{"id":22258,"date":"2004-11-05T01:01:01","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T07:00:38","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2011-05-19T07:00:38","modified_gmt":"2011-05-19T07:00:38","slug":"why_should_the_winners_compromise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Should the Winners Compromise?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

If you\u2019re willing to join <\/emphasize>him from the other side, fine. We\u2019ll welcome you to the fold. But Bush\u2019s agenda is what it is. Why would he modify his agenda after winning more votes than any president ever has, a three-point margin and an electoral vote victory? Why should he modify his agenda to let people in? It\u2019s silly but that\u2019s what the left is out there saying. (sigh) It\u2019s incredible. Let\u2019s go to E.J. Dionne Jr.<\/a> Now, this is on CNBC last night, the Capitol Report. The host, Alan Murray says, “Let me play a bit from the press conference today,” and then he plays Bush saying, ‘Now that I\u2019ve got the will of the people at my back, I\u2019m going to start enforcing the one-question rule. That was three questions.'” We played that for you yesterday. Murray says, “E.J., what do you make of that?” <\/line>EJ: Well, I think ‘ubris <\/emphasize>is this administration\u2019s Achilles heel. Uh, I think they, uhhh —<\/line>RUSH: Stop the tape. Hey? E.J.? You\u2019ve got to learn to laugh. The president is trying to be funny. Resume tape. <\/line>EJ: — intend to push harder than anything like they got a mandate for in this election, and on Social Security reform, he\u2019s going to have to answer so many questions: Who are the winners? Who are the losers? How is he going to pay the at least $1 trillion cost of the transition? I think Social Security reform could be, for President Bush, what healthcare reform was for President Clinton, because once you get down to the details, as you mentioned earlier, a lot of people begin to say, “Huh? This all sounded like a great deal. We were all going to get something out of it. No one would pay a cost.” <\/line>MURRAY: Well, but —<\/line>EJ: People have to pay a cost.<\/line>RUSH: Now, E.J., you know, you\u2019re smarter than this. You\u2019re the one with the degree and I\u2019m not, but let me educate you on this. There\u2019s a big difference between healthcare and Clinton, and Social Security and Bush. Bush is trying to take the government out <\/emphasize>of people\u2019s lives and make their Social Security retirement even better and larger. Bill Clinton was trying to add <\/emphasize>government to people\u2019s lives, which was going to cost everybody. There\u2019s a huge <\/emphasize>difference, E.J. But here\u2019s the question, ladies and gentlemen. I want you all to hear this and I want this to become a mantra out there. — I\u2019m doing this to seize the left. You guys are all robots and I\u2019m giving you marching orders. (Laughter) — Now, look, though, here\u2019s the truth. They keep wailing and whining and mooooaning <\/emphasize>about the “transition costs” of Social Security. Now, what this is?<\/line>If we decide to do this, they\u2019re going to take 2% of current payroll taxes and let people invest 2% of the 12%. Forget this, you know, seven and five or seven and seven, the company matching. You\u2019re paying it all! So let\u2019s say your Social Security is 15%, the first 86 grand, whatever it is. Two percent of that goes into an account with your name and it gets managed and it grows and so forth. The other goes to the government. Okay. The theory is, “Well, it\u2019s 2% the government doesn\u2019t get and you add all that up, the transition cost, because we still have to pay the benefits of those that are retired.” That\u2019s true. That\u2019s true. The president said, “If it were easy, it would have been done already.” We\u2019re going to have to find a way, because here\u2019s the alternative. <\/line>We either come up with a way to do this and manage <\/emphasize>the transition costs, whatever they turn out to be, or we don\u2019t do anything<\/emphasize>, as Senator Kerry wanted to do with Social Security, let the Baby Boomers retire in full force, and then we\u2019re looking at $15 to $17 trillion <\/emphasize>in shortfall — trillion, not billion. It\u2019s two trillion transition\u2019 $15 to $17 trillion <\/emphasize>in shortfalls in Social Security if we don\u2019t do anything, because when the Baby Boomers get there, people retire, we\u2019re going to have to extend the retirement age, cut benefits or something. This plan by the president is a way of lessening <\/emphasize>the financial pain and improving <\/emphasize>the system. Look, this is not the 1930s anymore. It\u2019s time to modernize the program!<\/line>BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/line>RUSH: We\u2019re up to audio sound bite #3: Nancy Pelosi<\/a>, Miss America, digging in for a fight. Doesn\u2019t sound like she\u2019s going to be doing any reaching out or compromising here, folks. On the Today Show today, Matt Lauer interviewed Pelosi with Senator Mitchell McConnell<\/a> and Mr. Lauer said, “In the press conference, the president said the following: ‘I\u2019ve earned capital this election. I\u2019m going to spend it on what I told the people I\u2019d spend it on,\u2019 which is you\u2019ve heard the agenda: Social Security, tax reform, moving the economy forward, education, fighting and winning the war on terror.” Lauer then says, “Now clearly people like you and the senator are going to appear on programs like this in the days following the election and say, ‘Yes, we\u2019re too divided. We got to work together,\u2019 but it never seems to work out that way. Will it work out that way this time,” Miss America?<\/line><\/p>\n

PELOSI: Well, I certainly hope so. The result of the election did not erase the fact that he had the worst record of job creation in seven decades [sic] —<\/line>RUSH: (Laughing)<\/line>PELOSI: — that many more people, millions more, do not have access to healthcare [sic], that we have a growing deficit [sic], and that the war in Iraq is going poorly [sic].<\/line>LAUER: But Congresswoman Pelosi, this doesn\u2019t sound like the type of language that\u2019s going to lead to unite on alcohol.<\/line>PELOSI: Well the president said when he ran the first time that he was a unifier [sic?uniter] and not a divider. He\u2019s now saying he\u2019s going to reach out. I hope that he will try to be president for all of the people, not just the people who voted for him.<\/line>RUSH: You know what\u2019s happened here is, these guys all sounded contrite and, you know, Pelosi, we had the bite yesterday where she was saying: “Oh, yeah, we screwed up. We\u2019re losing the values states. We don\u2019t know what we\u2019re doing wrong.” It sounded like they all got together last night on the phone and said, “What are we doing? We\u2019re idiots! We got to go hardline. We don\u2019t make…” and so they\u2019re back on track. I mean, they\u2019re re-running the Kerry campaign in this bite. Nancy Pelosi rerunning the Kerry campaign! This whole business about Bush saying he was going to be a uniter and not a divider. He tried. He brought Ted Kennedy up. He wrote No Child Left Behind, the education bill. Don\u2019t get me started on this. I\u2019m just giving you evidence here, more and more evidence these people have not gotten it. <\/line>I mean, this is a big slap up side the hee\u2019ad, <\/emphasize>if you want to talk about it that way, but apparently the pain\u2019s already worn off. They just do not. They\u2019re just delusional. They do not have a clue. They\u2019re in denial. They haven\u2019t the ability to see reality. There\u2019s more here from Miss America on the Today Show. Matt Lauer said, “Congresswoman Pelosi, on tax reform, the president would like to make the tax cuts permanent. That\u2019s not been something the Democrats have favored. Instead of telling me where the president has to come toward you, what are you willing to do and what are Democrats willing to do to move toward the president\u2019s point of view on this?”<\/line> PELOSI: Well, it\u2019s a question of the president making the tax code more complicated in the first four years of his term and now saying, “Let\u2019s simplify it.” We should <\/emphasize>simplify the tax code. We should <\/emphasize>have more tax cuts for middle-income Americans, and when — if the president wants to meet on that ground, we\u2019re happy to do it, but we will not contribute to the growing deficit. When we go into the lame duck session, the Congress will be called upon to raise the debt limit again because of the reckless economic policies of the Bush administration. Just because the election is over doesn\u2019t mean that the challenges aren\u2019t still there. Just because the president thinks he has a mandate doesn\u2019t mean that Democrats don\u2019t have a responsibility to point out the challenges we still have.<\/line>RUSH: All right. So she\u2019s not going to move anywhere. Gave a nice little bob-and-weave there, sort of a chuck-and-duck, but she\u2019s not going to — they\u2019re not going to — move anywhere near the president. They have no intention of moving anywhere near the president. “Just because the president thinks he has a mandate doesn\u2019t mean that the Democrats don\u2019t have a responsibility to point out the challenges we still face.” Go ahead. Rerun the campaign. Rerun it. See you in \u201908. Okay. We\u2019re going to skip #5, Altamont. We\u2019re going to move on here. I mentioned this to you earlier. I watched this, actually. Don\u2019t ask me why. It was on C-SPAN 2<\/a>. You know, it\u2019s odd enough that I\u2019m watching C-SPAN 1<\/a>. I was watching C-SPAN 2. I was. You know, I admit it. I\u2019m surfing around and I\u2019m actually looking for those postmortems featuring Democrats because it\u2019s than any reality show out there, and I found one last night. There was a big panel at George Washington University, which is where they do crossfire in the afternoon. They didn\u2019t even tear down the Crossfire set, except for “CROSSFIRE!” <\/line>The words weren\u2019t there but all those colored little banners and things were there. They had Peter Fenn up there and you had Sarah Taylor from the Republicans; Bill Greener from the Republicans. You had Mark Mellman<\/a> from the Democrats and they were all reviewing the election results and there\u2019s this exchange between Peter Fenn. Now, Peter Fenn was one of Clinton\u2019s big defenders during the Monica and impeachment stuff. Big Democrat consultant. Rich Democrat. Very rich Democrat inside the Beltway and Bill Greener, Republican guy, and this is an exchange here, and Peter Fenn, you\u2019ll hear him start out by saying — and this is a smart guy, but he\u2019s adopting… Who was it that we had this on Monday or Tuesday? Some crackpot. “We don\u2019t understand! People are not voting in their own self-interests.” He says that people are “voting against their own personal interests.” Now, what wacko said this? It was some Democrat, obviously, couldn\u2019t believe it. I mean, but it\u2019s kookville, but here\u2019s a mainstream Democrat consultant saying it and listen to the rest of the conversation, because what you\u2019re going to hear Peter Fenn trying <\/emphasize>to sound “mainstream America” but can\u2019t hide the elitism. <\/line><\/p>\n

FENN: Look, you know, a lot of people were voting against <\/emphasize>their own personal self-interests when they voted for George Bush [sic]. They — they — they — you know —<\/line>AUDIENCE: (laughter)<\/line>FENN: — they got a $3,500 — <\/line>GREENER: You guys really don\u2019t get it. It\u2019s amazing!<\/line>FENN: Well, let me tell you, in the next election, it may be amazing to you <\/emphasize>because the Wal-Mart families are going to vote for us not you, because here\u2019s what\u2019s going to happen: They\u2019re going to see that their insurance for their healthcare went up 3,500 bucks.<\/line>GREENER: That level of palpable, patronizing and condescension on the Wal-Mart voter so permeates what you say —<\/line>TAYLOR: Yes.<\/line>GREENER: — that it deafens what it is that comes through.<\/line>FENN: There\u2019s knowing condescending about it. <\/line>RUSH: Well, you be the judge. You know the Democrats hate Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart big Republican donors. They love CostCo because it is owned and run and donated by a big liberal. The Wal-Mart voter? If you listen carefully and you go back to the archives, you will find that conservatives are always made fun of and laughed at because they are Wal-Mart voters. What\u2019s a Wal-Mart voter? A Wal-Mart voter is an idiot. Wal-Mart\u2019s where stupid fools go. No self-respecting liberal would ever set foot inside a Wal-Mart. They\u2019re too good for Wal-Mart. They wouldn\u2019t dare <\/emphasize>be seen going in and buying things so cheap that they\u2019re in Wal-Mart. That\u2019s the way the liberals look at it. I mean, guys like Peter Fenn. I realize there are Democrats that go into Wal-Mart but you Democrats got to understand — especially you Democrats in the South, you have to understand — how you\u2019re <\/emphasize>looked at by your own elites simply because of where you live and where you shop, and that was Bill Greener, again, the Republican there.<\/line>Let\u2019s see. I\u2019m going to forget George Mitchell. I really don\u2019t care. Can you believe the guy that\u2019s CEO of the Disney or chairman of the board is up there on Democrat stages on Election Night during the last campaign? I can believe it. Paul McCartney? I don\u2019t care what McCartney says. Elizabeth Bumiller? (reading) Buh, buh, buh. Don\u2019t care what she says. Susan Page? Kwame Holman, I guess that… Let\u2019s see. Who? Maybe grab #10 there Altamont. You want to hear McCartney? Why do you want to hear him? Do you really think you\u2019re going to be surprised by what McCartney says about the election? Do you really think you\u2019re going to be surprised what he says? Grab #8, Altamont. Some people want to hear Paul McCartney of the Be\u2019les<\/emphasize>. He said this on the KLTA morning show. The anchor, Sam Rubin, was interviewing McCartney, and Rubin says, “Now, more political conversation, I suppose. Within the hour I talked with Sir Paul McCartney. He\u2019s in London. We talked about, among other things, America\u2019s place in the world and the election.”<\/line>MCCARTNEY: I think it\u2019s sad, really, because after 9\/11, the perception and the feelin\u2019 of support for the American people was tremendous, obviously, you know, and everyone sort of stepped up to the plate. I think that\u2019s been eroded and I\u2019m not really quite sure. I think it\u2019s to do with the, uh, administration. So I think a lot of people over in Europe are a bit saddened that this has happened, and that America seems to be sort of ignorin\u2019 a lot of the rest of the world and trying to — is just intent on going it alone. It\u2019s a bit of a sad thing, you know. I mus\u2019 say I was, you know, interested to see the result of the election.<\/line>RUSH: And then the anchor, Sam Rubin, asked McCartney, “What did you think of the result of the election? What did you personally think?”<\/line>MCCARTNEY: I personally wasn\u2019t too keen on it. I was supportin\u2019 the other guy.<\/line>RUSH: Really! Well, shocking news from across the pond, from Paul McCartney, supporting John Kerry. Tell you what, I\u2019m glad I played that. I would have not known where McCartney came down on the political spectrum. Thanks, Mr. Snerdley, for making me play that. (Flawless Beatles impression:) “We love you, yeah, yeah, yeah. We love you, yeah, yeah, yeah.” Yeah… Yeah…<\/line>END TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you\u2019re willing to join him from the other side, fine. We\u2019ll welcome you to the fold. But Bush\u2019s agenda is what it is. Why would he modify his agenda after winning more votes than any president ever has, a three-point margin and an electoral vote victory? Why should he modify his agenda to let […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nWhy Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Why Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"If you\u2019re willing to join him from the other side, fine. We\u2019ll welcome you to the fold. But Bush\u2019s agenda is what it is. Why would he modify his agenda after winning more votes than any president ever has, a three-point margin and an electoral vote victory? Why should he modify his agenda to let […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/\",\"name\":\"Why Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T07:00:38+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2011-05-19T07:00:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Why Should the Winners Compromise?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Why Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Why Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"If you\u2019re willing to join him from the other side, fine. We\u2019ll welcome you to the fold. But Bush\u2019s agenda is what it is. Why would he modify his agenda after winning more votes than any president ever has, a three-point margin and an electoral vote victory? Why should he modify his agenda to let […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/why_should_winners_compromise.Par.0007.ImageFile.jpg"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/","name":"Why Should the Winners Compromise? - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2011-05-19T07:00:38+00:00","dateModified":"2011-05-19T07:00:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2004\/11\/05\/why_should_the_winners_compromise\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Why Should the Winners Compromise?"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22258"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}