RUSH: Well, here's a headline that says it all: "Putin Redraws Russian Borders; Obama Unveils Bracket Picks." Does that not say it all? Vladimir Putin is reassembling the Soviet Union, and while all that's going on Obama is filling out his March Madness bracket picks. In fact, that is such a big story that CNN broke away from the coverage of the Malaysian airliner disappearance to report on Obama filling out his NCAA March Madness bracket picks.
That's big, because that missing airliner, that's all CNN is talking about. And you know why? Because their ratings are through the roof. They've finally found something they do that an audience wants to watch, so they're not letting go of it. I mean, it's like Howard Kurtz said yesterday, CNN is devoting 26 hours a day to this story. But they did break away to cover Obama filling out his March Madness picks.
RUSH: In the National Journal today, try this headline: "Here's How NASA Thinks Society Will Collapse." Wait, what? "Here's How NASA," the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, "Thinks Society Will Collapse." And then I had to remember that the NASA mission has been redefined by Obama. As you know, we don't have any manned spacecraft any longer. We don't launch human beings into orbit.
If we want to send an astronaut the International Space Station, we have to pay $70 million to the Russians to get aboard a Soyuz. I think it's $70 million. It's an absurd number. So the mission of NASA was changed to "Muslim outreach." Now, they still do other stuff at NASA. They've got this really, really extreme just Looney Toon environmentalist wacko there by the name of James Hansen.
He's using NASA as his perch to propagate this hoax of man-made global warming. But what in the world is NASA doing examining the way society will collapse? Well, they are, and they have reported their findings, and do you know what they are? You know what will doom America, our society? "Too much inequality and too few natural resources could leave the West vulnerable to a Roman Empire-style fall." Too much inequality. This is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration reporting this.
This is how, I tell you, they politicize everything they do. It's another example.
RUSH: No, of course not! It was not inequality and lack of natural resources that doomed the Roman Empire. It's crazy.
RUSH: Now, this NASA business. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration thinks that our society will collapse for the same reasons that the Roman Empire collapsed, and that is too much inequality and too few natural resources. Now, just so you know, most historians think the Roman Empire collapsed because of bloated government. There was way too much government spending by the leaders -- a lots of palaces, the Colosseum, lots of games -- and giving Roman citizenship to too many people.
You can find this if you read the great histories. In The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire by Will and Ariel Durant, you will find the theory that Rome sought to expand so rapidly that they granted Roman citizenship to way too many people who had nothing in common with Rome, which diluted the concept of being a Roman citizen. In other words, mass immigration. I'm not making it up. Roman history is replete with variations of that theory.
Now, the Romans conquered anything they could, but in the process they granted citizenship to be able to expand the Roman Empire, and they ended up diluting what being a Roman citizen was. There are also the theories that they collapsed morally on themselves. There are a lot of people that try to draw that comparison in what's happening here and Ancient Rome. But this business of inequality and too few natural resources?
Hell, they were conquering the world! They did not have too few natural resources. They went and took whatever they needed. They built the aqueducts. They found a way. This is a crazy theory.
RUSH: Let's move on a little lighter thing here just for a second here, folks. From TheHill.com. It's actually not lighter. This is actually pathetic, if you must know. You're gonna hear about it somewhere, so you may as well hear about it from me. "House Republicans plan to vote this year on legislation promoting construction of," dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut! Wait for it! "a National Women's History Museum, Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-Va.) office told The Hill.
"The move lends enormous momentum to the years-long push to establish a memorial to women's history near the National Mall -- a proposal that's lingered in Congress for nearly two decades without ever reaching the president's desk." There isn't gonna be a National Men's History Museum. See, what you don't understand is, all those war museums and memorials, those are museums to men. We've left the women out! That's right.
"Museum supporters wasted no time praising the announcement, with Rep. Carolyn Maloney -- a New York Democrat who's been working on the proposal since 1998 -- saying she's 'thrilled' by Cantor's move. With top House Democrats already behind the proposal, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, Maloney predicted it will sail through the lower chamber," the House.
We already have, ladies and gentlemen, I don't know how many museum for women all over the country. They're called malls. (I told you we had to get light here.) See, this is what makes people say, "Rush, you were doing so good, and you had to go do that, and now everyone is upset. My friends were listening and you said that, and you just ruined everything you've said about foreign policy by having to say that a mall is no different than a woman's museum.
"I had my friends listen, and you just had to ruin the whole show that you did today by doing that." Satire? Parody? Anyone? You know what this is, if I may veer back to the story? It's pandering. It's this War on Women business. (Hey, I could have said "brothel," but I didn't.) It's pandering. It's this War on Women business. If the Republicans try to block it, how many votes is this gonna get?
Let's take the quintessential prototype single woman the Democrats aim for, like in that Julia commercial. A woman who is born thinking she's gonna get nothing without the government giving her an apartment, giving her appointment at the sperm cell place, a little garden, and her health care and all that. So here come the Republicans, "Hey, we're gonna build a museum for women!"
She says, "Oh, wow, I'm voting for you!" Do they really think that this happens? They, the Republicans, do. They obviously do think that this is going to nullify some of the negatives attached to this baseless claim the Republicans are conducting a War on Women by saying, "What do you mean, War on Women? We're the ones making it possible for your museum to be built!"