![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/RushPhonesWeGo-2016.jpg\")
<\/a>I got an email during the break, and I want to deal with it. The email says, “Rush, I notice you\u2019re taking fewer and fewer callers. Why?” That is not… If that\u2019s true, I\u2019m not aware of it. It\u2019s not a conscious thing. It\u2019s not a programming format change. But I thought about it. I thought, “Okay, we just had an hour go by, and I didn\u2019t take a call.” We have a full board of people. The reason why this concerns me, is it\u2019s people on hold here for a long time. I mean, we give the number out, the program starts, and they call, and Snerdley screens \u2019em.<\/p>\nIt generally takes him the first half hour of the program to fill up the board and then, say, from 12:30 p.m. on, people are waiting, and many of these people will wait two hours, which I don\u2019t like. I mean, it makes me feel bad. Sometimes we get their numbers and call \u2019em back if they can\u2019t wait that long. But that\u2019s risky \u2019cause they may not be there when we call \u2019em. So we really don\u2019t encourage that, but it is an option that we provide as a top-flight program.<\/p>\n
But, if that is the case, I\u2019ll tell you what\u2019s driving it. It\u2019s real simple. It is the desire that when this program is over, after three hours of it every day, that nobody out there says, “But you didn\u2019t talk about X. Why didn\u2019t you bring that up?” Or, “You know, you need two more hours. Look at all the stuff you didn\u2019t get to today!” I hate when people have that reaction, and so I feel compelled… I know that many of you watch cable news, you read on your own, and I really… I\u2019m sitting here, and I do not like imagining you coming across something, say, at five or six in the afternoon after the program\u2019s over or later tonight, and saying, “Rush didn\u2019t mention this. Why not?”<\/p>\n
I hate it. I just… I can\u2019t deal with you having that reaction. Some of you think I might have missed something or didn\u2019t get to it. So it is actually… If I\u2019m taking fewer calls, it\u2019s not on purpose. It\u2019s the result of trying to make sure this is a one-stop shop for you, that you don\u2019t need anything other than this, that whatever is actually important, we hit it here, \u2019cause I just could not… It\u2019s not that I couldn\u2019t deal with it; I just don\u2019t want it to happen that every night, people are saying, “Well, I didn\u2019t hear about it! Rush didn\u2019t bring this up.”<\/p>\n
So it\u2019s not purposely trying to take fewer callers. If anything, it\u2019s trying to leave as little as possible on the table. So what I… I just have to make a more concerted effort here to increase the number of callers. It\u2019s an ebb-and-flow thing anyway. I\u2019ll tell you, folks, we\u2019ve also got another phenomena going on here. Ever since the campaign started a year and a half ago, there has not been a slow news day. I mean, we haven\u2019t even approached a slow news day. In the old days, after the election until the inauguration (chuckles), every day was a slow news day.<\/p>\n
So when you have a slow news day, ah, it\u2019s maybe when you spend more time taking calls, finding out what\u2019s on people\u2019s minds, but when this… I mean, I\u2019m overflowing. The Stacks every day of things that I don\u2019t get to, you don\u2019t know because I don\u2019t tell you. But I assume you know because I assume you are profoundly, massively informed and know it if I don\u2019t get something. I\u2019m trying to avoid as little of that as possible. So after the monologue segment here we\u2019ll come back and we\u2019ll start on the phones.<\/p>\n
Plus, I\u2019ve got all these sound bites I have to get to. People are working their tails off producing these sound bites for me every day, and if time doesn\u2019t permit me to get to them, I don\u2019t want staff saying, “You know what? You\u2019re not using any of my work? Screw you!” You know, and they move down the hall, try to find some other show. That wouldn\u2019t happen. There is no other show. But, I mean, all these people are spending a lot of time — you on hold, other people preparing the sound bites — and not to use any of it is…<\/p>\n
Well, it would be thoughtful to use some of it just to acknowledge the time and work people are spending trying to put things together, and they\u2019re good every day. It\u2019s just the inability to get to everything and the attempt to try is really what explains it.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: Dennis in Dublin, Georgia, great to have you, sir. I\u2019m glad you waited. Welcome to the program.<\/p>\n
CALLER: Hey, Rush. It\u2019s an honor to speak with you.<\/p>\n
RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much. RUSH: Uhhhhhhh… (sigh) Yeah.<\/p>\n CALLER: Basically because Trump is putting his sons in charge of the business, so he\u2019s divesting himself of the running of the business, it would be the same if Bill Gates\u2019 father had tried to run.<\/p>\n RUSH: Yeah, but Gates has effectively done that anyway. He\u2019s retired. He\u2019s pulled out of Microsoft. Still has some stock but now he\u2019s investing in mosquito nets and stuff.<\/p>\n CALLER: Right. I was talking about 1988.<\/p>\n RUSH: Right, but what is your point?<\/p>\n CALLER: The point would be that comparing Trump now, what they would have done if Bill Gates\u2019 father had run in 1988.<\/p>\n RUSH: Yeah, but Bill Gates didn\u2019t, and he never would.<\/p>\n CALLER: No, he didn\u2019t, but if Bill Gates\u2019 father had, Bill Gates would have been running a big company like Trump\u2019s sons are gonna be doing because Trump is president.<\/p>\n RUSH: Wait a minute. Are you saying Trump should not have to divest because they might not have made Gates divest in 1988? What are you saying?<\/p>\n CALLER: I\u2019m saying that Trump is handing over the running of his businesses to his sons, and he\u2019s not gonna be in charge of business, his sons are. It\u2019d be like if Bill Gates\u2019 father had run in \u201988. Bill Gates\u2019 father wouldn\u2019t be in charge of the business, but Bill would have.<\/p>\n RUSH: You\u2019re saying that if that had happened with Gates, the left wouldn\u2019t have cared; they would have applauded it? But with Trump doing it and his sons doing it, they\u2019re not accepting it?<\/p>\n CALLER: I\u2019m not sure wouldn\u2019t have cared, but that\u2019s entirely possible.<\/p>\n RUSH: Well… I… I\u2019m… I\u2019m sorry to be rude, but I don\u2019t get the point. Bill Gates didn\u2019t run.<\/p>\n CALLER: No.<\/p>\n RUSH: We can play the what-if game on anything here. I don\u2019t… Are you suggesting that Trump should not have to divest? Are you suggesting that, uh…?<\/p>\n CALLER: I\u2019m suggesting that the handing over his running of the company to his sons should be sufficient.<\/p>\n
\n
\n<\/a><\/a>CALLER: The point I\u2019d like to make is that by the logic we use to try to force Trump to sell his businesses, if Bill Gates\u2019 father had tried to run for president in 1988, Bill would have had to sell Microsoft.<\/p>\n
![\n<\/a>](\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/TrumpFamily-022216-Z.jpg\"){kind=link}