Posted on 09/28/2009 6:56:07 PM PDT by GOP_Lady
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
On Today's Show... |
September 28, 2009
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Copyright & Trademark Notice | Unsubscribe
The Rush Limbaugh Show® Premiere Radio Networks © All Rights Reserved, 2009. Premiere Radio Networks, Inc. 15260 Ventura Blvd. Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
|
||||||
"The National Post has published some comments that Sarkozy made about Obama's UN speech that I have not seen anywhere else, and they are blistering.
They basically take Obama to task for being a sophomoric, wishy-washy, unrealistic boob. Imagine being told that by the leader of France, of all places!"
"Now we learn that Obama's talked to McChrystal only once in 70 days? Obama also says he wasn't aware of ACORN's massive criminal enterprise.
Maybe he's not aware of what's going on in Afghanistan, either. Does the guy ever work?"
"You are damn right we want Obama's agenda to fail! We want it to fail in order to save the country, President Clinton!
You know, Mr. President, if I were you, I would think about joining us. Do you realize what this man's done to you and your wife?"
"President Clinton, Barack Obama has done what we tried to do for eight years, and that's make you irrelevant and a babbling, worthless force in the Democrat Party. Nobody has ever been able to pull that off, but Obama has now, and you're out there supporting him?"
"With capitalism, the question is not about when is enough, enough. With capitalism, the question is about constant productivity, improvement, and rising tides lifting all boats."
"Tehran has a new uranium enrichment plant that, 'God willing, will blind the eyes of the enemies,' said Iran's semi-official news agency on Saturday.
So, yes, by all means, let the serious, meaningful dialogue with this bunch of lunatics begin."
"Oh! So we're going to replicate what we did in North Korea for Iran, Mrs. Clinton? Well, if that's the case, Iran is going to have nukes!"
"Now, if you want to know why Obama's health care plan won't get implemented until 2013 even if it passes, here is your answer: because once the reality of it hits, he's going to have a popular revolt on his hands."
"In the world of Barack Obama, the United States is the problem, and he, in his warped ego, is the solution. That's undeniable, that's where we are now, and that's who we elected."
"Do you remember the media and the Democrats all complaining that our troops didn't have the right body armor in Iraq, and that therefore George Bush didn't care about the soldiers? Well, now we have a president who cannot decide even if he wants to win the war in Afghanistan. Now, which is more dangerous?"
"When I work in New York, I don't pay anywhere near $13,000 a day in taxes. I wish it did! But that's why I have not been to New York one working day this year, and I will not go."
"Remember: Whatever Obama said during the campaign that was not to a union group or a trial lawyer's convention was just an attempt to mainstream himself and to hide his radicalism."
 |
Continually repeat ... It's not about me. I'm the President. |
Past editions of " RUSH IN A HURRY "
To be added or removed from the "Rush In A Hurry" Ping List, FReepmail GOP_Lady.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, this, folks, is hilarious. Let's go to the audio sound bites. This is Sunday morning, NBC's Meet the Press. David Gregory said, "Your wife famously talked about the vast right-wing conspiracy targeting you," and they bought it! They bought it. "As you look at the opposition on the right to President Obama, is the vast right-wing conspiracy still there?"
CLINTON: Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was. I mean they're saying things about him, you know, it's like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did. But it's not really good for the Republicans and the country what's going on now. I mean they may be hurting President Obama, they can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up, but fundamentally he and his team have a positive agenda for America. Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail. And that's not a prescription for a good America.
RUSH: Seems that the president, former president, made a coded reference to me. I think I'm on these people's minds all the time. They cannot get me off of their mind. "Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail." Damn right it is. You are damn right we want his agenda to fail. We want it all to fail. And we want it to fail in order to save the country, Mr. President. Mr. President, if I were you I would think about joining us. Do you realize what this man's done to you and your wife? Barack Obama has done what we tried to do for eight years, and that's make you irrelevant and make you a babbling, worthless force in the Democrat Party. Nobody has ever been able to pull that off. Obama did and you're out there standing up and supporting him? And I know at the first sign of genuine weakness Hillary and Bill are going to be in there trying to undercut this guy as fast as we are. But right now he's gotta present this notion that they're all unified and the vast right-wing conspiracy is back. Gregory said, "Do you worry about a repeat of 1994 politically?"
CLINTON: There's no way they can make it that bad, for several reasons. Number one, the country is more diverse and more interested in positive action. Number two, they've seen this movie before because they had eight years under President Bush when the Republicans finally had the whole government and they know the results were bad. And number three, the Democrats haven't taken on the gun lobby like I did and they took 15 of our members out. So I don't think -- it will be -- whatever happens, it will be manageable for the president.
RUSH: No, but, I'll tell you what, health care numbers are at a record low, Rasmussen 41% support. The anger in this country, according to Rasmussen, is universal. It's universal demographically and it's rising, genuine anger at Obama, at his policies, at the state of the country and for the future. It's an unreported story because the State-Controlled Media doesn't see it. And when they do see it they laugh at it and mock it. They think it's just a bunch of mobsters, a small, unruly mob. They think that everybody is still in love with Obama. Now, they're starting to get a little edgy, Howard Fineman is begging Obama to stay off of television now. Just saw the piece, haven't printed it out yet, just saw it before the program started, "Mr. President, Please Stay off TV," is the headline from Howard Fineman at Newsweek.
Now, let's go back, one more sound bite, Clinton Friday night on CNN, Anderson Cooper's 180, he said, "Do you think things are more polarized now? When you see the so-called tea party protests, when you see some of these raucous town hall meetings and you hear Obama being called a Nazi, a socialist, is the debate just nastier now? I mean, it was pretty tough against you when you were president." Now of course, there was no hate, there was no acrimony. There was no polarization during the eight years of Bush. Have you ever asked what eight years of hate produced? You know, all during those eight years I kept telling anybody who would listen, the people of this country are simply not going to reward this kind of virulent rage, insane hatred. But I was wrong. The Democrats attacked Bush for eight years. They said "no" to everything he proposed, the things that they agreed with they later turned around and said he lied to them about it and acted like they never did support him. They used vile, disrespectful language. They wrote books and made movies on how to assassinate George Bush. And what did all that hate and what did all those no's get 'em? Well, it got them the House, it got them the Senate, and it got them the White House. The hate worked. I'm not suggesting anything by it. I'm just making an observation. Not suggesting that we hate. Nor am I suggesting that we should. Anyway, "It was pretty tough against you, Mr. President, when you were president. Is this just politics as usual?"
CLINTON: The public is so tired of all this, they want to just get together and go for it and have a solution. The congressional Republicans need to know that just saying "no" on everything and praying for the president to fail is not a good strategy.
RUSH: We're not praying, Mr. President, we are working hard. We're not praying for Obama to fail. We are working and fighting as hard as we can to make sure that it happens. So Clinton says the right-wing conspiracy that once targeted him is now focusing on the poor little experienced Obama, says their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail. How typical. How typical of Clinton. You see how his mind works? It's the way all liberal minds work. When they cannot force their weak ideas on us -- and they've got all the power, we don't have one way to stop them with votes. They've got these weak ideas. When they can't even unify -- by the way, "The public is so tired they want us to just get together," that's what they thought Obama was going to bring. They thought Obama was going to bring this, Mr. President, and he has created all this partisanship. Just like I said on Jay Leno's show, there are lots of people who are opening up their eyes and saying, "This is not what I voted for." So they can't force their weak ideas on us. What do they do? They blame it on the evil and vast right-wing conspiracy. When the polling gets bad and State-Controlled Media start to catch onto their lies and misdeeds, then it's time to blame it all on the evil and vast right-wing conspiracy. Vast. I love that word. I love being part of a vast group that objects to fascism.
I love being the Mister Big of the vast right-wing conspiracy, and I still am by virtue of being reanointed by Mr. Clinton here, the Mister Big of the vast right-wing conspiracy that objects to socialism and fascism. So let's just review, shall we, ladies and gentlemen, despite having control of everything in the world and a summer-long full-court press to court support, gone out there and wined and dined, given gladly by the Drive-Bys, all of this support, not one negative word other than for the unruly mobs at the town halls and the tea parties. He has not stimulated our economy nor created jobs. Young people, unemployment rate, 52%. Now, what's one of the crown jewels of the Democrat Party and the left? The minimum wage. The minimum wage goes up, 52% unemployment among young people. And the story is it's so bad, it will take them years to find a place in the economy with decent paying jobs because there are many people ahead of them looking with more experience, and when things do kick back in gear and get up and running, those will be the people that are hired first, not these young people.
The AP even has a story today on, you know, all these tax increases on the rich are not working in New York and they're not working in New Jersey. I couldn't believe this story. It even mentions me. Anyway, that's just part of what's coming up. So he hasn't stimulated the economy, he has not created any jobs, all because of us, all because of the vast right-wing conspiracy. That's what Clinton's out there saying. The economy is in the tank, no jobs, all because of us. He can't get his health care legislation passed, all because of us, the vast and evil right-wing conspiracy. He can't figure out if he should commit more troops to Afghanistan, because of us, the vast right-wing conspiracy. He can't talk tough with Iran. You can't stop Iran from nuking up. All he wants to do is really, really talk to them. It's all our fault, it's all the fault of the vast right-wing conspiracy. He cannot stand up to any nutcase. Iran, Russia, Venezuela, the Norks, because of us, the vast right-wing conspiracy.
I guess I should mention this. Not only are we evil and vast but we are racist, the evil, vast, racist right-wing conspiracy is what they have tried to tag on us. They're blaming all of their failures just like they always do on us, when we are powerless to stop them. If they unify, which they'll have to do against the will of the American people, if they unify, nobody can stop 'em, until perhaps the 2010 elections. And I think President Clinton's a little optimistic over what the results of the 2010 elections will be.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Yes, my friends, I am talking about that very same vast right-wing conspiracy that arranged for Monica Lewinsky to be hired as an intern at the White House and then arranged for Monica Lewinsky to take a pizza into the Oval Office -- and then the same vast right-wing conspiracy that unzipped President Clinton's pants and enabled all of those Lewinskys to take place in the first place. Yes, that's the vast right-wing conspiracy to which I refer. And remember the vast right-wing conspiracy was created by Hillary to distract people's attention away from the unzipped pants and the pizza and the Lewinskys in the Oval Office. (crumbling up paper) Pure and simple.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • New York Times: Bill Clinton Echoes 'Right-Wing Conspiracy' Theme • Sweetness & Light: Clinton Sees Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy |
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: March of 2008, then we'll get to the phones. In March of 2008, Hillary Clinton ran an ad, a Hillary for President ad -- and the ad has been scrubbed from her website. There is no YouTube version of it. It has been taken down. You cannot find it anywhere. But I have the transcript of the ad, a little 30-second ad, and this was it. The announcer opens by saying, "Barack Obama says he has the judgment to be president. But as chairman of an oversight committee charged with the force of fighting Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, he was too busy running for president to hold even one hearing." Then they have Obama actually saying, "I've (unintelligible) chairman, this committee, beginning campaign, 2007, so, yeah, it's true. We have not had one oversight hearing on Afghanistan." He never did conduct a hearing. The announcer comes back and says, "Hillary Clinton will never be too busy to defend our national security, bringing our troops home from Iraq, and pursuing Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan," and he closes with the, "I am Hillary Clinton and I approved this message." You can't find the ad on YouTube. It's been scrubbed from her website. Don't forget, she was given $20 million to help retire her campaign fund. That will buy a lot of cooperation. Mrs. Clinton -- Mrs. Clinton, of all people -- warned us of this. This is smack-dab in the middle of Operation Chaos, by the way, March of 2008. To the phones we go, Sarah in Las Vegas. You're first. It's great to have you with us today. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. I have... I'm a little nervous so I got a 19-year-old grandson in the army and he's supposed to deploy to Afghanistan in June of next year. (choking up) He wants to go, but I'm very nervous about it with and I just wonder what you think Obama's going to do about that kid.
RUSH: You know, we took a call from a distressed mother in Texas, I think it was last week. She had the same identical circumstance, other than her son is going before next June. I must tell you: I really feel for you. I don't know... If I had a son that wanted to go... I'm thinking about, you know, the troops that are there, I'm thinking, "What must they think? What is their morale?" Their commander has asked for more troops otherwise the whole thing may go down the tubes and the guy is flying off to Denmark on a Chicago Olympics bid. He's on television all over the place talking about health care. He's putting the decision off pending a "strategy review." Meanwhile, the North Koreans and the Iranians are launching test missiles, and they send this doofus Gibbs, the White House press secretary out there, to give a statement. Gibbs is saying "Iran must demonstrate it will give up weapons program." The world doesn't care what Gibbs says! The world wants to hear what Obama says about it, but Obama is too busy trying to get the Olympics in Chicago and who the hell knows what else. Sarah --
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: -- I -- I -- (sigh)
CALLER: You know to choose --
RUSH: The fact is, I don't know what Obama is going to do in Afghanistan. All I can tell you is that he has said -- I need to this quote. I think we had it as an audio sound bite. Certainly we can find the text of the quote. He said he's troubled with the whole concept of victory in Afghanistan. It reminded him of how humiliating it must have been for the Japanese to sign the surrender treaty in World War II aboard the USS Missouri. I read that and I was aghast. I think if you listen to what the man said at the UN, he doesn't believe in victory.
CALLER: Well, to die for a noble cause is a noble thing. I believe that. But to go over there with you don't even care if there's a victory, it's pathetic. I'm just sick and tired of it.
RUSH: Look, I understand. To quote former president, "I feel your pain." I mean I really do. You've had this man speak at the United Nations last week that we're all equal here. There's no nation any better than any others. The days of us being a superpower essentially are finished.
CALLER: Well, Netanyahu, to me, his speech was just off the charts. I was actually crying when he was giving his speech. It was so moving. And our president got up and apologized for America, which I believe is the greatest country on earth. But there's nothing wrong with being great. But that's not what we're hearing coming out of the Washington.
RUSH: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I can't emphasize this enough. In the world of Barack Obama the things that made us great are unjust and immoral and are examples of imperialism.
CALLER: True.
RUSH: Do you realize, look at what he said to the United Nations. "To those of you that think my country can't change I ask you simply look at the last eight months." I mean, that is a dangerous --
CALLER: I know.
RUSH: -- dangerous self-absorption.
CALLER: I know. You know, and I have a grandson that's got to go. You know, I have a vested interest in this. Which I always have had, but it's very personal now. So I just hope he makes the right decision.
RUSH: You know what, I understand you're saying it's personal but for all of us, it is. This is our country.
CALLER: Exactly.
RUSH: It's your son, but your son's ours when --
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: -- your son goes to battle.
CALLER: Exactly.
RUSH: Everybody's son is ours.
CALLER: And I have met so many at his graduation from basic training. He just went through Air Assault School. I've met so many young men that want to do what they're doing.
RUSH: They all do. They volunteer.
CALLER: For me, enrollment is like... You know, that would be the last thing that I would want to do. But I just am so thankful for young men and women who want to do this.
RUSH: So are we all, and that's why we get angry, upset, when we see them be undercut. And remember, this is not new. For the last five years, Obama and his party single-handedly fought for their defeat in Iraq. They single-handedly fought for it, tried to demoralize the troops, excused them of rape and murder with no evidence whatsoever. In the world of Barack Obama, the United States is the problem. He, in his warped ego, is the solution. And that's undeniable, and that's where we are. That's who we elected. God bless, Sarah. I'm confident that America has not changed as Obama believes it has or wants to make it change, and that this can be beat back. If I didn't think that, I'd chuck it. And I'd spend the rest of my days making sure the last check I wrote bounced.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here it is. It was from July 29th of this year. Obama was giving a TV interview with ABC News, and here's the ABC News report: "'Obama: "Victory" Not Necessarily Goal in Afghanistan.' -- President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but "victory" in the war-torn country isn't necessarily the United States' goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview. 'I'm always worried about using the word "victory," because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,' Obama told ABC News. 'We're not dealing with nation states at this point. We're concerned with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Al Qaeda's allies,' he said. 'So when you have a non-state actor, a shadowy operation like Al Qaeda, our goal is to make sure they can't attack the United States.'"
I don't know that victory is what we're looking for there, and yet July 15th of 2008, Associated Press, "Contending that the U.S. is not pursuing a sound strategy for keeping Americans safe, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Tuesday that fighting al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan would be his top priority after ending the war in Iraq. 'This is a war that we have to win,' Obama said in remarks prepared for delivery at the International Trade Center in Washington." So July 15th, 2008, this is a war we have to win. July 29th, 2009, "I'm always worried about using the word 'victory' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a --" I don't think it was Emperor Hirohito, was it? Anyway, just more evidence Obama talked one way during the campaign and it was not true. He is governing as who he really is.
BREAK TRANSCIRPT
RUSH: I want you to hear this before we go to the break. ABC's Nightline, July 23rd, 2009, Terry Moran asked Obama, "Define victory in Afghanistan, or maybe that's not the right word."
OBAMA: I'm always, you know, worried about using the word "victory" because, you know, it evokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur. You know, we're not dealing with nation states at this point. We're concerned with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
RUSH: All right, that's it. That sets it up. I don't want to hear him mispronounce "Taliban." Those words there: "Victory, I'm always worried about using the word victory." And besides, I was right, Hirohito did not come down from the hills and sign the surrender papers.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Karen in western Michigan, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush.
RUSH: Yes?
CALLER: I am a mother of a soldier who deployed to Afghanistan the end of July, the Fifth Brigade's 2nd Infantry Division, and I thank you for all the good comments you've been making today about the policy of Barack Obama in the Mideast and throughout the world. I had one more point that concerns me, and that is that Iranian missiles are able to reach our bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I'm concerned for my son and the other soldiers.
RUSH: Yes. Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force. You are now, I don't know, the third or fourth call from a parent of a member of the US military. And I totally (sigh) totally understand the emotion you have about this. This is really unprecedented. I think the closest we could probably come to this was the latter stages of the Vietnam War -- and then, of course, we had the draft. These people are all volunteering. Speaking of the draft, isn't it about time for that? I mean, you know, Charlie Rangel was always trying to embarrass President Bush by suggesting we needed a draft. (interruption) Yeah. I know Chuck Rangel is busy trying to find more millions of hidden dollars he hasn't reported to the IRS.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Do you people remember all during the war in Iraq...? Do you remember the State-Controlled Media, the Drive-Bys and the Democrats all complaining that they didn't have the right body armor and the Humvees were not armored properly? Remember all of the unmitigated hell that George Bush got from the Democrats in the media that he didn't care about the soldiers. And now we have a president who cannot decide even if he wants to win a war in Afghanistan. Now, which is more dangerous? One could be fixed, and it was. The other is a personality flaw that is unfixable and deadly -- and that would be Obama.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Candace in Clarksville, Tennessee, glad you called, great to have you here. Hello.
CALLER: Mega mega dittos, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: I am concerned because my husband is in the military and he will be deploying next spring for the third time. I want the president to be concerned enough about the war to talk to his commanders more than once in 70 days. And what is he doing, Rush? He's trying to make sure that the Olympics are going to be in Chicago in 2016. And all I have to say to any liberals listening out there is that Iran did not test fire any missiles while Bush was in office because Bush practiced peace through strength. And this stuff has me scared, Rush, it really does.
RUSH: By the way, do you know it's not a coincidence that today is the day the Iranians fired the nukes. It's Yom Kippur, a Jewish holiday.
CALLER: Okay.
RUSH: And those missiles and their test firing are among other things to determine how far along they are at being able to target those missiles at Israel. So it's not an accident. That's a very good observation. They didn't launch any of this stuff during the Bush years. The Norks did, but the Iranians didn't. Do you remember what Biden said during the campaign? (paraphrasing) "We're going to be tested, Obama is going to be tested, Barack is going to be tested, the first six months going to be tested, and we're going to have a real problem on our hands, and you're not going to understand, you're not going to appreciate our response to it, and we're begging you to hang in with us." Do you remember him saying that?
CALLER: Yes, I do.
RUSH: Well, I don't know if this is it or if it's yet to come. But we've got a pretty good idea why Biden thinks we're not going to hang in with him. More and more people like you, you're the fourth or fifth call now since last week about this, military member family worried about the commitment of the commander-in-chief when your husband or son or daughter is heading off to the theater of battle. Let me ask you a question. Is your real concern, is your concern really based on whether or not this president will defend the country or will give your husband in this case all the tools necessary to win?
CALLER: I'm concerned on both. I want him to give the commanders the tools necessary that they need to win this war, and Obama has shown no interest whatsoever in winning this war. I mean I just want them to have the support that they need over there. I really do. I want them to win. I want them to fight to win, and I have no confidence in this administration, I'm sorry, I just don't.
RUSH: Amen. Join the club. More and more people have that same sentiment. It's a dawn of reality coming up and more and more people are glaring at it, not happy with what they see.
David in St. Louis, glad you called. Welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: Thank you, first-time caller. I got a question for you. I'm a union guy from St. Louis, been a military reservist for over 20 years, son on active duty, another son getting ready to go into the Army. I pop open my St. Louis Post-Dispatch this weekend and what do I read? A $20 million earmark for the Kennedy Institute out of a $360 billion defense budget that was snuck in there by Senator John Kerry. Has anybody beside myself called and been alarmed by this idea?
RUSH: I'm glad you reminded me. I saw that over the weekend, or maybe it was today I looked at it. Yeah, $20 million in there for a memorial, in essence, to Teddy Kennedy in the defense bill, defense appropriations bill.
CALLER: Yeah, they say it's going to be for the library to house the papers for a billionaire family and they say this will only cover 40% of the institute's initial fundraising.
RUSH: Well, we gotta have some sympathy for the Kennedys. They may be a billionaire family but they got about 1,500 sponges soaking it up who still haven't figured out how to get a real job.
CALLER: Another question for you.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: Did you see 60 Minutes last night?
RUSH: Yeah, I saw the audio. I don't watch the show anymore. It's called the National Football League on Sundays for me.
CALLER: Well, another thing that caught my attention as a military family --
RUSH: Quickly, very quickly.
CALLER: Okay, the general said he's only talked to the president one time since he's been in office. To me that's stunning.
RUSH: Yep, one time in 70 days. One time. With all the high-tech Obama has, only one time. But you gotta understand, now, he's gotta go get the Olympics for Chicago in 2016, he's been talking to Mayor Daley a lot, and Obama has his priorities, people need to understand.
END TRANSCRIPT
"But important as they were, those news reports masked a surprising and perhaps heartening long-term trend: Many students of terrorism believe that in important ways, Al Qaeda and its ideology of global jihad are in a pronounced decline -- with its central leadership thrown off balance as operatives are increasingly picked off by missiles and manhunts and, more important, with its tactics --" wait a second here. Wait just a second. This is the same New York Times who told us that everything we were doing in the war on terror was a waste, it was a bust, we had no business being in Iraq, Afghanistan, ah, really shouldn't be there, either, just capture Bin Laden. Now all of a sudden they say we're succeeding or did succeed so well that Al-Qaeda is so fractured and disoriented that there's no reason to fear terror attacks. That's what the sum total of this story is, we really have an unrealistic fear of future terrorist attacks, and there are quotes from terrorism experts in this.
Now, this, again, to remind you, it's yesterday's New York Times written by the same New York Times national security expert Scott Shane, the same reporter who saw nothing wrong in leaking the name of the CIA interrogator who questioned Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. So the New York Times on September 27th, 2009, tells us that there's really no reason to fear terror attacks anymore, that leaders have been picked off, they're in a state of disarray. Can I take you back to the New York Times July 10th, 2001, headline: "The Declining Terrorist Threat," two months before 9/11. Two months before 9/11. "Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism. None of these beliefs are based in fact," wrote the New York Times on July 10th, 2001.
In fact, "While many crimes are committed against Americans abroad (as at home), politically inspired terrorism, as opposed to more ordinary criminality motivated by simple greed, is not as common as most people may think." So two months before 9/11, the same worthless newspaper wrote about the declining terror threat and the sheer paranoia of the American people and the bigotry of the American people in judging most terrorists to be Islamists. Now, if history is any precedent, we ought to be preparing for another terror attack. As the New York Times has today or yesterday said, "We need to rethink our terror fears, really no reason to fear terror attacks anymore, we've picked off their leaders." I guess George Bush did that. They gonna credit it now? This guy's downplaying 'em in the story today, he's downplaying these five attempts, they were just chump change, amateurs, we really need to rethink this.
Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force. And we have seen rise to prominence the literal naivete, the dangerous naivete of a utopian-inspired left that basically has as its world perspective and experience academia and theory and philosophy, coupled with an arrogance and a conceit that is personified by President Obama that says they are the really smart people in the world, that only when they are leading the nation will the rest of the world which is all smarter than we are, too, only when the real true elites are leading this country will the rest of the world's bad guys realize that the United States has turned a corner and is no longer a threat to them, and they can stand down and join us in this weapon-free worldwide utopia. That is the summation of where we are in this country, of course aided and abetted by the same kind of academic philosophical naivete in the State-Run Media.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • New York Times: Rethinking Our Terrorist Fears - Scott Shane • Sweetness & Light: NYT: No Reason To Fear Terror Attacks |
There is no Social Security surplus! "It will add to the overall federal deficit. Applications for retirement benefits, 23% higher than last year while disability claims have risen about 20%. The recession hit many older workers suddenly. They found themselves laid off with no place to turn but Social Security. 'If they were younger we'd call them unemployed,' said an economics law professor at University of California Berkeley," which means that the unemployment numbers are higher than are being reported. So job losses and early retirements hurt Social Security. And remember there was no COLA increase, no cost-of-living increase in Social Security. I can't believe the Republicans didn't make hay out of this, because while there's no cost-of-living increase in Social Security, members of Congress got a raise -- and they voted themselves even more money for other things.
Now, this story I referenced at the beginning of the program today, and I am still stunned that it ran in State-Controlled Associated Press. "This year, New York's deep-pocketed rich were required to dig even deeper to help shore up state finances. They now pay higher taxes on their income and on limousines and yachts, more to enter a horse in a race and more to dabble in real estate." No, we wouldn't want people to "dabble in real estate" in a recession, would we? Oh, no, no, we wouldn't want any of that. Who the hell "dabbles in real estate"? Anyway, I don't want to get distracted by that. "Meanwhile, many are losing millions [the rich] from the closing of business tax loopholes and those making over $1 million are losing tax deductions others get. It even costs more to hunt foxes or pheasants and have their taxes prepared.
Now, a half-dozen states in this recession-driven movement are nervously eyeing New York to see if it's wise to demand so much from people rich enough to have a second home in less taxing states -- and for whom a change of address can be its own tax break. Early data from New York show the higher tax rates for the wealthy have yielded lower-than-expected state wealth." Lower than who expected? "Gov. David Paterson, who had always warned targeting the rich could backfire, fears that's just what happened." He never did! It was Bloomberg that said it would backfire. Paterson never said it. "Paterson said last week that revenues from the income tax increases and other taxes enacted in April are running about 20 percent less than anticipated." These doofuses, what do they expect? The evidence is all over the place!
You tax an activity, you slow down that activity. So you tax income you're going to slow down the earning of income. If you tax yachts, you're not going to sell as many. They look at the private sector as a never ending golden goose that they could just constantly go out and grab money from and money from, and now, Oh, no! Oh, no! Tax revenues are down? How can this be? "The concern about millionaire flight has prompted some states, including New York, New Jersey and California, to increase the highest tax rates only temporarily. For New York, it's the second temporary increase for high earners since 2001. The first one ended as scheduled after three years. But Paterson and economists warn that came as the economy began to grow fast into another boom, something that isn't expected now because Wall Street -- which historically provided 20 percent of state revenues -- is perhaps permanently downsized."
And, by the way, who's leading the charge to do that? It's not the vast right-wing conspiracy that has permanently downsized Wall Street. It's not the vast right-wing conspiracy that wants to cap executive pay or anybody else's pay on which tax revenue is based. No, it's Bam! It's Nancy Pelosi. It's Henry Waxman and every single damn Democrat in the country. Detroit, Michigan, may have to declare a government shut down again. "So far this year, half of about $1 billion in expected revenue from New York's 100 richest taxpayers is missing. The state budget office says losses suffered in the recession could be largely to blame, and it may still come in next year when filers exhaust their extensions. Those seeking extensions nevertheless had to pay in April at least as much as they owed in 2008.
"The six-month extension for the balance ends in October, but given the hard times many filers likely didn't earn much more than a year ago. State officials say they don't know how much of the missing revenue is because any wealthy New Yorkers simply left."Well, I do. (laughing). I do. I can tell 'em. "[A]t least two high-profile defectors have sounded off on the tax changes: Buffalo Sabres owner Tom Golisano, the billionaire who ran for governor three times and who was paying $13,000 a day in New York income taxes, and radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh. Golisano changed his official address to Florida, and Limbaugh, who also [lives in Florida], announced earlier this year that he was relinquishing his home in Manhattan."
Ladies and gentlemen, on the days, just to tell you that I work in New York, I don't pay anywhere near $13,000 a day. I wish it were. That is why I have not gone. Thirteen thousand dollars a day in New York income taxes, I wish that's what it cost me. That is why I have not been to New York one working day this year, and I will not go. "Donald Trump told Fox News earlier this year that several of his millionaire friends were talking about leaving the state over the latest taxes." I played golf with Trump back in the spring and he told me the same thing. He named some names. "Golisano, who created 5,000 jobs from his Rochester payroll processing company, Paychex, bristled when politicians said he was bailing on New York in the spring. 'If anything, New York state has bailed out on us,' he said. And it's not just the well-known leaving.
"Nancy Bell is moving her Science First manufacturer of scientific products from the Buffalo site her father founded in 1960 [also] to Florida, which aggressively courted her and her two business-partner sons. They are building a new facility there and, with the state's help, had 1,000 applications for 20 jobs. ... 'Overall, as in most states, revenues are down at the higher income levels,' said Joseph Shapiro, spokesman for the Maryland Comptroller's Office. The ... Tax Foundation said that through the early 1990s, several states maintained double-digit income tax rates for the higher earners. Those rates were dropped, however, in the boom of a fast-growing economy. States also realized that having a higher tax rate than their neighbors would cost them talent, lose jobs and hinder economic growth..."
The liberals know this. It doesn't matter. It's power. It's control that they want. "The foundation said the taxes can undermine growth, and notes even states that increased taxes on high-income earners -- New Jersey, Maryland, and California -- face shortfalls comparatively worse than others." Yeah, we've told 'em this for decades. This is why the left had to work so hard to rewrite the history of the eighties and Reagan's tax cuts and the burgeoning revenue they brought. Because, see, folks, it's not about revenue generation. Oh, they're worried about it now! It's about power, it's about control. I'm still stunned the story ran, though. I'm amazed. (interruption) Mmm-hmm.
"'You can say, 'The millionaire is evil,' but they don't just put their money in a coffee can,' said Christopher Summers, president of the nonpartisan Maryland Public Policy Institute. 'They employ people ... That fact is, you need rich people to keep working hard so they will invest,'" even though they're evil. You can say they're evil. You can say they're evil, but, damn it, we need 'em! Damn it, we need 'em. Jay Leno has over 200 cars. I wonder how many people he pays to clean 'em and maintain his storage facility. I wonder what kind of economy Jay Leno single-handedly is supporting with his car collection. Yet he asked me, "Gosh, Rush, I mean how big a piece of pie can you eat? When's enough enough?" And in capitalism, the question is not, "When is enough enough?" In capitalism the question is constant productivity, increased productivity, improvement, a rising tide lifting all boats. Capitalism is also what enables brilliant people to answer the question: "Okay, President Reagan, Cold War: What are your thoughts?" "Simple. We win; they lose."
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
| • AP: Job Losses, Early Retirements Hurt Social Security • AP: Risky Business: States Tax the Rich at Their Peril |
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: All right, to the phones we go, to Louisville, Kentucky. This is Mike. Nice to have you on the program, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's a pleasure. I got a quick question for you. Maybe you can help me out on it.
RUSH: Yes, sir.
CALLER: A long time ago I was watching the primary between Edwards and Hillary and Obama. They were asked about nuclear weapons, and I'll quote Obama. He said, "I will never, ever under any circumstance use a nuclear weapon." You know, and then Hillary said, "Well, I won't take anything off the table," and Edwards said, "Well, I'll negotiate to get rid of them." Well, Obama has changed his tune but my question is: Do I pray that Obama lied when he said that, that he would never use them -- or does he really think that since he'll never use a nuclear weapon, we might as well get rid of them?
RUSH: Well, but you have forgotten that he also said he would nuke Pakistan, right?
CALLER: Correct.
RUSH: Even if they didn't give... Remember he said he was... Look, what you have to do is whatever he said during the campaign that was not to a union group or not to a teachers union or not to a trial lawyer convention. Everything he said was an attempt to mainstream himself and to hide his radicalism. Now, "I'll never use nuclear weapons," he was probably being very truthful there, in an exception to my rule.
CALLER: Wouldn't that get rid of our deterrent?
RUSH: Well, yeah. Didn't you hear him last week in this stupid sophomoric speech he gave at the UN? He's going to disarm! He's gonna get into all these new treaties saying we're gonna lead the way in getting rid of our nukes.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: We're going to be back to the same old stuff we were with the Soviets where we were disarming and they weren't. I think the guy is a menace. He's a dangerous, dangerous, naive soul. Remember: "Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force." Bob in Port Charlotte, Florida. I'm glad you waited, sir. You're up next. Hello.
CALLER: Okay. Dittos from Florida, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: It's a pleasure to speak to you.
RUSH: Thank you very much, sir.
CALLER: I'd like to know if Eisenhower didn't take a month to send Patton to help the troops at Bastogne, why has it taken the president over a month to decide whether to send more troops to Afghanistan?
RUSH: He still hasn't decided.
CALLER: I mean, he's found time for everything else. He goes on TV every day to give speeches. He goes to the Black Caucus dinner. Now he's planning on plying to Copenhagen about some Olympic event for Chicago. He's doing everything but what he needs to do.
RUSH: What puzzles me about the Olympics is I don't know why he cares, because there are people that win at the Olympics, and that doesn't fit with his agenda of nations. You know, no nation should be better than any other or different than any other but clearly nations are going to win medals.
CALLER: But his primary job is commander-in-chief. He should be more concerned about the troops in Afghanistan and what they need and whether to send more troops to help them out.
RUSH: That's the way you and I look at it. That's just a troublesome sideshow.
CALLER: Well, I think he's playing politics with the lives of our troops over there, and frankly I'm sick of it.
RUSH: Oh, there's no question. Look, I don't know how else to say this. Obama comes from that radical left that doesn't like the US military, doesn't like them being victorious. Look, we played it, folks. He's uncomfortable with the concept of victory in Afghanistan. And we're not making too much of that. Here, go back to the audio sound bites. Friday night in Pittsburgh at the G20 summit, Obama held a press conference. The reporter said, "You said a couple months ago that the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity. Do you think it's possible to meet our objectives there without an extra infusion of troops?"
OBAMA: And, uh, I would expect that the public would ask some very tough questions. That's exactly what I'm doing is asking some very tough questions. Uhhh, aaand, you know, we're not going to arrive at perfect answers. I think anybody who's looked at the situation recognizes that it's difficult and it's complicated. But my solemn obligation is to make sure that, uh, I get the best answers possible, uh, particularly before I make decisions about sending additional, uh, troops, uhh, into the theater.
RUSH: That is just pathetic. The commander on the ground says, "We need more troops." It's a no-brainer! (Obama impression) "Well, it's not easy. I expect that the public would ask very tough questions. It's exactly what I'm doing. Tough questions. We're not going to arrive at perfect answers. Anybody look at the situation recognizes it's difficult." And here's pathetic Obama again on Friday at the G20 summit. A reporter says, "Ahmadinejad said today that your statement this morning was a mistake and that your mistakes work in Iran's favor. What gives you any sense that you can genuinely negotiate with this guy? And also, when you talk about 'holding Iran accountable,' is the military option growing more likely?"
OBAMA: Iran is on notice that when we meet with them on October 1st they are going to have to come clean and they are going to have to make a choice: Are they willing to go down the path which I think ultimately will lead to greater prosperity and security for Iran -- giving up, uh, the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and deciding that they are willing to abide by international rules and standards in their pursuit of peaceful nuclear energy -- uh, or will they continue, uh, down a past that is going to lead to confrontation? I'm not going to speculate on the course of action that we will take. We're going to give October 1st a chance.
RUSH: "We're not going to speculate on the course of action... continue down the path. We're going to really talk now. We've talked to them before. We're going to really, really talk now." It's like... I forget who wrote this. Somebody wrote this and I've got it somewhere in the stack. Somebody said you know what this speech is like? This is like when you were a kid and you did something wrong, and your mother said, "All right, you wait 'til your dad gets home." Well, this is an Obama you-wait-'til-your-dad-gets-home answer to the question about Iran. "We're going to really talk now. We're going to really sit down and talk. We're going to have really meaningful dialogue now," which is all anybody's been doing with Iran while they laugh about it. Now, Mrs. Clinton, one of the things that he's not talking about is military action. He's not going to do that. He's talking about meaningful and tough new sanctions on them. So let's go to Mrs. Clinton, shall we? The Secretary of State was on CBS' Face the Nation Sunday morning. Harry Smith sitting in said to her, "You talked this summer about if diplomacy failed you called sanctions, crippling sanctions would be in order. What would those crippling sanctions be?"
HILLARY: Well, Harry, we're exploring how you broaden and deepen sanctions. Now, sanctions are already in place, as you know, but like many sanction regimes they're leaky. But in the last, ummm, eight months, uh, since we've been dealing with North Korea on a similar, uh, set of issues, we have forged an international consensus around VERY tough sanctions. And that's given us some additional information about how to proceed on the Iranian front.
RUSH: Oh! Oh! So we're going to replicate what we did in North Korea? Well, if that's the case, Iran is going to have nukes.
END TRANSCRIPT
RUSH ARCHIVE: Closing Gitmo isn't going to happen. It's not going to happen. It is not going to happen. They're not going to close Gitmo. I constantly suggest to people that they not doubt me. Don't doubt me. I checked the e-mail during the time-out. People think that the left in this country is going to be outraged when they find out that Obama won't close Guantanamo Bay for four years. They won't hear that. It's in the Washington Post today, but that's where it will die. What they're going to hear is an executive order announced to close it.
RUSH: All right, that's enough. That was January 16th when I predicted they're not going to close Club Gitmo. Sunday morning This Week, George Stephanopoulos talking to Robert Gates, "Major story in the Washington Post suggesting the president's deadline of January 22 for closing Gitmo won't be met. White House officials tell me at least some prisoners will still be there on January 22nd beyond. How big a setback is that?"
GATES: The question was, "Should we set a deadline?" I actually was one of those who said we should. "If you don't put a deadline on something you'll never move the bureaucracy." But I also said, "and then if we find we can't get it done by that time but we have a good plan, then you're in a position to say it's going to take us a little longer but we are moving in the direction of implementing the policy that the president said." And I think that's the position.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That's where we are. So the deadline of January 22nd will not be met?
GATES: It's going to be tough.
RUSH: And January 23rd will not be met, and January 24th will not be met. And January 25th will not be met. They're not going to close Gitmo. They don't know how. They don't know what to do with the people that are there. So, again, my friends, don't doubt me.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • AP: Gates: Closing Gitmo More Complicated Than Thought • Bloomberg: Obama May Not Close Gitmo |
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Turning to the Washington Post today, Fareed Zakaria. He's also an editor at Newsweek, and I think he still has his own CNN show, but they have so small an audience that I don't know if anybody ever sees it. His Washington Post piece from today: "Obama the Gambler -- Betting That Machismo Is Not Foreign Policy." In other words, Fareed Zakaria is betting that Undeniable Truth of Life number six, "The world is governed by the aggressive use of force," is untrue. He says in this piece that we on the right have a "phony realism." "Obama's speech was part of a calculated strategy. Obama was telling the world the United States is willing to be cooperative to rejoin international institutions, to adhere to treaties, but in return other countries will have to help solve some of the world's common problems. You just can't kick us around anymore. Obama's approach has already produced remarkable results." (laughing) It sure as hell has! None any of them any good.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Folks, just to show you how far we've come, do you remember Ronald Reagan's theory on the Cold War? Ronald Reagan's theory on the Cold War was: "We win; they lose." That's a quote, and that was it.
"Mr. President, what's your strategy for the Cold War?"
"We win; they lose."
And he was despised for that by the left and the Democrat Party said, "Whoa! You can't talk like that. That's only going to be destabilize the situation." But he was right. No compromise with bullies. No compromise with liars. No compromise with thugs. Now, what is Obama's theory on dealing with the world's bullies, liars, and thugs? "Meaningful dialogue." No concept of victory. What is Obama's concept of victory in Afghanistan? He doesn't have a concept of victory. He's waiting to decide what to do with the request for more troops in Afghanistan, and while the Iranians are launching more missiles that can reach Israel, and they've got that nutcase leader who says... Here's the thing about Iran that you have to understand. If they are doing nukes, if that day comes, folks, they are led by a bunch of religious fanatics who believe in the apocalypse, and if they can bring it about they will.
It's all about the 12th imam. That's their version of the messiah. And there has to be so much world chaos before the 12th imam will show up. Ahmadinejad is telling us exactly what his intentions are! Now, I want to know, when did Obama first learn about that second nuclear site, and how long did he keep it secret from everybody? How long has he known about it? The best word I've gotten is he found out about it long time ago. Look, he even surrendered the stage talking about that. There's Ahmadinejad at the UN in New York talking about whatever he was talking about, and Obama is on the stage with an embarrassed-looking Gordon Brown and Sarkozy in Pittsburgh at the G20. Meanwhile, while all this is going on, Obama makes a supposedly last-minute decision to fly to Copenhagen, Denmark, with the lovely and gracious Michelle (My Belle) to make a pitch for the Olympics in Chicago, the Olympics that Chicago doesn't want!
A Chicago television station ran a story. Not a big story, didn't make a big deal out of it. Fox TV in Chicago ran the story, "Hey, Chicago doesn't want the Olympics. We don't want the hassle. We don't want this. We don't want that," and they got it suppressed. They called the news director at the Fox TV station in Chicago and they said don't run that anymore, and he didn't. If they'd have shut up, nobody would have ever known about it. They made a big deal about it now everybody knows that somebody in Chicago got the TV station to not run the report. I don't believe, by the way, that Obama never intended to go to Copenhagen. I think it was always part of the plan. Remember with him it's about me, me, me, me, me. And this focuses attention on him. "Oh, I gotta go to Copenhagen to save the day." While he's going to Copenhagen to try to get the Olympics in Chicago in 2016, and we have Ahmadinejad doing what he's doing, the situation in Afghanistan.
Look, Fareed Zakaria "betting that machismo is not foreign policy," betting that my Undeniable Truth of Life, "the world is governed by the aggressive use of force," is untrue. That is undeniable. He's betting that it's untrue. Listen to this: "There is a phony realism brandished on the right these days that says no one will ever cooperate with America. Russia and China have their own interests, and any attempt to find common ground is naive." We're not against finding "common ground," Fareed. We just recognize who our enemies are and we don't want to lose to them, and we understand what their intentions are because they're saying so! So while Fareed Zakaria -- and I'll tell you what he's doing -- Fareed is one of these New World Order types, loves the UN, wants to be accepted by all the global organizations -- probably already is, probably already a member of all these groups. It's a special interest column for him.
Listen to these headlines:
"Iran Conducts Third Round of Missile Tests, Could Reach Israel."
"Revolutionary Guards Begin War Games in Iran."
"Venezuela Exploring Uranium Deposits with Russia."
"China to Display Upgraded Missiles in Parade."
"India Raises Nuclear Stakes, Can Make High-Yield Weapons Now."
And we've got Obama saying, "We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth." We have a sophomoric, naive, leftist radical little child who we have elected president who actually has such an ego that he thinks this is all about him, that he's president of the world. His presence is gonna magically result in all of these utopian, unrealistic dreams that these pantywaists on the left have harbored their entire lives. And now we've got people like Fareed Zakaria saying, Hey, you know what? That's a good move." So let's move to Saturday, Iranian news from over the weekend. "Obama Remarks Mocked by Ahmadinejad -- Iran's president has criticized the US President Barack Obama and blasted his British and French counterparts for their recent comments on Tehran's nuclear program.
"'Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Brown's statements lack any real credibility. From our viewpoint, what they say is not of much value… If they have the guts they should solve the problems they face in France and Britain. ... Who exactly are they to decide about others around the world?'" This is why he agrees with Obama. Obama basically said, "It's not our job anymore to decide these things. We can't lead the free world. No one nation is going to have dominion over another. It isn't going to happen," and Ahmadinejad is saying, "That's right! President Obama agrees with me -- and he agrees with Kim Jong-il. He agrees with Hugo Chavez." So I said Friday, "You have these thugs parroting Obama talking points, running around saying our new president agrees with them!" So after this story runs in Iranian news from the Associated Press, this is the next morning. This is Obama's Saturday morning radio address.
President Obama "is offering Iran a serious, meaningful dialogue over its disputed nuclear program while warning Tehran of grave consequences from a united global front. 'Iran's leaders must now choose. They can live up to their responsibilities and achieve integration with the community of nations or they will face increased pressure and isolation and deny opportunity to their own people,' Obama said in his Internet and radio address Saturday. 'My offer of a serious, meaningful dialogue to resolve this issue remains open, Obama said, urging Ahmadinejad to take action to demonstrate its peaceful intentions.'" This man, God help us, is the leader of the free world, who doesn't even stand up for freedom! Who does not even stand up for it. He does not stand up for the oppressed peoples of the world such as those in Iran who would like to get rid of their oppressive regime. He's the first president in the history of the United States that does not stand for our own ideals around the world. The first in US history who looks at the United States as evil and unjust and immoral, until he came along.
Meanwhile, from CNN: "Tehran's new uranium enrichment plant will be operational soon and 'will blind the eyes of the enemies,' said Iran's semiofficial news agency on Saturday. 'God willing, this plant will be put into operation soon and will blind the eyes of the enemies,' said the senior official in a written statement." This written official heads the office of the country's supreme leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yes, so, by all means let the "serious, meaningful dialogue" with this bunch of lunatics begin. Let the magic and the power and the charisma of The One's personality single-handedly disarm this bunch of lunatic nutcases. When you attach a religious fanaticism to the possession of nuclear weapons, you have a situation that is untenable. But Obama doesn't believe that ours is a world government by the aggressive use of force. Nor does Fareed Zakaria. Here again the headlines:
"Revolutionary Guards Begin War Games in Iran."
"Venezuela Exploring Uranium Deposits with Russia."
"China to Display Upgraded Missiles in Parade."
"India Raises Nuclear Stakes, Can Make High-Yield Weapons Now."
And it's all the fault of us, the evil vast right-wing conspiracy. You know what our biggest accomplishment was? The evil vast right-wing conspiracy got hold of some of Bill Clinton's semen and put it on that blue dress that Monica Lewinsky was wearing! That was the single biggest achievement that we ever had here in the vast right-wing conspiracy.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Tom in Portland, Oregon, welcome to the... (laughing) Well, I would. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, Rush. It is an honor to talk to you.
RUSH: Thank you, sir.
CALLER: But, hey, I want to let you know that I disagree with your characterization of Chavez and Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il. I do not think these guys are insane. I think they know exactly what they're doing, and I think they're playing for keeps, and we've got our eyes closed to that in this administration.
RUSH: Well, we're splitting hairs here on "insane." I think that it is truly insane for one country to want to wipe another off the map just because. I think it's truly insane to want to engage in mass murder and genocide, for bigoted reasons. For any reason. I think it's absolutely insane. Now, are they smart tacticians? Yeah! They've got a man-child that they've wrapped around their little finger. This guy's ego is so out of control, he thinks he has them right where he wants them. He still believes that all of this melodic talk is going to change the world forever. He's savior of the world! You know, he's in a battle with Bill Clinton for that, they both think they're saviors of the world: Clinton with his Global Initiative and Obama with his presidency. But, look, evil is evil. These guys -- Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il and Chavez -- for people who don't know world history, they're very common. These are very common. That is the history of the world. Torture, tyranny and no liberty. Poverty. Squalid conditions. Look at the history of the world. That is what is so exceptional about the United States of America. When we say the whole concept of American exceptionalism, it's not that we're better than anybody else. It's not that we're special human beings, because we're no different from any other human being on the planet. The DNA is identical. The brain the same. Structure, all created the same. The exception is the way we govern ourselves. Freedom as dominant. That's the exception, and that's what Obama finds a problem. It is not exceptional to him. So these guys are playing him like the sap that he is. He's going to be tested. Biden was right.
END TRANSCRIPT
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: There is an Undeniable Truth of Life, ladies and gentlemen, written by me back in the 1980s. I forget what number this is. There were 35 Undeniable Truths of Life and one of them is going to be one of the themes of the program today and that Undeniable Truth of Life is "ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force." It is not words, doctors, nurses, clean water, environmental policy that has determined and will determine the shape of the world in the future. As is always been the case, ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force. And we have a namby-pamby wimp in the White House leading us in exactly the opposite direction, and he's being made a fool of. Greetings, folks, and welcome. It's Rush Limbaugh and we got a brand-new week of broadcast excellence.
Truth number six of the Undeniable Truths of Life, 35 total, number six: Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force. Now, I can see some people frowning at that. I'm looking at Wendy over there. Wendy is frowning, "What does that mean?" I'm going to explain it and I'm going to illustrate just exactly how dangerously at risk we are with the leadership of President Obama. The National Post in Canada has published some comments that the French President Sarkozy made about Obama's United Nations speech that I have not seen anywhere else, and they are blistering. They basically take Obama to task for being a sophomoric, wishy-washy, unrealistic boob. Imagine being told that by a leader of France, of all places.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You see what happened in Germany? The German election? Angela Merkel... Don't you just love real women in power? I love real women in power. She won in Germany, and she got enough of a mandate for tax cuts and a labor revamp. Which gives our international minded president two paths to follow. He can either follow Germany on the right or follow Venezuela and Iran on the left. He could go for more growth of the economy or more growth of tyranny. It shouldn't be a tough choice, but Obama doesn't make tough choices, folks. He votes "present." Obama makes speeches, pure and simple. I mentioned that Sarkozy mocked Obama at the UN Security Council. I'm holding in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers -- I'm going to show you this on the Dittocam -- a PDF file of the headline from the National Post in Canada this week. It's got a picture of Obama and a picture of Sarkozy, and it's full page, "Nuclear Loggerheads."
And they quote Obama: "We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth." Sarkozy: "President Obama dreams of a world without weapons but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite." Sarkozy smacked down Obama. Here's the cover. I'm showing the people on the Dittocam. You will not see this in any State-Controlled Media in the United States. You won't even see it reported. But we're going to post it. I sent the PDF file up to Koko at the website. He's going to put it up there. Ahmadinejad, by the way, is continuing to make fun of Obama and censure his remarks, but more on that in just a second. The French president, Sarkozy, is stronger than the American president. Here's what Sarkozy said in total: "President Obama dreams of a world without weapons ... but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.
"'Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993. 'I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map,' he continued, referring to Israel. The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr Obama's resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy. 'If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons,' he said. Mr Sarkozy has previously called the US president's disarmament crusade 'naïve,'" and it is. Remember: "Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force."
Turning to the Washington Post today, Fareed Zakaria. He's also an editor at Newsweek, and I think he still has his own CNN show, but they have so small an audience that I don't know if anybody ever sees it. His Washington Post piece from today: "Obama the Gambler -- Betting That Machismo Is Not Foreign Policy." In other words, Fareed Zakaria is betting that Undeniable Truth of Life number six, "The world is governed by the aggressive use of force," is untrue. He says in this piece that we on the right have a "phony realism." "Obama's speech was part of a calculated strategy. Obama was telling the world the United States is willing to be cooperative to rejoin international institutions, to adhere to treaties, but in return other countries will have to help solve some of the world's common problems. You just can't kick us around anymore. Obama's approach has already produced remarkable results." (laughing) It sure as hell has! None any of them any good.
END TRANSCRIPT
OBAMA: I was up in the G20 and some of you saw those big flags and all the world leaders come in and Michelle and I are shaking hands with them and one of the leaders, I won't mention who it was, he comes up to me, we take the picture, we go behind and, he says, "Barack, explain to me this health care debate." He says, "We don't understand it. You're trying to make sure everybody has health care, and they're putting a Hitler mustache on you. I don't -- that doesn't make sense to me. Explain that to me." (applause) He didn't understand.
RUSH: I wonder if Obama pointed out that the people carrying those signs around are Democrats, Lyndon LaRouchies. I wonder if Obama explained to whoever this was that asked him about this, "We have a First Amendment in our country, and some people don't agree with my plan." I don't even think I believe this. This was a favorite Bill Clinton ploy. (doing Clinton impression) "Yeah, you know what, I was over there at the G14, whatever it was, and I had some of these world leaders come up to me and say, 'You know, you're trying to do the greatest things for the people of your country. Why, why, why, why, why are your people so opposed to what you're doing?'" This is a standard ploy. Who was this world leader? He won't identify the world leader. Probably Hugo Chavez. Who was it? Certainly wouldn't be anybody from Canada, Great Britain, or France.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
| • ABC: 'World Leader' to Obama: Explain Why 'They're Putting a Hitler Moustache On You' |
|
|
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Rasmussen, Monday Morning Update: "Support for Health Care Plan Hits New Low." Forty-one percent now favor Obamacare. Fifty-six percent oppose it. Support among seasoned citizens has fallen to 33%. Now, if you want to know why this thing doesn't get implemented 'til 2013, here is your answer. He's gonna wait 'til after the 2012 election to make sure any of this stuff is implemented. Because once it hits, once the reality of it hits, he's going to have a popular revolt on his hands and he wants three years or four years of his presidency left once the chaos begins. Let me tell you what this is. The desire to put this off to 2013 is a tantamount admission that he knows it will not be liked, that he knows people will hate it, that he knows people will oppose it. So look at this. We're being told of this great sense of urgency, we had to get it passed into law before the August recess, and now we have to get it done by Thanksgiving, and we have all of these people working hard on it, and it's gotta get done, it's gotta get done, it's gotta get done, we can't wait but we're going to wait to implement it 'til 2013 because Obama knows we don't want any part of it, he knows we won't like one bit of it. And if it got implemented soon after it was signed into law, he could kiss his reelection in 2012 good-bye. And he knows this.
So the sum total is he knows it's bad, he knows it's rotten for us; he knows it's nothing anybody wants. He knows that once people are actually enrolled into his version of health care reform -- and, by the way, this public option business, I keep hearing people talk about, "Well, we're going to go forward without it." The whole thing is a public option. When the government does and takes over health care, the whole thing is a public option. It's just semantics at work here that the Democrats are working on. Have you heard there was a proposal, bipartisan duo, Representative Brian Baird, Washington Democrat, Greg Walden, Oregon Republican, came up with a 72-hour resolution that would require all nonemergency legislation to be posted online in final form for at least 72 hours prior to a floor vote. Representative Baird said, "Members of Congress are too often asked to make decisions on bills that can be longer than telephone books and are only given a few hours to actually read them. Both parties are guilty and both should stop doing it." So they propose this 72-hour period, which ought not be necessary because Obama promised a week. Remember one of the favorite words he used to describe his administration: transparent. There would be a new transparency, and there would be an end to corruption.
Well, guess who's putting the skids on this proposal? Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi does not want voters to see any of this sausage they're making, and it's understandable why. People have seen some of the sausage and it led to massive protests by, quote, unquote, unruly mobs at town hall meetings and at tea parties. So what we're faced here with is a Democrat Party that knows you're going to hate what they are going to love. You are going to revolt against what they are going to implement. They want to protect themselves from you having any idea what it is before it is implemented. Because after it's implemented, it's too late. And with its implementation, particularly health care, comes the right in the part of government to regulate and legislate every aspect of life, every aspect of your daily behavior. In other words, regulate your liberty, regulate your freedom. That's why they're not worried about it. You don't like it, tough toenails. You don't like it, take this. You don't like it, big deal. You can't do anything about it. The arrogance and the condescension in what used to be a representative republic is now turned into a nation of one-party rule where the biggest enemy that the leaders of this country think they face is their own people. Not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Not Hugo Chavez. Not Daniel Ortega, not Khadafy, not the Russians, not the Norks, not the Chinese. The biggest enemy Obama faces, the biggest enemy Pelosi and Reid face, the American people.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: John in Paducah, Kentucky. Hello, sir. You're next on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's an honor to speak with you, first-time caller. I've listened to you for about a year. The reason I called is, you know, I was listening to Clinton's comments earlier that you were playing. And I'm getting really sick and tired of all these politicians who say, "Well, the American people want. Well, the public want." How do they know? Because they weren't talking to us. You know here in Kentucky I call my congressman and senators a lot and they don't want to hear from me. I get some aide who claims she's taking my comments and a couple weeks later I get some form letter that doesn't even have an original signature on it, it's been copied. So how do they know what we want? You know, I've heard people calling your show from other states.
RUSH: Let me tell you something.
CALLER: And their congressman is telling them the same thing, they don't want to hear from us.
RUSH: They know what we want. That's why they're trying to ram it down our throats right now but not implement it 'til 2013. They can read the polls. It doesn't matter to them. But you're very shrewd. Do you remember during the Lewinsky circumstance, every night on CNN and MSNBC, it would be one Democrat consultant after another, it was either Lanny Davis or it was the idiot guy, his last name is Penn, Doug Schoen, whatever, they had a phrase. "The American people want this president left alone." It's their arrogance. It's their attempt to shape public opinion.
CALLER: Right. It's just like with health care, you know, they claim that private insurance is nothing but corrupt and greedy and money hungry, and yet they are clinging to it like glue. They want nothing to do with this public option that they are trying to push on all of us. That should turn on a lightbulb in every single American.
RUSH: It has. Look, overall support is 41%, down from 42% last week, opposition 56%, and that is the magic bullet question: "Are you going to go on this public option you're writing for us?" "Oh, no, no, no, no, of course we're not going to be doing that." I think the American people are up to speed on this a lot. Look, there's a summary here that Rasmussen put out on Saturday of polls, and let me sum this up for you. Sixty-six percent of the country is angry with the radical, far-left agenda Pelosi and Obama are pushing on America. Thirty-six percent are very angry, and 59% say the current level of anger is worse than it was during the Bush years. "Few nations are as generous with their time and money as the US, but right now Americans are a suspicious bunch." This is Rasmussen, uploaded on Saturday. "Sixty-six percent --" that's two-thirds "-- 66% of voters nationwide say they’re at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government. Thirty-six percent (36%) are Very Angry. Despite the high level of political anger last year that helped fuel President Obama’s election, 59% say the current level of political anger in the country is higher than it was when George W. Bush was president."
Now, if this surprises you, understand why. You don't see any of this anger reflected in media coverage. You see the tea parties and you see the town halls and you see the people being mocked and made fun of. The protest against Bush and all the anger was promoted and it was amplified and it was made to look like the whole country hated Bush, the whole country wanted to lose Iraq, the whole country wanted to get out, the whole country wanted Bush assassinated, the whole country wanted this, that, and the other thing. The country right now is angrier than it was at Bush but you don't know it because it's not being reported. Rasmussen says, "A lot of that anger is directed at the people who are spending billions and billion of dollars of taxpayer money. That helps explain why members of Congress have now surpassed corporate CEOs to hold the least favorably regarded profession in the country."
Members of Congress rate lower than CEOs and the Democrat Party and Obama have launched an all-out assault on CEOs ever since February, been on TV 24/7. "Just 16% of voters give Congress good or excellent ratings now that it's back from a rough-and-tumble August recess. That’s down seven points from its highest rating of 2009, reached in late May. Fifty-three (53%) percent say Congress is doing a poor job. Obama’s Approval Index ratings remain in negative territory as well in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. … Despite the president’s call for urgent action, Americans continue to send mixed signals about the dangers of climate change, and 47% reject the idea that they are selfish putting economic concerns ahead of the fight against global warming. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of adults take the opposite view and believe Americans are being selfish for putting the economy first."
There is no agenda item that is crucially important to them that he's winning on. There is no agenda item that the American people, by a majority, support. Not one. But you would never know it. But trust me. The anger out there is real and it's not a phony, trumped-up rage, it's not bought and paid for by the media. It is genuine. That's why they're actually frightened by it. And I'll tell you, Obama is destroying the best economic system ever created. And the results are in. Free market capitalism has never let us down. From time to time we let the system down because we are all human, after all. But there's no evidence of a better system than free market capitalism operating in a country which values individual liberty. On the other hand, there is ample evidence that regulators in Washington are deeply flawed in their thinking and corrupt in their behavior. Only a fool throws the baby out with the bathwater. Do you know where the phrase "throw the baby out with the bathwater" came from? You have to go back to Tudor times. The Tudor people bathed once a year. They thought bathing caused harm. They bathed in May. They all got pregnant a week after that.
When they took the bath, the man of the house got the water first. He got out, then the mother, and then all the kids. They didn't change the water. The last person in was the baby and by that time the water was so dirty that sometimes the kids got thrown out with the bathwater. So the phrase "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" was born. They bathed once a year in the same tub. I know it's difficult to believe out there. At any rate, Obama is sitting around destroying all this, and people see that it's their future and their kids' future, their livelihoods being destroyed. They want no part of it.
Fifty-two percent, the unemployment rate for young Americans has exploded to 52.2%, a post-World War II high. This is according to Obama's own Labor Department. This means that millions of Americans are staring at the likelihood that their lifetime earning potential will be diminished and combined with the predicted slow economic recovery job-wise, their transition into productive members of society could be put on hold for an extended period of time. Fifty-two point two percent.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • Drudge Report: Chicago Ordered Not To Rush Anti-Olympics Story • FOX VIDEO: 'Chicagoans for Rio': Not Everyone in Illinois Wants the 2016 Olympics |
They intend to and will pass it. The question is, what will we do? This is an important question to ask yourself because the end result of obama care is our deaths.
:-)
LOL. :-)
Thanks!!!! I’ve been WAY BEHIND the past few days...need to read up!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
