Posted on 01/18/2010 2:59:49 PM PST by GOP_Lady
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
On Today's Show... |
January 18, 2010
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Copyright & Trademark Notice | Unsubscribe
The Rush Limbaugh Show® Premiere Radio Networks © All Rights Reserved, 2010. Premiere Radio Networks, Inc. 15260 Ventura Blvd. Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
|
||||||
"The energy to save health care is not there.
The energy to save the Obama agenda is not there.
The magic has been lost. All of that's gone.
People aren't fainting anymore at Obama rallies."
"As many of you know, I really am uncomfortable talking about myself.
But I am forced into it by a constant drumbeat of erroneous reporting
that never ends by the State-Controlled Media of what I say."
"I don't know of a president ever who has asked people to donate to a relief effort through a White House website.
It's never happened before."
"By definition, everything the president of the United States does is political."
"How about Patrick Kennedy calling her 'Marcia' Coakley?
He doesn't even know her name!"
"Scott Brown is refusing to accept the traditional Massachusetts Republican Party role as token opposition to the machine.
He is full-fledged opposition to the machine.
He is positioning this as him and us against the machine, and that is resonating."
"Supporting a Republican in Massachusetts may no longer be something to keep quiet about.
The situation has reversed."
"The people all over this country are totally opposed to the Obama agenda.
They are totally opposed to the Pelosi Politburo way of running Congress.
This is a country steeped in the traditions of liberty and freedom and self-reliance.
They do not want big government."
"I am grounded in reality. I am Mr. Literal."
"It's a good thing that Patrick Kennedy didn't call her 'Marcia Moxley.'
It's a good thing he goofed up on the first name and not the last name."
"President Obama, because of your economic policies, not everybody can buy a truck.
There are a lot of people who would love to buy a truck who can't afford a truck right now."
"These people who claim to be the holier-than-thou, who claim to be Mr. and Mrs. Sensitivity,
Mr. and Mrs. Compassion, Mr. and Mrs. Tolerance, Mr. and Mrs. Understanding, these are
some of the most hateful people around.
They are all found on the liberal side of the Democrat Party."
"What's missing here from the Obama side is any desire to save the Obama agenda.
See, this is what's missing.
There's no desire to save it.
The desire is to stop it. Martha Coakley would not be in trouble if there were a desire to save this agenda."
"Do you know that unemployment benefits have been extended longer now than at any time in American history?
You have to conclude that extending unemployment benefits also extends unemployment and contributes to unemployment.
I'm sure even economic experts at the AP would agree with that."
"The day it becomes irresponsible to hold public servants accountable,
then I could say this country's great experiment at self-governance is over."
"If you give the press and the Democrat Party five uncontested years, every day an assault
on one man and his administration, there's nothing anybody can do to stop the result.
And it's exactly what happened."
"Barack Obama has given a terrorist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, constitutional rights and a show trial in New York City.
He did this for political purposes.
Don't tell me this is the best legal way to resolve this."
"Would a man who politicizes man-caused disasters, 9/11, politicize a natural disaster?
The dots are there for everybody to connect, or they can try to distract from the obvious by attacking me."
"The mainstream media convinced a majority of people that the country was in worse shape than it had ever been in,
that George Bush was a lout, that the country was hated and despised.
They really were convinced to believe that when none of it was true."
"This health care bill is not about the uninsured.
It can't possibly be if after this gargantuan thing -- over 2,000 pages -- it still leaves 12-1/2 million uninsured."
"This Obamacare bill expands government, raises taxes, and depletes the private
sector of one-sixth of its value that's put in control of the Democrat Party."
"Liberals cannot be open and honest about what liberalism is.
What happens when they are is what you see happening in Massachusetts."
"How many people have fainted at an Obama rally lately?
Big, fat zero, right?
Remember all those people fainting at Obama rallies during the campaign? Not happening now."
"America is hard-wired for liberty, independence, and freedom from overbearing government."
"Our founding journalists had built-in checks and balances on politicians,
but today's pretend journalists are nothing more than liberal propagandists and liberal activists."
"The people do not like a Nancy Pelosi Politburo-style House of Representatives and a Harry Reid Politburo-style Senate,
and they don't like an inexperienced president simply screwing up everything he touches."
"I never said, 'Don't donate to Haiti' I simply said there are a lot of it better places to donate than WhiteHouse.gov."
"Obama wants the media to help him smear President Bush and Vice President Cheney based upon the rantings of a Muslim extremist.
Obama is willing to bankrupt New York City, ignore the Constitution, destroy the CIA, and launch a banana republic style attack on his
predecessor to advance his political agenda.
It's one of the most brazen and destructive political ploys in American history, but it's there for everybody to see who cares to deal with reality."
"If you think a dollar of welfare ends up as a dollar of welfare when it gets distributed you're wrong.
Ten years ago the administrative cost of a dollar of welfare was 28 cents."
"To ignore the manipulative organizing practices of this administration is to give them a
free pass to brazenly consolidate power under the guise of good intentions and public service."
"Political correctness is killing this country -- and like Obama's recession is destroying the economy,
I'm simply choosing not to participate.
It would be irresponsible."
 |
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.
SCHIEFFER: Rush Limbaugh said, for example, that President Obama might try to use this for political means, to shore up support for himself in the black community. And he said we've already donated to Haiti, they call it the US income tax. What's your response to that?
CLINTON: Oh, I don't have any. You know, I -- I think we should -- it's not fruitful to get involved in that. I think every American has been heartbroken by what's happened, and I just think it doesn't do us any good to waste any time in what is in my opinion a fruitless and pointless conversation.
RUSH: Schieffer says, what would you say, Mr. President Bush?
BUSH: I'd say now is not the time to focus on politics. It's time to focus on helping people. I mean, look, you got children who's lost their parents, people wonder whether they're gonna be able to drink water. There's a great sense of desperation. And so my attention is on trying to help people deal with the desperation.
RUSH: So Bob Schieffer then says, what do you -- and Clinton erupts.
CLINTON: Let's take a serious point that Mr. Limbaugh was making is that the Americans pay for the government and the military is down there doing their part. But in a disaster of this magnitude, there is no way that the government, which has other responsibilities as well, national security and other responsibilities, you just can't deal with this just with government money. That's what all these faith-based groups are doing down there. That's what all these other nongovernmental groups are doing. And we think Americans know that and want to help.
RUSH: Exactly! Which is my point from the get-go, which was distorted by the media watchdogs that watch and misreport this program and people like Bob Schieffer who don't listen to this program then get an idea, a distorted idea of what I said. The government can't do it all! I can't believe he actually admitted it. These guys are having you believe government can do everything, government can fix your health care, government can solve war, government can solve pestilence, government can do everything. Now it can't. Did you ever hear them say this during Katrina? "Government can't do everything." You never heard them say this during Katrina. So vindication for me is all over the place. It's out there for one and all to see and hear.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • Washington Examiner: Clinton: Haiti Relief, Dem Politicking Are 'Two Sides of the Same Coin' |
Is Wyclef Jean a rap star or is he just reggae kind of music? Do you know? Well, Wyclef Jean is running a relief mission in Haiti. I think he's Haitian, but I'm not sure. Okay, he's Haitian. Well, he's being ripped apart by people for suggesting that people donate to his charity. Some in the media are suggesting that the administrative costs of charity going through Wyclef Jean's company or outfit may be a little bit high and the net sum that will end up getting to the recipients is not what it should be, and I'm stunned at this. What about the administrative costs of donating through WhiteHouse.gov, for crying out loud? Do you know that one of the reasons the welfare budget is as high as it is -- and these numbers are I guess ten years old, but in 1999, maybe earlier than that, for every dollar that was budgeted for welfare or food stamps, AFDC, whatever it is, 28 cents of it was spent on administering it, so 72 cents out of every dollar got there. I mean the high administrative costs are actually when you donate through the government. I don't know of a president ever who has asked people to donate to a relief effort through a White House website. It's never happened before.
By definition, everything the president of the United States does is political. They even put out from the White House over the weekend, Lynn Sweet at the Chicago Sun-Times, I printed it out, it's three-and-a-half pages: "Obama on the Haiti Earthquake Crisis: Behind-the-Scenes -- The Obama White House is taking the unusual step of pro-actively providing a heavy amount of on-the-record details of how President Obama is handling the aftermath of the horrific earthquake in Haiti. On Friday, the White House released a minute-by-minute account of events." From Tuesday, January 12th, all the way through Friday, January 15th, it takes two-and-a-half pages and the tiniest font size I've ever seen to go through it.
"Tuesday, January 12th, 5:52 p.m.: The President is informed of the earthquake at 5:52 p.m. The President asks his staff to make sure that embassy personnel are safe, and to begin preparations in the event that humanitarian assistance is needed. The Department of State, USAID and the United States Southern Command begin working to coordinate an assessment and any such assistance. 8:30 p.m.: The President receives another update on the situation..." It goes on and on like this for four days. The whole point of this is to show exactly how on the money here and paying attention Obama is, as contrasted to President Bush in Katrina. Now, this disaster in Haiti is worse than anything that ever happened in New Orleans. It's just an absolute disaster. The aid finally starting to trickle in now after about six days, but it's still very, very slow. The situation on the ground is unimaginable. I don't even want to describe to you the things that I have read with the vermin, the rats, I don't even want to go there. This is just unbelievable. It's unimaginable and for anybody to report that I said don't donate is absurd, and these people know it. The people who are making a big deal out of this, are themselves politicizing this for the express purpose of discrediting me, somebody they feel is a top-line conservative spokesman.
They are constantly trying to discredit people like me, rather than debate us on issues. Nobody here ever said don't donate. We just pointed out you already contribute to the government with your income taxes. If you want to donate above and beyond that, go through a charity that's constantly on the ground in Haiti, or the Red Cross, if you want to go that route or whatever. Nobody said do not donate, which is what is being reported. I've had so many e-mails over the weekend: "Rush, the press is castigating you unfairly. You know what you ought to do Rush? You ought to donate a million-dollars, make it public or you ought to ask all the liberal media to ask what they individually have donated and then promise to double it. It would probably cost you 20 bucks." That was the funniest one I've seen.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Well, here we go, folks. Week Two: Obama's Haiti Crisis. (interruption) What? (interruption) Yeah, I mean to say that. Of course I mean to say that. What do you mean why would I call it Obama's Haiti Crisis? Well, the media is! Look at all the nine pages here: Minute-by-minute meetings! Obama on Haiti. Obama here, Obama there, Obama doing this. It's Obama's Haiti. He's better than Bush. We're on the case. Week Two: Obama's Haiti Crisis. (interruption) I understand. Look, this just crossed the French News Agency: "About 30 Americans were hurt Monday during a massive relief operation in the Haitian capital in what was described as a 'mass casualty event,' US officials said," and that's all there is on this. This is starting Week Two here: "About 30 Americans were hurt Monday during a massive relief operation in the Haitian capital in what was described as a 'mass casualty event' ..."
END TRANSCRIPT
call for Brown dont get distracted by the democrat machine.... vote... get someone to go with you .. call do something but dont get distracted by the shows......
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Well, Wyclef Jean is going to have a press conference here pretty soon. It seems that some people are targeting him and him alone. Wyclef Jean is running charitable operations for relief efforts in Haiti. And some people ("experts," we are told by NBC News) say that Wyclef Jean's administrative expenses may be going into his pocket, that he may be personally profiting by virtue of his charitable operations for earthquake victims in Haiti. Now, why single out this guy? There are all kinds of charitable organizations that are working around the clock every day in Haiti, even before the earthquake happened. Why single out this guy? This is the first White House in history which has asked for these kinds of donations to go to a website run by the president of the United States. And, folks, I have to tell you something.
If you think a dollar of welfare ends up as a dollar of welfare when it gets distributed you're wrong. Ten years ago the administrative cost of a dollar of welfare was 28 cents. I'm sure it's higher now which means that only 72 cents of every dollar taxed or printed for welfare spending got spent. Only 72 cents of every dollar. The government -- you don't want to say "profited," but you have to pay people that administer these things. There are a lot of charities where the administrative costs are high. There are a lot of charities where the administrative costs are low. Some charities do a 100% pass-through. But why focus on this guy? Why focus on this guy? Could it be that they want all of this money to go through the White House website? I mean, it's a natural question to ask in discussing this. You know during Hurricane Katrina -- and let's be honest about something here.
The media is not comparing Obama's efforts in Haiti to the possible, and that's the difference in what's being reported in Haiti and how what happened in Katrina-New Orleans was reported. During Katrina, it was reported that Bush didn't do enough. Bush was portrayed as a Superman who with the push after button could make everything happen. Here we had "Shemp" Smith of Fox News in tears in New Orleans. (crying) "How can this be happening? Geraldo was down there and it was the same thing. He was in tears, "How can all this be happening? Where is the government?" and that was after two days. It was portrayed as though Bush could do anything and he didn't want to, and then people like Jeremiah Wright and the Reverend Jackson and some other prominent Democrats said, "Well, you know, these people are black and Bush really doesn't care." That was stated.
That was stated. Kanye West said it about black people. Kanye West said, "Bush doesn't care about black people." Ah, my memory is long in this stuff. I don't forget it. With a push of a button Bush coulda done anything but he chose not to. Now, we're not seeing that with Haiti. With Haiti, what are we hearing? We're hearing about all the physical limitations, the problems, the bottlenecks, the impossibility of it all. "Good old Obama, he's trying as hard as he can but there are just insurmountable odds. There are just insurmountable obstacles. Oh, poor Obama, he's doing everything! (We're going to nail that Wyclef Jean, by the way!) Obama is doing everything he can. But, man, there's just so much in the way. He's got Bill Clinton helping out, he's got George W. Bush helping out, and Hillary landed down there. He's doing everything he possibly can, but, oh! It's just impossible."
Well, are there things that Obama (and, more specifically, the military) could be doing in Haiti if they really wanted to? Are there? I mean, I'm just asking. Could the Navy go in there and build a new seaport, for instance? (interruption) Yeah, but could they get started on it? They may not be able to redo it quickly but could they repair this one, for instance? But somehow we got a closed port and we got a clogged airport. My point is the media is not demanding these things be dealt with. The media is not demanding that Obama fix this. The media is not portraying Obama with a magic button, a magic wand that could get all this fixed overnight. They did that with Bush. The media is making excuses for Obama. The media is making excuses for Clinton. Did you hear what Clinton said? He's campaigning for Martha "Coaxley," Martha Coakley.
Excuse me. I've had so many people mispronouncing her name I'm trying to honor them and I'm goofing it up myself. Bill Clinton went up there and he did an appearance for her on Friday. He said going up and making a campaign appearance for Martha Coakley and Haiti aid are two sides of the same coin. (interruption) Oh, yes, he did. I have it right here in my stack. I did. Let me find it. Let me find it. I've got it right here. Don't doubt me on this. Da-da-da-da. It's in the stack here. I went past it because a bunch of stuff I wanted to get to first. Well, let me find it during the break. But he did. He said they're two sides of the same coin. Coakley, that's purely political. Purely political. Now, the president of the United States... Let me just ask you a question, because they're raking me over the coals here for being flat-out honest.
I never said, "Don't donate." I simply said there are a lot of better places to donate than WhiteHouse.gov. People have been on the ground. There are missionary services there. You've got the Red Cross. You've got the United Way. There were all kinds of people that are in Haiti before this happened. So let me just ask you a question: Is it politicizing Haiti to direct Americans to WhiteHouse.gov to contribute? I think it is. It is politicizing it when you send Americans to WhiteHouse.gov. You see, the president of the United States politicized Haiti when instead of referring to nonpolitical entities for contributions to Haiti relief efforts he gave them his own highly politicized website: WhiteHouse.gov. It's been a political tool from day one, from Stay Connected, to the blogs, to the touting of purely partisan initiatives that a majority of Americans have flatly rejected.
That site, WhiteHouse.gov, is used for partisan purposes, to mine e-mails addresses, to cultivate political volunteers and voters, and to mobilize them. And there are companion websites, Organize Now or whatever it is. Now, the president could have referred Americans to the Red Cross for charitable giving, any number of apolitical organizations, but he didn't do that, although there is a link at WhiteHouse.gov to go to the Red Cross. But he didn't refer people to it. You gotta go to WhiteHouse.gov to see it. Now, the White House has proudly declared -- Rahm Emanuel did this, folks. Look, I didn't say this. They did. The White House has proudly declared that "a crisis is a terrible thing to waste," that a crisis has to be held to a higher, non-benefit of the doubt standard. Look, do you think the Democrats are still politicizing Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath?
Do you think the media still is? There's no doubt they are. They're still politicizing that. The White House still blames its predecessors instead of accepting responsibility for its own votes and policies. Obama voted for every spending measure he now blames Bush for. The buck has never stopped at this White House and it never will as long as the State-Controlled, propaganda-reporting media remains retired from journalism and full-fledged into propaganda. This White House, folks, politicized 9/11. "What do you mean, Rush? What do you mean?" Let me remind you. The White House politicized 9/11 when it made it "a day of service." Remember that? They said 9/11 should be a day of service, which is a left-wing political belief. It politicized art and artists. The White House in a conference call with selected artists who were rounded up by the National Endowment for the Arts to participate in paid political art to help support administration policies.
This has been exposed by Andrew Breitbart at BigGovernment.com. There are endless and countless examples of subtle and not-so-subtle efforts by this White House to recruit and organize Americans for the political benefit of one Barack Obama. You know it and I know it. The White House website was used to recruit union members to disrupt the tea parties and town halls last August. It has been obnoxious, inappropriate, unethical, and (some experts that I've talked to say) illegal. To push back twice as hard on the relentless, never ending political games by this White House has become an unpleasant responsibility, but I shoulder it. I happily do so. To ignore the manipulative organizing practices of this administration is to give them a free pass to brazenly consolidate power under the guise of good intentions and public service.
And that's exactly what they have to do. Folks, I'm going to tell you, it sickens me to have to be the one to point out sleaze dressed up as honorable public service. If the media were halfway doing its job, I wouldn't have to point out that a pervert has been named not just a czar, but the "safe school czar." If the media did its job, it would demand transparency. If the media did its job, it would investigate the epic corruption of Nancy Pelosi, of Harry Reid, of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. I mean, this is low-hanging fruit just waiting to be picked. If the media did its job it would demand to see Barack Obama's college and law school transcripts, and that just scratches the surface. You see, to demand a higher standard of this president may be an uncomfortable burden at times but I wear it as a badge of honor.
We used to demand this higher standard from every president. I don't think Barack Obama could handle one week of the treatment George W. Bush got for five years. I don't think he or anybody in this administration could put up with it. The president works for us, he reports to us -- and when he tries to manipulate and politicize people and situations that cross the boundaries of responsible public service, I will call him out. I don't do it for any other reason than it is the proper role of a responsible citizen. The day it becomes irresponsible to hold public servants accountable, then I could say this country's great experiment at self-governance is over. I'm not ready to stand by while our heritage, our inheritance of the freest country ever created is slowly given away by somebody who has apologized time and again for our proud history.
It still infuriates me: A man who means it when he says he will "remake" America if given the chance. Just so you know, I don't intend to passively sit by while he executes this plan of his -- and everything that's happened to this country over the last year is part of a plan. Only a fool or an accomplice would conclude otherwise. I just... I find it next to impossible, very difficult to sit by and quietly watch this travesty happen and say, "I couldn't do anything about it due to political correctness." You're just not supposed to criticize people in the midst of charitable efforts. Why not, if the charitable effort is being used for their purposes? Are they not going after Wyclef Jean? Why are they singling him out? I, frankly, don't know anything about his charity, but there are a lot of people that are doing charity work. Why single him out? See, political correctness is killing this country -- and like Obama's recession is destroying the economy, I'm simply choosing not to participate. It would be irresponsible.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Right here it is. It's in the DC Examiner: "Clinton: Haiti Relief, Dem Politicking Are 'Two Sides of the Same Coin' -- 'Somebody asked me today,'" Clinton said, "'Well, why are you going to this political rally?' he began. "And I said to them, this is just two sides of the same coin. You have to bear with me. I have friends killed there. I've worked with this country for 35 years. Hillary and I had a good cry on the phone because the cathedral that we sat in the pews 35 years ago was totally destroyed." Clinton said that they used frequent flier miles in 1975 to go to Hawaii. There's only one problem with that. The frequent flier mileage program didn't go into effect until 1981, until after airline deregulation in 1978. There was no such thing as frequent flier miles in 1975. You can look it up. It doesn't matter. Two sides of the same coin and they get mad at me for accusing these guys of politicizing things. They had a good cry. He and Hillary had a good cry because the cathedral where they prayed in 35 years ago went down, is what he said. He and Hillary had a good cry on the phone. Now, you can process that however you wish.
One more thing here about this WhiteHouse.gov, from The Politico, this is about a year ago, January 20th of 2009: "The new White House website unveiled by President Barack Obama’s team Tuesday includes a shot at former President Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina. Under the 'agenda' portion of the site regarding Katrina, it reads: 'President Obama will keep the broken promises made by President Bush to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. He and Vice President Biden will take steps to ensure that the federal government will never again allow such catastrophic failures in emergency planning and response to occur.'" And it goes on. So don't tell me, you people in the press, don't tell me and don't tell anybody else that I'm off track when I say this man politicizes everything, including the Haiti relief effort, by asking people to go to WhiteHouse.gov.
And don't ever tell 'em I'm telling people not to donate to Haiti because I've not said that. I have said, "You've already donated to the government in the form of your taxes." You already have. And what did they do, authorize a hundred million dollars from the government? That's been done. You want to donate, go someplace else. Remember, Obama wants to remove the charitable deduction. He wants all charitable contributions or all charitable outlays to come from government in the future.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me ask you another question here, folks. Would a man who politicizes a man-caused disaster, 9/11, politicize a natural disaster? Let me point this out, Barack Obama has given a terrorist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, constitutional rights and a show trial in New York City. He did this for political purposes. Don't tell me this is the best legal way to resolve this. Obama wants the media to help him smear President Bush and Vice President Cheney based upon the rantings of a Muslim extremist. Obama is willing to bankrupt New York City, ignore the Constitution, destroy the CIA, and launch a banana republic style attack on his predecessor to advance his political agenda. It's one of the most brazen and destructive political ploys in American history, but it's there for everybody to see who cares to deal with reality. And I am grounded in reality. I am Mr. Literal. So would a man who politicizes 9/11, would a man who politicizes Hurricane Katrina, politicize an earthquake? I think so.
The White House released a timeline trying to establish -- and I mentioned this earlier -- a four-day minute-by-minute timeline trying to establish Obama's concern and leadership in Haiti. This comes after his total lack of concern regarding Fort Hood, the terror attack there, the attempted terror attack on Christmas Day. This comes with the president's approval ratings in free fall. It's uncomfortable to connect the dots, but it's far more uncomfortable for me not to connect them. Now, let's not forget here, folks, this is the same person who wants to exempt his union political contributors from attacks on health care policies. Obama is trying to get you and me to pick up the tab for unions, workers who earn an average wage and benefits of $175,000 a year, just like he wants 49 states to pick up the tab for Nebraska and Louisiana. This is a man who thinks that it's appropriate to fine and jail Americans for not buying health insurance. So would a man who politicizes man-caused disasters, 9/11, politicize a natural disaster? The dots are there for everybody to connect, or they can try to distract from the obvious by attacking me.
Now, Michael D. Tanner, this is an article that originally appeared in the Christian Science Monitor on September 20th of 2005, and it's from the Cato Institute, which is a Libertarian think tank: "Katrina: Government Failure, Private Success." It's a long article, let me give you some excerpts from it: "As we hear calls for a 'compassionate' response to the victims of this tragedy, it is important to remember that you can't be compassionate with other people's money." He's writing this about Katrina. "This difference is as simple as the difference between my reaching into my pocket for money to help someone in need and my reaching into your pocket for the same purpose. The former is charity - the latter is not.
"Moreover, private charity has long been recognized as more effective and efficient than government welfare programs. Local churches and community groups are the best positioned to understand the needs in their respective areas, and can direct money or services to where they are most useful. Private charities are generally far more flexible than government agencies, which are frequently bogged down in red tape and regulations. Just ask yourself, who has done a better job at timely and effective response, FEMA or the American Red Cross? This is not to say that government has no role in dealing with a disaster like Katrina. From policing to search and rescue to infrastructure repair, the government has and will continue to be active. But there is a danger in turning to the government too quickly or too often. If people come to believe that government will provide the funding, they may decide that there is less need for their own contributions. This will result in a loss not only of money, but of the human quality of charity." And this is all that I was saying.
That was all that I was saying when I said, "Don't go to this WhiteHouse.gov business. That's a politicized entity. There are countless private charities to donate to. Find them, Red Cross and so forth and do it that way." Nobody here, including me, ever said don't donate, which is what they're trying to distract you with. More importantly, they're trying to distract me. They were hoping I would lead off my show with this today and ignore what's going on in Massachusetts and what's going on with health care, but I'm not going to let them distract me.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This is Mark Halperin who is one half of the authorship of the book Game Change and he was on Meet the Press yesterday during the roundtable, he's now at TIME Magazine, he said this.
HALPERIN: We see Rush Limbaugh say something outrageous and not a lot of repudiation from Republicans in Congress or others to say, "This is acceptable." It's a time when the American people are showing our best to help. I'm talking about other Republicans in this country who shouldn't be silent at such an outrageous remark, at a time when we should be coming together.
RUSH: So I don't know what he thinks I said. All I said was don't go the WhiteHouse.gov. If you're going to donate, do something more efficient than a politicized website run by the president of the United States. But Mr. Halperin, I could just as easily say that nobody in the media has chided you for not denouncing you, for withholding all this information in your book during the campaign, for your own personal profit. If I wanted to I could sit here and say, "Where's the rest of the media not denouncing Mark Halperin?" He had all this data on John and Elizabeth Edwards; he had all this data on the Clintons; he had all of this information on what was going on, information that would have impacted the campaign, and he withheld it for profit, for a book. And I thought journalists were about the news. I didn't think they were about profit. I thought they didn't believe in profit.
I don't see any journalist denouncing Mark Halperin or his coauthor for withholding important, vitally important campaign information during that news cycle. And even Howard Kurtz: "'Game-change' in Journalism?" Howard Kurtz on background sourcing issues, and he's a little distressed here. "These passages from the new book are at odds with the smoothly functioning Obama machine depicted by much of the media." Howard Kurtz is wringing his hands, why, we didn't know what was going on in this campaign. We thought the Obama machine was smooth and oiled and just heading on down the tracks and we didn't know. Come on, Howard, just say it. The media lied to us for a year for profit. Why don't you denounce Mark Halperin for this instead of wringing your hands about, oh, my God, why, things were not like we thought. And you're journalists?
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You know, Harry Reid has a following in Haiti. I had a story here from State-Controlled Associated Press. "Some voodoo followers --" I'm just reading verbatim from AP -- "Some voodoo followers see God's judgment on corruption among Haiti's mostly light-skinned elite." That's why the earthquake happened in Haiti, according to voodoo followers, according to the AP. So Harry Reid's got some buddies in the voodoo movement down in Haiti.
END TRANSCRIPT
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's a pleasure to talk to you. I was calling in regards to Martin Luther King's birthday, and national holiday, we're celebrating it, and what I wanted to comment was -- well, actually I had two comments, but I'm very tired of the revisionist history that they're talking about with Martin Luther King, because most people, I would reckon 90% of anybody I've ever spoken with think that he was a diehard Democrat. It's not true. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican, his father was a Republican, his grandfather was a Republican.
RUSH: I did not know any of this.
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: Martin Luther King was a Republican?
CALLER: Okay, he ultimately became a Democrat, well, a de facto Democrat when he was in jail and you see Kennedy had voted against the 1957 civil rights bill when he was Senator. And when Martin Luther King was in jail, Coretta made a Faustian bargain with Kennedy to get Martin Luther King Jr. out of jail by throwing her support in their direction, and Kennedy reciprocated by saying, "I'll go along with the civil rights bill." But, yes, Martin Luther King was a Republican.
RUSH: So you're saying he was a Republican 'til 1960, basically?
CALLER: Basically.
RUSH: Well, I do know that Richard Nixon was the first political figure to bring Martin Luther King to Washington as a political figure in the fifties.
CALLER: Absolutely. Absolutely.
RUSH: But I didn't know that King was a Republican nor his ancestors. I didn't know that, either.
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: Jeff, thanks much. I'm in a hurry here, but one other related story to Martin Luther King Day, this is from the San Francisco Chronicle today: "The Northern California Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday Observance Committee... after more than two decades of planning San Francisco's annual celebration... abruptly disbanded in December." This is the first time in 20 years there's not a Martin Luther King march. The marchers are too old, they can't do it anymore. "Reverend Cecil Williams and four board members cited declining participant numbers over the years and sensed it was time to pass the torch to younger activists." But the younger activists didn't show up. Nobody took the torch. The Martin Luther King parade canceled in San Francisco for the first time in 24 years.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • San Francisco Chronicle: King Day March in S.F. Ends After 24 Years • American Thinker: San Francisco MLK Day March and Rally Cancelled |
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: Yes, sir.
CALLER: Maybe you can help me understand why the bribes that Pelosi, Reid, and Obama are dealing out for this health care bill are any different than the bribes that Blagojevich has been charged with?
RUSH: Well, Blagojevich was asking for personal money to appoint people to that Senate seat that Obama had vacated.
CALLER: I voted against the guy twice in a row, and he's about destroyed the state, but still, you know --
RUSH: I get your point. It's still Chicago thug politics. It is.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: But this is the way of the world in Congress, bribing people, they're called earmarks. I mean how do you think they got the second slush fund passed? The first slush fund, $787 billion, but it cost a trillion because they had to pay off a bunch of congressmen to vote for it. This is not new. This is just nakedly visible. This is just apparent to everybody. This happened out in the open and everybody saw it. Ben Nelson's numbers now in Nebraska are down to 40% approval according to the latest news that I saw prior to the program starting today. And 19 states are prepared to file an action against this health care bill if it passes, because this is, in their minds, unfair, violates the Constitution, therefore is illegal. But to totally pay off Ben Nelson and the federal government by taking on the cost of all new Medicaid enrollees after this passes, and there's going to be a slew of them, because everybody's going to be shuffled off on to Medicaid and agreeing to basically the same thing for Mary Landrieu down in Louisiana.
New York is going to pay for it, Paterson and Bloomberg don't like it, Schwarzenegger in California doesn't like it, they don't like it in Michigan, this is just nakedly visible to everybody. This is what I meant earlier when I said liberalism is a lie but often people don't see the lie. You have to trust somebody like me to tell you it's a lie. Now it's out in the open. People see what liberalism is, when they are arrogant, when they think they have unstoppable, undefeatable power, that conceit and arrogance is on display and the way they do things goes public instead of remaining private where few people see it. People see it, they don't like it, they want no part of it, and they find out exactly who all Democrats are. Obama's destroying the Democrat Party regardless of what happens tomorrow. He is still doing that.
END TRANSCRIPT
BTTT
Thanks for thread and I LOVE RUSH!
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now we move on to Massachusetts and the special election tomorrow. The weather forecast does not augur a large turnout. There's snow and freezing rain, sleet today, 60% chance of the same tomorrow. And the people on the ground that I've spoken to, the Scott Brown people are far more fired up. He drew larger crowds than Obama did yesterday, far more energetic. Obama seemed to be not really interested in being there. He was thrown totally off track by a heckler on abortion. It's like the teleprompter did not offer guidance or direction on what to do if he got heckled. They put this thing together and at the last minute, and they chose a small venue. Now, normally during the campaign they picked venues of ten to 15,000. They chose a venue of 2,500 because they knew they wouldn't be able to fill ten or 15,000 that late. And even before it started, Carl Cameron on Fox is reporting that there were seats galore that were empty and there was not a line outside and finally they got that together and there was a line outside and so forth and they did fill the arena.
Now, Public Policy Polling which is this lib bunch down in North Carolina, this goes together with a Washington Post poll in Sunday that they undersold. The Washington Post had an ABC/Washington Post poll yesterday that has a really great nugget of information in it that they did their best to ignore, but first Public Policy Polling: "If Martha Coakley loses --" oh, and how about Patrick Kennedy calling her "Marcia" Coakley? He doesn't even know her name. Yeah, he went up there and started calling her "Marcia" Coakley, and they talked to some people coming out of the Obama event yesterday afternoon, some woman said, "Oh, it's just so sad, it's so sad, poor Obama is working 36 hours a day to try to fix the mess George Bush left us in," and the people walking out of that thing were blaming Bush one year later for all the problems that we're having. It's Bush's problem that Coakley is in trouble, "Marcia" Coakley, according to Patrick Kennedy. He doesn't even know her name.
Chris Matthews threw the religion card recently. A very Catholic state, Chris Matthews pointed out that Brown is Protestant. And he's surprised here that the tribals have not arisen here. He's trying to alert the Catholics that this guy is not a Catholic, he's a Protestant. I kid you not. I kid you not. Look, they're pulling out all the stops, Obama with a television ad now, and he did this in Virginia, too. Obama with robocalls all over Massachusetts. Now, he did this in Virginia and there was no hope of saving it in Virginia, and he did it in New Jersey, and it was a toss-up going in, so I don't know what to make of this. I really am going to come down on the side that Obama, if the ship's going to go down, he's going to go down swinging to try to show Democrats he'll run in for 'em and try to protect 'em. I think that's what's happening here. I'm still having trouble, folks -- and I'm not trying to infuse any negative, I'm just being truthful here -- I'm having trouble getting my arms around the fact a Republican can win this state, a Senate seat with the voter registration the way it is.
But I'm heartened by this data from Public Policy Polling: "If Martha Coakley loses tomorrow it will certainly have a lot to do with her running a poor campaign, but ultimately it will be a repudiation of the President. Scott Brown is winning 20% of the vote from people who voted for Barack Obama last year, but these are not people who think he's doing a great job and just think Coakley is a duddy candidate. For the most part it's people who voted for Obama and aren't happy with how he's performed in office. Among the Obama/Brown voters just 22% approve of the President's work and only 13% support his health care plan." That's of the 20% of the vote that went for Obama that's going for Brown. "Coakley is leading Brown 87-10 among voters who still approve of Obama, so it's not as if she's losing a ton of support from people who are still happy with him. Brown has a 96-3 lead with ones who disapprove of Obama." And Tom Jensen here at Public Policy Polling says: "Coakley has run a bad campaign, no doubt. But the state of the race in Massachusetts is more a function of unhappiness with Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats than anything having to do with her."
And the evidence can be found in question 15 of the Public Policy Polling survey. Here's the question, it's number 15: "Do you think that congressional Democrats are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?" Too liberal: 53%. This is in liberal Massachusetts. Fifty-three percent say congressional Democrats are too liberal. Fourteen percent say they are too conservative. And 33% say that they are about right. So Scott Brown, if you want to know what's really going on, the Democrat narrative is to throw "Marcia" Coakley -- call her that out of respect for Pat Kennedy -- the narrative is to throw "Marcia" Coakley under the bus, that she blew it. I mean if it weren't for her varicose veins she would be totally colorless, there's no question about that. But here are the biggest factors. Scott Brown worked his tail off. Scott Brown projected the image of a winning candidacy. That hasn't been done on the Republican side since Romney. Scott Brown made it clear that he would vote against Obamacare, no hedging on that under the pressure brought to bear by State-Controlled Media.
Scott Brown is refusing to accept the traditional Massachusetts Republican Party role as token opposition to the machine. He is full-fledged opposition to the machine. He is positioning this as him and us against the machine, and that is resonating. He's also had some extremely effective advertising. My spies on the ground up there say it's some of the best TV spots they've ever seen anywhere, and his supporters are energetic at every stop. My spies on the ground went to some of his events on Saturday. He had at least 500 people in Plymouth fired up like you can't imagine. They needed state police to direct traffic because passing cars kept slowing down to honk. There are pictures of Service Employee International Union workers brought in by the Democrats carrying Brown signs. A lot of SEIU carrying signs for Scott Brown after they've been brought in by the Democrats. Brown is signing autographs wherever he goes.
I think the key here, supporting a Republican in Massachusetts may no longer be something to keep quiet about. The situation has reversed. It's now the Democrats have to keep a low profile, and all of this is because -- and I've been trying to warn them, as you know I've been trying to warn the Blue Dog Democrats and any other Democrat up for reelection who would listen, you do not understand the mood of the people all over this country. They are totally opposed to the Obama agenda. They are totally opposed to the Pelosi Politburo way of running Congress. This is a country steeped in the traditions of liberty and freedom and self-reliance. They do not want big government, and that's what the ABC/Washington Post poll showed yesterday. They didn't emphasize it. They did report it, but they didn't highlight it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: All right. "[T]he Washington Post's Sunday story that focused primarily on a new Washington Post-ABC News poll -- 'Poll Shows Growing Disappointment, Polarization Over Obama's Performance' by Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta -- made no mention of the fact that the poll found that 58 percent of Americans say they favor a smaller government that provides fewer services... A large majority of Americans say they want a smaller government that provides them with fewer services, according to a new poll from the Washington Post and ABC News. But the Washington Post story about the poll makes no mention of this fact," and it's huge. "The poll asked: 'Generally speaking, would you say you favor smaller government with fewer services, or larger government with more services?' Fifty-eight percent said they favor a smaller government with fewer services, and only 38 percent said they favor a larger government with more services. The Post did not mention the results from this poll question in its news story about the poll."
Here is State-Controlled Associated Press. Headline: "A Year Later, Hope Dissolves into Disappointment -- A year ago, on an Inauguration Day like no other, Barack Obama placed his hand upon the Lincoln Bible and then assured a weary nation that, with hope and virtue, we could 'brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come.' Across the country, in Seattle, Glen Boyd had only just entered his own economic storm. A couple of weeks out of work as a DIRECTV salesman, the Obama supporter nevertheless watched the inauguration on TV with a kind of goose-pimply, things-are-bound-to-get-better anticipation. He really felt it, that thing which the poet Alexander Pope said springs eternal. 'I felt a tremendous sense of pride. I felt like he was the right guy. I felt a sense of optimism,' recalls Boyd.
"Now, a year later, Boyd writes this in his blog: 'We believed what the man said in all those "yes, we can" speeches. My one question is, where are all those reassuring speeches now?'" Mr. Boyd, the reassuring speeches are there. The recovery is in full-fledged swing. The stimulus has worked miracles. Have you missed them? Obama is still giving lofty, oratorical speeches. Your better question would be: Where's all the change and what happens actual the hopes? He concludes by saying, "To say I'm disappointed by the Obama presidency thus far would be an understatement." By the way, they collected a bunch of letters to the editor to approve the headline. It's nine pages long if you print this story, and it's nothing but letters to the editor all over the country. "A Year Later, Hope Dissolves into Disappointment." I can't help but say again what an absolute scam was perpetrated on the people of this country, not just in 2008 during the campaign but for five years prior. The mainstream media convinced a majority of people that the country was in worse shape than it had ever been in, that George Bush was a lout, that the country was hated and despised. They really were convinced to believe that, when none of it was true.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: As usual, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have. Now, many people ask me to illustrate many of the things that I say. What do you mean, Rush, arrogant? What do you mean liberals are arrogant? What do you mean that they hold average people in contempt? Well, I have the two sound bites that will illustrate this as well as anything could. We have a montage, first off, the elitist party of Barack Obama making fun of people who drive pickup trucks. Scott Brown happens to drive a pickup truck. Scott Brown happens to drive a GMC pickup truck. GMC is General Motors owned, which means Obama owns it. His truck is a GMC Canyon. Now, maybe Obama forgot yesterday, and maybe John Kerry forget that the United States and Barack Obama now own General Motors. You would think that Obama would want people to buy trucks. Here first a montage. We have "Marcia" Coakley -- you know, it's a good thing that Patrick Kennedy didn't call her "Martha Moxley." You know, it's a good thing he goofed up on the first name and not the last name. You remember who Martha Moxley is? Michael Skakel was convicted of killing her. That's Ethyl Kennedy's brother, whose father was Rushton Skakel, yes. Just a little interesting trivia. So here we have "Marcia" Coakley, we have Senator Kerry, we have Obama and state Senate candidate Scott Brown talking about his truck.
KERRY: I've never seen an advertisement in a campaign for the United States Senate that begins with "I'm Scott Brown, and I drive a truck." I didn't know it was a qualification for being in the Senate. Well, I got news for you, Scott, George Bush drove a truck, too, and look where it got us.
COAKLEY: And I'll tell you one thing, just because you're driving around in Massachusetts in a truck doesn't mean you're headed in the right direction.
OBAMA: Forget the ads. Everybody can run slick ads. Forget the truck. Everybody can buy a truck. I'd think long and hard about getting in that truck with Martha's opponent. (laughter) It might not take you where you want to go.
BROWN: I'm Scott Brown, I'm from Wrentham, I drive a truck and I'm asking for your vote.
RUSH: Now, that is arrogance, that is genuine arrogance and conceit and holding average people in contempt, and Scott Brown is just like Sarah Palin in that sense: not Ivy League educated, doesn't have the right pedigree, just an average, hardworking, real guy, drives a truck. They're making fun of him for driving a truck. George Bush drove a truck, and look where that got us. You can't get any more elitist than this. By the way, President Obama, because of your economic policies, not everybody can buy a truck. There are a lot of people who would love to buy a truck who can't afford a truck right now. Since cash for clunkers expired, almost no one can buy a damn truck and those who can are scared to thanks to your economic policies, coming tax increases. So here we have Scott Brown doing what Obama wants: buying a GM truck. GM needs it, Bam's union thug supporters at GM need it, Americans need it since we're all going to subsidize the union thugs' health care now, and here's Obama and John Kerry and Martha Coakley slamming Scott Brown on his truck.
So that's a great illusion of that and I don't think you need any more. And I guarantee you this is the kind of stuff that behind the scenes kills them. Making fun of somebody because of what they drive? And they jump on my case for some of my absurd humor? All I do is illustrate absurdity by being absurd. I simply tell the truth about these clowns. These people who claim to be the holier-than-thou, who claim to be Mr. and Mrs. Sensitivity, Mr. and Mrs. Compassion, Mr. and Mrs. Tolerance, Mr. and Mrs. Understanding, these are some of the most hateful people around. They are all found on the liberal side of the Democrat Party. Obama got heckled yesterday at his Coakley rally. During the speech he was interrupted by a protester. Here's that portion of it.
OBAMA: You -- (protester screaming) you -- you -- you need somebody -- (booing) you need somebody -- that's all right. That's all right. No, we're doing okay. All right. We're okay. (crowd chanting) I, uh -- we're doing fine. Now, listen. (protester screaming) Now, where were we? All right, let's go, everybody. Now, listen. Now, more than ever -- that's all right. Hold up, everybody. Hold up.
RUSH: He was totally taken off his game. Lost his place, didn't know where he was, did not look as if he wanted to even be there yesterday. Didn't sound presidential, didn't look to me like he even knew where he was. Just put him on the plane, going to Massachusetts somewhere, after that we're going to go somewhere else. During this appearance at Northeastern University, Obama tries to hold up his fired-up line from 2008.
OBAMA: Understand what's at stake here Massachusetts. It's whether we're going forward or going backwards. It's whether we're going to have a future where everybody gets a shot in this society, or just the privileged few. If you were fired up in the last election, I need you more fired up in this election. I need you out there working just as hard right now in those final days; I need you knocking on doors; I need you making phone calls; I need you talking to your friends and your neighbors and telling them what's at stake on Tuesday.
RUSH: Yeah, and what's at stake on Tuesday is not Martha Coakley couldn't care less, what at stake is his health care plan and the rest of his agenda. He wants people making phone calls and talking to their friends and neighbors telling them what's at stake. We have two stories on this. First from The Plumb Line, WhoRunsGov.com: "The Brown campaign is hiring scores of paid temp workers from temp agencies to help staff Brown’s get-out-the-vote effort, work that’s typically handled by unpaid volunteers." The Brown campaign is hiring temporary workers. We pay people to help with the campaign. They pay people to vote.
And the companion story here, there's a YouTube video out via the yidwithlid.blogspot.com blog: "Martha Coakley Phone Banks Are Empty As She Continues To Slip In Polls… Below is a look at one of Martha Coakley's phone banks today. Granted there is a mixture of snow and rain, and it is a holiday, but the office is quite empty." Below is a look at one of Martha Coakley's phone grants today, granted the mixture of snow and rain it's a holiday but the office is quite empty. Maybe the morale there is not all that high." Obama asked them to staff the phones, get out there, tell people. Meanwhile, Brown is paying people and his phone banks are busy and tied up and being used and hers are empty.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This could be the death knell for Martha Coakley. Last Friday on the radio in Boston, Coakley had this exchange with the host.
COAKLEY: Probably if it weren't so close, Rudy Giuliani wouldn't have come in, either, and, besides, he's a Yankee fan. I just want people to know.
RADIO HOST: Yeah, but, now, Scott Brown has Curt Schilling, okay?
COAKLEY: Another Yankee fan.
RADIO HOST: Schilling?
COAKLEY: Yes.
RADIO HOST: Curt Schilling, a Yankee fan?
COAKLEY: No. All right, I'm wrong on my -- I'm wrong --
RADIO HOST: The Red Sox great pitcher of the bloody sock?
COAKLEY: Well, he's not there anymore.
RUSH: Uh, my friends, Curt Schilling responded.
SCHILLING: I will cast my vote for Scott Brown. (cheers and applause) One more thing. For the record, I am not a Yankee fan. (cheers and applause)
RUSH: I mean, that sound bite she just sounded... Obama didn't know where he was and I don't think she knows where she is, either.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Somebody tell me: How many people have fainted at an Obama rally lately? Big, fat zero, right? Remember all those people fainting at Obama rallies during the campaign? Not happening now. Greetings. Welcome back. It's Rush Limbaugh and this is the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Great to have you with us. The telephone number, 800-282-2882. E-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
Brown versus Coakley. I really don't think any of the talking heads -- any of the State-Controlled Media or Democrat Party -- will truly grasp the profundity of a Scott Brown victory if it happens. And the reason I think that is they're so focused on health care. "Oh no! What's going to happen to Obama's health care?" I have to tell you I think something else is happening here. The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that if Brown wins this tomorrow they're going to take steps to make sure health care gets done before he gets there to stop it. This cannot bode well for them. David Shuster on PMSNBC asked if Massachusetts Democrats have lost their minds. No, they've lost their freedom. They have lost their freedom. This is what the talking heads and the Democrat Party do not realize. They're so focused on Obamacare.
"Let's win one for Obama! Let's keep the Kennedy seat! Let's keep the blue state vote!" They're missing the real story, and the real story is the pulse of our nation. America is hard-wired for liberty, independence, and freedom from overbearing government. The ABC News/Washington Post poll that was released yesterday proves it. In that poll, 58% want smaller government with fewer services. They don't want what we have now. The Founding Fathers built in checks and balances. The liberal politicians for life get around that, and they're trying to get around the checks and balances even now. One of the balances and one of the checks is an election, and they're still maneuvering to try to make the election meaningless. Our founding journalists had built-in checks and balances on politicians, but today's pretend journalists are nothing more than liberal propagandists and liberal activists.
So the only real check and balance left is us: The people. We, the People. Tomorrow it will be "we, the people of Massachusetts." In November, "we, the people of America." I really think they're in such a bubble that they don't understand that this is not just about health care. It's about far more. It's about the fact that people do not want this agenda. They do not like a Nancy Pelosi Politburo-style House of Representatives and a Harry Reid Politburo-style Senate, and they don't like an inexperienced president simply screwing up everything he touches. They don't like it. They don't like the agenda, period. Now, to show you that they're dumb and insensitive and arrogant and conceited, in an interview a couple days ago with the liberal journalist Al Hunt on Bloomberg TV, they were discussing this race. It was Chris Van Hollen, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Chairman.
He's a congressman from Maryland, and they were discussing such things as Scott Brown's surge in Massachusetts and the likelihood of the Republicans capturing control of the House this year, and Van Hollen repeated a talking point that I heard from many Democrats all last week -- and you've heard it, too. You'll remember when I pass it on to you. Van Hollen said, "Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?" They are talking about the race to replace Ted Kennedy. Now, if anybody "walked away from the accident after driving the car into a ditch" it is Ted Kennedy. Why would they remind people of that? It's funny. They're just dumb and insensitive.
Now, here's a great indicator. I saw this mentioned, too, in other polling results earlier today. There's a little blog out there, AJStrata, that I was checking out, and I think this is a good indication. Coakley is down by 16% in absentee voting. Now, in many states absentee voting pretty much tracks with day-of-vote voting. It's really not that much different in most states. Now, in some states and in some precincts, some counties run by the Democrats, they'll hold out and see how many votes they need to win a certain election, and they'll play some games with voter registration and absentees. But Real Clear Politics is reporting that with the 9% of Massachusetts voters who voted absentee (which ended a couple days ago) Brown is winning 58-42 or 16%.
That's right in line with computations which indicate that Coakley could lose by as much as 10%, depending on who is energized to get out and vote. So if absentee voting is any indication of intensity -- and it is; by definition it is -- then by this measure Coakley is toast. But one thing concerns me, and that is all the reporting. Even the White House is saying, "Oh, yeah, yeah! I think we're toast." The White House is telling CNN: "I think there's no way. Coakley's going to lose." Folks, up in Massachusetts, it could be a ploy to get you to relax, to think it's already over. I know you're not going to fall for it but I'm just going to remind you: Don't fall for it. The weather forecast for today and tomorrow is not good for Boston and much of Massachusetts, which would indicate a low turnout among people who are not highly mobilized, motivated, and energized to get out.
I think in the race up there, turnout probably on the Brown side is going to be very high because I think this has become a cause, not just a race. People want to stick it to the machine. Coakley, "Marcia" Coakley is just a symbol (according to Patrick Kennedy, who called her "Marcia" numerous times yesterday). "Marcia" Coakley is just a symbol of their pent-up frustration against what Brown is brilliantly running against. Brown is running against "the machine." So the absentee vote I think is a key signal of the enthusiasm gap that does exist up there and no late surge can take away his absentee vote lead. Now, there is a Harvard professor who explained the race: Rosabeth Moss Kanter, a professor at Harvard Business School.
It's at Politico. "Will Martha Coakley win the Massachusetts Senate seat? Yes. Will Scott 'Who?' Brown become a national Republican darling and Fox talk show guest? Yes. Can we read the Tea Party tea leaves about next November's Congressional elections? No. Then why did the race tighten? As an adult-lifelong Massachusetts citizen, let me count the ways." This is Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Harvard Business School. "The weather has been brutally cold. Seasonal affective disorder has set in, and people are cranky. Grouches want things to oppose, so they can express their general discontent." So the reason that Coakley is losing, according to according to a Harvard Business School professor, Rosabeth Moss Kanter, is the result of grouches with cabin fever!
She continues: "Coakley (whom I support) has not run a perfect campaign. Brown has come across as a charmer. Coakley doesn't remind anyone of Ted Kennedy nor can she claim his mantle. So the nostalgia factor doesn't work in her favor. ... These are some of the reasons the race tightened. In the end, however, what matters is not polls but who goes to the polls, so to speak. The Dems have formidable get-out-the-vote machines, especially in Mayor Tom Menino's Boston. Coakley has a big women's network, a group with a high percentage of likely voters who are mobilizing their email pals. So Coakley will win, and it might not even be a squeaker." That's from Rosabeth Moss Kanter who says all this polling showing Brown way ahead is just a bunch of grouches who have cabin fever.
It's totally absurd. That's why I'm passing it on to you. It is a hundred percent totally absurd. There is no energy. (interruption) It's Harvard, yes. Look, that's the machine, too, the elites. This is what people are fed up with, all these people that openly claim "We're smarter than you. We know better than you. You don't know what's good for you; we know what's good for you." We are a people who are hard-wired for liberty and freedom and the pursuit of happiness, and these people don't get it. I'll tell you, it's a condescension, an arrogant condescension that the elites have for average people. You heard it in the sound bite, John Kerry and Obama and "Marcia" Coakley making fun of Scott Brown driving a truck, and yet these people make a play for NASCAR votes every year.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Fred Barnes from Weekly Standard, interesting story. Paul Kirk cannot vote after Tuesday, according to Republican lawyers. Republican lawyers say that Paul Kirk, who's now sitting in the Senate in the Ted Kennedy seat, will no longer be a Senator after Election Day regardless when it's certified. "Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys. Kirk has vowed to vote for the Democratic bill even if Republican Scott Brown is elected but not yet certified by state officials and officially seated in the Senate. Kirk’s vote is crucial because without the 60 votes necessary to stop a Republican filibuster, the bill will be defeated. This would be a devastating loss for President Obama and congressional Democrats.
"But in the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s. Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office 'until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.' The vacancy occurred when Senator Edward Kennedy died in August. Kirk was picked as interim senator by Governor Deval Patrick. Democrats in Massachusetts have talked about delaying Brown’s 'certification,' should he defeat Democrat Martha Coakley on Tuesday. Their aim would be to allow Kirk to remain in the Senate and vote the health care bill. But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. 'Qualification' does not require state 'certification,' the lawyers said."
Nineteen states are prepared to file suit against the health care bill in the Senate because of all the Louisiana Purchase and the Cornhusker kickback and this sort of thing. This is by no means over, by no means is this over. Now, whether the Republicans will actually have the gonads to go out there and file a suit and claim that Kirk has no standing remains to be seen. But if they don't they're missing a golden opportunity. The people of this country, not just Republicans, the people of this country are fired up. The people of this country want no part of the Democrat agenda. I mean they're even losing their base over some of this in convoluted ways, but they are. Now, listen to this montage that we put together yesterday in Boston. This is a bunch of reporters talking to people, students waiting to get into the Martha Coakley rally, and you'll hear a theme here.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So why are you guys here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So what do you all think about Martha Coakley?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: I'm from New York. Eh.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there anybody else here that you're here to see?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: Um. Not really.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
STUDENT JAMIE RUDEN: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else?
STUDENT JAMIE RUDEN: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: See Obama. Anybody else?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there anybody else you came here to see today?
STUDENT VICKIE: No, that's it.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else you here to see?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: All right. Is anybody voting in this election?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you guys here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else? All right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: Scott Brown.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Scott Brown? (laughing) Thank you.
RUSH: They just heard a celebrity was in town, they showed up to see Obama, clueless on Coakley. And Obama did not make the case for Coakley. He made the case for himself and he's not on the ballot. CNN's Ed Henry, I referenced this earlier. This is Sunday morning, State of the Union, John King said, "Republicans believe if they win this race, they can tie up the Senate, prevent a vote on health care reform and other issues. That happens to be a fact."
HENRY: In terms of that fear I was told very reliably that a couple of the president's top advisors have told senior Democrats they think Coakley's going to lose. Now there may be some hyperbole in that, it may be about scaring the base, you know, turnout, just going down, but the way I'm hearing it is that there is real genuine fear inside the White House that she's going to lose, that's going to have dramatic implications not just on health care but beyond.
RUSH: And again, Ed Henry may have a point, they could be putting this news out trying to frightening the Democrat base into showing up. I don't think that's gonna work. You know, it's kind of being too cute by half. What's missing here from the Obama side is any desire to save the Obama agenda. See, this is what's missing. There's no desire to save it. The desire is to stop it. Martha Coakley would not be in trouble if there were a desire to save this agenda. We can look at the polls on health care, 36% of the people want it. Over 50% do not, nationwide. In Massachusetts it's the same, pretty similar. The energy to save health care is not there. The energy to save the Obama agenda is not there. The magic has been lost. All of that's gone. People aren't fainting anymore at Obama rallies. Wall Street is looking at Massachusetts as the place where the American economy could be saved from the Pelosi-Obama socialist agenda. This last Friday on CNBC, Jim Cramer, who's in the tank for Obama after a brief flirtation outside the tank, the Obama administration really came down on him, on the Jon Stewart show, so Cramer got his mind right, so he's in the tank for Obama but nevertheless said this.
CRAMER: We could have a gigantic rally off a Coakley loss and a Brown win. It will be a signal that a more pro-business, less pro-labor government could be in front of us. Hey, would you say it is more childlike, perhaps? No. We can never be as capitalist as the communist Chinese. How about a little less like the old Soviet Union? Yeah, that would be more like it. Pelosi Politburo emasculation, everything from the banks, which are usually in the Democrats' penalty box, to the oils which are despised by this administration for being carbon could be propelled dramatically higher, all of this Tuesday night.
RUSH: That would be a fascinating thing if it happens, if all of these interesting stocks and these areas of business skyrocket up because of a Coakley loss and an Obama loss. Cramer still has a job, oh, yeah, he got his mind right, oh, yeah. He drifted off the reservation. You remember, after Santelli started the tea party movement, Cramer got on board, and then he made the mistake of going to the Jon Stewart show and Jon Stewart pummeled him into embarrassment and submission. So he got his mind right, went back to CNBC, became one of the biggest shills for Obama and he has been ever since. But he's talking about stocks going through the roof, business rebounding if there is a Coakley loss, which equals an Obama loss because of a Brown victory.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I was happily wrong on Friday, ladies and gentlemen, when I warned -- I didn't predict, but I warned of a possible hit piece on Scott Brown over the weekend from the Boston Globe. None was forthcoming. There hasn't been one. In fact, a couple of stories in the Globe, one by somebody that's been in the tank for "Marcia" Coakley all this time, pretty much concedes it to Scott Brown. It's interesting.
"Race is in a Spinout," Boston Globe columnist: "[Marcia] Coakley made a jaw-dropping --" I know it's Martha but Patrick Kennedy called her "Marcia" all day yesterday. I know the Democrats did their hit piece with the rape ad, but that would be about effective as Martha Coakley running an add saying that the Haiti earthquake is because Scott Brown knows George Bush. She is the one that has the explaining to do on letting sexual predators go scot-free and not be charged, she's the one that has the explaining to do when she was prosecuting attorney, attorney general, she's got the explaining to do on that kind of stuff, people in Massachusetts know all about that.
"Martha Coakley made a jaw-dropping declaration earlier this week at the only live televised debate in Boston that she has deigned to do. She said, and I quote, 'I’ve traveled the state and met tremendous people.' If she did, it was under the cover of darkness, with an assumed name. Because if she had really traveled the state, if she had taken the time to meet voters, Coakley wouldn’t be in the position she finds herself in now, heading into the final weekend of this special election campaign in a perilously close race against a GOP state legislator nobody had heard of a mere six months ago. Back in December, Coakley beat her closest opponent by 19 points in a primary in which she got stronger by the day. She strolled into the general election with high name recognition, strong favorability ratings, and as the Democratic candidate in a state that hasn’t elected a Republican to the Senate since 1972. It looked as if it would be impossible to lose. So what did she do? Apparently, she’s tried to accomplish the impossible. Literally, she all but vanished. She refused to debate on TV unless it was exactly on her terms. She went days without venturing out in public. When she did appear, it was typically to accept endorsements from elected officials or union heads in front of supportive crowds."
Anyway, this is the Boston Globe and this was on January 15th, and it's a prelude to throwing her under the bus. Listen to this. It's the final three paragraphs: "Prominent Democrats in Boston are privately seething at the candidate and her campaign. First and foremost, they see the immediate impact defeat could have on the health care overhaul. Beyond that, they fret about the seismic impact a Republican victory in Massachusetts would have on Obama’s national standing. And they are nearly despondent about what a defeat would mean to Ted Kennedy’s legacy and memory. We’re at an amazing point right now in which nobody knows what will happen Tuesday. And it’s not because of anything Coakley did, but because of everything she didn’t."
Jake Tapper, on his ABC blog: "Martha Coakley: A Democratic Canary in a Coalmine? -- Political operatives say the Senate race in Massachusetts between Democratic state attorney general Martha Coakley and Republican state senator Scott Brown is too close to call. But the fact that President Obama felt the need to fly to the Bay State to campaign for a Democrat in one of the most Democratic states in the nation speaks volumes about the ugly climate for Democratic candidates. Coakley has run an imperfect campaign and has had a rough couple weeks. But, as one senior White House official acknowledged to me, 'in Massachusetts, even after a rough couple weeks the Democrat should be ahead.' Polls have Coakley and Brown neck and neck." So it's despondency and depression in the State-Controlled Media.
Now, the AP has an interesting story here: "Coakley Hopes for Historic Win in Kennedy Seat Bid." Would somebody explain to me what the historic bid would be? What is this historic win? The headline should be: "Coakley Poised for An Historic Loss." What is so historic about this election is this, they say: "Coakley, hoping to become the first woman elected to the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, said she always expected a tough election." So AP, shameless propagandists in the tank, "Coakley Hopes for Historic Win in Kennedy Seat Bid," because she'll be the first female elected to the Senate from Massachusetts. As I say, the more apt headline: "Coakley Poised for An Historic Loss."
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Hey, get this: The Democrat mayor of Quincy, Massachusetts, has endorsed Scott Brown. "James Sheets a six term Democratic mayor of Quincy today endorsed Scott Brown for United States Senator. He released the following statement via the Brown campaign: 'Despite being a lifelong member of the Democratic Party, I am endorsing Scott Brown for Senate, as I know he will always represent Massachusetts with an independent voice in Washington,' Sheets said. 'Martha Coakley has repeatedly stated she would cast the critical 60th vote for the current health care proposal that would slash Medicare funding by nearly half-a-trillion dollars and dramatically impact the care so many seniors rely upon in their final years. As our United States Senator, I am confident Scott Brown will only support legislation that will benefit his constituents, and this is why I will be voting for him on Tuesday.'" That's pretty big, the Democrat mayor of Quincy, Massachusetts, endorsing Scott Brown. Here's another Democrat sinking with the Obama albatross, a new TV ad that "Marcia" Coakley is running.
OBAMA: Martha knows the struggles Massachusetts working families face because she grew up with those struggles. She's fought to the people of Massachusetts every single day. As attorney general, she took on Wall Street and recovered millions for Massachusetts taxpayers.
RUSH: She did?
OBAMA: She went after big insurance companies and took on predatory lenders.
RUSH: She did?
OBAMA: This is what Martha Coakley is about. Every vote matters! Every voice matters! We need you on Tuesday.
COAKLEY: I'm Martha Coakley, and I approved this message.
RUSH: Now, what's the problem with that ad? Snerdley, what's the problem with that ad? You tell me right now. Three...two...one. What's the problem with the ad? The problem with the ad is that people in Massachusetts do not hate the insurance companies right now. The health care plan that they're saddled with there is not the fault of the insurance companies. It was passed by the state government. Obamacare is a mirror image of it and it costs more. They don't hate Wall Street. People in Massachusetts do not hate Big Oil. People in America do not have the same enemies that Barack Obama has. They simply don't. The Democrat Party's number one enemy right now is you, the people, and the places where you work. There's no other way to say this. If you're an insurance agent, you're evil. If you work on Wall Street at whatever job, you are in the crosshairs. If you work in an oil company of any size, you're in the crosshairs. If you work at a pharmaceutical company or a pharmacy, you are in the Democrat Party's crosshairs. Everywhere you work... If you are in a small business, you are in the Democrat Party crosshairs. Taxes are going to be increased. Obama and the Democrats are targeting these businesses. If you have a job, you are in the crosshairs of the Democrat Party, and the people of Massachusetts have figured it out.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, there's another sound bite to explain the elitist arrogance of people like Marcia Coakley. This is from Fox25 in Boston this morning. She was on television and the host said, "Sixty-one percent of the people that respond to that Suffolk poll say they don't think the government can afford this health care plan. Are they wrong?" Now, listen to her answer.
COAKLEY: They are wrong, because the plan, if you look at it, over the next ten years will be cost neutral from the budget office but what's more important, Gene, is what it does is it changes the way we think about health care. We're going to do more screening early on; we're going to get those kids who are going to have diabetes; we're going to do cancer screening. We don't have a health care system that works now. We only fix people when they're stick already and it costs too much, and it's hard to measure that, and it's also a little complicated.
RUSH: So it's too hard for people to understand, it's just a little too complicated. We do not have a ten-year cost neutral plan for the budget office. We have a trick, Ms. Coakley. The trick is that taxes begin immediately, the so-called benefits, the spending doesn't start for four years. And that's how they arrive at budget neutral over ten years. But it's nowhere near budget neutral.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Ardis, Redondo Beach, California, great to have on you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. I'm honored to speak to you and a million thanks for all you do for everyone, keeping us educated.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: I have a complaint. On January 9th I sent out my absentee ballot for the Massachusetts election and Saturday it came back into my mailbox here. And the only thing I can figure while I'm waiting here is where they have the return to go back to my hometown in Chicopee, Mass, they said it is stamped so light that it didn't get read in the post office. And I'm wondering if that's deliberate because I'm a registered Republican.
RUSH: I don't know. How can they know you're a registered Republican just from your absentee ballot without opening your envelope?
CALLER: Well, but because I've always been, you know, when they mail it out, but I just wondered because, where it has my address --
RUSH: Well, it could be. Look, these are Democrats, you know, and they're desperate. It could well be that they looked up your address, found out you're a registered Republican and sent it back. I mean it is a union at the post office -- hell, I don't know. With Democrats you cannot reject this kind of thing. You just can't. It may sound implausible, it may sound impossible, but you just can't reject it out of hand. In the old days you could. The absentees that have been counted so far, Scott Brown has a 16-point edge, 9% of the vote so far is early absentees.
END TRANSCRIPT
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Oh, it's so exciting to talk to you. You're just wonderful.
RUSH: Thank you. Thanks very much.
CALLER: Well, I was just thinking that this deal that the unions may be getting of protection from having to pay the extra taxes because they've given so much money to the Democrats seems a lot like the sort of deal you would get from the Mafia when you pay for protection, and they shake you down for some money and then they'll protect you.
RUSH: Exactly. And again, this is another thing that happened right out in the open. I mean, it's a shakedown. It's an organized crime type shakedown. Everybody on the other side of the glass is laughing, but I think your point is well made. But see here again, folks, this happened out in public. It was nakedly visible. The unions made a big stink publicly of saying, "Whoa! We're not supporting this. Are you saying we are going to pay a tax on our Cadillac health care bills? You got another thing coming, Mr. President." They coulda done this behind closed doors. They coulda done it behind the scenes. They went public. At first, the White House held firm. But then the White House caved. The White House has been buying off whoever they need to buy off to get this done. You know, even Democrats who voted for this thing, some of them, Ben Nelson, he is out there saying, you know, we ought to junk this and start all over. We should have focused on the economy first, which they did, by the way and gave us the current predicament that we are in.
By the way, do you know that unemployment benefits have been extended longer now than at any time in American history? Breaking the record in 1982. You have to conclude here that extending unemployment benefits also extends unemployment and contributes to unemployment. There can be no question about it. I'm sure even economic experts at the AP would agree with that. What everybody is missing is that this is not accidental. This is not a bunch of mumbling, bumbling, fumbling around by dumb, naive people. What's the guy's name that appeared at a Scott Brown rally yesterday, John Ratzenberger? He was in Cheers. He's got it right when he said, (paraphrasing) "I was at Woodstock. I built the stage at Woodstock, and all we have here are a bunch of sixties hippies that have assumed power, just a bunch of sixties type hippies," and I'm sure he's referring to people like Bill Ayers, the Weather Underground, the New Black Panthers and all these radicals that Obama has appointed to positions in government and czars in his White House. He said, (paraphrasing) "I built the stage at Woodstock. And when everything went bad, when it all fell apart, it was the National Guard that came in there and fed those drugged-out people peanut butter sandwiches."
It was the very people these hippies are protesting that came in and saved them, and now these people have finally realized -- the Clintons are part of this sixties hippie generation, they are -- they've achieved power. They finally got there. You could say that they're naive in their idealism, it's a mistake to chalk up all this as an accident. This is not the result of good intentions. This economic disaster and the slush fund to fix it, the TARP fund, these are not accidents. These are purposeful steps, and I don't believe that these people really do believe it's going to revive an economy. That's not what they're trying to do. They're trying to show their compassion, they're trying to enlarge government. These are big statists. These are socialists, fascists, or whoever. They're radicals. They're on the fringe of American thought and belief. But because their beliefs were embodied in some great orator who was able to be a blank piece of canvas, people were allowed to paint whatever they wanted on that canvas and make Obama whatever they wanted him to be, he got elected because the Republicans didn't have the guts and the chutzpah to campaign and run a real critical presidential campaign of who the guy was and they knew who he was but they refused to do it.
And the Democrats were wise. They knew that the Republicans would not criticize him because he's black. They were intimidated; they didn't want to be called racists, so they backed off and McCain was firing people who even pronounced Obama's middle name. He wouldn't have that. Mark McKinnon who was his original media director said, "If there's any criticism of this historic man, Obama, I'm outta here," and he did quit the campaign. Now, the reason that the blank canvas thing worked is because for five years, and maybe longer -- I'd have to say for the entire eight Bush years, but it really intensified after the invasion of Iraq, there was a relentless and an unstoppable lie after lie after lie about the state of the economy, about how America was viewed in the world, we are torturers, the world hates us, we are creating terrorism. Look at all the people that believe that Bush actually had something to do with 9/11. You had Michael Moore out there with Fahrenheit 9/11 which is a total piece of propaganda, then he makes this movie that health care in Cuba is better than health care here. Meanwhile, doctors are defecting from Cuba left and right, and people believe this stuff because the Bush administration never defended itself, the Bush administration never laughed at them and said, "You guys are crazy."
The Iraq war was painted as unjust and immoral and unnecessary. I mean you give the press and the Democrat Party five uncontested years, every day an assault on one man and his administration, and there's nothing anybody can do to stop the result. And it's exactly what happened. You shoulda heard people coming out of this rally for Coakley yesterday where Obama was still blaming Bush. Poor Obama he's working 36 hours a day to fix the Bush mess. We had 4.7% unemployment, we had full statistic, full employment in this country, we had revenue to the Treasury that was going like crazy because of capital gains reductions. Fifteen percent is the capital gains rate right now. It was the exact opposite of the way it was being portrayed. Every day we had a new body count out of Iraq. Every day an unjust, immoral war. The Democrats actively pursued defeat. "This war is lost," said Harry Reid. They called Petraeus a liar. They had people in this country hating their own government, hating their own president, hating their own country, after five years of propaganda unresponded to, unanswered lies.
It's not that the press is powerful. They're not as powerful as they used to be, otherwise there wouldn't be a race in Massachusetts. And, by the way, if there's no difference in the two parties, why do we care who wins up there tomorrow? Hmm? If all these political parties are the same, it doesn't matter, does it, who wins? What's all the razzmatazz about? If you give the Democrats in the press five-years, 24/7 of unanswered attacks, they can change public opinion, and they did. So people thought Obama was a messiah. There was a cultlike thing that developed. And they gave him of course the benefit of the doubt, why, he got in there and the first six months everything is going wrong, they accepted it being blamed on Bush. But they have painted Mr. Perfection on that canvas. And there's nothing in reality that approaches what they painted. And so now the day of reckoning has come, and the whole blank canvas and the whole myth that Obama was something new and different, unprecedented, blown to smithereens.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I'll tell you something else the Obama people want, all of these sixties hippies. Obama has written about this in the Audacity of Hope about how he wanted to reverse what Reagan and his "minions" did. Well, what that means is this: They wanted a new depression to get back and expand the safety net, restore things to the status before Reagan and the Reagan Revolution. Reagan trimmed the welfare rolls, slowed the growth of the welfare state, and they didn't like that. These people are all about expanding the welfare state, getting as many people as possible on the welfare state. They need to give us a new depression, and they're in the process of doing it. Don't doubt me.
END TRANSCRIPT
CALLER: I am at Camp Delta in Iraq, which is near Al Kut, Rush.
RUSH: Well, great to have you here.
CALLER: Mega dittos from here.
RUSH: Thank you much.
CALLER: I have a question about the health care bill, sir. I hope you can hear me okay. I'm calling over the Internet actually too.
RUSH: I actually hear you better than most telephone calls.
CALLER: Excellent. The question is: How have we gotten to the point where we are now in the health care debate? We went from wanting to insure people that had no insurance. Now, I realize we provide most Americans with health care, but we went from providing people who didn't have health insurance to this gargantuan bill and we're still leaving out 12-1/2 million people without insurance. I don't understand how we went from trying to get everybody on insurance to this gargantuan monstrosity of a bill which still leaves 12-1/2 million uninsured and you rarely ever hear anybody ask that question of them.
RUSH: All right. I think you probably do know the answer, don't you?
CALLER: Oh, absolutely I do.
RUSH: Okay. Then answer your own question.
CALLER: It's not about providing health care. That's the answer.
RUSH: Absolutely right. It's not about the uninsured. It can't possibly be if, after this gargantuan thing (over 2,000 pages), it still leaves 12-1/2 million uninsured. It can't possibly be about that.
CALLER: But I thought that's what this is all about?
RUSH: No, no. That's what they tell us it's all about so that they can hoodwink people into supporting it. They grab at people's heartstrings, their hearts. They tug those heartstrings and try to say (sobbing), "It's a terrible thing, so many people uninsured in the richest country in the world. It's unseemly. It's a sin and we gotta fix it," and everybody supports this until they see the details and then realize that this is not about health care. It's a bill that expands government, that raises taxes, and depletes the private sector of one-sixth of its value that's put in control of the Democrat Party. There's an even better explanation for it, and this is something that is so simple that it's difficult for people to accept, and that is: This is a bill advanced by who? Liberal Democrats; and the one thing that's inexorably true about them is they lie.
They have to lie. They cannot be open and honest about what liberalism is. What happens when they are is what you see happening in Massachusetts. They have gotten arrogant and they're condescending. They're thinking they hold all three branches now so they don't have to wear the mask anymore and they can go out and say whatever they really believe, plan what they really want to do. And when they do that people rise up and revolt. They're going to do that tomorrow in Massachusetts. They're going to do it big time in November. The health care bill, which they intended to get written in secret, has been made public (no thanks to the mainstream media) and so it is what it is. It's a reassuring fact, I think, Don, that the country has not gone over the cliff. The country's not socialist. The people of this country are not wacko leftists like we were being led to believe after the election of Obama.
CALLER: Well, I'm just glad that people have come to realize what's going on in this country. We really appreciate you over here. I can't tell you how many of our men listen to you on the Internet, and we appreciate everything you do.
RUSH: That --
CALLER: We're here fighting for you. We love you and we love all the people that are over there supporting us and we appreciate everything you do, and people like you are the reason that we're here doing what we're doing.
RUSH: Well, my God. You have melted my heart. (deep breath) It's very few people that can render me speechless but you have, because we here in this country have a reverence for what you all are doing above and beyond what you even know. So it's very humbling to hear you say that.
CALLER: Like you, it's my calling and it's what I love to do. It's hard for me to leave my family back home and come here and do this, but when I'm with my men... I'm a flight medic here. When I'm with my men and I'm treating the soldiers, it's just my calling. It's what I was designed to do.
RUSH: It's what you were born to do. I understand that totally. I often say that about myself. How long you been there?
CALLER: I've only been here about five months now. I've got about eight more to go.
RUSH: Well, God bless you, sir. Thank you so much.
CALLER: God bless you, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: Yes, sir.
RUSH: I truly appreciate it. That's Don calling from Iraq over the Internet. That's a VOIP call: Voice Over IP. Sounds superb. Ladies and gentlemen, he's got people tearing up here at the EIB Network.
It's not often that I share with you things that I see floating around the Internet that are mass-spam mailed, but this one's kind of interesting. You never know if the origin here is truthful, but I'll just read you what it says. "This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on 'How Would You Fix the Economy?' This article was one of the ideas submitted... 'Dear Mr. President, Please find below my suggestion for fixing America's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan.
"'You can call it the "Patriotic Retirement Plan:" There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations: 1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings – Unemployment fixed. 2) They MUST buy a new American CAR. Forty million cars ordered – Auto Industry fixed. 3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage – Housing Crisis fixed. It can't get any easier than that!! P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress pay their taxes... Mr. President, while you're at it, make Congress retire on Social Security and Medicare. I'll bet both programs would be fixed pronto!'" Now, if you run the numbers on this (and I haven't done it), if you're gonna give 40 million people a million dollars each, I don't know how many billions or trillions you're looking at.
I'm not good at numbers in my head, but the point is here is to contrast it. Obama has spent $2.3 trillion additional, added to the national debt, this year. This program that this guy proposed would cost nowhere near that. It's the same thing with health insurance. If you really wanted to insure the uninsured, you could do it. There are 12 million uninsured people that want it. The rest don't particularly want health insurance. They want to buy it. But this health insurance plan is going to require that you buy it or go to jail or pay a fine or both. But we ran the numbers on this. You can insure these 12 million people -- the 12 million that want health insurance that can't afford it -- for about $30 billion a year, which is chump change compared to this $2 trillion we're talking about spending on Obamacare.
END TRANSCRIPT
Took a class in college taught by now-head of the NAACP Julian Bond. Bond told exactly the same story (and, IIRC its recounted in “Eyes on the Prize” as well) - it was JFK’s outreach to MLK Jr. while he was in jail during the 1960 campaign that started the stampede of Blacks into the Democrat Party.
Very interesting! Thanks!
Scott Brown for president or Vice-president with Palin as either/or. It would be a nightmare for bozo and the left. :-)
The Kennedys never know the woman's name.
Wow! That’s a great Crantini! LOL.
Hubby saw the pic of the cupcake and wanted one. LOL.
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.
