RUSH: Left is Freaking Because OBAMA Proves LIBERALISM DOESN'T WORK

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | August 11, 2011 | Rush Limbaugh

[Yosemitest]

Left is Freaking Because Obama Proves Liberalism Doesn't Work
August 11, 2011

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Tavis Smiley and Cornel West are on their poverty tour, stopping in places like Nightline, C-SPAN, and MSNBC (where there is definitely poverty, but not the kind that they are describing), and what are they running around saying?
They're running around saying,
"90% of the wealth in this country is controlled by 1% of the population!"
We know the wealthiest employees in this country work for the federal government now.
We know with that employees of the federal government earn, on average --
when you throw benefits and pensions and all that stuff in there, they earn
-- twice as much as people in the private sector.
The wealthiest 1% in this country employ more people than the poorest in this country.
So what's the problem?

The wealthiest 1% in this country employ more people than the poorest in this country, and the people that work for the government are making out like bandits!
But the issue is:
What are these guys -- people like Tavis Smiley, Cornel West...? Brother Tavis.
I'm sorry, Brother Tavis and Brother Cornel.
What do these guys recommend that we do?
How would they change the country?
You see, the fact is their target is not the 1%.
Their target is everybody -- and Obama, I don't know what they're so upset about!
Obama is employing their radical views.
Obama is going after every target they've got.
Obama's got a bull's-eye on practically every target these guys want to be hit.

Yet they're out there attacking him.
Why?
Maybe it's because Obama's proving that their radical views are bankrupt.
I think this is one of the reasons why there's so much "delusionment," derangement, and literal insanity throughout the leftist media.
Obama is proving that all that they believe in is bankrupt -- economically, morally.
Obama's proving it doesn't work.
It doesn't get people their stuff.
It doesn't get them their economic justice.
It doesn't get them their social justice --
and have you noticed we don't talk about just who are these top 1%?
Who are the top 10%?
They're not always the same people.
The richest company today...
Do you know what the wealthiest company in America is today?
Snerdley, do you know what the wealthiest company in America is today?

That's right! Apple.
Apple, Incorporated, is wealthier than Exxon.
Except yesterday Exxon was wealthier than Apple.
They're going back and forth. It depends on the stock price.
(Screw the camera! There, the camera is on.
Okay. You interrupt me for the camera, but I haven't lost my place.)
Evil, ExxonMobil is no longer the richest company in the country.
Today it's Apple.
The economy is constantly evolving and progressing. New wealth is created.
People who are rich lose everything.
A lot of people lost a whole bunch at least the last two weeks alone in the stock market.
The problem today is the very system that has produced the greatest wealth in the country is under attack.

The entire system, the whole country, everybody is under attack in the name of attacking the top 1%.
That's right, Brother Tavis, and that's right, Brother Cornel.
You're not just aiming at the top 1%
-- and Brother Barack, he's not just aiming at the top 1%.
Brother Barack is aiming at everybody.
The entire country, our entire system is under attack.
When we talk about "creating wealth," we're talking about one thing: Capitalism.
Socialism does not create wealth. Socialism redistributes it,
but if there's nothing creating wealth, then of course there's nothing to redistribute.
Socialism destroys wealth.

Government destroys wealth, plain and simple.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Leo, Minneapolis.
Leo, great that you held on, and welcome to the program, sir.
Hi.

CALLER: Mega dittos, Rush. I've been a longtime listener and a first-time caller now.
I just talk about these riots that are going on in London right now,
and I want to talk about why I think the Drive-By Media is not really covering it as much as they would otherwise.
I think that's because they think the riots are gonna come to America at some point, and when that happens
they're gonna want to make out to the rest of the country who's not as informed as you people and I am
that this is an American problem
because we're the evil rich people, and we have capitalism,
and we are the people who have been discriminating against people for so long
and they're gonna say we need to be more like Europe
and they're gonna be banking on the fact
that people will forget what's happening in London right now.

RUSH: The problem is there hasn't been a lot of coverage of the UK riots.

CALLER: Not amongst the mainstream media.
I mean, you've covered it, Drudge has covered it, and the UK stuff's covered it.

RUSH: Okay, well, let me ask you this.
By the way, I would submit to you that the first vestiges of those mob riots are already happening in this country.

CALLER: I agree, but it's gonna be large.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: I mean sixties scale.

RUSH: But I'm under the belief that that will be part of the recipe of chaos that's desired,
but you think the media --
and there's no wrong answer. I'm just asking your opinion.
Don't misunderstand the tone of my voice.
Do you think that the media is going to be happy with riots out there?
Do you think they're gonna be able to somehow blame Republicans for those riots?

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Debt deal, that kind of thing?

CALLER: They'll try.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: And they're gonna say -- this is what they're gonna say.
They're gonna say -- and the Democrats are gonna say this, too
-- that we need to be more like Europe because they're gonna bank on the fact that
people are gonna forget that it started in Europe,
because most people are not as well informed as we are.

RUSH: Well, why we want to be more like Europe.
I mean, we're heading in that direction already.

CALLER: I know but media and the Democrats want us to go even more in that direction.
It's only because people like you and the Tea Party
that we haven't gone so far off the cliff in that direction yet.

RUSH: Well, I appreciate that.
You're very kind to say that and I appreciate you.
Thank you very much.
Leo, have a good one out there.
No, no. I mean it.
I think that one of the reasons there's such a liberal crackup is that
Obama is illustrating how bankrupt every one of their ideas is.
I mean, their radical views are being implemented all over the place.
These liberals that say Obama is not liberal enough,
believe me, that's a smoke screen.
There has been more damage done to this country in two and a half years by agents of this country's government than ever before in history.
But, see, this stuff wasn't supposed to lead to this kind of damage.
This was supposed to lead to panacea.
It was supposed to lead to nirvana, utopia, economic, social justice.
Everybody was supposed to get their stuff!
It hasn't worked, and that's why Tavis Smiley -- Brother Tavis and Brother Cornel -- are on their tour.
Because they are being shown and everybody else is being shown that their radical views are bankrupt, that they don't work.
They don't bring about what is promised.
It's just that simple.

RUSH: Tuesday night on the Charlie Rose Show, he spent the hour with George Will.
But there's a segment that they talked about dinner, and all these conservative columnists that George Will's house with Obama.
Rose says,
"So let me take you back to 2009,
new president comes to down, gets a dinner invitation, goes to the home of George Will.
You have collected conservatives there to meet the new president.
Is he any different?"

WILL: He was awfully serene at, uh, my house, about his confidence in his ability to regulate the economy.
Progressivism is nothing if not confident about its abilities to --

ROSE: So he was more serene and less confident?

WILL: He wuh -- he was...
No, he was...
He was serene and confident.

ROSE: Oh, serene and confident! Okay.

WILL:
But nothing like what I've seen since.
This terrific confidence --

ROSE: So what do you think happened?

WILL: I think that this is, as I say, nothing happened.
This is the emergence, in flower, of American progressivism after a hundred years of maturation.
This is what it looks like.

RUSH: Charlie Rose is still...
This was Tuesday; this is Thursday.
Charlie Rose is still scratching his head trying to figure out,
"What did George Will just say to me?
What did he just say to me?"
He's looking for all kinds of praise.
He hears the word "confidence" and thinks,
"All right, George Will! Loving my guy, Brother Barack,"
and then Will says: No, no, no.
"This is the emergence, in flower, of American progressivism after a hundred years of maturation.
This is what it looks like,"
in other words, utter chaos and failure,
and Charlie didn't think that was what was on the agenda.
He says, "Wait a minute, now."
I don't know if anybody's told him yet what George Will said.
Utter, full flower, American progressivism after 100 years of maturation.
This is what it looks like.
And of course Charlie, everybody knows this doesn't look good, whatever it is.
It doesn't look good.
This is not what it was supposed to be.
This is my whole point.

Obama is illustrating that everything these people believe is bankrupt, folks.
It doesn't work.

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...


• Gallup Poll: Americans' Confidence in the Economy Plunges

• Washington Post: Poll: Majority of Public Has Lost Faith in Government Ability to Fix Economy

• CNNMoney: Tax Hike on the Rich Would Impact Just 3% of Taxpayers


*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

[Yosemitest]

Rush, as usual, you're right on target.
You nailed it.

I'm always tired after doing one of these post, but ...
Rush, you got to explore and discuss the liberal's problem of psychological projection.

Liberals do this all the time.
Here's a definition.

Freudian Projection

The following is a collection of definitions of projection from orthodox psychology texts.
In this system the distinct mechanism of projecting own unconscious or undesirable characteristics onto an opponent is called Freudian Projection.

• "A defense mechanism in which the individual attributes to other people impulses and traits that he himself has but cannot accept.
  It is especially likely to occur when the person lacks insight into his own impulses and traits."
  
  
• "The externalisation of internal unconscious wishes, desires or emotions on to other people.
  So, for example, someone who feels subconsciously that they have a powerful latent homosexual drive may not acknowledge this consciously, but it may show in their readiness to suspect others of being homosexual."
  
  
• "Attributing one's own undesirable traits to other people or agencies, e.g., an aggressive man accuses other people of being hostile."
  
  
• "The individual perceives in others the motive he denies having himself.
  Thus the cheat is sure that everyone else is dishonest.
  The would-be adulterer accuses his wife of infidelity."
  
  
• "People attribute their own undesirable traits onto others.
  An individual who unconsciously recognises his or her aggressive tendencies may then see other people acting in an excessively aggressive way."
  
  
• "Projection is the opposite defence mechanism to identification.
  We project our own unpleasant feelings onto someone else and blame them for having thoughts that we really have."

And here's a problem with honest people.

(General) Projection

Here projection is assuming that others act or perceive similarly – according to this definition it is not necessary for a projected trait to be undesirable or unconscious.
Projection is probably inherent in social animals and the single most important psychological mechanism.
The following are given as examples:

1. Individual A assumes that B sees the colour red as he does, until informed that B is colour-blind;
   
   
2. Someone who never lies is easy to deceive because he projects his truthfulness onto others, assuming that others are honest also;
   
   
3. ‘It takes one to know one’;
   
   
4. An inept con-man fears that others are trying to cheat him, signals his fear and alerts others;
   
   
5. (Freudian) An individual who possesses malicious characteristics, but who is unwilling to perceive himself as a protagonist, convinces himself that his opponent feels and would act the same way.

Liberals constantly project their own vile values onto conservatives, intentionally or unintentionally,
and they need to called on it, shamed on it, and laughed at to scorn, when they do it.

We MUST get rid of these evil people.

[vanilla swirl]

“Someone who never lies is easy to deceive because he projects his truthfulness onto others, assuming that others are honest also;”

You just described how Obama got elected (and the rest of this mess).

[Venturer]

The richest club in America that meets regularly is the Congress of the United States.

If they weren’t rich when they went in they are when they come out.

My Congress critter Steny Hoyer, never worked a private job in his life, has made a career of politics, but it seems to have been lucrative for him.

[Christian4Bush]

bump

[Common Sense 101]

I disagree with Rush... the leftists/Marxists will NEVER admit communism/liberalism doesn't work. Instead, they will say it was implemented incorrectly (i.e. O-hole “doing it wrong”), not enough money was spent, or some other lame excuse for its disastrous results.

[maddog55]

[Jeff Vader]

the true believers will always fall back on that excuse, but the people who were hoodwinked into going along with the socialism are seeing it for what it is and will be less likely to vote for it again.

[FlyVet]

How much does Tavis Smiley worth? $10,000,000.

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-businessmen/tavis-smiley-net-worth/

When is he gonna put some redistributive change into his own life? Give them the wealth, Tavis! Give them the wealth!

[Yosemitest]

I like it.

[Yosemitest]

Here's your link.

Tavis Smiley Net Worth.
Tavis Smiley is a talk show host, author, political commentator, and entrepreneur with a net worth of $10 million.
(For infromation on Tavis Smiley telling us about his background and how he came to write "Accountable," click the photo to the right.)
Tavis Smiley has earned his net worth through his career
as an aide for the mayor of L.A.,
as a talk show host for BET Talk
and the host of The Tavis Smiley Show.
He was born in Gulfport, Mississippi.

[Luke21]

Liked your Freudian references. Absolutely correct. All they do is project their neurotic foolishness onto us.

[Yosemitest]

Thanks.
You know that most photos I post are also links to source information?

[ken21]

rush is right, of course.

but progressives will not brighten up; they’ll just chose another idiot.

[Let's Roll]

We are finally running “out of other people’s money”.
All the interviews, papers, books etc. on the subject and it always boils down to Margaret Thatcher’s quote. God Bless her.

The acronym for Other People’s Money is OPM. Say that quickly and you will understand why it is SO hard get the lazy, incompetent etc. out of your pocket.

[yuleeyahoo]

It looks like Tinky-Winky has scammed Uncle Sugar! I knew the Tele-Tubbies were evil!

[mad_as_he$$]

I agree. They just double down and claim it wasn’t enough.

[Mygirlsmom]

I disagree with Rush... the leftists/Marxists will NEVER admit communism/liberalism doesn't work. Instead, they will say it was implemented incorrectly (i.e. O-hole “doing it wrong”), not enough money was spent, or some other lame excuse for its disastrous results.

That's because Liberalism is truly a mental disease. There is one huge problem with that belief system. Natural Law cannot be ignored. It wins every time. Hence my tagline.

Those that understand will come to realise that if we are to survive, Liberals cannot be compromised with -their ability to influence policy must be destroyed.