Posted on 03/19/2010 4:12:43 PM PDT by GOP_Lady
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
On Today's Show... |
March 19, 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 simplest way to explain what's happening here is that not one Democrat in a leadership position in the House,
Senate or White House is telling anybody the truth."
"The Democrat Party has to have a demon and the insurance industry is the latest demon."
"It's just striking. Obama's 'strongly disapprove' numbers are now equal to George Bush's when he left office."
"If you don't believe that Obama's purposely setting out to destroy the US private sector and
take it over in a fascistic sort of way, then you gotta open your eyes and be honest with yourself."
"If a House Democrat votes for reconciliation, which is deemed to include the Senate bill, y
ou are knowingly voting for the Senate bill, warts and all.
This is what the House Democrats must understand."
"The health care bill is purposely confusing. It is confusing to the point of distraction."
"Obama knows exactly what he's doing, and the radical left Democrats know exactly what they're doing.
They are destroying the economy."
"I hate that word 'reconciliation,' because it is not accurately describing what's going on here.
This is an amendment package.
This is the House changing what they don't like about the Senate bill in a separate piece of legislation."
"The bottom line is there are no expanded services, there are no smaller premiums.
Nothing that they're saying about this -- Pelosi, Hoyer, Obama -- none of it is true."
"The American people are being screwed royally by the President of the United States.
There's no other way to put it. We're being screwed royally. The big shaft.
We are being bludgeoned. This is banana republic-type stuff. This is what happens in dictatorships.
This is tyranny. If you ever wondered what it looks like, close up, this is it."
"A vast majority of the American people do not think they're being represented by the federal government, and they're right.
The federal government is governing against everyone's will.
The American people are angry, they are fit to be tied and they're not going to comply with this whatever and whenever it happens."
"The biggest insurance company in the world is the US federal government: VA, S-CHIP, Medicare, Medicaid.
They have more customers than any private insurance company in the country.
They deny more claims, by percentage, than any private insurance company in the country."
"Obama is the president and CEO of the biggest insurance company in the country, and it is broken,
bankrupt, and there is no literal intelligent reason why this man should be entrusted with the power to run anything.
He is a neophyte, he is clueless, and he is dangerous."
"In the reconciliation bill there are dramatic cuts for private inpatient psychiatric care. Yep.
What they ought to do then is reopen that place and just put it in Pelosi's office, because that's where the insanity in this country is."
"About 46% of the people get some kind of government assistance, and a lot of them, as you know,
we've had 'em on this show, associate it personally with Obama, from his stash, and about 25 to 30% are paying for that 46%."
"The thing to understand about the Blue Dogs and these moderates, they're Democrats.
What will turn them is when they know you understand what's going on here."
"If the Blue Dogs become convinced that their constituents know what's going on here,
that's how they're going to be persuaded,
that's how they're going to be swayed and that's why you have to keep calling them."
"They do not have the votes. Obama wouldn't have gone on Fox,
he wouldn't have gone out to George Mason today, if he had the votes.
He wouldn't have canceled his trip for Sunday if they had the votes.
They don't have the votes. This is by no means over."
"Nancy Pelosi, a woman who's pro-choice and wants every abortion possible,
is out there praying to St. Joseph that the bill passes?"
"It took them five years to get Bush into the thirties. At this rate, we'll have Obama in the thirties by August."
"The Cartoon Network has a larger audience than MSNBC and CNN combined. People aren't watching them."
"There are some people who are just going to say they like the job Obama's doing
because they're afraid to tell a pollster anything other than that because he's black.
They don't want a pollster to think they're racist."
"If Democrats get away with the Slaughter solution -- if they get away with voting on something other
than the Senate bill and saying they did vote on the Senate bill, if they get away with 'deeming'
something to pass -- they're going to do it again."
"Once the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate certify that they have a bill,
the Supreme Court said -- in an 1892 ruling -- that they will not look at how the bill became law."
"This bill is about amnesty for illegal immigrants and getting them health care.
Obama is going to need those people to win reelection.
He's going to be so unpopular by 2012 he's not going to stand a chance unless he has amnesty and those new people."
"There's not a lot of ambiguity in the clause and the section of the Constitution describing and requiring how a bill becomes law.
It's not ambiguous at all and it's being shredded here."
"I don't want anybody to get down and out over this, because even if this passes, it ain't over.
You have to understand that. We're not going to just lie down and turn our country over to these people."
"Did the Baltimore Colts say, 'Okay, you guys win,' after Joe Namath guaranteed a Jets victory in the 1969 Super Bowl, hmm?"
"It's crucial that members of the House who have been given these special deals
understand that the likelihood of these deals ever happening is less than 15%."
"House Democrats have to know that what they are doing by voting on their reconciliation
package Sunday is nothing more than sending the Senate bill into law by itself.
That's all that's going to happen and that's all Obamacare is about."
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.
OBAMA: If this vote fails, the insurance industry will continue to run amok. They will continue to deny people coverage, they will continue to deny people care, they will continue to jack up premiums 40 or 50 or 60% as they have in the last few weeks without any accountability whatsoever. They know this and that's why their lobbyists are stalking the halls of Congress as we speak and pouring millions of dollars into negative ads and that's why they're doing everything they can to kill this bill. So the only question left is this: Are we going to let the special interests win once again? Or are we gonna make this vote a victory for the American people?
RUSH: It's just striking. Obama's strongly disapprove numbers are now equal to George Bush's when he left office. The people of this country don't want any part of this. The leaders of the Democrat Party are openly lying and they are brazenly doing so right to people's faces. And now targeting the insurance industry, which is really nothing new for these people if you look at their enemies list, it's anybody that makes a profit in the private sector. Doesn't matter, they have to go out and have a demon and the insurance industry is the latest demon. If you don't believe that Obama's purposely setting out to destroy the US private sector and take it over in a fascistic sort of way, then you gotta open your eyes and be honest with yourself.
END TRANSCRIPT
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's what's happening with the legislation. And I myself, ladies and gentlemen, even this morning was a little confused based on what I was reading and seeing in the media. I thought I understood it, then I'm reading things people are writing and I thought, "This doesn't make any sense." And I thought, well, maybe I'm wrong here. But as usual, I was right.
The confusion is this reconciliation bill, the amendments to the Senate bill that the House posted yesterday. Everybody's getting caught up in those. It's important, but here's what is going to happen, if it happens. Once the House passes reconciliation, that is, the Senate bill and this amendment package that they posted yesterday, once they pass that as one bill, Pelosi will break out the Senate bill, she'll separate the Senate bill, having claimed it was passed as part of reconciliation. This is the deem-and-pass. The House thinks they're voting only on the changes, the members of the House think they're voting only on the changes, so Pelosi will break out the Senate bill having claimed that it was passed, and then she and whoever is in charge of it Senate at the time will certify that they have a bill, and they will send the bill to the Senate. The Senate bill alone -- no reconciliation bill goes to the president -- the Senate bill alone goes to the president, he signs it, and we have national health care. And this could happen Sunday, unless a court steps in to stop it, which we can't possibly know if that will happen in advance.
Now all this talk about the Senate stopping the reconciliation or aspects of it does not stop the Senate bill from becoming law. The Senate, dealing with the changes the House makes, will not have one thing to do with whether or not we get national health care on Sunday. At that point, all that's happening is we're fighting the amendments to the bill that the House wants. Now, the Republican senators, like Coburn and McConnell and the rest are saying to the House Democrats, "Now, look, you House Democrats, we're not going to make this easy for you. We're going to track everything that was given to you, we're going to track every bribe, and we're going to publicize every bribe. We're going to stop every nomination -- put it on hold -- that you may have been promised to vote for this thing." In other words, the House Republicans are saying, "You're not gonna get all these amendments. You can't believe Pelosi when she promises you that these are going to happen."
For example, this Earl Pomeroy guy getting a big deal for his bank in Bismarck, the one bank that will be exempt from the student loan change, the one bank that will be allowed to make student loans, the one private bank other than the government that will be allowed to make student loans. Mr. Pomeroy, you're not going to get that. This is the point. Obama is going to sign this bill without that in it and then you're going to have to rely on the Senate agreeing to all these changes. Pelosi's making all these promises, and I'm sure Harry Reid is assuring these House Democrats, "Oh, yeah, we'll take care of this for you." And the Senate Republicans are saying, "Nah-uh, we're going to fight this at every step of the way and we have a lot of tools at our disposal. You're not gonna get all these amendments, so don't vote for reconciliation and think you're going to get away with telling your constituents that you voted for reconciliation under the assumption that these amendments will be enacted."
These House Democrats are actually being told that when it comes time to run for reelection, that they'll be able to say, "We didn't vote the Senate bill, we voted reconciliation." And the Republicans in the Senate say, "You go ahead and try it but we're going to tell everybody what you voted for. Whether you deem it or whether not, the Senate bill will have become law because of you." The Senate Republicans are going to make it as difficult as possible for these reconciliation amendments to be passed. The Senate would have to approve them, go back to the House, tidy it up and then as a separate bill go to the White House for Obama to sign it before all of these deals, before all of these promises that Pelosi's making to these members actually become law. So if a House Democrat votes for reconciliation, which is deemed to include the Senate bill, you are knowingly voting for the Senate bill, warts and all. This is what the House Democrats must understand. And I don't know how much they're being lied to about this and I don't know how confused they are. I'll betcha 90% of them are not going to read the reconciliation bill, and probably haven't read the Senate bill. I'm sure they don't really know full well what's going on.
It is purposely confusing. It is confusing to the point of distraction. All Obama is doing Sunday, all he's waiting for at the White House is to sign the Senate bill the minute Pelosi and Biden or whoever is in charge of the Senate at the time certify it and send it to him, and then he leaves. Obama will not wait around for debate over reconciliation between the Senate and the House, he won't care about that, he can come back for that later. The idea that they may go ahead and try to fulfill the promises made to House members is even dubious at best. But the House Republicans and the Senate Republicans are going to make sure that every American knows about every bribe, every sweetheart deal, and they're pounding the halls of Congress right now telling these Democrats, don't believe the promises because the Republicans in the Senate are going to block as many of these things as possible. If you're being promised that your bank will be the only bank to be involved in the student loan program, don't count on that, Mr. Pomeroy, don't count on it because we're going to stop it.
As many of these amendments as possible will be stopped through a legitimate legislative process of objections, amendments, points of order, parliamentary procedure, whatever. Everybody says, "Well, but, Rush, they'll only need 51 votes to pass these things." I actually believe, folks, as I've said all week, that after Obama signs this, the only people that are going to be openly talking about this are Republicans. Boehner said it today in his press conference just now, once big pieces of legislation are signed everybody forgets it and moves on to the next thing. He said it ain't going to happen in this case. We're never going to let people forget what happened here. We're going to be reminding people all the way through November and all the way through the election of 2012. This will not be forgotten. The temperature and pressure will be ratcheted up by the day to make sure that all of these changes in the reconciliation bill in the House do not happen over in the Senate. And I, again, would not be surprised if the Senate just drops it because this is such a negative, this is such a drag, they don't want any more talk, they don't want any more debate, they don't want any more opportunities for the details of this to become known, as we get closer and closer to the reelection season and the election itself in November.
All right, a brief time-out. I hope that clears it up. Snerdley, are you clear on it now? I was confused. My confusion was I thought what I just told you was the case, then I got up today and I started reading things and I could swear people think this whole thing -- they're reporting it on television that this is not over Sunday. That it goes to the Senate, the reconciliation fight happens, and Obama not signing anything 'til the Senate finishes and that's just not true. Obama's going to sign this Sunday because Pelosi's going to separate or break out the Senate bill from her reconciliation package, and it's a done deal, we got national health care, and the Senate bill is horrible. The Senate bill is absolutely a train wreck. They're doing everything they can today as well to make everybody think, oh, we're close, Clyburn just came out, "I think we've got the votes now, I think we've got the votes," and Carl Cameron at Fox, "Well, he's normally very cautious, if he's saying that they probably do have the votes." They're still ten short.
There's a story, big news, big press release today. This is the kind of thing designed to make you think it's over: "Congressional Hispanic Caucus Calls for Passage of Health Care Reform -- The Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) today called for passage of President Obama's health care reform proposal, saying that it would greatly improve the quality of life for millions of Latinos." What's the big deal about this? There are no changes here. They voted for it last time. The news is that they didn't. The news was that they're thinking about not voting for it unless they get some assurances on immigration, which I'm sure they did. But they were never going to vote "no." They have not voted "no." But a lot of people were misled by this whole thing. Every Congressional Hispanic Caucus member voted for the bill last November after threatening not to. They're going to vote for it this time after threatening not to, but they have never been in the "no" category. But it's being portrayed here like, whoa, Pelosi's picked up a whole caucus today. She didn't pick up anything with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus coming out and lobbying for the bill's passage.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, this carve-out for Earl Pomeroy is being called the "Bismarck bribe." I need to clarify something. The bank of North Dakota is a socialist bank. It's not a private bank, it's state owned bank, and that's the bank that has been given a special dispensation from the student loan law and will be allowed it make student loans. Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota says he doesn't want this. Now, this is key, because Conrad is crucial budget committee when it comes to reconciliation and Conrad does not want any special deals for North Dakota. So Mr. Pomeroy, you gotta understand something here that your little carve-out here likely is not going to happen if this reconciliation ever does really get to the Senate and if they ever do actually take it up, the bank of North Dakota would be allowed "to issue federally subsidized student loans, meaning that it would be the only lender remaining outside of the Education Department's direct-lending system.
"The Bank of North Dakota is a state-owned lender that Democratic aides described as representing the type of nonprofit entity they want to encourage. Critics of the loan bill suggested the provision was designed to win the support of a key Democrat, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota," but he doesn't want it. He is on record saying he doesn't want it. It's also designed to get Earl Pomeroy, a member of Congress.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me run through this, again, folks. I did this at the open of the program because even I, ladies and gentlemen, got confused watching media this morning. I thought I had this all figured out, and now I'm watching and reading media, and I'm saying, "Wait, wait. Something's wrong here." 'Cause what I was reading was that the reconciliation package -- the amendments, if you will -- that the House Democrats are being promised to secure their "yes" votes, was going to be part of the deemed-to-have-passed Senate bill and sent to Obama and that when Obama signed it, that the Senate bill plus these changes would become law, and I got that impression because of two things. A, they were saying it; and B, they were treating this reconciliation like it was more important than the Senate bill.
And my instincts and what I thought I knew, was, "No, no, no, no. The reconciliation bill is not nearly as important." Ah! My instincts were right. Here is what is happening. Once the House passes reconciliation -- and I hate that word, because it is not accurately describing what's going on here. This is an amendment package. This is the House changing what they don't like about the Senate bill in a separate piece of legislation. They are not going to vote on the Senate bill. They're going to vote on their changes. They're going to have "deemed" the Senate bill to have passed as they vote on reconciliation. That's what they're trying to get 216 votes for, is this package of changes. What the House Democrats need to know is that they're not voting on that Sunday, in reality. They are voting on the Senate bill. They are being misled and lied to by their own leadership.
If their own leadership is promising them all these special deals -- like the Bismarck bank and whatever else that these people are being given -- those are not going to see the light of day until the Senate agrees with them. Obama is not going to be signing those into law. All Obama is going to sign is the Senate bill, and this vote Sunday, the House Democrats have to know that that's what they're voting on. Now, they think they're voting on reconciliation, this package of amendments -- and that's what Pelosi's telling them they're voting on, and in their minds, they are. They don't want to vote on the Senate bill. They want to be able to say they didn't cast the votes for it. "Oh, yeah, that was 'deemed' to have passed." But after they vote, whenever they vote, Pelosi is then going to separate the Senate bill, take it out, break it out. That alone will be sent over to the Senate, and whoever's running it -- either Biden or Byrd, the pro tem -- will certify it.
Pelosi will certify it for the House. After the Senate certifies the Senate bill and the Senate bill only, that gets sent to Obama. He will sign it in five seconds and throw the biggest party you have ever seen, and we will have national health care. We will not have any of the amendments, the reconciliation that the House voted on. They have to go over to the Senate, and they will do so separately -- and there is where the Republican senators are saying, "Look, you House Democrats. We're not going to make this easy for you to get these promised changes." You're not going to get all these amendments, so don't vote for reconciliation and think you're going to get away with telling your constituents that you voted for reconciliation under the assumption that these amendments would be enacted. If you vote for reconciliation, House Democrats, you are knowingly voting for the Senate bill, warts and all. You are not voting for these changes you've been promised.
So Obama's up there, he's waiting at the White House to sign the Senate bill the minute Pelosi and Biden or whoever over there certifies it, and he flies off or throws his party or whatever. He's not going to wait around. There's not going to be debate next week on the reconciliation package. There isn't going to be debate next week on these changes. Obama's not going to wait around for the Senate to act on that before he signs this -- and this is what got me confused. I'm hearing news media people saying, "Oh, see, even if they vote Sunday, this ain't over. Oh, no. It goes over to the Senate and all these debates have to happen." (groans) No, it doesn't. The Senate bill is going to be separated, Obama's going to sign it, and we've got national health care in a horrible bill. The Senate bill is rotgut horrible. So what needs to happen here is that these House Democrats have to know, somebody's going to have to sit them down and tell them, that they are in fact voting for the Senate bill when they vote reconciliation.
They think they're voting for their changes to keep their base happy or to keep the reelection chances looking strong. They think that they're voting X, Y, and Z but they're not. They are, in effect, voting for the Senate bill because that's all that Obama will see. And then the Republican senators are saying (paraphrased), "Okay. Every one of you House Democrats that got a special deal, a bribe, or a promised job; we're going to know who you, we're gonna know what you got, and we're gonna tell everybody what you go, and we're gonna prevent you from getting it. We're gonna stop every one of these things as best we can. We're going to hog the process. We're gonna use amendments. You may need 51 votes over here in the Senate to get this stuff, but we're gonna make sure that you don't get very many votes, period, on any of these things." That's Coburn has said. That's what McConnell has said. They're going to do everything they can. That's why Coburn said yesterday (paraphrased): "You better be prepared. If you're a House Democrat and you vote for this, you better be prepared to defend the bribe that you got."
END TRANSCRIPT
CLYBURN: You know, you looked at what we did in civil rights. In 1964 when the Civil Rights Act was passed, it did not have voting in it, it only outlawed discrimination in the private sector of employment. It was a year later before we got voting, and it was three years after that before we got housing. And so I believe that what we're doing here is laying a solid foundation which, over time, will have complete universal access to quality health care by all Americans.
RUSH: And there you have it. We're laying the foundation. We will have complete universal access to quality health care for all Americans down the road. Kucinich has opened up. Kucinich has said that he was assured a robust public option is coming in Obamacare 2. Obama himself, let's go back and revisit this, March 24th, 2007 in Vegas talking to the Service Employees International Union. This is a campaign stop. And, remember, now these are his boys, these are his buddies, these are the people to whom he speaks the truth.
OBAMA: My commitment is to make sure that we've got universal health care for all Americans by the end of my first term as president. I would hope that we set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort but I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.
RUSH: I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately, but we're going to do it. Meaning we're going to get rid of private sector health insurance. Go back to 2003 at an AFL-CIO conference while campaigning for the US Senate, Barack Obama said this.
OBAMA: I happen to be a proponent of single payer universal health care plan. A single payer health care plan, universal health care plan. That's what I'd like to see.
RUSH: Yet he's out there saying all these people are throwing every scare tactic in the world, it's a government takeover of health care, granny is going to die. It is a government takeover of health care and granny is going to die. Granny always dies at some point, we all do. It's going to be hastened under this bill, and it is a government takeover. They're lying through their teeth. Here's Barney Frank July 27, 2007, National Press Building, a reporter for SinglePayerAction.org had this exchange with the Banking Queen.
REPORTER: Congressman, real quick, why is single payer off the table?
FRANK: Because we don't have the votes. I wish it weren't. I'm all for it. I'm a big sponsor. Been a cosponsor for single payer for a very long time.
REPORTER: Don't you think we should scratch everything and start anew with single payer?
FRANK: No.
REPORTER: Why shouldn't we start with single payer new?
FRANK: Because we don't have the votes for it. I wish we did. I think if we get a good public option it could lead to single payer, and that's the best way to reach single payer. The best way we're gonna get single payer, the only way, is to have a public option and demonstrate its strength and power.
RUSH: That's a elevator bell you hear in the background. Barney is trying to go up or down, I don't know which way on this particular occasion. But, ladies and gentlemen, they're laying it out here, that's back in 2007. Here's Jan Schakowsky, she's a Democrat congresswoman from Illinois and she has said basically the same thing.
SCHAKOWSKY: And next to me was a guy from the insurance company who then argued against the public health insurance option, saying, it wouldn't let private insurance compete, that a public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and -- (cheers and applause) He was right. The man was right. Here's what I told him. I said, "Excuse me, sir, the goal of health care reform is not to protect the private health insurance industry." (cheers and applause) And I am so confident in the superiority of a public health care option that I think he has every reason to be frightened.
RUSH: Our objective is to wipe out the private health care industry. Jan Schakowsky, Democrat from Illinois, and that was April of last year. So they're open and honest about what they really want to do and they're doing it, and this is what they're telling people like Kucinich and others to get their votes. You've heard it from their own words.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • Sweetness & Light: Clyburn: We Are Laying The Foundation • Heritage Foundation: A First Look At The House Health Care Fix: More Bad News |
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, if they get away with this -- if they get away with the Slaughter solution, if they get away with voting on something other than the Senate bill but saying they did vote on the Senate bill, if they get away with "deeming" something to pass -- they're going to do it again. Bob Gibbs said so yesterday. He said they'll even use it on amnesty. They'll even use this same procedure to get amnesty for illegals. It was yesterday afternoon at the White House press briefing in the Rose Garden. A reporter said, "Mark Levin with the Landmark Legal Foundation has prepared a suit against the President that if he signs the health care bill passed by the House without a recorded yea or nay vote required by Article I, Section 7. My question on that is, would the President rule out signing future bills such as immigration reform or finance reform you mentioned earlier that are not subject to a yea or nay vote in both chambers?" In other words: Will you do this again? Will you pass bills without actually voting on them?
GIBBS: I understand that there are those that want to discuss this as being, uhh, a unique thing. It is not. I stated earlier that, uh, when this bill passes the House, the president will be happy to sign.
REPORTER: So the president wouldn't rule out signing future bills that didn't pass both houses by a yea-or-nay vote?
GIBBS: I'm not going to get into a series of legal hypotheticals that both of us seem unprepared to discuss.
RUSH: So they are prepared. If he does it this way, he'll do it again. Gibbs said Obama is "perfectly happy" to sign the bill if it comes to him without having been voted on and passed by both houses. So they'll do it again, and they will because the Constitution's an impediment to these people and what they want. It's serious. Now, what are the likelihoods...? A lot of people are asking, "What are the likelihoods a lawsuit to stop this can succeed?" and it is a tough challenge here. There are a tough couple of things to overcome. The Supreme Court had a decision in 1892 and there have been two subsequent circuit decisions that rely on it as precedent, including the DC circuit where this would be litigated, if it is. The Supreme Court decision in 1892 said that the court will not look behind the enrollment of the bill. That is, once the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate certify that they have a bill, the Supreme Court said they will not look at how the bill became law. If that holds, then all this is academic and it ain't going to happen. Separation of powers, coequal branches.
The Supreme Court says, "It's not our business how they do it. We'll rule on the constitutionality of the result but we're not going to mess around with how they did it and get involved in that." That's what they said in 1892, and that is a key provision or issue that has to be overcome. And given that this is a fundamental violation of the Constitution, a lot of legal scholars think that they have a solid chance here of getting the court to actually look at the process because it is, without question, a violation of the Constitution. It's a violation of the Constitution that is profoundly specific in its intent. There's not a lot of ambiguity in the clause and the section of the Constitution describing and requiring how a bill becomes law. It's not ambiguous at all and it's being shredded here. It is being totally ignored and lawlessness is taking place, unconstitutionality is taking place right in front of our eyes. Now, go back to audio sound bite number three. I want to go back to Obama today at George Mason University, because really what he was doing here was starting his victory lap. He thinks he's got the votes on Sunday. Here's what he said about all the people having lying about what's in his bill.
OBAMA: We have heard every crazy thing about this bill. You remember. First we heard this was a government takeover of health care. Then -- then we heeeard that this was going to kill granny. Then we heard, well, eh, "Illegal immigrants are going to be getting the main benefits of this bill." There -- there has been -- eh... They have thrown every argument at this legislative effort. But when it -- it turns out, at the end of the day, what we're talking about is common sense reform. That's all we're talking about.
RUSH: Did you notice he didn't deny anything? He didn't deny any of that. He just said "they're throwing every crazy thing at it." Well, because it's true. We happen to have read it. The Senate bill does have death panels in it. What do you think all these switches are from? Luis Gutierrez, Illinois, was going to vote "no." He's a "yes" now. I wonder why. This is about amnesty and illegal immigrants and getting them health care. Obama is going to need those people to win reelection because he's going to be so unpopular by 2012, he's not going to stand a chance unless he has amnesty in those new people.
END TRANSCRIPT
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Daniel in southern Virginia. Great to have you on the program. You're up first on Open Line Friday. Hi.
CALLER: Good-afternoon, Rush. How you doing?
RUSH: Very well, sir. Thank you.
CALLER: I just had this comment to say, and I want all these people out here listening, I want them to hear this. I had a good factory job in Richmond, Virginia. They closed my plant down over a year ago. I got laid off over a year ago. I was making decent money, you know, making 20-some dollars an hour and I had wonderful health insurance. I had to pay for it every week, it wasn't very expensive but my family was covered and our coverage was wonderful. So I don't understand why these people up in DC cannot see that. If you have good paying jobs, you get our jobs back or create some new good paying jobs, people can afford health insurance, people will have good jobs, but I guess they just want to shove it down our throats and make --
RUSH: Well, that's a great, great question. I thought we were going to have a laser-like focus on jobs, if people just had jobs they could afford stuff and all this panic wouldn't be ensuing out there. But where is the laser-like focus on jobs? Well, I'll tell you what, Daniel, there is no laser-like focus on jobs, and the administration has said, "Get used to it, 10% unemployment for the next few years, the foreseeable future." This is the new norm. That's exactly what they want, too.
END TRANSCRIPT
| Read the Background Material... |
|
| • Reuters: Unemployment Soars in US Metropolitan Areas • Heritage: Six Ways the Senate Health Care Bill Raises Health Care Costs, Kills Jobs, and Weakens the Economy |
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now Fox News is reporting (they've been reporting all day) that the House is two votes short of passage. They just now said that they're one vote short, so that means they've got 215. Clyburn, the House whip, Democrat whip, just came out and said, "We got the votes. We're gonna get this thing done Sunday afternoon at two o'clock. It's over, it's over." Other whip counts show them still under 200. The bottom line is, folks...
Let me give you a football analogy. I don't want anybody to get down and out over this, because even if this passes, it ain't over. You have to understand that. We're not going to just lie down and turn our country over to these people. But don't believe yet that it's going to pass. On Tuesday morning of every National Football League week, Las Vegas oddsmakers publish the line for the following Sunday's or following weekend's games. And every one of those games we pick a winner. Well, they're not actually picking a winner. They're trying to pick a winner they get money bet on both teams equally so they don't lose. But to entice people to bet that will install a team as a certain favorite, 6-1/2 point favorite, +3 favorite. Why do we play the game? If somebody's out there predicting the outcome of something, then why engage in the activity?
So now we got all these people predicting it's going to pass, which they've been doing for a year. They have been predicting they had the votes for a year. Obama had to go to a Republican to try to get him to change his mind, Joseph Cao, Joseph "Cash" Cao of Louisiana. Now, if you gotta go to a Republican, something tells me you're not that close. Bloomberg today, while Fox was saying they were two votes short, was saying the Democrats are ten votes short. But you play the game, I don't care what it is, and in the process you find your opponent's strengths and weaknesses. If your opponent says, "Hey, you know what? We're going to beat you." "Oh, okay. You think you're going to beat us? Well, let's not play the game." Did the Baltimore Colts say, "Okay, you guys win," after Joe Namath guaranteed a Jets victory in the 1969 Super Bowl, hmm?
No, they played the game. Well, we're going to keep playing the game, because these people are Democrats. These people are leftists, and they have been engaging in a PR scam from year to convince everybody they've got votes when they don't have them. The media is pushing this. The media is not your friend in this. The media is doing everything they can to further this PR effort to make you think it's over, so you don't show up in Washington tomorrow at noon if you're planning on going, so that you stop calling. But the game isn't over. They've announced kickoff at one o'clock Sunday -- and guess what? There's another little procedural trick that they're going to do. They have a bill on ocean algae or something. I don't even know what it is, but they're going to be voting on a second piece of legislation on Sunday. Why?
Because if they come up short, if there is a surprise... If they call a vote, Pelosi thinks they've got them, but somebody could change their mind in the middle of the vote. It isn't over 'til that 216 number is reached. So if somebody waits, somebody delays, somebody doesn't vote the way Pelosi wants, they can hold off and go to this second piece of legislation before closing out the first vote. It's common. It's not something special that they're doing this Sunday, it's common. But that again tells me that they're not confident, that they don't have the votes, if they're trying to get a second bill to vote on to keep the first period, the health care vote, open longer than normal. To twist arms or what have you. So let 'em say they've got the votes. Let Fox News say they're only one vote short. You know, let 'em say the game's over.
But it's not over until it's over. It's not over until it's played, and in the process of playing the game you find your opponent's strengths and weaknesses and how to exploit them, and it's crucial -- it is crucial -- that members of the House who have been given these special deals understand that the likelihood of these deals ever happening is less than 15%. What is going to happen again, if this passes, is that the reconciliation package (all of these amendments, all these special deals like the North Dakota bank and whatever other deals there are) are going to be separated. And the Senate bill alone -- which will not have been voted on; it will have been "deemed" to have been voted on -- will be broken out, and it will be sent by Pelosi. She'll certify it, send it over to the Senate for whoever's running the Senate to certify it, and it goes to Obama.
And if they've got the votes, we've got national health care: Senate version only, on Sunday. Senate version only. None of these changes that the House has been promised, none of that bill that was posted on Louise Slaughter's website yesterday, will become law on Sunday. Only the Senate bill will become law. Those changes that these House members are being promised will have to, at some point, go to the Senate where reconciliation will take place. The Republicans are going to do everything they can to stop every one of them from happening and identifying every one of them and explaining who was bribed with what so that everybody will know, prior to November, who was bribed, who accepted the bribe, what the bribe was, who was appointed to some ambassadorial post, who was given some nomination that will be held up.
House Democrats have to know that what they were doing by voting on their reconciliation package Sunday is nothing more than sending the Senate bill into law by itself. That's all that's going to happen and that's all Obamacare is about. He'll split. He'll find somewhere to go. This reconciliation stuff, you won't see that acted on until well after the Easter break, if then. These Democrats in the House, just like the Blue Dogs -- I've been trying to warn the Blue Dogs all year -- you're going to be sold out. Pelosi would love to cull her herd. She wouldn't mind if you guys lose big in November. The House Democrats are being shafted, lied to, by their own leadership and by Harry Reid. They don't trust each other. The House Democrats, Senate Democrats, don't trust each other. Somebody has told them something to make them believe the Senate's going to enact all this stuff for them. But if they don't trust each other, why should we trust 'em? We don't. The American people don't. The American people are being screwed royally by the President of the United States. There's no other way to put it. We're being screwed royally. The big shaft. We are being bludgeoned. This is banana republic-type stuff. This is what happens in dictatorships. This is tyranny. If you ever wondered what it looks like, close up, this is it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay, forget everything that you have heard today about they've got the votes or they're just two votes shy or they're just one vote shy. Forget Clyburn saying, "Yep, we've got the votes, we're voting on Sunday, we're going to have health care by two o'clock Sunday afternoon." The truth of the matter is, and no less than Obama's own network, MSNBC, just announced it, Democrat leaders say they do not have the votes. But it's even more profound than that. There are 40 undeclared Democrats, 40 Democrats who have not declared how they're going to vote. There is no way anybody knows that they're five short or one short or two short or what have you. There are 40 undeclared votes, and if this thing is to pass on Sunday, if they're going to have this vote on Sunday, Pelosi's going to have to get over two-thirds of that 40 voting "yes." There are 40 undeclared, 40 undecideds. Now, the conventional wisdom is that somebody telling you they're undecided is just buying time and trying to avoid hassles, that they actually are going to vote "yes," but it could just as easily they're going to vote "no" and they don't want to get hassled because of that, too. It could go either way.
Now, as I mentioned, 40 members are undeclared and House leaders just said they don't have the votes. Even Obama, at his declaring war on the insurance industry rally at George Mason University this morning, said, "If this vote fails, if this bill fails," so it's still in his mind it could fail. Remember, Pelosi's telling people to go ahead and quit their day jobs, they're going to have health insurance, complaining about people being job locked, have to keep a job they don't like just to get health insurance, forget that, we're going to pay your health insurance for you.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let's go to the audio sound bites. And remember, again, the House leaders said today, they don't have the votes yet. Clyburn went out and said he's got the votes. He doesn't have them. There are 40 undeclared House Democrats on this. So there's no way any of these accurate whip counts that say one vote short, two votes short, five votes short, nobody knows what they're talking about, all this is just PR put out by the Democrats, media is lapping it all up, trying to create an inevitable, it's a done deal. It's like I said, people predict they're going to win, okay, let's not play the game then, if you think you're going to win, you win. Nope, not going to do it that way. It never happens that way in real life, but that's what they're trying to do, just get us stop playing the game. It ain't going to happen. James Clyburn this morning, MSNBC, F. Chuck Todd said, "The soonest you can call a vote as far as the pledge you guys made is two o'clock Sunday. But is it fair to say that you won't call the vote until you know you have the votes or will you possibly call the vote even if you're not quite sure?"
CLYBURN: Nancy Pelosi will make that call. But I'm very hopeful that by the time we get to two o'clock on Sunday afternoon, we will see our pathway forward. You know, a lot of momentum has built over the last day or so and from what I hear, the wind will continue to blow at our backs throughout the day.
RUSH: Now, that's this morning. He's the whip. He's talking about this like he's looking at it from afar. "From what I hear, a lot of momentum built over the last day or so. From what I hear the wind will continue to blow at our backs throughout the day." He's the whip, he is the wind, he's the wind that's supposed to be blowing at everybody's back. They don't have 'em yet, folks. Do not doubt me. Last night, Charlie Rose asks Clyburn, "Does this CBO report close the deal for you to get to 216 votes?"
CLYBURN: I think so. I really am -- believe that the people who were very leery about what this would do to the country's debt and deficit are very pleased with this. It makes it easier, as well as on the progressive side, they wanted more people covered, and we'll be almost doubling the size of community health centers.
RUSH: Not true. Not true. Don't forget Steny Hoyer has a memo to all Democrats, don't discuss details of the CBO report, just say it cuts the deficit, just say it cuts the deficit, don't focus 'cause they don't want anybody looking at the real CBO numbers. People have looked at the real CBO numbers even though they're just estimates. It's a disaster. Folks, it is a disaster. It would cost over $2 trillion. Jeffrey Anderson, Weekly Standard: "The CBO’s most recent analysis is out, and it’s not likely to convince wavering House Democrats to jump to the Obamacare side of the fence." It's over $2 trillion, and not $1.3 trillion in deficit reduction. We are being fully, totally lied to about it. "It includes 2010 as the initial year. As most people are well aware, 2010 has now been underway for some time. Therefore, the CBO would normally count 2011 as the first year of its analysis, just as it counted 2010 as the first year when analyzing the initial House health bill in the middle of 2009. But under strict instructions from Democratic leaders, and over strong objections from Republicans, the CBO dutifully scored 2010 as the first year of the latest version of Obamacare. If the clock were started in 2011, the first full year that the bill could possibly be in effect, the CBO says that the bill’s ten-year costs would be $1.2 trillion." No wonder they don't want to focus on any of the details in the CBO report.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, here's a post from Ramesh Ponnuru at the National Review's Corner blog and it's from yesterday. "A Whip Count Going Around K Street ... has fewer than 30 undecideds, with Pelosi needing two-thirds. Don't believe Democrats who say they're within five." Well, it was just a half hour ago, 40 minutes ago now that NBC -- the Obama network -- announced that there are 40 undecided Democrats, not 30, and that she needs two-thirds of those. Clyburn said this morning they've got the votes. House Democrat leaders quickly ran out and said, "No, we don't have the votes." It's not over. Just because they make predictions of how this is going to end up does not mean that that's how it's going to end up.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, there's Fox again reporting that the Democrats are two votes short. I don't know how they're coming up with that, but that's just not right. I mean, there are 40 undecided Democrats, unless they know at Fox what these 40 are going to do. But NBC doesn't know what they're going to do. NBC has no clue what the 40 are going to do. They're saying the Democrats don't have the votes -- and get this. Fox just published this on the website: "So the House will vote to approve the health care bill on Sunday, the Senate will promptly polish off a 'fix-it' bill, and this whole political nightmare will end -- right? Not so fast." I have to stop here again. This opening sentence gets it all wrong. "So the House will vote to approve the health care bill on Sunday, the Senate will promptly polish off a 'fix-it' bill, and..." That's not what's going to happen! Pardon my frustration here, folks.
This is so crucially important and it's really unfortunate so many people are getting what's going on wrong. This fix-it bill, the reconciliation bill, the amendment package -- all of it -- it's not going to the Senate to get fixed next week! It's not going to be part of what Obama signs into law, if they sign anything. The Senate bill will be broken out. Once this thing is passed, it will be "deemed" to have passed. It will go to the Senate for certification (as I get blue in the face repeating this) and if Obama signs anything Sunday or whenever, it will be the Senate bill. It's not going to be any of these "fixes." But a lot of people in the media are out there saying, "Oh, even if this thing goes on Sunday doesn't mean anything because a lot of real action is phone shift to the Senate." It's not going to shift to the Senate!
You're telling me that Obama is going to wait when he's got a Senate bill that's "deemed" to have passed both houses? That he's going to wait? (laughing) He's going to sign it, throw his party, and let everybody else start dealing with these fixes later on. Anyway, I just wanted to correct this because the Senate is not going to do a quick fix-it bill and agree with what the House is doing. The Republicans in the Senate are making a point of that yesterday and today. That's not going to be the case. Anyway that's not the focus of the story. I just had to correct it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay, here's the latest from Paul Ryan, ladies and gentlemen, via Robert Costa at National Review Online, The Corner. Ryan says, "It is a coin toss. We were just on the floor going through whip-check. [The Democrats] still aren’t there yet. It’s narrowed down, from what we can tell, to four or five. Obviously, the numbers favor [the Democrats], if you compare the pool of undecided votes to how many they need to come over. They only need about 50 percent of the remaining undecideds to break their way. On [the Republican side], we need seven votes to defeat this." Seven of the undecideds, and I don't know what that number is now. It's 20 or 30, I'm not sure which. Paul Ryan further says, "At this point, we’re really only talking about a handful of votes. It’s such a close situation, and very, very fluid. They don’t want to win by just one vote -- with everyone cast as the tiebreaking vote -- they want to win by two or three votes. That’ll be hard to do, as will muscling votes in these final hours, since everyone is watching."
Now, that's a good point. When he says they don't want to win by just one vote because then everybody could be cast as the tie-breaking vote, every Democrat could be cast, "You're the guy who gave us this bad bill, you're the Democrat," and none of them want that so they want to win by two or three, which Ryan says is going to be -- they'll take it, don't misunderstand, they'll take a one vote win, but they want to get more than that. Whether it will prevent them from calling a vote on Sunday is another thing.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay, two things on websites and phone calls. A friend of mine, Heather Higgins, Independent Women's Voice, just posted a very easy-to-use website, it's called BarackHatesThis.com. It is a list -- you don't have to spend any money there, there are no tricks, you're not going to get fundraising letters, you're not going to get requests for money -- it's a list of all the undecideds, their local phone numbers and their Washington phone numbers. And the thing to understand about the Blue Dogs and these moderates, they're Democrats. What will turn them is when they know you understand what's going on here. If they think they can vote for this and rely on your ignorance, when they come back, "No, no, no, what I voted for was X," and that you'll believe the lie, then they'll vote for it.
But if the Blue Dogs become convinced that their constituents know what's going on here, that's how they're going to be persuaded, that's how they're going to be swayed and that's why you have to keep calling them. It's BarackHatesThis.com. They're probably going to shut this down for a while, but keep trying to get through. It's very well placed and positioned for people to see who is still undecided and very simple, their local office number and the Washington office number, BarackHatesThis.com. Remember that the Blue Dogs and all these moderates, once they know that their constituents have figured out what's going on, that's the beginning of the process where they firm up and vote "no."
Somebody pointed out to me yesterday that this toll-free number in Washington, 877-762-8762 translates to SOB-U-SOB. 877-762-8762 is SOB-U-SOB. Ha-ha. SOB, you SOB! Look it up. It works.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: They do not have the votes. Obama wouldn't have gone on Fox, he wouldn't have gone out to George Mason today, if he had the votes. He wouldn't a canceled his trip for Sunday if they had the votes. They don't have the votes. This is by no means over. 877-762-8762, or SOB-U-SOB, that's the toll-free number to the Capitol Hill Switchboard.
END TRANSCRIPT
Click on pic!
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, here are some things in the reconciliation package, the reconciliation fixes that will not be part of the bill if they vote Sunday and Obama signs it. This is the deem-and-pass thing. I've told you about the increase, almost 1% increase in the Medicare payroll tax on investment income, capital gains. There are even deeper cuts to Medicare Advantage, which will mean fewer and less attractive Medicare Advantage plans available to seniors.
And as I mentioned yesterday, take a look at Walgreens in the state of Washington, they are not accepting any new Medicaid patients starting April 16th. I mean that's the future. There are increases in the employer penalties for not complying with the mandates which will hit all businesses with more than 50 employees. It's deadly. Now, what's in the Senate bill? What's in the Senate? The Senate Democrats' health bill cuts Medicare by $463 billion. And, by the way, folks, you should know this. Steny Hoyer has sent a memo to all Democrats in the House: "Do not get into a discussion about specifics of the CBO report. Do not get into specifics." The reason is, if they get into specifics they're going to have to admit that everything they're saying is untrue about how much it costs and how much premiums are going down and how much the deficit's going down because none of that's true. Hoyer is printing out a memo to staff members to tell their leaders and members of Congress, do not get into a debate with anybody about what's in the CBO report, just focus on deficit reduction.
In other words, Hoyer sent a memo out to his members saying: "Just lie, just lie, and say this reduces the deficit but get into no specifics. You keep walking, you don't stop, and you do not get into a detailed discussion of CBO numbers." They don't want a detailed discussion of any of the details here. They lose if that happens. They don't want it, and that's why people are focusing on these details today. The sum total of Medicare cuts in the Senate bill is $523.5 billion dollars. That's the total and that's what will pass. The Senate bill will be separated if they vote on this reconciliation thing Sunday, it will be sent over to the Senate to be certified there, then on to Obama. The reconciliation package will not be part of it. The reconciliation package may never see the light of day. Here are the way the cuts break down: $202.3 billion in cuts to seniors Medicare health plans including massive cuts targeting the extra benefits and reduced cost sharing that seniors receive through Medicare Advantage; $156.6 billion in cuts to inpatient and outpatient hospital services, inpatient rehab facilities, long-term care hospitals. Folks, there's no expanded care anywhere, especially for you seasoned citizens. There are massive cuts. And this $523 billion is being taken away from Medicare and is being spent elsewhere. They're taking it away from senior citizens, spending it elsewhere in the new entitlement. This is in the Senate bill, not this reconciliation stuff, what has been passed last Christmas Eve in the Senate.
Thirty-nine point seven billion in cuts to home health reimbursements; $22.1 billion in additional cuts to hospitals by slashing reimbursements designed to assist hospitals that serve low income patients; $20.7 billion in cuts to the Medicare improvement fund; $13.3 billion in yet-to-be-determined Medicare cuts from the hands of an unelected federal board. Look, I'm going to stop with the numbers because they get blurred after a while. We're talking about a couple of different things, reconciliation and the Senate bill when we start talking about these numbers. The bottom line is there are no expanded services, there are no smaller premiums. Nothing that they're saying about this -- Pelosi, Hoyer, Obama -- none of it is true.
END TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Former Colorado Governor Roy Romer this morning in Washington, DC.
ROMER: I'm going to name names. You know, I unfortunately get on the radio sometimes and Rush Limbaugh is on too many stations and I can't avoid him. I think this is poisonous to have everybody just drill daily upon the irrationality of the extremes. Brainwashing really can be effective. I'm worried about.
RUSH: Governor, you need to direct your attention to the White House, if you're worried about lying.
END TRANSCRIPT
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: White Lake, Michigan, for Henry. Nice to have you here, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Good afternoon, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you, sir.
CALLER: One point that's been missed, if you're a welfare recipient or if you're drawing unemployment compensation, please call your congressman and let them know that they're threatening your benefits if they vote for this bill.
RUSH: How so?
CALLER: The federal government is already saying that they can't maintain their commitments for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. If they pass this health care bill, welfare, food stamps, military retirement, federal retirement, all of those are on the list. As soon as someone says there are Medicare cuts in this bill, all you have to do is look down the line and see that if they can't afford Medicare, they can't afford the rest of these, either.
RUSH: Wait a minute, nobody affords Medicare. I'm sorry to be losing my patience. You qualify or you don't qualify.
CALLER: Yes, but funding for Medicare comes from the federal government.
RUSH: Yeah?
CALLER: This bill could bankrupt the federal government.
RUSH: Yeah. The federal government's already bankrupt. That's actually a good point. This is all academic at this point. We don't have any of this money and there is no deficit reduction with any of this. And everybody, a lot of people are going to lose coverage, by design. Insurance premiums are going to go up. Nothing that they're saying is true. Look, there are memos out today from Steny Hoyer to the members: Do not discuss the details of CBO. If you get dragged into a discussion of details, the lie will be exposed. There is no deficit reduction. So you just keep saying there is. I've seen the memo. It's been leaked. Politico's got another memo from the Democrats. Don't talk about it, we're going to do the doc fix later in a separate piece of legislation. What's the doc fix? The doc fix is going to repeal reimbursement cuts to doctors. It's going to cost $321 billion to permanently repeal this. So all this talk of $500 billion in Medicare cuts, which is just a budget gimmick anyway, is wiped out 60, 70% by the doc fix. The doc fix, in a separate piece of legislation, seals the fact that there is no deficit reduction in this. The point is that everything being said about this is a lie, particularly the structural things: the cost, insurance premiums going down, deficit going down. None of it is true. I mean it's not even close to being true.
Here's Susan in Concord, California, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: Yes, ma'am.
CALLER: Hey, I'm just wondering, I feel like as time goes on we keep giving the Democrats an excuse by saying that a lot of what they're doing is about their ideologies. I believe it's more about the unions, about SEIU wanting to take over the industry. I firmly believe that Obama is maybe a front man for the union. He doesn't seem to really have much interest in running the country. And I think that they're just getting their way in there, they're gonna take over as much industry as they can, which will guarantee the Democrats back into party again, as long as the union members continue to vote the way they tell 'em to.
RUSH: Well, that makes it about ideology because the unions are as far left as anybody else in the country is. The unions are as radical -- the government unions -- well, even John Sweeney, the AFL-CIO guys are as radical left as Saul Alinsky. I mean they regularly have their op-eds published in the Communist Party of America's publication, Daily Worker or whatever the hell it's called now. It's clearly ideologically driven and it's clearly driven to expand government, and the unions are out saying this is our payback, this is what we want, we got Obama elected. I've heard a lot of people also speculate what you've speculated here that there's somebody really running the show here besides Obama, that he's the front man, that his lack of interest in things, lack of interest in specific details, lack of caring about whether he's telling the truth or not means he's doing somebody else's bidding. Frankly, if it's true I don't really care. Either it's Obama or somebody, but he's executing the orders and we're dealing with the most radical leftists who have ever achieved in this country, and it's right in front of our noses, right in front of our eyes what they want to do with it. And it is to transform by overthrowing this country as founded. It's right there for everybody to see. And they are seeing it.
There's an interesting Fox poll today: "Americans Feel Disenfranchised By Obamcare Push -- The latest Fox News Poll was just released and it reflects the degree of anger and disenfranchisement Americans feel about their federal government, spurred on by the Obamcare poll that very few want. Presidential Approval has fallen to an all time low in this Fox poll, 46% approve and 48% disapprove." It's pretty close to what Gallup has. "Do you feel your views are represented by the federal government right now, or not? Only 35% of Democrats, 19% of independents, and 7% of Republicans think so." In other words, a vast majority of the American people do not think they're being represented by the federal government, and they're right. The federal government is governing against everyone's will. The American people are angry, they are fit to be tied and they're not going to comply with this whatever and whenever it happens.
Here's Joe in Rock Falls, Illinois. Great to have you on Open Line Friday. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Yes, Rush, thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: We're forever in debt to you. We wouldn't even be in this fight at this stage if it wasn't for you.
RUSH: Nah, but thank you very much.
CALLER: And I want to thank you. It seems like the Democrats and their media friends are always successful at framing a debate. Right now they're pitting the people that need health care against the insurance agencies when, in fact, it's actually the government that has the biggest role for health care costs being so high, and that's through Medicare and Medicaid. I work at a hospital and at the hospital we only receive pennies on the dollar for Medicaid, sometimes that takes years to recoup. Medicare does a little better, but still falls short, and --
RUSH: Right. And they want to expand. The point he's making and he's dead right about this, the biggest insurance company in the world is the US federal government: VA, S-CHIP, Medicare, Medicaid. They have more customers than any private insurance company in the country. They deny more claims than any private insurance company, by percentage, than any private insurance company in the country does. They have lousy care. They don't pay well, they don't pay the doctors, they don't reimburse. Obama is the president and CEO of the biggest insurance company in the country, and it is broken, and it is bankrupt, and there is no literal intelligent reason why this man should be entrusted with the power to run anything. He is a neophyte, he is clueless, and he is dangerous.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's Nancy in Morris Plains, New Jersey. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. I'm really spitting nails. You've got a irate Italian on your hands here. Every time I hear that Obama is at 46%, I want to know why half of the people in the United States are this stupid. Of course my husband the engineer keeps telling me that, you know, they pick the intelligence level at 80, so half of the people are below that.
RUSH: (sighs)
CALLER: But I am sick and tired of listening to these actors and actresses and the Main Street (sic), quote, media pushing this garbage agenda, this "progressive" nonsense. Unless people listen to Fox, or ABC Radio, they're fed the same crap. And most of them do not have either the intelligence or the will to listen to the other side. What. Can. We. Do? This is so frustrating. I'm tired of Tom Hanks. I'm tired of all these A-holes! Excuse me. This frustration level just builds and builds. My husband has worked since he was 15 years old. We're almost ready to retire. Our money is gone from our 401(k). He went to college 12 years. Now, we grew up in Newark, no one gave us a penny, and I have to listen to this idiot talking about "sharing the wealth"? I just cannot stand it anymore. I have had it, and it is so frustrating. I argue with people in the post office, in the grocery store. My husband's afraid he's going to have to bail me out someday. What can we do? We have calls, we have e-mails, we have written letters. They're not listening to us. They are trying to ruin this country. My father came here in Ellis Island and built a business when he couldn't even talk English. What can we do besides calling? They're ignoring us. You can hear the frustration in my voice.
RUSH: I hear it, and it is being echoed from coast to coast.
CALLER: But they're not listening!
RUSH: Yeah. Wait, no --
CALLER: They don't care what we say!
RUSH: It's not that they're ignoring us, Nancy. It's that they are looking us in the face and saying, "Screw you."
CALLER: Absolutely.
RUSH: They're not ignoring us. They are insulting us. They are telling us that we don't count. They are telling us, "Whatever the hell you want doesn't matter. They look at us with contempt." They look at us as an obstacle to overcome. They are like many totalitarians: The people are the problem. The people are the obstacle. The Constitution is an obstacle that has to be overcome and they're using trickery and illegality and lawlessness to get this done if they're able to Sunday with the Slaughter solution. You --
CALLER: But, Rush, 46% of the people in the United States are still approving of the job he's doing! Where are these idiot 46%? He should be at 20%. That's what they did to Bush --
RUSH: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. It took 'em --
CALLER: -- who in my estimation, I wish he was back.
RUSH: Wait a second, now. Bush was nowhere near these numbers at this point in his presidency. He was still in the sixties. It took --
CALLER: Oh, I know, but at the end --
RUSH: Wait a second, now! Wait. It took them five years to get Bush into the thirties. At this rate we'll have Obama in the thirties by August.
CALLER: He should be in the twenties now. Don't they see?
RUSH: Well, "should be" and "will be" are two different things, and you have to understand: It's still honeymoon time for a lot of people. He's the president. There are some people who are just going to say they like the job he's doing because they're afraid to tell a pollster anything other than that because he's black. They don't want a pollster to think they're racist. There's all kinds of stuff that factors into this. What you have to understand is that you are in the vast majority of people in this country. You are as frustrated, and you have as many millions and millions of Americans who are as frustrated as you, who are asking: "Who the hell is Tom Hanks and why do we care?" and, "Who the hell is actress A, B, C, and D? Why do we care?" and, "Who is Chris Matthews and why do we care whoever is?"
CALLER: But they have a platform.
RUSH: Why do we care?
CALLER: They have a platform.
RUSH: Well, we don't care. The Cartoon Network has a larger audience than MSNBC and CNN combined! People aren't watching them, Nancy. We are winning this except our obstacle is we have a bunch of statist, tyranny-devoted totalitarians that we're fighting here, who don't care about the democratic process or that this is a representative republic.
CALLER: They have a soapbox, and so does... You know (TV channels) two, four, five, seven, they got him elected. They are the ones. Those idiots on Saturday Night Live that made fun of Sarah Palin. Every time somebody says to me, "Sarah Palin is an airhead. She's stupid," I say, "Tell me one stupid thing she said."
RUSH: (groans).
CALLER: They can't say anything. They watched Saturday Night Live and Tina Fey. They listened to Tina Fey and equated that with Sarah Palin. Nobody can tell me one stupid thing she said, and I say to them, "You're telling me she can't do a better job than Obama is doing?" I mean, I look at people and say, "Tell me what stupid thing she said." On the economy, why aren't we drilling for oil? Do you know how much money we could save if we drilled for oil in Alaska? All that money we wouldn't have to pay Saudi Arabia
RUSH: All right. All right, all right. Why don't you try to answer just one of these questions for me? Why --
CALLER: I know why. It's all political. Why did he send $2.2 billion to Brazil and let them drill to oil? It's because George Soros gave money to his campaign and he owes money.
RUSH: All right.
CALLER: Oh, I know what's going on but you can't talk people into it. I'm arguing in the post office and some idiot kid says to me "Halliburton." I said, "If I hear that name one more time..." I'm just I have almost gone to jail. I tell my nephew, who's a police officer, "Tom, get ready to bail me out," because I'm standing in the post office, and I said something, and then some idiot turns around and says, "Oh, Halliburton." I said, "Oh, PUH-leez with the Halliburton! Let it go." I said, "Do you know that Obama's sent $2.2 billion to Brazil to drill for oil off the coast of Brazil because his friend George Soros owns a company?"
RUSH: Yeah, but why?
CALLER: Most people don't know that. They have buzzwords.
RUSH: Why? I want you to dig deep.
CALLER: Because the media isn't reporting it.
RUSH: No, no, no, no, no.
CALLER: None of the stations is honest.
RUSH: Why? No, no, no, no. No, no. Why is Obama doing all these destructive things? Why?
CALLER: Because he wants to ruin the country.
RUSH: Okay!
CALLER: He wants to bring us down. He wants a world economy because he's a communist. I'm sorry, but he's a communist.
RUSH: What's your favorite pasta dish?
CALLER: Umm, I guess I like manicotti best. Any time you're in New Jersey, give me a call. I'll make you a nice Italian dinner.
RUSH: Thank you, Nancy. I appreciate your call.
CALLER: I make it homemade!
RUSH: (laughs) I can't wait. I'd love that. Thanks so much.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, this lady Nancy that called from New Jersey, Nancy exemplifies what is about to boil over and boil over outside people's homes. She said that inside her home, but she's not far from taking it outside her home if you get my drift, and this is happening all over the country. Nancy, I want to answer your question, I didn't want to interrupt you, why do 46% of the people still approve of Obama? It's about the percentage of people that get government benefits. About 46% of the people get food stamps, welfare, unemployment compensation, whatever, 46% of the people get some kind of government assistance, and a lot of them, as you know, we've had 'em on this show, associate it personally with Obama, from his stash, and about 25 to 30% are paying for that 46%.
But there's a lesson here, and I would be remiss if I did not teach it to you. Nancy's call, all of this anger, all of this frustration, all of this "I can't take it anymore" is what happens when Republicans decide to teach Republicans a lesson. All of you who are mad now, you were mad back in 2006, Republicans were too big spenders, they were no different than the Democrats, you wanted to teach Republicans a lesson, there was no difference in the two parties, and so the Democrats won the House, Obama won the White House two years later, this is what happens when you teach Republicans a lesson, when you think there's purity in throwing your own guys out. This notion that there's no difference between the parties, do you think that's true now? Do you think there's really no difference between the two parties? Do you think any of this would be going on? Even with McCain, do you think we'd be doing this kind of process to get national health care even if McCain had been elected? Nope. No way.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: John on Route 81 in New York, great to have you on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hey, thank you for taking my call.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: Yeah, I was traveling back to Virginia. I just elected about a month-and-a-half ago to move my family back to Virginia from New York, we're voting with our feet. Not against our will, we'd rather stay, this is where we grew up, but there's not really any choice, you know, I'm a small business guy, self-employed guy and we just finally had to say uncle, and what I really wanted to say is if the rest of the country really wants to have a regulated health care situation similar to that we have in New York and all that goes with it, the high cost of health insurance and the incredibly low benefits, then all they have to do is support this health care reform and that's exactly what they'll get.
RUSH: Well, in fact, if you go to Massachusetts, I got a story right here in the Boston Globe, more cuts loom as state faces $295 million in red ink. There is rising demand for Massachusetts University care, because people think it's free, and people are using it for things it was never intended, average, run-of-the-mill, I got a cold.
END TRANSCRIPT
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This is Nancy in Incline Village, Nevada. It's great to have you, Nancy. Hi.
CALLER: Hi. How are you today?
RUSH: Very well. Thank you.
CALLER: I'm calling about Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution. The House Republicans can still stop this health care bill right through the Constitution. Section 5 provides that "the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the journal." In other words, the Republicans can require that there be an up or down, recorded vote on the health care bill regardless of the Slaughter rule.
RUSH: So you're talking about the Senate bill that they're trying to "deem" to have passed. You're saying the Republicans can demand with 20% a vote, up or down, on the Senate bill?
CALLER: Yes, sir, they can. I called my House representative to ask him to do this and I was told that the House leadership is taking the position that another section supersedes this. The leadership is quoting also Article I, Section 5, of the Constitution which provides each House may determine the rules of its proceedings. But I am a retired attorney. I worked for the Department of Justice for many years. I practiced appellate law. I was involved in a lot of cases regarding statutory and constitutional interpretation, and I can tell you that they're wrong. There's a general rule, a statutory interpretation which provides that a specific section of the law will overrule a general section and will control the issue. Therefore, this specific section of Article I, Section 5 -- which says you can require an up-or-down vote -- in this case is going to trump the general part, which says that they get to make their own rules.
RUSH: Well, now, have you explained this to them as authoritatively as you just have to me and my audience?
CALLER: Well, yes. I tried to tell them that, and they said, "Well, the House leadership is taking this position." If the congressional leadership is taking this position, are we going to take Nancy Pelosi's word for what the Constitution says, when John Boehner and the Republicans can get out there and actually require a vote?
RUSH: I understand, but they did get a vote on whether or not the Slaughter solution will be used at all, and they shot that down, of course. That got 30 minutes of debate on that. That vote was mincemeat.
CALLER: Yes, but that's a different legal issue. If they pass a law where the Republicans have requested an up-or-down vote -- or any 20% of the House request an up-or-down vote -- the law wouldn't be voidable. It would be void. It would be illegal and unenforceable. And the reason I'm calling I tried to call my own representative. I don't feel like the word got through and the hope the Republican House is listening and that they will not a Nancy Pelosi's word on this and that they will actually make a formal request under Article I, Section 5.
RUSH: Run me through it again because this is news to me. Article 1, section 5, what does somebody...? I guess you're talking about Boehner, but any Republican could do what?
CALLER: Anyone who can get together 20% of House membership can require an up-or-down vote because it does say "the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the journal." They can force the nays to be taken down and the up-and-down vote to be given.
RUSH: Hmm. I am, of course, not a constitutional scholar nor constitutional lawyer, and I'm going to have to defer to people who are. But you were an assistant US attorney, Department of Justice?
CALLER: Was an assistant US attorney. I was a chief assistant US attorney. I worked in appellate law, specifically, for several years. I also served as the deputy assistant secretary for law enforcement at the Treasury department.
RUSH: Huh. Okay. Impressive. I'm glad you got through. I really am, because they are listening. They do listen. There is the cowed factor with Pelosi, there's no question, in more ways than one.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Constitutional scholars are, at this moment, looking into this. I got ahold of F. Lee Levin. Andy McCarthy is also looking into this. That was a fascinating a lady in Incline Village, Nevada. Her name was Nancy. Are you there, Flee?
MARK LEVIN: I'm here, boss.
RUSH: All right. Article I, Section 5. It was all Greek to me in terms of procedure. What was she actually suggesting?
MARK LEVIN: Well, she's saying that 20% of the members can demand that a vote be taken or the bill. Now, let me ask you something: If that were the case don't you think the Republicans would have done that already?
RUSH: I don't know. I'm literally... When I say, "It's Greek to me," it's Greek to me.
MARK LEVIN: No. That's why you have a House rules committee and the House rules committee makes determinations over what bills will be voted on and what bills will come to the floor and what amendments there will be. I mean, you can call for a voice vote -- yays and nays -- on a bill that's presented to the House. But 20% can't force a bill to come out and be voted on.
RUSH: So she's mistaken or is she just...?
MARK LEVIN: Well, I believe she's mistaken, but let's pretend that she's right.
RUSH: All right, let's. Yeah, go at it that way because a lot of people are fired up about this.
MARK LEVIN: All right. Let's suggest that she's right and you go into court, and what do you say in court? You say, "Well, 20% of them wanted to vote on this bill and they couldn't," which I don't think that's the way that it works. If I'm wrong, then we have 200 years of mistakes going, but 20% of the members say this needs to come to a vote, and so the court says, "So what? That's their problem. They didn't do it. That's not our problem. What do you want us to do?" So, in other words: What's the relief?
RUSH: Wait a minute. You've already lost me on going to court. The way I understand what she's saying is let's just say Boehner can say if he's got 20% of the House, "We want you to vote on the Senate bill."
MARK LEVIN: Yeah, but I'm saying it doesn't work that way. They can say, "We want a yea-or-nay vote," and you hear them do it on the floor: "I want to hear the roll call. I want to hear the yeas or nays, not just a voice vote. We want to take the names down on a particular bill that's before the House." So we want yeas or nays on reconciliation you'll get it but we can't have yeas or nays on a bill that the rules committee hasn't presented to the floor.
RUSH: Ah, okay, because the Senate bill is technically not a bill. They're "deeming" it to be passed so it's not really a bill. They're pretending it doesn't exist?
MARK LEVIN: That's correct. So, look, there's no easy way around this. I'm getting callers to my show with 4,000 ideas, everything from amending the Constitution... That rule there simply means, and how it's been practiced traditionally over the last 200 some years is, a member can get on the floor and say, "Take down the yeas or nays," or "We want to hear the votes," or, "Give me a roll call on that," and they usually say okay, because 20% is not hard to get to get that done. But it's not that 20% can force a bill to the floor, and that's what you would be doing, you would be saying 20% say, "No, we want a vote on the Senate bill, up or down," and I know I'm right about this.
RUSH: But I remember her saying, though, that in her opinion the rules committee ruling would not take precedent.
MARK LEVIN: But she's misreading the Constitution. That's not how it works. It's not a question of precedent if it doesn't work that way. Twenty percent of the House members can't call up a bill. Twenty percent of them can demand a vote on a bill that's called up.
RUSH: And the only bill is the Slaughter solution, the reconciliation amendment.
MARK LEVIN: Well, that's exactly why they're doing it this way.
RUSH: Right. Okay. So the Senate bill can be obviated, avoided, and pretend it doesn't exist at all costs.
MARK LEVIN: Yeah, and, you know, they have all kinds of smart people Republican parliamentarian types on Capitol Hill, and I can assure you that if it was as easy as that caller just said it would have been done already.
RUSH: Okay. Nevertheless, a lot of interest been sparked on this, and I appreciate you trying to sort it out.
MARK LEVIN: That's good because we need to kick ass and stop this.
RUSH: Well, I know, and it's all about Sunday. It's all about Sunday when the Senate bill. Thanks for the clarification on this, Flee.
MARK LEVIN: All right. God bless.
RUSH: Mark R. Levin of the Landmark Legal Foundation. He was the chief of staff to Ed Meese as attorney general during the Reagan administration, and stopping the bill is exactly what this is all about.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, in particular Nancy from Incline Village in Nevada, I'm not trying to referee an argument here and say anybody's right or wrong. I'm very appreciative of Nancy's call. I'm very appreciative of her effort here to find a way to stop this, and I think everybody who is looking into this in any way, shape, manner, or form is to be applauded. I appreciate her calling in here and we got a lot of people that are looking at this. It does appear that you can't call for an up-or-down vote on a bill that doesn't exist and right now in the House the Senate bill doesn't exist, that's what this is all about. We got a Senate bill, everybody knows we're voting on the Senate bill, but they're hiding it. They're using reconciliation. We could call for an up-and-down vote on that, which is what they want, when they got the votes, but you can't call for a vote on a bill that hasn't been presented and the Senate bill hasn't been presented and it's not going to be presented.
We didn't put Mark on to knock down Nancy. I don't want anybody thinking that. Here at the EIB Network we're always trying to get to the truth and when I don't understand it I'm not going to pretend I do and act like I understand it, I'm going to find out people that know more about it than I do and have them explain it to you, and that's what it is.
END TRANSCRIPT
Have you had luck getting through?
I haven’t gotten through to anyone.
Even had emails bounced back.
All this is good, but I’d would love to talk to someone.
I’ve called my congressman, Mollohan, twice. After a couple of tries I got through today. The staffer answering the phone was obviously rattled. I told her to give my thanks to Mollohan for switching his vote to no. She came unglued. Where did you see that? I said a website I couldn’t recall.
He’s still supposedly undecided. With Rahall a no, Mollohan is in a real bind.
You are fortunate. I can’t get through.
Still working on emails.
“The American people are being screwed royally by the President of the United States. There’s no other way to put it. We’re being screwed royally. The big shaft. We are being bludgeoned. This is banana republic-type stuff. This is what happens in dictatorships. This is tyranny. If you ever wondered what it looks like, close up, this is it.”
You know...Rush doesn’t take this stuff lightly. He would NEVER say this if it weren’t true...and I listened to him all through the Clinton years. He was NEVER this adamant that a President was out to destroy us as he is these days. Clinton was a charming clown. Just a preoccupied horndog for the most part! He wasn’t capable of the destruction that 0bama is bringing to us...in 14 months! FOURTEEN MONTHS!
I think we’re in a lot more trouble than we can ever imagine...
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.
