Skip to comments.RUSH IN A HURRY -- Obama Seeks to Overthrow the American Way of Life
Posted on 03/10/2010 3:51:44 PM PST by GOP_Lady
On Today's Show...
March 10, 2010
The Rush Limbaugh Show® Premiere Radio Networks © All Rights Reserved, 2010.
Premiere Radio Networks, Inc. 15260 Ventura Blvd. Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
"Hugo Chavez has taken over two sugar mills. He's a piker compared to Obama!
Obama has taken over two of the largest companies in the world, General Motors and Chrysler."
"David Letterman spent ten minutes making fun of Rahm Emanuel last night. This kind of stuff just doesn't happen."
"The sole intention of the Obama administration is to destroy private health insurance.
Why else would they be trying to force insurance companies to take on preconditions?"
"What deadline has Obama met? Gitmo is still open. We're still in Iraq. We've ramped it up in Afghanistan."
"Rahm's up there trying to twist arms and whatever other body parts he can get a hold of in these meetings
with Democrats on Capitol Hill, and March 18th is not possible because they don't have the votes."
"You House Democrats, you Bart Stupaks, you Blue Dogs, you yellow dogs, you lapdogs, you Chihuahuas, if President Obama
would ambush Supreme Court justices at the State of the Union in their faces, what do you think he would do to you?"
"At some point there is going to be a frustration that overwhelms our young president.
He's going to make a mistake during an occasion when there is no prompter, and he is going to let fly his anger and his intent."
"Hillary's biggest supporters when she ran were Jewish females.
Do you think Hillary's going to go in there and dump on the Israelis and praise the Palestinians if she's going to run for president?
Ain't no way, folks."
"At some point the fines for not having insurance will be larger than what insurance premiums would be."
"The patient's ability to pay is not a factor in the pricing, and so the market's
been blown up to smithereens here, and none of it makes any sense.
And that's why there's such a sense of entitlement to health care on the part of many, many people."
"Larry King Live has become a total train wreck.
People sometimes go to train tracks to watch a train wreck, they go to auto races to watch a crash,
and here we got Larry King every night with one."
"If this Obamacare bill passes -- in any way, shape, manner, or form -- no matter what they do,
there will be eventually and ultimately federal funding for abortions, taxpayer-funded abortions."
"One of the great, great talents I have is making the complex understandable."
"Those of you who are pro-lifers, understand something:
The overall objective here is to kill the bill, not get a bill passed that strips funding for abortion.
This bill is a disaster even if they strip federal funding for abortion out of it."
"They can't get the Obama agenda done with 60 seats in the Senate and a vast majority in the House.
They can't get it done. For every idiot that is for the Obama plan, there are two informed people against it."
"There is an informed public here being polled that understands that
no government program ever costs less than what it says.
It always costs more, and it never delivers what it promises."
"Obama is running against the will of the American people.
He, Axelrod, that idiot Gibbs, Rahm, and Plouffe, they're isolated now.
They're like those polar bears on a melting glacier --
and they can't swim 60 miles like polar bears can."
"If the election were today, Obama would be gone and so would the Democrats.
That is why he and his flunkies have become so defiant."
"The very foundations, the institutions, the principles that founded and led to this country
being the greatest nation ever are under daily assault by this administration on purpose."
"Let's just admit it: The nation made a horrible mistake in electing Barack Obama.
Not us, of course. Not us.
The nation at large made a huge mistake, and the majority of them know it."
"The vast majority of the people of this country want no part of what this administration has offered or has done."
"I would much rather have Liz Cheney and anybody she knows at the Department of Justice as attorney general.
I'd much rather have her at the State Department. I'd much rather have her in the White House or anywhere, than any of these people."
"People say, 'Well, Sarah Palin, she's so stupid!' Uh, Obama is a piercing light of intelligence?"
"The left will always tell us who scares the hell out of 'em, and right now Liz Cheney scares the hell out of them.
Paul Ryan, they're going after him, too -- and they've been going after Sarah Palin."
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.
RUSH: Yeah, folks, it is a delight to watch the implosion of the Democrat Party. It is a delight to watch the fact that the Democrat Party is a gulag being exposed. It is a delight to just watch all of the idiocy. Nancy Pelosi, we've got the sound bite coming up: "We have to pass the Senate bill so people will know what's in it." Somebody said that's like you gotta buy the house to get a tour. I think it was Ed Morrissey. I'm not sure who said it. Massa's a train wreck, and Rahm Emanuel is a train wreck. David Letterman spent ten minutes making fun of Rahm Emanuel last night. This kind of stuff just doesn't happen.
RUSH: We have now from a relentlessly silver lining Associated Press: "Americans have come to detest Congress ever more deeply as it nears the end of a nasty fight over health care. But more than half still back President Barack Obama, a bright spot for a Democratic Party counting on its leader to help stave off --" what a joke! The headline of this story is: "Obama More Popular than Congress." What the real headline ought to be when the read the story is: "Congress Hated More than Obama is Hated." And he's down to 43% approval in Rasmussen. It's the lowest he's ever been, the highest the Rasmussen super approval, disapproval index is.
"The latest Associated Press-GfK poll found that fewer people approve of Congress than at any point in Obama's presidency. Support has dropped significantly since January to a dismal 22 percent as the health care debate has roiled Capitol Hill." Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying we're out of the woods with these people. It's just a delight to see all of this kind of stuff happen. Here, for example, Kathleen Sebelius, again from a very approving Associated Press: "The head of the Health and Human Services Department is sketching out a stark choice for the nation's insurers: oppose reform and eventually lose customers, or work with the Obama administration to improve the legislation.
Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told health insurers Wednesday that if overhaul fails, premiums will continue to rise and employers will cancel coverage." All that by design, by the way. "She said the industry may make money in the short term, but it won't work for Americans and it eventually won't help insurers."
Never mind that, as we have previously pointed out, the sole intention of the Obama administration is to destroy private health insurance. Why else would they be trying to force insurance companies to take on preconditions? That means that many, if not most people will happily wait until they desperately need insurance coverage for an illness or accident before they resort to buying any, and Obamacare demands that the insurance company sell it to them. Well, that's not even insurance. That's private sector welfare and they can't stay in business doing that, which is the purpose, it is the design. And now this deadline, don't you love this. The argument over the deadline out there, ladies and gentlemen, a disconnect. This is from The Hill newspaper: "House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and the White House on Tuesday engaged in a rare public dispute over when healthcare reform will be voted on. ... Hoyer on Tuesday morning suggested the March 18 deadline recently set by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs --" Does anybody believe Gibbs is setting deadlines? Does anybody really believe that, that Gibbs is setting deadlines? This is an Obama deadline.
At any rate. That deadline of March 18th is not endorsed by congressional leaders, Steny Hoyer said. "'None of us have mentioned the 18th other than Mr. Gibbs,' Hoyer told reporters when asked if March 18 was still a 'viable' date for the House to vote on the Senate bill. ... Gibbs didnt back down Tuesday afternoon, saying there 'seems to be a disconnect' between Congress and the White House before stopping himself to add, 'This was information I was given based on conversations that people had in this building with Capitol Hill.'" So now they're arguing about the deadline. But they don't have the votes to get this done by March the 18th, which is just eight days from now. They do not have the votes for this. Now, they want to get this done by March 18th. Why do you think they want to get it done by March 18th? I'll tell you why they want to get it done by March 18th.
By the way, I think this is all bogus, but this is the timeline theory, this is the story. They want the House to pass the Senate bill by a week from tomorrow. Then the Senate will have a week or so for reconciliation and to be able to get it all done and sent to Obama before everybody leaves on the Passover-Easter break. They're all worried that when these clowns head out of town to go back home for the Passover-Easter break they're going to catch hell from constituents, and it's going to be like the August recess was last year, town halls, all kinds of public protests and they're really saying, "If we doesn't get it done here --" and this is about five different dates that they have said, "If we don't get it done by X, it's gone." Now it's, "If we don't get it done by March 18th, it's dead." And Hoyer said, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Now, Obama has told us that health care reform is important, 45,000 people die from lack of insurance every year. Obama has told us this. I don't forget these things, ladies and gentlemen. Obama and some Democrats over the course of this debate, 45,000 people a year, of course a bogus number, but that's what they're saying. Forty-five hundred Americans die from lack of insurance every year. But it's not more important than Congress going on another vacation on time. They haven't had a vacation since last month. They gotta have another vacation, the Passover-Easter break. And passing health care is not more important than their vacation even though 45,000 Americans every year are dying from lack of insurance. So really, really important stuff here, like voting for a bill, no way that they're going to be held to a deadline. Of course Obama's never met a deadline either. He has yet to meet any of his own deadlines. Gitmo is still open. We're still in Iraq. We've ramped it up in Afghanistan. What deadline has Obama met? He's got that lackey Gibbs out there slapping down Hoyer and all these other guys.
In fact, I'm told that Pelosi, in a meeting with Rahm Emanuel said, "Look, butt boy, back off." Didn't say butt boy, "Look little naked guy, there's not going to be a deadline of March 18th." Now, Rahm's up there trying to twist arms and whatever other body parts he can get a hold of in these meetings with Democrats in Capitol Hill, and March 18th is not possible because they don't have the votes. They're nowhere near it, folks. They haven't been anywhere near it all year. It is a smoke screen that they are as close as they are. Drudge has a great timeline on his page today about all of these deadlines, what was said at these deadlines.
RUSH: So here's the timeline on Drudge. Oh, speaking of Drudge, I meant to mention this yesterday but we were loaded and I didn't get to it. Did you see this? The Senate has sent out e-mails to all of its staff aides, senators, everybody working there not to use the Drudge Report. Don't go there because all kinds of viruses are coming on their computers from the Drudge Report. Which, of course, is BS. There are no viruses whatsoever. These people are so stupid! That's like saying, "Don't think pink." What are you thinking right now? "Don't go to Drudge? Oh, my God, what's on Drudge? Let's go there and see." They don't want what's on Drudge to be seen, and it's why F. Chuck Todd is all mad at Drudge. What a whimpering, sniveling little whiner.
Chuck Todd of NBC News was standing in front of the White House the other day bemoaning what's happened to journalism. "Just because it's on Drudge doesn't mean it's a story." These guys are so ticked off. They used to have a monopoly, and one of the biggest sources of their power was determining what you did not see, what news you did not know, what things that were happening you were not told. So there's an alternative media out there, and I take a look at what's happening to these guys. The cable channel that F. Chuck Todd works for, nobody watches it. CBS, NBC, ABC, New York Times, take a look at what's happening: Downsizing, layoffs, ad revenue down, pages printed down, all of this stuff, and it's all content related. It's content, content, content. So they're trying to put a genie back in the bottle and whining and sniveling about it. How unbecoming! A member of the State-Controlled Media to complain about a goo with a Web page on the internet.
"Just because it's on Drudge doesn't mean it's a story." See, that's the crux of it. They don't have the power to shape news. You know, some of you people whine and moan about the media. If the media landscape were as it was in 1988 and prior, do you realize health care woulda passed last August? And most of you would have loved it? Because all that you would have heard about it was what the people like F. Chuck Todd and all these others in the mainstream media are saying and it woulda passed because they love Obama and it's great for the country. Had there not been an alternative media, had there not been the opportunity for the alternative media to survive, thrive, and save democracy and our representative republic, this thing woulda passed last August. And that's what they're ticked off about. They don't have the power to get these kinds of things done.
They can't get the Obama agenda done with 60 seats in the Senate and a vast majority in the House. They can't get it done -- and the State-Controlled Media, I'd be mad if I were them, too. Michael Barone. Well, let's stick with Drudge here in this timeline. His question is: "'End' of the 'End Game' or 'The End'? -- Today: "Obama Pushing on Health Care End Game" (AP). July 28: 'Healthcare Endgame on Capitol Hill' (Reuters). August 21: 'Analysis: Health Care Endgame Near But Uncertain' (AP). October 14: 'Senate, Administration Begin Healthcare Endgame as Dem Leaders Express Unity' (Hill). October 25: 'Senators Say Health Care Bill Endgame is in Sight' (Politico). October 27: 'End Game: So When Will Health Care Really Happen?' (TPM). October 30: 'Health Reform Inches Closer to Endgame' (Washington Post). November 23: 'The Health Care Endgame' (NPR)."
So since last July 28th we have been talking about the health care "endgame," and here Obama is today pushing the health care endgame. So we have a template. We have a storyline that they're simply trying to move forward with no reporting, no analysis, no nothing, just the horse race or political aspects of this. Michael Barone, however, writing of this failure today in the Washington Examiner: "Dems are Stuck with a Mess of Their Own Making." Basically there's a fork in the road out there for the Democrats, both sides lead to failure. Both roads lead to failure. Here's the pull quote from Barone's piece: "It's beginning to look like the goal of health care legislation was a bridge too far. There's a reason it's hard to pass unpopular legislation on party-line votes. It's not the Senate rules. It's called democracy. ... There's a lively debate going on in the blogosphere and the press about whether Democrats would be better off passing or not passing a health care bill. Some liberals claim that Democrats would be better off passing a bill, any bill, even if it's unpopular with the general electorate. The idea is to energize the Democratic base, currently demoralized by the prospects of failure." A yearlong failure, I might add. "Current polls show Democrats far less enthusiastic and far less likely to vote; passing a law might change that. Others, mostly conservatives but also some liberals speaking privately, figure that Democrats would be better off letting the issue drop. Back in January, Barack Obama said he would emphasize 'jobs, jobs, jobs,' currently a higher priority for voters than health care. By November, these [people] hope voters will have forgotten about health care and may be impressed by Democratic economic policies."
They can't! The Democrat economic policies are destructive, Mr. Barone. There's no way anybody's going to be -- what? -- "impressed by Democratic economic policies." We're watching Democrat economic policies. It's called destruction of the private sector. It's called massive debt that nobody's ever going to be able to pay back. It's called deficits. It's called redistribution of wealth. It's called destroying the US middle class!
That's Democrat economic policies. Barone says, "I'm inclined to think both sides are wrong. They both assume that there exists some optimum course that will produce happy results. But sometimes in politics there is no course that leads to success. Disaster lies ahead whatever you do," and that's to the fork-in-the-road analogy where failure awaits at the end of whatever road that you take. "It's beginning to look like the goal of health care legislation was a bridge too far. There's a reason it's hard to pass unpopular legislation on party-line votes. It's not the Senate rules. It's called democracy." In the Wall Street Journal today, we have Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen, a former Clinton pollster. He's on TV all the time. In fact, he's on Fox all the time. I'm surprised they haven't drummed him out of the Democrat Party. But Doug Schoen's over there all the time. He's a Democrat pollster writing with Rasmussen here: "Why Obama Can't Move the Health Care Numbers," and basically what their story says is that for every idiot that is for the Obama plan, there are two informed people against it.
"One of the more amazing aspects of the health-care debate is how steady public opinion has remained. Despite repeated and intense sales efforts by the president and his allies in Congress," dwindling, I might add, "most Americans consistently oppose the plan that has become the centerpiece of this legislative season. In 15 consecutive Rasmussen Reports polls conducted over the past four months, the percentage of Americans that oppose the plan has stayed between 52% and 58%. The number in favor has held steady between 38% and 44%. ... For every person who strongly favors it" who is the idiot "two are strongly opposed." They are the informed. So there are all kinds of reasons to be happy with the news today, folks. All kinds of reasons. The informed outnumber the idiots, the New Media -- and you -- are now preventing F. Chuck Todd and his cronies in the mainstream media from being able to monopolize this and get passed for Obama whatever they want.
Then the question: "Why can't the president move the numbers? One reason may be that he keeps talking about details of the proposal while voters are looking at the issue in a broader context. ... But the bigger problem is that people simply don't trust the official projections." Hallelujah! By gosh, folks, if this is actually true, big progress. "People in Washington may live and die by the pronouncements of the Congressional Budget Office, but 81% of voters say it's likely the plan will end up costing more than projected. Only 10% say the official numbers are likely to be on target." Do you realize how breathtakingly profound this is? It means that there is an informed public here being polled that understands that no government program ever costs less than what it says. It always costs more, and it never delivers what it promises.
I'm not going to say this is a permanent realization. But on this instance it is. "The reason President Obama can't move the numbers and build public support is because the fundamentals are stacked against him. Most voters believe the current plan will harm the economy, cost more than projected..." Remember, a Democrat pollster helped write this piece. "Most voters believe the current plan will harm the economy, cost more than projected, raise the cost of care, and lead to higher middle-class taxes. That's a tough sell when the economy is hurting and people want reform to lower the cost of care. It's also a tough sell for a president who won an election by promising tax cuts for 95% of all Americans." So we're left to what we always have known exists: Obama is running against the will of the American people. He and Axelrod and idiot Gibbs, who else up there, Rahm and Fluff, Plouffe, whoever. They're isolated now. They're like those polar bears on a melting glacier that's broken off and they're just floating further and further away from safety. The problem is they can't swim 60 miles like polar bears can.
|Read the Background Material...||
| Newsbusters: David Letterman: 'Top Ten Signs Rahm Emanuel Is Nuts'
Sweetness & Light: AP: Obama Is Less Hated Than Congress
U.S. News & World Report: Pelosi: Pass Health Reform So You Can Find Out What's In It
AP: HHS Sebelius Exhorts Insurers to Get on Board
The Hill: Disconnect: Gibbs, Hoyer Dispute Vote
Washington Examiner: Dems Are Stuck With a Mess of Their Own Making - Michael Barone
Wall Street Journal: Why Obama Can't Move the Health-Care Numbers - Rasmussen & Schoen
RCP: The Democrats' Pickett's Charge on Health Care - Dick Morris
OBAMA: My cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill which reduces most people's premiums.
RUSH: This morning on the Senate floor here is Senator Dick Durbin speaking.
DURBIN: Anyone who would stand before you and say, "Well, if you pass health care reform next year's health care premiums are going down," I don't think is telling the truth.
RUSH: Dick Durbin has just called President Obama a liar. He just called him a liar. The rest of Durbin's comment: "Nobody ever said we're going to bring the rates down. What we're going to do is slow the rate of growth." (laughing) So his own party is under cutting President Obama.
|Read the Background Material...||
| HotAir: Durbin: Of Course Premiums Will Still Go Up With ObamaCare
RUSH: here from the WeeklyStandard.com by John McCormack: "Stupak: There's No Deal, and I Won't Agree to a Promise to Fix the Bill in the Future." Now, "Stupak said that White House officials are 'trying to get face time with members to convince them to vote for a bill that no one has seen in writing.'"
So they are working on something other than the Senate bill, 'cause they know that's a nonstarter in the House. So they're working on something out there but nobody's seen it. And Stupak's saying, "I'm going to see it first, I'm not going to accept your promises." Now, Bart's still a Democrat. And Democrats are Democrats first at the end of the day. "'The point I was trying to make' by relaying the opera story, Stupak said, 'is that the White House is pulling out all of the stops trying to get members to commit to voting for health care. I continue to say to the White House: Put forth your proposal in writing so that members can see it. No member is so weak on this issue that just because they got to go to the opera theyre going to vote for health care.' Stupak emphasized that his coalition of pro-life Democrats is sticking together: 'My numbers remain firm at 12. These are 12 who voted for it [in November] who will not vote for it unless we resolve this issue.'"
Now, there's a big trick, there is a huge trick that is being planned in the Senate regarding abortion to try to satisfy Stupak and his guys, and I have to say the Republicans have discovered the trick, and they're not going to fall for it. The trick -- and I'll explain this in greater detail when we come back -- but the trick was to get Republicans to go along with stripping any federal funding for abortion in the Senate bill during reconciliation, and the Republicans would go for that but Republicans, oh, pro-lifers out there vote for Republicans, and the Republicans said, "Hey, hey, hey, hey, we're not going to carry your water. This is your bill. If you want to strip abortion funding out, you're on your own, we ain't doing it for you." Now, that's gutsy because they're running the risk a lot of pro-life groups are going to see the Republicans refusing to strip federal funding from the Senate bill, "Whoa, whoa, whoa wait a minute here. I thought you Republicans were pro-lifers."
This is going to be an interesting test because the genuine pro-life groups out there are going to understand what's going on. The objective is to defeat health care, not come up with a health care bill that does not have federal funding for abortion. The objective is to wipe this out. The objective is to stop it. Not to end up with a bill that Democrats will sign and give to Obama and the only way to do that is to not help them strip the abortion funding out of the Senate bill. The Republicans are not going to do that. Am I making myself clear on this? Do you understand? I'm willing to say it two or three times because this is going to be one of those times where the Republicans in the Senate are going to go against their core belief, they're gonna look like they are because the real pro-life groups know that at the end of the day there's going to be federal funding for abortion if this thing passes. It's going to get added at some point down the line. The objective is to make sure this thing doesn't go any further than where it is right now, and the Republicans are not going to help the Democrats satisfy Stupak. It's just that simple. At least that's what they're saying now.
RUSH: All right, let me try to explain this again here, because if you're hearing this for the first time it may sound a little convoluted. One of the great, great talents I have is making the complex understandable. So let's start at the beginning. Bart Stupak (Democrat-Michigan) House of Representatives is pro-life. The only thing Stupak objects to in all of this Obamacare garbage is the fact that abortions are federally funded in the Senate bill. Stupak says he has 12 votes to vote against Obamacare, the Senate bill, unless the federal funding for abortion is taken out of it. Now, the Democrats in the Senate don't want abortion taken out of it (they put it in there because they like it) and most of the Democrats in the House want federal funding for abortions.
If this passes -- in any way, shape, manner, or form -- no matter what they do, there will be eventually and ultimately federal funding for abortions, taxpayer-funded abortions in Obamacare. So if there is reconciliation... Now remember, Stupak is saying that he hasn't seen a bill, meaning they're making promises to him that the abortion funding will be stripped out of it but he hasn't seen it in writing. The reason he hasn't is because reconciliation hasn't begun, and there's still a genuine question as to whether or not there will ever be reconciliation. See, the argument is they're trying to convince Stupak they're going to make him happy but they're not showing him anything in writing and he's demanding it in writing.
There is nothing to show him. So if -- if, if -- we get to reconciliation, the Senate Republicans have announced a strategy to block any effort the Democrats make to take abortion funding out of it. This is going to incur the wrath of some pro-life groups if they're not up to speed on this, and I hope the Senate Republican leadership takes some steps behind the scenes to explain what's going on here. But see, the objective here is not -- and for those of you who are pro-lifers, understand something: The overall objective here is to kill the bill, not get a bill passed that strips funding for abortion. This bill is a disaster even if they strip federal funding for abortion out of it. So the objective here is to kill it. The objective is to send this bill packing yet again never, ever to be heard from again.
Now the only way that Stupak, as far as what he's saying, can be mollified is if he sees something in writing in the reconciliation pack that says, "Yep, federal funding for abortion is coming out of there." So if we go to reconciliation, there will be an effort by the Democrats to strip abortion funding from the bill, and the Republicans' strategy is to oppose and stop and stop any such effort. What the Republicans are going to do to facilitate this in reconciliation (and remember this is this "budget reconciliation") is they'll raise a point of order. This is a procedural effort that is objecting essentially to the reconciliation process.
They're trying to get back to 60 votes to defeat this thing, when the Democrats don't have 60 votes, unless some Republicans join them in stripping federal funding. So the Republicans say, "We're not going to join the Democrats' efforts because we are not going to do the Democrats' dirty work for them. We're not going to be the guys, just because we're thought to be pro-lifers, to make Stupak happy. We're not going to be the guys that take language he doesn't like out of this bill. If the Democrats want to take it out they gotta find a way to do it on their own without us and we're going to invoke a point of order which is going to require them to get 60 votes to do it." Now, holy hell is going to be raised if we get to this point. Again, I'm still not convinced we're going to get to reconciliation. Look, folks, it's very simple.
You Democrats in the Congress gotta ask yourself something: If a president of the United States would ambush a Supreme Court sitting in front of him at a State of the Union speech, if a president of the United States would ambush Supreme Court justices, do you think he would have the slightest compunction in ambushing you either in front of you or behind your back? If this guy is willing to diss the US Supreme Court and the justices who showed up at the State of the Union, don't think you're sacred. So the whole point here is to defeat the bill if it goes to reconciliation. If it gets this far -- I'll be stunned but if it does, this is the strategy -- Democrats are going to have to find a way to take abortion funding, let them make their base mad and let them make Stupak happy. The Republicans are not gonna carry the water for the Democrats to make Stupak happy. That's a big test if we do get to this reconciliation biz.
|Read the Background Material...||
| Weekly Standard: Stupak: There's No Deal, And I Won't Agree to a Promise to Fix the Bill in the Future -John McCormack
ROBERTS: The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court, according to the requirements of protocol, has to sit there expressionless I think is very troubling.
RUSH: It is very troubling, and it shows the profound disrespect for the separation of powers. It shows the thugocracy style of Obama. What the chief justice is referring to here, one branch of government standing up literally surrounding the court, cheering and hollering, is when Obama ripped the court for a decision and Alito, if you were watching, mouthed, "No," you're wrong, that's not right, that's not true, or whatever. All these Democrats standing up and shouting like peasants with pitchforks ready to storm the gates and mall these guys, and I would not be surprised if next year not one member of the Supreme Court shows up for the next State of the Union. And you House Democrats, you Bart Stupaks out there, you Blue Dogs, you yellow dogs, you lapdogs, you Chihuahuas, if President Obama would ambush Supreme Court justices at the State of the Union in their faces, what do you think he would do to you?
You know, I'm really glad that this speech is back in the news. I'm glad the Chief Justice said this.
|Read the Background Material...||
| FOXNews: Roberts: State of the Union Scene 'Very Troubling'
Politico: Roberts Questions SOTU Attendance
I missed yesterday’s, wanted to get an exact quote from the Rove interview.
Norman Podhoretz has written a whole book on it: "Why Are Jews Liberals?" It's too well written to summarize, but one thing is liberals are liberals first, even now. Also driving them is the fact we're not gonna let those conservatives win. We're not going to let those conservatives be perceived to be right, we're not going to have the world realize that we're wrong. We'd rather be wrong and suffer the consequences than have people realize the other side is right. And that's part of it, too. So here you've got Biden, running around snubbing Netanyahu, plugging for the Palestinians, who are not allies. The Israelis are our longtime allies. Where does this leave Mrs. Clinton? Why is Biden doing this? Do not we have a Middle East op -- I thought that was George Mitchell. And don't we have an Afghanistan envoy, that Richard Holbrooke guy. Where is Hillary Clinton? I know she's not getting ready for her daughter's wedding in July yet. Well, yeah, I know she's giving away the Falkland Islands, but, still, she's the Secretary of State, where the hell is she?
Now, let me run through this little progression for you here. One very curious thing is the low-key Hillary Clinton. Biden is out there all but doing her job in the Middle East, Biden is getting all the fawning, approving media, because the media doesn't like Israel either, they're snubbing Israel, they're sending Biden out to do it, his fingerprints are all over it, where's Hillary? Do you also remember Hillary did not attend Obama's State of the Union? She wasn't there. She wanted to be at a random meeting in London that day. She has been super quiet on the health care front. Remember, this was her signature issue back in 1993 and '94. After decades of being in everybody's face on health care, bus tours to all this, where is she on this issue? Where was the last time we saw Hillary? Doing what? What was she doing in Latin America? She was in Chile. She was passing out telephones. She was handing out relief supply telephones to the earthquake victims. The Secretary of State is handing out telephones.
Now, if somebody on the left were thinking of making a run at Obama in 2012 in the primaries, it would have to start later this summer, don't you think? Does anybody think that the Clintons have just kind of said, you know, White House, president, screw it, we'll continue passing out phones here in Chile, and Bill's happy flying off to Haiti, having to go to hospital for more open heart surgery or get the stints in there. Does anybody really think they've given up this idea of the White House? Either she's keeping herself out of the way. It's sort of like Evan Bayh. Evan Bayh's never lost an election. He's a Senator from Indiana. (crying) "I can't get anything done, there's no bipartisanship." No. Nice try, Evan. But if you want to run for president you need to distance yourself as fast as you can from this guy because everybody thinks they made a mistake electing this guy and anybody who is on this guy's side who wants to be president doesn't have a prayer, the proverbal snowball's chance in a devil's spawn of Rahm Emanuel, not one. Same thing for Hillary. If she wants it, she's gotta keep her distance. Hillary's biggest supporters when she ran were Jewish females. You think Hillary's going to go in there and dump on the Israelis and praise the Palestinians if she's going to run for president? Ain't no way, folks.
|Read the Background Material...||
| Financial Times: Israeli Housing Push Hits Peace Moves
AP: Biden: Palestinians Deserve 'Viable' State
Reuters: Visiting Biden Condemns New Israel Settlement Plan
RUSH: The reason that I will never bet against America and make Obama the odds-on favorite to destroy this country with health care is I would like to believe Obama isn't a clever enough thug. Now, I could be wrong about that. But it's ham-handed stuff like what he did to the Supreme Court during the State of the Union speech that gives me hope that Obama will ultimately blow his monument grab. And what's next to fall? He still has pretty high likability. But I have a prediction. I don't know when, I will not predict when but at some point, ladies and gentlemen, there is going to be a frustration that overwhelms our young president. And he's going to make a mistake during an occasion when there is no prompter. And he is going to let fly his anger and his intent. (imitating Obama) "I don't care what you do, I don't care what you think we're gonna change this country, this country is immoral, this country is nonjust, this country has been unfair to people and we're going to change it."
At some point the level of frustration at not being able to get this through by lying, cheating, conniving and so forth is going to lead to a moment. This incident of really ripping into the Supreme Court during the State of the Union is a small indicator of what's possible on this score. So you mark my words. Barack Obama is going to be the final nail in his own political coffin. He's going to hammer it one of these days. This is March 10th, 2010, at about 12:55 p.m. That's when I make the prediction that Obama at one point is going to lose composure and somehow, some way, is going to admit himself what he's really doing and why. And at that point, the likability numbers will start joining the popularity numbers, approval numbers of his policies.
RUSH: Let's just admit it. It is time to fire here straight ahead, pulling no punches. Let's just admit it: The nation made a horrible mistake in electing Barack Obama. Not us, of course. Not us. The nation at large made a huge mistake. Many others know it. People know it, and they regret it and they want to reverse course. The vast majority of the people of this country want no part of what this administration has offered or has done. The problem is we don't get to start fixing this until November with the congressional elections, and even then the Democrats hang on 'til January, even if they lose. Obama, of course, hangs on for another three years or so. Now, President Obama is a loose cannon. He knows he's a mistake, and he knows that a majority of the country know that they made a mistake in electing him. He knows that if the American people could vote up and down or him today they'd throw him out of office.
He knows it. He's ego may not allow him to think of it much but he knows it and Axelrod knows it and David Plouffe knows and Robert Gibbs knows it. They don't care because nothing can happen but they know. What they're doing is saying, "We did it! We fooled 'em," and they know that they've got three years to screw this place up in their image. They have three years now. They also know that they'd throw out his party. If the election were today, Obama would be gone and so would the Democrats. That is why he and his flunkies have become so defiant. That is why they are trying to get their agenda installed before the public can deal with this mistake. It is in this atmosphere that I firmly believe, and I predicted mere moments ago on this very program from behind this (tap, tap) the Golden EIB Microphone... What, did I break a meter in there when I do that? Engineers hate it when you do that (tap, tap) because it pegs the meter and they just don't like it. Even though it doesn't hurt anything, they just don't like seeing the meter being pegged.
At any rate, it is in this defiance and it is in this attitude -- and I know people like this: "You can't touch me!" We're dealing with Bart Simpson here who's just burned down the house, who's saying, "You can't prove it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't touch a thing." Except we've all seen him do it but there's nothing we can do about it. So he's laughing at us. He's laughing at us behind closed doors. He and Michelle (My Belle) they're laughing at us, but they are defiant now and they know they've got three years to get this done. That's why health care, health care, health care today and March 18th. If it's not March 18th, it's going to be March 19th. If it's not March 19th it's going to be May 19th. They're not going to stop. They know that their game is over.
They know that the vast majority of people now realize that they were fooled and elected somebody who's totally unlike the man they thought they were electing, in every way possible. It is in this defiance that he becomes this loose cannon and will screw up and will himself reveal what his true motivations have been from the day he first started planning running for the presidency (which was many, many years prior to when you think it was) for the express purpose of, within the democratic process, overthrowing this country. "You really mean to say that, Rush?" Yeah. Of course I do! I wouldn't say it if I didn't mean it. What the hell do you think is happening out there? Our way of life is being overthrown. The very foundations, the institutions, the principles founded and led to this country being the greatest nation ever are under daily assault by this administration on purpose.
If you were alive during the sixties and you remember that raucous bunch running around blowing up bank buildings and shouting out whatever invective against the establishment, they're running the country now. They now have the power to legally blow up whatever they want to blow -- without explosives. So we have a circumstance where everybody knows what's going on here. The vast majority of people know they made a mistake in electing Obama. Obama knows that they know. People regret it, they want to reverse course but he's laughing. "You can't touch me for three years, and I don't care if my party loses in November. I'm just as happy to blame my failures on the Republicans as I am on the Democrats. You can't touch me. In the meantime I can stop you from going fishing wherever you want.
"I can buy your car companies. I can put competitive car companies out of business. I can determine what kind of food you're going to eat. I can determine what kind of health care you're going to get. I can determine what everything's going to cost you. I can determine whether you have a chance to get rich or not. I can tax you into poverty. I can do whatever I want to do, and I'm going to give it my best shot. I'm going to make sure that this country pays the price for all of its transgressions since its founding. I'm going to make sure this country is knocked down to size. I'm going to make sure this country and people find out just how much pain and suffering they have caused around the world, and it's time they paid a price for it." That's what's happening here. So they become defiant and know their time is limited.
I knew this was the case, folks. I knew this was the case when Obama said he'd just as soon be a great one-term president as a mediocre two-termer. If you are a one-term president seeking to be a second-term president, but you don't make it, it means you're voted out of office. Why? It means people do not want you! Think Jimmy Carter. People didn't want four more years of a misery index. They didn't want four more years of incompetence. Obama, if he can get what he wants done, he'd be happy to be thrown out of office after having a very successful four years in transforming the country into an image that he and his radical buddies have longed to make it for longer than I've been alive, and many of you as well. As each day goes on more and more people are going to see this. It's right in front of everybody's eyes.
You have 2200 people in St. Louis today opposing Obama's health care plan after 4,000 speeches, versus 400 people who show up (invited guests only). I've heard... I can't confirm this. Somebody is going to have to find this. I'm not even going to mention a name here 'til I can confirm this. I've heard that a famous mainstream media reporter was told by Obama's press people on Monday in Glenside, Pennsylvania, "You are not allowed to interview the people who attended the rally." I don't know if that's true. I would not doubt it. We're gonna try to find out. If it is true it makes perfect sense. It's a stacked deck. It wasn't members of the public. It was bought and paid for, union people, Organizing for America crowd, generated, what have you. And it's that way in St. Louis today, or St. Charles. The public is not invited.
State-Controlled Media is just giddy, just can't contain their excitement that they think I'm going to move to Costa Rica if health care passes. Folks, I just want to tell you: It is a badge of honor to have been attacked by the worst president in our history. It's a badge of honor. Wherever this guy goes he's the least qualified, the least experienced guy in the room. It will be the case at that high school in St. Charles this afternoon at ten 'til four Central Time. So here's a list -- and I'm sure it's not complete, a partial list -- of Americans the president has honored with lies winning insults, and smears. Of course the top of the list: Me. Doctors, Supreme Court justices, health insurance executives and employees, CIA interrogators, bankers, investment analysts, President George W. Bush, global warming "deniers," Sergeant James Crowley (the beer summit attendee from Cambridge) and, of course, the guy that this man has insulted more often than anybody else is Mr. Straw Man.
RUSH: Checking the e-mail: "Rush, did you really mean to use the word overthrow?" Yeah, we're in the middle of an overthrow of our way of life. How else can I describe this? By the way, it was Karen Tumulty of TIME Magazine who was told by Obama's people, "You are not allowed to interview people in the audience at the Monday health care rally in Glenside, Pennsylvania." Karen Tumulty at TIME Magazine. Yeah, I meant to say overthrow. It's just another word for transform. What the hell is transform? I got an interesting question: "You think Obama's going to let it slip one day what his real intentions are? Do you think he has?" No, no. But I'll tell you when I think he's come close. There have been a couple of instances. I think the bitter clingers comment in San Francisco, that was close. He was with a bunch of buddies, and he was telling them what they and he really think the people in flyover country, yeah, these religious people, these people clinging to their guns and their religion when things don't go right. But he's also had some comments, what he said about the cop in Cambridge, calling the cop stupid. He has told us what's really floating around in his mind.
But when I think it almost happened, remember the health care summit when Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor both just took it to him, and particularly Paul Ryan, who we're interviewing tomorrow afternoon after the program for the next issue of the Limbaugh Letter. Paul Ryan just took it to him in every which way you can, the numbers don't add up, the American people don't want this, this is about national universal health care, and Obama just stared, and Cantor got much the same kind of reaction. You remember that look, Obama staring at these guys like how dare you, how dare you expose the truth of what this really is, don't you understand the game we're playing here? We're all politicians, and I'm the big dog in the room, you're to defer to me, and here's Cantor treating him like he's just another guy picked up on the street who happens to be dead wrong about something. And I think if Cantor or Ryan had just stopped and paused, I think we might have had a mini-explosion. So, yeah, I think all of this defiance and the knowledge -- don't think that they don't care about these poll numbers and don't think in the White House they don't care.
This guy wants to be loved and appreciated, and he's not being. And when liberals think that you don't appreciate their brilliance and their compassion and what they're trying to do for you -- remember they hold you in contempt anyway as being too stupid to know what's good for you, but when you reject their good offices, when you openly reject their better, elitist understanding of what you ought to do in your life, well, then that contempt becomes something a little stronger, and then the defiance, "I'll show you." So don't be surprised. I don't know how soon it's going to happen but at some point Obama will get close, if not all the way, to telling us who he really is and what's really in his heart.
|Read the Background Material...||
| FOXNews: Roberts: State of the Union Scene 'Very Troubling'
RedState: The Health Care Summit: Paul Ryan and the GOP Steal the Stage From Obama
TIME: Free The White House Press Corps! - Karen Tumulty
RUSH: This is yesterday afternoon and last night, a montage of a bunch of media people, all pure propagandists. Every one of these people said what you're going to hear them say after I said specifically I was not moving, I was simply leaving the country for health care if Obamacare passes and then coming back. Not moving. I said that before all these people say this.
RATIGAN: Rush Limbaugh, threatening to leave our country for good.
HALL: Rush Limbaugh vowing to leave the country if Democrats manage to pass their health care reform bill.
GEIST: Rush Limbaugh. Now he's threatening to do something if the President succeeds with this health care reform. He's threatening to leave the country.
MOULITAS: I definitely look forward to Rush Limbaugh leaving the country.
FERGUSON: Do you know that Rush Limbaugh said that if the health care bill passes, he will leave the country.
SHUSTER: Rush Limbaugh says that if health care reform passes, he will leave the country.
LENO: Radio host Rush Limbaugh says he will leave the United States if health care reform passes.
BEHAR: Rush Limbaugh has said that if health care goes through in the country, he is moving out of the country. Hey, hello, good news?
RUSH: (imitating Behar) "Hello, hello, Maude!"
That's Maude! No, that's actually Joy Behar. I heard a great line about Joy Behar. It's a joke. I couldn't repeat it on this show. I don't care how much cajoling. It's so hilarious, but I couldn't dare tell it on this show. (interruption) No, it's not coyote... No, it's none of that. It's none of that. I shouldn't have said this because there's no way... (interruption) You're not going to cajole me into telling the joke. I couldn't possibly tell the joke, could not possibly. I'll tell you in the commercial break. (laughing) Could I give you one word where you could reconstruct the joke? One key word? Let's see... Uh. Uh. "Penis." I'm sorry it's not much help. (laughing) They're trying to diagram a joke involving Joy Behar and penis. Well, it's not tough if you have a vivid imagination.
KING: You're both in a gym, right, no women are there, you were nude, too, right? He's walking around nude, the fact that he's nude is immaterial, he's angry at you because you're going to vote against this president's bill. That sounds like a tough chief of staff getting angry at one of the members of his own party who's going against him. The fact that he didn't have clothes on and you were coming out of a shower is immaterial.
MASSA: No, it's just terribly awkward, it's terribly awkward.
MASSA: When was the last time you had a political argument with a naked man? It just doesn't --
MASSA: -- work well. Well, and that's my point.
RUSH: Okay, they're heading on down the tracks.
MASSA: By the way, I owe Rahm an apology. I went over the top. I don't think he'd strap his children to the front of a locomotive. He'd strap my children to the front of a locomotive.
RUSH: So King says, "Well, you said, quote, 'Not only did I grope him, I tickled him until he couldn't breathe and then four guys jumped on top of me.' So you did grope somebody, right?" This is Larry King Alive last night. "So you did grope somebody, right?"
MASSA: Larry, when you grab someone and you're wrestling, I don't know how to describe that word. So if that's the word that -- that you want to have an entire debate about, then I can't stop you.
KING: No, I'm just asking the -- you said you groped --
MASSA: Yeah, I --
KING: A lot of people associate groping with sexual.
MASSA: Well, it wasn't sexual, period.
RUSH: What Massa shoulda said is, "Well, to each his own, Larry." Now, the next bite, see if you agree with me that the train comes off the tracks here.
KING: We have to ask, are you gay?
MASSA: Here's that answer. I'm not going to answer that. In year 2010, why don't you ask my wife, ask my friends, ask the 10,000 sailors I served with the in the Navy.
KING: No, all right.
MASSA: I'm not going to answer that. It's an insulting --
CALLER: I didn't mean it to insult you.
MASSA: Not me. It insults every gay American. That somehow classifies people -- why would anybody even ask that question --
KING: Because --
MASSA: -- in this age?
KING: -- you said you groped someone, who was a male.
MASSA: And, Larry, and I explained what that was three times.
MASSA: Come on, now.
KING: We're just asking you to set the record straight. I'm not offending -- at least I'm not trying to offend, certainly would not offend the gay community, or meaning to.
RUSH: Of course not. What's wrong with being gay? So -- (laughing) And tomorrow night Mikhail Gorbachev here on Larry King Live. (laughing) Everybody rushed in to have this kook on. It was funny. So let's just keep going. Last night Anderson Cooper 360 had David "Rodham" Gergen on there. Cooper said, "What do you make of the whole tickle fight?" This is CNN, with about 25,000 viewers.
GERGEN: I don't know whether this fellow needs media help or mental help, probably both. I think he's sort of a mess. In some ways he's become a political corpse. The best thing we can do is put a sheet over him and move on. He does not have the goods in making this wild charge about the Democrats forcing him out.
RUSH: Is it political corpse or political corps? It depends on who's pronouncing the word, I guess. So they found Pelosi last night on Charlie Rose, and Charlie said, "He's now become the darling of the conservative talk radio people, Rush Limbaugh --" no, Charlie, this is another thing that took on a life of its own. But anyway, that's why they had him on because they thought that I was supporting this guy. Anyway, here's what Pelosi said.
PELOSI: So what? I mean the point is this is a very sick person. He has been diagnosed with cancer, perhaps his judgment is impaired because of his -- the ethical issues that have arisen and he is no longer in the Congress. Poor baby. Poor baby. Sometimes we really exaggerate our own importance in a lot of these things.
RUSH: Poor baby. Poor baby. Speaker of the House. Larry King: (imitating King) "Are you gay? Well, because you said you groped a guy. I'm not saying you're gay, you did." (laughing) "Really? Rahm was naked? What did that look like?" (laughing)
So we got Dan Rather out there saying back in the good old days when we were reporting on civil rights and I was able to make stuff up and nobody was able to prove that I was making it up, everybody knew I wasn't a racist but now Obama is so bad that he couldn't sell watermelons the side of a road if a state trooper was stopping traffic for him. Now, Rather worked where? He worked at CBS. This morning on the CBS Early Show today Harry Smith had a colonoscopy live on camera. They did this after the story on Massa claiming that Emanuel walked into the gym shower with no clothes on. So they went from the nude conversation about the health bill here to colonoscopy on camera. And during the procedure, we have a portion of this, Katie Couric is in there offering encouragement, and Dr. Mark Pochapin, the doctor performing the procedure -- now, this is the network of Murrow and Cronkite now airing colonoscopies, and they wonder why nobody is watching.
COURIC: You have apparently a very long colon. By the way, I just want to point out I'm wearing my splash shield because I was told I was going to be in the splash zone, and I could have gone all day without knowing that.
POCHAPIN: Sorry about that, Katie.
COURIC: Thank you. Anyway --
RUSH: So that is the CBS Evening News anchor, Katie Couric, describing being in the splash zone of a colonoscopy at breakfast time on the CBS morning news after a story on Eric Massa and Rahm Emanuel nude in the House gym. We also learn Harry Smith's colon is very long and that Katie could have gone all day long without knowing she was in the splash zone. (interruption) Is Harry gay? I don't know if Harry Smith's gay. What does it matter? Oh, Larry King wants to know. Well, no. I don't think so. But I wouldn't know. I wouldn't care. Now, let's go to last night's Joy Behar show. Have you figured out the joke yet you guys? Have you figured out the Joy Behar joke? Well, that's the point, if you find a way to make that connection you'll find yourself on the floor laughing yourself silly. Okay, last night Joy Behar had sex columnist Dan Savage and political correspondent Nia Malika Henderson about Dan Rather and the watermelon comment.
BEHAR: Of all the fruits to choose, why would he choose watermelon? There's an orange, there's a cantaloupe, any other fruit. Why that?
SAVAGE: If you drive through Texas in the summer, it is watermelon that is sold by the side of the road. Dan Rather is almost 80 years old, and you can hear Chris Matthews and the other guests on that show jumping in to interrupt him like you would interrupt great grandpa at Thanksgiving. I don't think Dan Rather is a closet racist.
BEHAR: So it's a Ratherism?
HENDERSON: Yeah, that's what it seems like. I'm from South Carolina. And, yeah, people do sell watermelons on the side of the road.
RUSH: Yeah, but there aren't news anchors who talk about Obama being unable to even if a state trooper was stopping traffic for him. But nevertheless this is what passes now for what goes on in primetime in what is called the mainstream media: colonoscopies, splash zones, why couldn't he have chosen another fruit. When she said that I didn't know if she was talking -- well, we'll be back.
|Read the Background Material...||
| Breitbart.tv: 'Are You Gay?': Massa Won't Answer King's Question
RCP: Nude Rahm Emanuel Told Massa He "Better Vote With The President"
Bloomberg: Pelosi Says Democrats Didn't Push Massa to Resign
Real Clear Politics: CBS' Harry Smith Undergoes Live Colonoscopy
That's not what this is about! Nobody's upset that these guys defended. What we're curious about is why the hell did they end up in the Justice Department? How the hell did they end up in there and why won't Holder tell us who they are? Bernie Goldberg had the greatest analogy of this that I've heard yet. I think it was Bernie Goldberg. He said, "Look, if this were the Bush administration, and any of his attorney generals had secretly put seven lawyers who had defended the Ku Klux Klan in the Justice Department Civil Rights Division and would not announce their names, do you think that the media and the Democrats would say, 'Oh, yeah. Well, every client deserves a defense.'" There is a fundamental argument going on in this country over the fact that we are threatened by militant Islamists who have made their intentions very clear and they've acted on them countless times, and -- here's the whole context -- we have an administration that doesn't appear to take the threat seriously!
We have an administration who, giving them the benefit of the doubt, believe that it's partially our fault and that if we would just engage in some "outreach" to the Islamists and show them that we have a great set of values here and the American dream is alive and well, and say, "No matter what you do to us, we will still tie both hands behind our back to be fair dealing with you," and until we do that we will not garner once again the respect of the world that was lost during the Bush years. Well, I don't know if anybody's seen the polls lately, but respect for the United States since Obama took over is plummeting! Now, as far as I know, nobody in the Liz Cheney organization is suggesting these people don't deserve representation or lawyers. One thing that I'm confident in saying is that they should be tried in military tribunals and bringing them into civil courts in the United States is an absolute abomination of a mistake.
This administration has made it clear that they don't have much interest in the defense of this country from this particular enemy, and so there are people that are very much concerned that that laxity on that issue be dealt with. So if Liz Cheney and her group want to call this bunch of Department of Justice lawyers "the Al-Qaeda 7," (snorts) fine with me. I wish I'd-a come up with it. What's the difference in that and the Chicago 7? What's the difference in that and the FALN 32? I think it's pretty clever, and it sure has hell got everybody's attention, didn't it? And everybody wants to know what I think about Liz Cheney. Well, now, you know. I would much rather have Liz Cheney and her group in charge of defending this country than Eric Holder, Barack Obama and that "sis," Janet Napolitano. I would much rather have Liz Cheney and anybody she knows at the Department of Justice as attorney general. I'd much rather have her at the State Department.
I'd much rather have her in the White House or anywhere, than any of these people. I'd rather have Sarah Palin there than Eric Holder. I'd rather have Sarah Palin there than Barack Obama. None of this is a mystery to me. People say, "Well, Sarah Palin, she's so stupid!" (snorts) Obama is a piercing light of intelligence?" You know, that's another good point. These same people -- these same people, Eric Holder and whoever the hell else is in that Department of Justice with him and Obama -- are trying to criminalize Bybee and John Yoo for the CIA interrogation techniques that led to the uncovering of the mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and what he did and buddies and so forth. They want to criminalize the interrogation process!
The way we look at it here we've got an administration who thinks the enemy is the United States of America, and so if we think that they think that the problem in the world is us, and they're going to bring in lawyers that they won't name to the DOJ who have defended pro bono -- and Holder's own firm about this, by the way, pro bono defense of Guantanamo detainees. If they're going to bring 'em in there, then when you put everything together say, "Why? What's the message? Are they more qualified to be in the DOJ because they've talked to these guys and they've had them as clients? Does it somehow give them a greater understanding of the enemy?" If so, tell us. If that's the reason, tell us that's why you're doing it. Tell us who they are. I mean, for crying out loud! The left will always tell us who scares the hell out of 'em, and right now Liz Cheney scares the hell out of them. They'll always tell us. Paul Ryan, they're going after him, folks. They've been going after Sarah Palin. They will always tell us who frighten them. So, am I embarrassed by what Liz Cheney's done? No. I'm scared to death about what Obama and Holder are doing. Please!
RUSH: Before we get to the phones, just one thing more here. Remember the Attorney General during Bush/Gonzales was excoriated for firing nine US attorneys for, quote, unquote, political reasons, and they tried once again to frog march Karl Rove into jail over it with never-ending investigations. And Bill Clinton fired all 93 -- or whatever the number was in 1993 when he took office. This is something presidents do. Bush shoulda done this years before he did it. So we're not supposed to notice that Eric Holder hired seven attorneys for really ugly political reasons and we're not supposed to question it, given everything else we know about this administration's thinking on foreign policy.
|Read the Background Material...||
| National Review: Why the al-Qaeda Seven Matter - Andrew McCarthy
Wall Street Journal: Justice and the 'al Qaeda 7'
Washington Post: The 'al-Qaeda Seven' and Selective McCarthyism
RUSH: Steve in High Point, North Carolina. Hi. Glad you waited welcome to the program.
CALLER: Oh, it's such an honor to talk to you Mr. Limbaugh.
RUSH: Thank you. You bet.
CALLER: Let me say I agree with you 100% about the attempt to overthrow our government, our country, but it grieves my soul to say that you made a mistake earlier in the broadcast.
RUSH: Well, it was not an opinion error; it was verbal dyslexia. I said "4,500 a year."
CALLER: It's 45,000 a year, is the claim that they're making.
RUSH: Is this the Harvard study?
CALLER. Yes, and when they say Harvard study, that doesn't mean the university necessarily conducted it itself. It was actually put out by a group called Physicians for a National Health Program.
RUSH: Oh, so an Obama bunch.
CALLER: Exactly. They're for single payer completely. But the methodology of the survey -- the reason I called is I think your listeners should know about this. The methodology of that study was, they checked with a sample group say in 1987, then checked back over 15 years later, and if someone had died in the time since then, they assumed that if you didn't have health insurance in 1987, that if you died in 1998, it must have been because you didn't have insurance.
RUSH: Oh, so they did the old assume game?
CALLER: That's it exactly.
RUSH: So use a static economy. If you didn't have health insurance in '87, then you never had it after that.
CALLER: Exactly right.
RUSH: So if you died after '87, it had to be because you didn't have insurance.
CALLER: Yeah, I think that your listeners should know that because that number is being bandied about so much, and it's been thoroughly discredited, but of course that wouldn't stop the Obama crew from using the numbers.
RUSH: Well, you know what, I'm not good with numbers in my head and half the time I screw it up on a calculator, and everybody I assign number projects to gets it wrong on this staff. It's just amazing. But 45,000 --
CALLER: That's the claim, and it's been thoroughly debunked.
RUSH: Yeah, yeah. So 45,000 divided by 365. Now, I'll get a number, the commas will be in the wrong place --
CALLER: They even went so far as to divide the country up and begin making claims on how many people died in each state, which they couldn't possibly do.
CALLER: And one other thing before I get off the phone here, I did want to let Mr. -- was it Rodriguez that was complaining about the lack of a popup window for the video?
RUSH: No, he was complaining that I hadn't fixed it yet.
CALLER: Well, all he needs to do is right click and a menu will come up and he can open it himself in a new window.
RUSH: Well, maybe, I'll have to try that myself. Since I'm hosting the show I never use the media player.
CALLER: Of course. I just wanted to say great job, and I'm a first-time caller and I got through on my first time, unbelievable.
RUSH: Well, that's great and you remarkably contributed here: 45,000 a year and the methodology. If you didn't have health insurance in '87 and you were alive, and you died any year after that, they just assumed you didn't have health insurance and that was why you died. Forty-five thousand a year is the number out there.
All right, here's John in Keene, New Hampshire. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, Rush. I'm here to surpass caller expectations. Did I hear you say a little earlier that Joe Biden was plugging for the Palestinians?
RUSH: He was.
CALLER: He's just living up to his nickname.
RUSH: That's right. Good catch.
CALLER: Anyway, I'm here to discuss basically the totalitarianistic nightmare that will come with the enforcement of the compulsory health care system because many people have drawn parallels to, well, if you get pulled over while you're driving, you have to show proof of insurance. But if you're not driving, if you're walking down the street, the authorities can't come up and demand your proof of auto insurance. But with the health care, you will have to prove anywhere you are, they'll be able to set up a checkpoint and have a dragnet, goon squad revenuers that will say, "Let's see if your papers are in order here."
RUSH: The revenuers, eh?
RUSH: I didn't know they used that word in New Hampshire. I thought revenuers was strictly Tennessee and maybe Georgia.
CALLER: Well, I lived down here for a while. (laughing) So, yeah. But that's basically what it will amount to because somebody's going to have to pay a $700 fine if they don't have the insurance --
RUSH: Which is what they're going to do, that's the whole point -- he's right. The IRS becomes the enforcement agency of this. The IRS will be the enforcement agency on whether or not you have health coverage. Now, of course you'll be required to have it but then if you don't there's a fine. And for most people the fine will be less than 25% of what a policy would cost you. It's on your tax return. That's why the IRS, you're going to have to put it on your tax return if you have health insurance, prove it, and if you don't, you have to pay the fine. Look, the theory behind this is that citizens will be eager to report that they don't have insurance because they'll want to choose the cheaper route of paying the fine rather than buy insurance. And employers are also gonna pay a much smaller fee in the form of a fine if they don't insure their workers than if they do, and then after that happens don't forget that there is real no penalty to you in not having insurance because if, to use John's example here, let's say that you are up in Keene, New Hampshire, you're brewing some moonshine, distilling some moonshine and some revenuers come your way and they tell you if they capture you and so forth that you gotta have health insurance. In the process of running away, you run into a tree, you don't have health insurance, you're trying to escape 'em for doing moonshine.
The revenuers are chasing you, you run into a tree, and you nearly decapitate yourself. Now, you don't have insurance because you've been paying the fine. Well, guess what? The health insurance company has to pay for your treatment from that day forward even though you didn't have any insurance. This is called cost control. It's called compassion. It's also called let's destroy the private insurance industry as we overthrow the United States as we've known it. So it won't be long before people figure out the cheaper option is no insurance, especially if you tell 'em that everything is going to be paid for if they haven accident anyway because Obama is going to insist the insurance companies -- all of this has as its endgame wiping out private insurance and forcing you on the government exchange rolls for health insurance. At some point the fines for not having insurance will be larger than what insurance premiums would be. It's real simple, folks, if you understand who these people are. And, if you don't understand who these people are, trust that I do. And then do not doubt me.
Snerdley just asked me if the revenuers will be armed. Revenuers will not be armed. They're not going to be chasing you down. It's going to be on your tax return. Look, it's impossible for them to catch everybody. They can't audit everybody. That's why anti-tax people: "Hey, let's just all not pay one year, they can't possibly put us all in jail." Look it, I'm making this sound like it's workable. It's not workable. None of this is possible. It's their plan but none of it's possible, don't you see?
RUSH: Here's Rob in Glen Cove, Long Island. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hi.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Very well, sir. Thank you.
CALLER: You know, I wanted to share some thoughts with you and America as someone who is doing health care day in, day out, every day for the last 20 years here in New York. I'm really saddened just to hear the kind of things that they're talking about where there's really very little creativity in the solutions, where we could have tremendous changes in health care with preexisting conditions across the country. But I think it's really important that you with your status could drill down as to what kind of benefits they're offering. And the point I want to make to America is that you can't offer these third-party system with these dollar-one benefits and expect any kind of crunching of the cost curve. I spent the first eight years of my career inside a TPA where before they linked with networks where you paid copayments, you paid cash. And as soon as they contracted with these networks where suddenly the employee could just say, well, you know, I'll just pay $15, we saw some of the stupidest claims that if you had to pay some money out of your pocket, you know they wouldn't have been done. There's a study at Mt. Sinai that if you watch your weight, you exercise, you don't smoke, you watch your blood pressure --
RUSH: You're going to die someday.
CALLER: No. You reduce your chance of a heart attack over a given ten-year period by 99%. Do you know if you're hurt in a car accident, no health plan pays for you? Do you know if you're hurt on the job or workers' comp, no health plan is paying for you. And at a time now with epic budget crunches across the country. I'm telling you that when US health care and Oxford came to New York in 1993 the promise was we're going to give you physicals, we're going to keep the rates low and everyone's going to stay healthy because we're going to find the cancers ahead of time. The total opposite happened. Rates went up 600%.
CALLER: Because people had no invitation to want to be consumer oriented and the doctors realized, hey, my business has now morphed into a volume practice. And one of the things I'd like to talk to you about or just put out there is that I believe -- you know, in New York we have Boar's Head on the meat menu at the delicatessen. I believe that if you go to a neurologist's office and he has an ownership interest in a diagnostic facility he's gotta clearly display that but also these plans should not be covering forms of radiology or technology where diagnostic studies, where these prices should be publicly showed and people should start to compete --
RUSH: Well, look, I think I get your point. You go to a deli, you know you're buying Boar's Head. You go to the doctor you don't know what you're getting because you're not paying for it. There's no relationship -- this has been a bone of contention of mine for a long time and this is what's primarily wrong with our health care system and that is the patient and the provider and the service have no financial relationship to each other at all. The patient's ability to pay is not a factor in the pricing, and so the market's been blown up to smithereens here, and none of it makes any sense. And that's why there's such a sense of entitlement to health care on the part of many, many people.
RUSH: Ron in Cincinnati. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Rush, it's a sincere pleasure.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: Following splash zones and colonoscopies is going to be a tough act to follow.
RUSH: Well, we gave you a couple minutes break here, yeah.
CALLER: Just a quick point. President Obama talked quantitatively about the number of people that die every day, I think he mentioned 124 people and as your previous caller mentioned, that may not be a proper conclusion but let's use it just for the sake of argument. I did a little research and found out that unfortunately in this country many people die as a result of the medical care they do receive, and most of them being insured. There are some 80,000 deaths per year just due to infections in hospitals. I was wondering if maybe we could shift the discussion from quantitative to qualitative and maybe talk about the things that we need to improve beyond the number of people that may be uninsured and that is tort reform and perhaps a critical examination of the way that we deliver health care.
RUSH: This is a key point. None of it is addressed in any Obamacare proposal. They're addressing things like the uninsured for compassion, claiming they're going to lower costs, but nobody will believe that's going to happen. But the very act of passing this is going to retard the improvements you talk about. It's going to penalize and punish research and development in drugs. It's going to stop medical progress and advancement in hospitals, treatment dead in its tracks.
CALLER: Exactly. Well, richest country in the world, Rush, and we have hundreds of thousands of people. I hope that's not an exaggeration but my source indicates hundreds of thousands of people dying every year unnecessarily. So I hope he does address the qualitative issues as well as the 124 people and the poor souls that he indicated die each day from the lack of health care. It's a very tough thing to prove one way or the other --
RUSH: Because of the lack of insurance. It's bogus anyway because everybody gets treated at the emergency room. There's nobody doing because you don't have insurance, not in this country. The whole thing is bogus. But the problem here -- I'm not sweeping your point off the table, but Obama's proposal is not about qualitative health care, it's not about health care. And it really isn't about insurance, other than destroying private sector insurance. Obama's health care proposal is not about health care. It's about nationalizing two and a half trillion dollars of the US private sector and putting the government in charge of it and then being able to regulate almost every aspect of life possible. It is an attempt to overthrow a portion of the US private sector, pure and simple.
|Read the Background Material...||
| FOXNews: HHS Sec. Sebelius slams Insurance Industry
Business Media Institute: ABC, CBS, NBC Join Obama's Attack on Insurance Companies
Washington Examiner: Video Proof: Obama Wants a Single-Payer System
CBS News: Administration Continues Attack on Health Insurers
If we don't prevent it we will soon wake up to a shredded constitution and the end of the rule of law!
All the best to you, Gail! :-)
The doctor will take good care of you.
Hi and thank you so much. I love these threads. God bless you and our ElRushbo.
Check out THIS picture -- that I created just for YOU!I'm working on a way to promote this kind of PERSONALIZED "Hand of Sarah" images online...
...starting with some of the "regular" threads posted here on Free Republic -- like YOURS!What do you think about "cutting and pasting" the following image, text and link...
...and then POSTING IT -- somewhere on each of the "RUSH IN A HURRY" threads?Something like THIS?