in a mirror. Rush is certain
that the guy at Medalist Sandnit went out of his way to make sure
those jerseys arrived at Christmas, so that Rush would appreciate
them all the more. His family didn't understand any of this, of
course, but Rush was beside himself with joy at actually having
actual Pittsburgh Steelers jerseys with his name on them.

EIB substitute broadcast engineer Tony Lo Bianco asks why Rush
doesn't wear these on his TV show, and Rush sighs that he can't
fit into them anymore. His wife, though, is now wearing them
around the house, although they go down to her knees.

However, he still has a soft spot in his heart for these old
uniforms. He notes that the 49ers modern uniforms are totally
different than their vintage uniforms, and he loves seeing the
Cowboys in their vintage uniforms, although the team has yet to
win a game in them.

The vintage uniforms, in fact, are selling like hotcakes, with
the NFL Properties merchandising unit unable to keep up with
demand. Rush hopes, though, that someday he can get back into his
beloved Steelers jerseys someday, reclaiming them from his wife.

*BREAK*

Phone	Craig from Lansing, MI

Craig thinks Senator Levin was being disingenuous about the
language in his bill; the original bill came through the House
and Senate about three or four weeks ago, and its language was
quite different then. Rush notes the bill was originally
introduced in the Senate, at the Senate Governmental Affairs
Committee, on February 4, 1993, introduced by Senator Carl Levin,
cosponsored by six Democrats and four Republicans. On May 11,
1993, the bill went to the House Judiciary Committee, and
eventually ended up where it is today.

Craig says the original bill was a decent attempt at lobbyist
reform, and that's why it got bipartisan support. However, two
weeks ago President Clinton was aired on a national radio talk
show that airs only on Saturday and Sunday, and he was asked
about campaign financing reform and lobbyist reform.

Clinton agreed with the host that something had to be done about
the money being spent by lobbyists, but he then went on to say
"not only that, we're going to have to put a stop to these
lobbying organizations going around to the people and going
around to Congress, and going to directly buy media time. That's
got to stop!"

Rush is stunned to hear this, and Craig says this also stunned
the host, who then immediately went onto another topic. Rush
finds this interesting, given how Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) calls
this bill "Hillary's Revenge," motivated by her anger over the
opposition she encountered over health care.

Rush asks if Craig thinks President Clinton was responsible for
the addition of the language in the bill which defines and
regulates "grass roots lobbying." Craig thinks so because this
language was put in after Clinton's remarks, and the first time
anyone outside of the conference committee saw this language was
on Wednesday. Thus, it had to have been inserted within the past
two weeks.

Furthermore, if the Health Insurance Association or any other
paid lobbyist group purchases media time on behalf of some other
group or candidate, the language in section (c) would require the
secondary organization to register and submit a list of all of
its members to the government. Rush rereads the paragraph and
notes that Craig is right. He asks Craig to hang on through the
break.

*BREAK*

Phone	Craig from Lansing, MI (continued)

Rush again rereads paragraph section 3(c):

"[Grassroots lobbying communications means] any communication
between an organization and any bona fide member of such
organization to directly encourage such member to urge persons
other than members to communicate as provided in either
subparagraph (a) or subparagraph (b)."

Rush asks if this means that the people who ran the "Harry and
Louise" ad put on a similar ad, or otherwise encouraged people to
call Congress or influence the outcome of legislation, would
require the third-party groups and individuals that did call
Congress to register as lobbyists. Craig says yes, but this bill
would also require that if anyone pays for an ad on behalf of
another group - for example, the Arthur DeMoss Foundation paying
for an anti-abortion ad for a state pro-life group - the
secondary organization would also have to register as a lobbyist
and send in lists of their membership.

This obviously would have a chilling effect by preventing any
lobbyists from encouraging others to call or contact Congress.
This bill will not only stop the lobbying groups themselves, but
also the grass roots organizations which they might also use or
encourage to act.

Craig remarks that he's in law school now, and he couldn't
believe President Clinton's statement, given how blatantly
unconstitutional it was. He hopes Rush can find a tape of this
appearance, and bets that Rush will be as chilled as he was to
hear Clinton demand the abridgement of the First Amendment rights
of any group that would dare bypass Congress and go directly to
the media with their message.

Craig says he used to think Americans have the right to free
speech, but Clinton obviously feels different. Rush says he will
check this out, and notes that this issue won't go away since the
bill will next be debated in the Senate. Since the language which
makes this bill so objectionable didn't even show up until
Wednesday, there are still a lot of people who will have
questions about it, and it's not going to just quietly vanish
away.

If the addition of this language in the conference committee does
indeed coincide, as Craig thinks, with Clinton's statement, then
it will just add more fuel to the theory that this bill is
"Hillary's Revenge." People didn't come up with this phrase at
random, but rather in response to how those in the administration
have not taken the defeat of their health care plan lightly.

The administration was hoping to turn health care into the
blueprint for the next 50 years of Democratic governmental
dominance in America. This was going to be their masterpiece, so
to have it go down in flames as it did, has just angered them
beyond words. This is especially true, given that the heavy
losses expected by the Democrats in November will destroy any
chance for further attempts at big government Clinton-style
reform.

The Clintons wanted their health care plan desperately, and they
came so close, at one point having 60% approval ratings; it's
since crashed in flames, and the Clintons aren't going to blame
themselves, but rather all those who opposed them. And if someone
was really arrogant and determined to use their power in a
blatant manner, they would respond by making sure their opponents
would never have the ability to put on such opposition again.

The fact that there are such varying interpretations of this bill
- as proven by Rep. Istook and Senator Levin - shows that there
are severe underlying problems in how it's been written. How can
any bill have such two diametrically opposed interpretations? The
people will have to come to their own conclusions about this.

However, people can use past history as their guide, and the
current administration has shown it is more than willing to use
the power of government to intimidate its opposition into
silence. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has, at
least on three occasions, used threats of fines and jail time to
silence average Americans who have dared to oppose the placement
of homeless shelters in their neighborhoods. HUD even forced
Seattle residents to throw a block party for the incoming
homeless.

If a government is going to be willing to do this, in addition to
its attacks on all sorts of legal behaviors, one has to be
suspicious of that government. Furthermore, members of Congress
and this administration think anyone who listens to talk radio
aren't really Americans, but somehow of lesser worth than others.

House Speaker Tom Foley is suing his constituents for daring to
vote for term limits, and in response he's now in real danger of
losing re-election. If this happens, it will be the first time in
recent American history - perhaps this century or longer - that a
sitting Speaker of the House has not won re-election. Such men
either die or retire, but they are not thrown out of office.

Foley is in the tightest race of his life, as are many others
touched by all the congressional scandals of the past four years.
The threat to the established power in Washington is very real,
and those in power don't respond kindly to such threats. That
Foley would be arrogant enough to sue his own voters should speak
volumes about the attitudes that the established leadership in
Congress have about themselves, Congress, Washington, and the
American people.

*BREAK*

Rush remarks that it's a lazy Friday in the EIB studios, perhaps
because everyone is wearing their Uggs shoes. H.R. "Kit" Carson
complains that his feet got too warm, and Rush tells him that he
should take off his socks because the inner-lined Uggs are
designed for bare feet. WABC broadcast engineer Kiki dela Garza
complains that she has no Uggs, so Rush throws a pair her way.

Phone	Caroline from Gibsonia, PA

Caroline asks who Rush thinks was behind Carter's trip to Haiti -
did the Democratic leadership insist that Clinton accept Carter
for this, or did Carter just volunteer? Rush replies that the
official story is that Carter has been begging the White House
since the summer to send him to Haiti.

Rush, though, recalls that when Richard Nixon died, with everyone
eulogizing him as a great statesman and foreign policy expert, it
seemed that Carter realized that his only legacy so far was
building houses. Rush bet then that Carter would soon make moves
to try to build back his reputation in foreign policy matters,
and this is what Carter has done, in North Korea and Haiti.

What amazes Rush about this, though, is that there's obviously a
lot of friction between Clinton and Carter, and it makes one
wonder if Carter is being forced on Clinton by the Democrats.
Caroline says this is what she thinks - the Democratic powers
that be seem embarrassed at the idiot they have in the White
House, and they're trying to lessen the damage by using Carter to
clean up some messes.

Rush says he has no quarrel with any President using the best
people he can to get done what needs to be done. If Clinton
thinks Carter is the best guy to send, then that's fine. However,
can it truly be said that Carter is the best guy available?

Raoul Cedras is throwing grenades at people now, and none of the
Haitians at Guantanamo Bay seem interested in going back while
Cedras is there. Yet Carter, who seems to have never met a
dictator he didn't like, is calling Cedras a near saint, someone
who saved Aristide's life - Carter even invited the man to
Atlanta to teach one of his Bible classes.

Carter seems to think he can work with these people, getting them
to do what's right in terms of human rights, and they're playing
him like a fiddle. Rush agrees with Caroline about the Democrats
being frightened to death at what's happening in the White House;
Clinton was supposed to herald a return to the heydays of the FDR
legacy, but it's now all falling apart.

The big fund-raisers and powerbrokers of the Democratic party
must be looking on at this in stunned amazement and horror,
appalled at what they see, so Rush doesn't doubt that some
serious damage control is going on now. Rush admits he has no
specifics to back up this theory, as it's just a gut feeling, but
his every instinct is telling him that this is what is going on
now.

*BREAK*

Phone	Richard from Strasburg, MO

On the news last night, Richard saw an American soldier trying to
protect one of the grenade-throwers from an outraged mob, and the
soldier looked like he didn't know what was going on, as he was
trying to protect himself as much as the guy the mob was after.
Rush says he saw this, too, and CNN this morning had other
footage of Haitians looting anything they could get.

CNN's Christiana Amanpour seemed stunned and amazed at all this
looting, and Rush had to wonder why this woman was surprised. The
average per capita yearly income is $250 to $300, so if they get
the chance to steal some rice, they will.

Meanwhile, the U.S. troops are right in the middle of this; the
military was supposed to keep the peace, yet they seem unable to
stop such events. At best it seems that the military's mission is
defined a bit murkily.

Richard agrees and next asks if Rush picks out his own bumper
music. Rush says he used to - back when EIB started, he did it
all. However, after about three months, he noticed that the staff
was inspired and wanted to contribute. Rush was glad to encourage
this participation.

For example, Tony Lo Bianco has chosen every bit of bumper music
played on today's show, and he even brought some of it from home.
Rush trusts Lo Bianco, though, so is not worried about this.

Richard says he's heard some David Lee Roth on Rush's show, and
has wondered if Rush is a fan. Rush says he doesn't own any Roth
CDs, but he does own a video of "Jump" by Van Halen. However,
this doesn't mean Rush doesn't like Roth's music; he just doesn't
buy CDs, except for use on his show. He instead makes CDs of his
favorite songs - he really doesn't have favorite groups or
artists, just songs.

Rush thanks Richard for calling and gives one last plaintive "Go,
Steelers, please!" before the show ends.

