All Episodes
Previous Next
July 10, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:27
July 10, 2007, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, welcome back folks.
The views expressed by the host on the show, that's me, documented to be almost always right, 98.7% of the time.
As I have often cautioned, I make this look easy.
Make it appear that anybody could do this.
Do not try this at home.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
The email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
Day number five, that we give away an iPhone.
And we have a female winner for the first time.
Her name is Lauren N from Orange, Connecticut.
She listens to us in New Haven on WELI 960 AM.
So she gets the 8-gig iPhone, a check for just under $1,500 from us.
We are good guys.
We do not give away prizes that cause our winners and recipients additional funds.
So it's a check for less than $1,500, just a little under $1,500 to cover two years of service with AT ⁇ T so the iPhone could be activated and used.
One year subscription of the Limbaugh letter or an extension if you're already a subscriber.
Same thing for the Rush 24-7 website and a $100 gift card from BocaJava.com, some of the most unique coffee you probably have ever tasted.
It's easy to register to become eligible to win one of these things.
We've got five more to go, one a day until they're gone.
Just go to rushlimbaugh.com and register for our free after-the-show flash email.
That's entitled Rush in a Hurry.
And you go to RushLimbaugh.com, you can't miss the banner.
And once you sign up for that, you'll get it every afternoon about an hour or so after the program.
And once you're signed up, if you already signed up, you're eligible to win one of the five remaining iPhones.
If you sign up today, you'll be eligible for the drawing each day for those remaining five.
Nothing to it, and it's free.
No obligation, no charge whatsoever.
Simply go to rushlimbaugh.com, sign up for Rush in a Hurry, and you are eligible.
Rush in a Hurry is a summary of what happens on each day's show.
It'll tell you what happened if you missed it.
It'll make you feel regretful that you missed it, but you'll be able to see it there.
Some hyperlinks for selected audio soundbites and monologues and so forth.
And a little heads up on the full site update, which happens roughly 6 p.m. each day.
Presidential politics, USA Today Gallup poll.
Very brief.
Rudy is up by 10 points over Fred Thompson.
Hillary is up by 16 points over Barack Obama.
And that's pretty much all there is with that.
I mentioned earlier, ladies and gentlemen, you got a caller wanting to know when are we going to get in gear here on making tax cuts permanent?
And I referenced a story that the Democrats, you know, they've been promising everybody to get rid of the alternative minimum tax because the alternative minimum tax, and this is classic, this is classic Washington, the alternative minimum tax set up some years ago to trap, what was it, 30 families?
Yeah, it's a ridiculously small number that somehow were not paying any income tax at all.
And they were wealthy.
So the alternative minimum tax was designed to trap those people.
They were not doing anything illegal.
They were following the tax code.
It just, yeah, you can't get away with that.
So what's happened is the alternative minimum tax is now affecting millions of Americans more and more every year.
And so there have been all these promises to get rid of it because it's punitive and it's unfair, which is exactly why they're not going to get rid of it.
It is a measure of control.
That's what tax increases and taxes, as far as liberals are concerned, is all about.
And the AP even references this today.
House Democrats' promise to permanently protect millions of middle-class families from a mostly unknown tax increase is faltering before it's even unveiled.
Senate Democrats prefer a band-aid approach to delay for just a year or two the alternative minimum tax, the AMT, from adding $2,000 more in taxes on average families with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 a year.
That way, the Democrats wouldn't have to go into next year's elections after having tried and likely failed to raise income taxes on wealthy taxpayers, those making $500,000 or more, back to almost what they were before President Bush took office.
And that's what their plan is.
They want to raise that rate back to 39%, which is where it was before President Bush's tax cuts lowered the top rate to 35.
But they don't have the votes right now to do it.
And they want to offset the AMT and getting people out of its clutches by raising taxes on the rich.
But they don't have the votes to do it, and the president will veto it.
He's not going to stand for it.
He wants his tax cuts made permanent and so forth.
So the Democrats aren't even going to try because they don't want to go into the 08 elections having lost a tax increase on the rich battle.
New York Representative Charles Wrangell, who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee where all tax legislation originates, would like to rewrite the AMT to once and for all prevent it from ensnaring about 20 million additional and unsuspecting middle-class taxpayers.
He and Representative Richard Neal, a Democrat from Massachusetts, had planned to unveil their plan in May, but now that's not likely to occur before September, if even then.
And the problem is that Wrangell's and Neal's plan is a non-starter in the Senate, where the Tax Writing Finance Committee's chairman, Max Baucus of Montana, also a Democrat, is up for re-election next year in a state whose voters overwhelmingly favored Bush in 2004.
Baucus wants nothing to do with a Wrangell-Neal proposal to pay for protecting middle-class voters from an AMT increase by instead imposing a new 4% or so surcharge on incomes above half a million a year.
That would effectively raise the marginal tax rate on those with half million dollar incomes back to 39%, where it was in 2000.
The tax increase on the wealthy would raise an eye-popping $800 billion over 10 years, enough to fix both the AMT and spread smaller benefits to lower income taxpayers.
You know, that's not going to happen.
That is not, it doesn't work that way.
Besides, $800 billion is not eye-popping in terms of running the government or anything else.
It's not eye-popping whatsoever.
The thing about taxation, how many times have you heard, well, this is a great example.
The Democrats, they want to sponsor tax relief for the middle class.
But, We've got to offset that somewhere.
Why, government can't do with less.
What are you talking about?
So if we cut somebody's taxes, why we've got to find someplace else to increase taxes we can't do without.
Let me ask you this.
When they want to raise your taxes, do they care whether or not you can afford it?
Do they care whether or not you have a way to go out and generate additional income to pay for it?
Because even if you do, that income is going to be taxed.
Do they care about that?
Do they ever care that you may have to do with less?
No, they don't.
Couldn't care less that you have to do.
In fact, the more of you that have to do with less, the more they can portray you as victims and blame Republicans for it and the wealthy and so forth, which is a hoax and a fraud on the par with the fraud and hoax that is global warming.
Many Democrats, including party leaders, appear comfortable with Baucus' temporary fix, Which rather than forcing a politically risky vote to raise taxes when the idea isn't going to go anywhere in the Senate, you know, the temporary fix.
I've been play around with the standard deduction for a while for those 20 million Americans, families that are affected by this.
So they want a monkey in nickel and diamond, but they don't want to do anything permanent because they can't risk losing a vote on raising taxes for the rich.
And there's a Democrat standing in the way because his people who support him are not going to vote if he does that.
They voted for Bush in 2004.
So he will wait till he's re-elected before he goes along with raising their taxes.
Back after this.
As usual, ladies and gentlemen, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Back to the phones we go.
Monroe, Ohio, this is Larry.
You're next on the EIB Network server.
Great to have you with us.
Thank you, sir, and good afternoon.
Just have a quick question.
Which is better for America?
Conservative talk radio, i.e. you running America, or gridlock like we had in the 90s when we had one Clinton in the White House with the Republican Congress?
You know, actually, a lot got done in the 90s.
Well, after the budget battle of 95, a lot of things got balanced, budget, welfare reform, you know, the welfare reform happened and so forth.
Look, I always love gridlock.
I am not one of these people that believes that unless Washington's producing mounds of legislation, the country's not moving forward.
That is asinine.
We have enough laws.
Look, what is the $3 trillion budget?
I mean, the idea that we don't have enough money and budget cuts and all this.
We don't have gridlock enough.
So I love gridlock.
I actually do.
And it provides a lot of fun, too, because the people that are sitting up there defining their existence by getting good legislation get frustrated, and that gets fun to watch, too.
Alexis in Huntsville, Alabama.
Great to have you with us on the EIB Network.
Hi, Dear Rush, darling.
Last hour, you made a comment or read a story about women preferring men that were muscular.
And my proposition to you is, I will pretend that you're muscular if you'll pretend that I'm a 36 double D. On the phone, we can pretend anything.
That's exactly right.
And that's the beauty of radio, isn't it?
Well, except I'm not hiding behind the microphone here.
I have a ditto cam, and people can join the website and watch this whole show.
And there are many, many different ways to define muscular.
Well, this is true.
Which leads me to another question, Rush.
You're always talking about having half your brain tied behind your back just to make it fair.
And I'm wondering if there's anything else you keep tied behind your back to make it fair.
Depends on the circumstances.
Okay.
You're funny.
Well, you're delightful, and I look forward to listening to you.
I've been listening to you since 89.
Wow, you're almost a lifer here.
Almost.
Almost.
Well, I appreciate it.
Thanks so much.
You're welcome.
You bet.
Here's Janet.
This is Smithfield, Utah.
Hi, Janet.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi, it's Janice.
Janice.
Yeah.
Megadittos, Rush.
Thank you.
Janice or Janet, what difference does it make?
That's right.
As long as I get to talk to you, I'll be male.
I don't care.
As far as this rhetoric of Bobby Kennedy's accusing everybody that disagrees with him of being treasonous, I thought dissent made you patriotic.
I think we're patriots because we are dissenting.
Yeah, this, but you know, let's go back and play these soundbites because people are still talking about this, and we played these at the top of the hour.
Mike, grab, what is Bobby Kennedy's soundbites?
It's looks like it's one and two.
But yeah, let's play both of them because people are reacting.
And hang on out there, Janice, and we'll talk about this after we listen to both of them.
This is at Giant Stadium Saturday during Live IRF.
I'm going to tell you this, that the next time you see John Stossel or Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, these flat earthers, these corporate toadies lying to you, lying to the American public, and telling you that global warming doesn't exist.
You send an email to their advertisers and tell them you're not going to buy their products anymore.
Right, right.
So here's Robert Kennedy Jr. all hopped up on the global warming Kool-Aid, calling America's truth detector a liar.
That doesn't fly, nor does his technique of sponsor boycotts.
His crowd's been trying that for 19 years.
And it hasn't worked because our advertisers get results.
And they also know that these campaigns are just five or six little malcontents trying to make themselves sound like millions.
It doesn't fly anymore.
Here's the second thing that he said that we culled from his raspy remarks.
It is more important than buying compact fluorescent light bulbs or than buying a fuel-efficient automobile.
The most important thing you can do is to get involved in the political process and get rid of all these rotten politicians that we have been watching the first time.
Stop the tape there because I've got to make this observation just as I did in the first hour.
I thought global warming was a science issue.
I thought it was all about science.
I thought the science, the consensus was there.
No, of course it's not.
It's about politics.
It's about socialism, big government, liberalism, whatever.
And Bobby Kennedy doesn't like the fact he can't control all these people and make them see the world the way he wants them to see it because they see through his hoax.
Who are nothing more than corporate toadies for companies like Exxon and Southern Company, these villainous companies that consistently put their private financial interests ahead of American interests and ahead of the interest of all of humanity.
This is treason, and we need to start treating them now as traitors.
And they have their slick public relations firms and their phony think tanks in Washington, D.C., and their crooked scientists who are lying to the American people day after day after day.
And we have a press that has completely let down American democracy.
Okay, so what you hear here, a full-fledged admission and definition of socialism, companies are villainous, companies that his family's trust is invested in, that he's living off of.
And now anybody who dissents from the stated funds, the consensus science on global warming, is a traitor.
Now, I remember Mrs. Clinton.
Janet, you're Janice, sorry, you're right.
Remember, Mrs. Clinton, when her patriotism was challenged, or she thought it was because she was dissenting against the Iraq war, she started screaming bloody murder.
We've played that bite over and over again, where she says they try to redefine patriotism as dissent and as disagreeing with the president.
But see, liberals, this, I'm glad you pointed this out, Janice, because liberalism is about thought control, mind control, and behavioral control.
And if you don't follow suit, if you don't snap to, they're going to come find a way to tar and feather you and do even worse if they ever could.
Yeah, dissent is only patriotic if you're liberal, I guess.
Exactly right.
It's only patriotic if you are liberal when you are dissent.
And I think I take umbrage with this flat earth society.
They keep calling those people that disagree with them.
I think they're the chicken little society.
Well, that's true.
But they're worse than that.
This is, you know, we sit here and laugh at them, and I think that's an effective way of dealing with them.
These people, you've got to understand what their objectives are.
It is about control.
It's about managing outcomes, managing events.
These are people, they don't really like dissent.
They don't like alternative points of view.
They aren't any alternative points of view.
They are that superiorist.
They are not going to deal with anybody who doesn't agree with them.
And if those people who disagree with them happen to give them problems, provide real objectives, well, then it's potentially dangerous.
Then they'll try to shut you up in any way, shape, manner, or form.
This is Bibi, Bibi from Southern Illinois.
Nice to have you on the program on the EIB network.
Hello.
Rush, I can't believe I'm talking to you.
Hey, I've got a great idea for you.
Just put a little tattoo behind your ear.
It says cochlear or something like that with the international warning.
I love all of you people with these helpful hints.
I just do.
We want to protect your brain.
We don't want it blowing up.
It's us.
Yes, I do too.
I understand that.
But, gosh, bracelets, necklaces, tattoos?
Just a tiny one.
No one would ever know it.
They might even, if it's that tiny, the doctors in the emergency room, such a circumstance, might miss it.
Oh, I don't think so.
The first thing they do is look over your head, especially if you're unconscious.
Especially if you're unconscious.
Yeah, well, hold on.
Just a tiny one on your chest.
They also put you on a heart monitor first thing.
You know, I just, I've always, I've looked at tattoos as something just short of butchery.
Well, this is for medicinal purposes.
Yeah, yeah.
Okay.
Yeah, okay.
Well, the important thing is here, BB, that you and millions of other Americans care, and that is what warms my heart.
It really does.
Well, you're welcome.
And we smart women prefer the muscles between the ears, not on the biceps.
Yeah, I've heard that too.
You take care, buddy.
We love you.
Take care.
All right.
Thank you, BB.
Nice to have you with us on the program.
All right.
When we come back, ladies and gentlemen, sometimes even the libs in the drive-by media screw up their mission to manage the news.
It happened yesterday on CNN with Michael Moore and his movie Sicko and their medical correspondent, San Jay Gupta.
We'll let you hear how the message broke down and how it irritated Moore right after this.
Stay with us.
A man, a living legend, a national treasure, a way of life.
Learn it, love it, live it.
It's a beautiful thing.
Here are the EIB network.
All right, as I said, normally, ladies and gentlemen, the drive-by media doesn't really have to coordinate its message with willing accomplices of the Democrat Party.
It just happens.
But occasionally, occasionally, there's a breakdown.
It's rare.
It doesn't happen much.
Normally, when a lib goes out and does something that's factually incorrect, A little bit off the beaten path.
They either ignore it or try to circle the wagons, massage it, paper it over.
This didn't happen yesterday.
The situation room with Wolf Blitzer, Michael Moore was coming up.
But before Moore, he talked about his new propaganda piece called Sicko.
And before they brought Michael Moore on, their senior medical correspondent did a report on the propaganda piece.
His name is Sanjay Gupta, and it's about a three-minute piece.
So we just, we culled it down here to half a minute to get to the essence of what made Moore mad.
Moore presents a lot of facts throughout the movie.
Do they all check out?
It's true that the United States is the only country in the Western world without free universal access to health care.
But you won't find medical utopia elsewhere.
So there's no perfect system anywhere.
But no matter how much Moore fudged the facts, and he did fudge some facts, there's one everyone agrees on.
The system here should be far better.
Okay, so my transcript doesn't match what I just heard, except for the last line.
So anyway, Moore, he was basically saying, Gupta was saying, look, there's some facts fudged in the Sicko propaganda piece.
It's not panacea in Canada and Brits, and there are people in waiting.
Things that we all know.
He just said things they all know.
Then they bring out Moore.
And Wolf Blitzer was talking to him.
And Moore is disgruntled by Dr. Sanjay Gupta's report.
And he comes out and says he wants 10 minutes to respond to it.
And Wolf said, come on, Mike, just give us a couple of headlines here, what you'd like to say.
I don't talk in soundbites.
So that report was so biased.
I can't imagine what pharmaceutical company ads coming up right after our break here.
But, you know, why don't you tell the truth to the American people?
I mean, I wish that CNN and the other mainstream media would just for once tell the truth about what's going on in this country, whether it's with health care, I don't care what it is.
I mean, you guys have such a poor track record.
And for me to come on here and have to listen to that kind of crap.
I just love it when the system breaks down.
What normally should happen is that this thing should have gotten a glowing review.
Moore should have come out wearing a halo, if for nothing else, and doing such great propaganda in Fahrenheit 911.
But the medical reporters, I can't, there's some facts here that have been fudged and so forth.
And later on in the interview, Moore continued the rant.
For me to have to sit here and listen again to more crap about socialized medicine or how the Canadians have it, you know, worse than us and all this.
And you're the ones who are fudging the facts.
You fudged the facts to the American people now for I don't know how long about this issue, about the war.
And I'm just curious, when are you going to just stand there and apologize to the American people for not bringing the truth to them that isn't sponsored by some major corporation?
You notice a similarity here.
Michael Moore and what's his name?
Robert Kennedy Jr., these evil, evil corporations.
Anyway, I think later in the interview, Moore denied them the permission to tape it and use it later.
Get this because he was afraid they might take it out of context.
A propaganda movie maker afraid that he's going to be taken out of context on CNN.
So as I say, folks, this kind of breakdown in the message, the management of the news, doesn't happen very often.
But when it does, it's a delight.
Scott in Shreport, Louisiana, thank you for waiting and welcome to the EIB Network.
Hey, thanks a lot, Rush.
You good?
It's an honor to speak to you.
Thank you.
I'm in the good part of the state, by the way.
So anyway, in the northern, the tiny hills up north.
I just had a quick comment or really to get you to comment on, as I was telling you, Screener, is liberals and Democrats seem to always want to project this progressive image, and yet they always want to live in the past.
They want to relive Vietnam.
They want to relive these protests in the 60s and relive these concerts for peace and everything.
I just kind of want to get your take on that.
Well, this is a common theme that I have recited on this program for many years.
The liberals have a playbook that's very, very old.
They never update it.
Well, look at now.
I mean, you're focusing on the fact progressive.
Progressive is simply to hide the word liberal.
Liberal doesn't poll well.
Liberal, there aren't a whole lot of people that really admit to being liberals.
They call themselves progressives because they think it's making them sound forward-thinking and forward-moving, whereas conservatives are rock-ribbed, stuck in the mud, want to stay focused on the old-fashioned putrid ideas of the past.
When in fact, when it comes to strategy, when it comes to vision, dealing with problems, so forth, winning elections, there's nothing new in liberalism because liberalism has its roots in Marxism-Leninism, and that stuff's old.
And so it just, there's no reason to update it.
It is what it is.
So they keep coming up with new ways to execute the same plan.
Global warming is nothing more than the modern era of Paul Ehrlich's 70s book, The Population Bomb.
Or remember when everybody was worried about Acid Rainer, everybody was worried about nuclear holocaust and runaway arms races and so forth.
All of these things are just tools, and they change from generation to generation, sometimes year to year, but their objective is to keep you on the edge of your seat scared, in a mired in the midst of doom and gloom.
They don't want you happy.
They want you miserable.
They want you constantly thinking things are falling apart so that you will want change.
And they come out and promise to be the architects of change in many situations, as in global warming.
They blame you for the problems facing the country, say that you must take the blame for this by paying higher taxes, but you can assuage your guilt by going along with bigger government programs and so forth.
But it's the same objective.
They just have different issues that they use to move all of these things forward.
Like in the Iraq war, they're trying to remake that in the public image, in the public's mind, of Vietnam.
They're trying with all of these investigations to paralyze and weaken the presidency.
They're trying to create a Nixonian flavor and air about the Bush administration because they think those are two big successful periods in their past.
And I think ever since Watergate, they have decided that the simplest way to get rid of political enemies is to criminalize everything they do.
Criminalize their beliefs, criminalize their policies, get rid of them via scandal since they really have so much trouble getting rid of people at the ballot box.
They have trouble winning because they can't go out and be honest about who they are.
Hence, they come up with the term progressive.
Liberalism, Clintonism, Democrat Partyism, it's all oriented around how can we fool them today.
How can we depress them today?
How can we scare them today?
What crisis can we create to make them think only we represent solution and salvation to this horror that is the future that's just waiting to unfold right before our very eyes?
John and Houston, you're next in the EIB network, sir.
Hello, Rush.
Omega Dittos to you from Houston, Texas.
Thank you, sir.
Anyway, I just wanted to share with you about how Al Gore and his movie ruined what was going to be a great date.
Al Gore ruined my date.
All right.
I went out with this babe and she was a babe on the first date.
And I have a rule.
Wait, I need to know when this happened.
When did this happen?
This happened about two weekends ago.
Two weekends ago.
Are you still dating this babe?
Well, no, no, and I'm going to get to that.
Okay.
All right.
The first date I have a rule.
Never talk politics or religion.
So I take her out on the second date.
It was going real well.
You know, she's a babe real well.
Driving home, and we start chit-chatting, and she asked me if I'd seen Al Gore's movie about the global warming.
And I looked at her and just said.
Now, wait a second.
Wait a second.
This is the second day of the first date because I thought she ruined your first date.
He ruined what's turning out to be a great date.
Okay, I'm sorry.
It turned out to be a great date.
Second date turned out to be great.
First date, got feet wet.
Second date was really going place.
You're rounding second base, and then Al Gore's movie came up.
Okay.
And Al Gore comes up.
She asked me if I'd seen his movie.
I just said no because I wanted to hear her opinion on it.
She's kind of see, you know, what are her political views.
Well, had you seen it?
Wait a second.
Had you seen it?
No, I have not seen it.
Okay, so you didn't lie to her.
No, I didn't lie to her.
I have not seen it.
But she starts, but, you know, I've heard enough about it to know that there's many falsehoods.
And I just don't buy into the global warming.
I'm a mega ditto.
So anyway, she starts going off on how great this movie is, how informative it is, how great Al Gore is.
And what I call it, she was having the best gorgasm of her life.
Talking about a movie?
You are so lucky that this thing blew up on you on date two.
And she was just having this enormous gorgasm, like the best she'd ever had.
And so we get back.
I said nothing.
Now, wait a second.
Wait a second.
John, you're speaking figuratively on this?
Speaking figuratively, how do you mean?
On the orgasm bit.
Gorgasm.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
My hearing.
Gorgasm is having a gorgas.
She's ready to take control of this call and steer it a different direction.
Yeah, okay.
She has a gorgas.
All right, good, god, gotcha.
He was just, I mean, she just, I mean, she was almost in ecstasy talking about the movie.
So we get back to the house, and finally, you know, she actually, this babe invited me in, but I just said, good night.
I said, thank you for the date.
Have a nice life.
And walked off.
He ruined what could have turned out to be a great thing.
But that stupid movie, I think she would have had more fun that night lying in bed watching his movie than she would have had with me.
I mean, she just, and it ruined what could have been a great thing.
Obviously, it did.
I mean, in your mind, if it's over, But, you know, any babe that gets you.
Was there an argument that ensued when she started having these gorgasms?
No, I just let her ran and rave.
Okay, so you don't want an argument.
So she doesn't really, I mean, she doesn't know that.
I mean, you didn't make the decision to blow all this up simply because you had a fight and get an argument.
You just knew that would come down the road, and I'm not going there.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, has she called you back?
Has she wondered where you are?
Has she called me back?
She called me back one time, and I explained to her.
I said, look, Al Gore, he's the biggest tool I've ever seen.
And I'm sorry.
If those of you have views, there's no way I can date it, babe.
Well, okay.
I was going to advise you along those lines because if there was any possibility that this could have gone forward, and it shouldn't have, you took care of it when she called you back.
I can't discuss this anymore because of the constraints of time, but I appreciate the story out there, John.
We'll take a brief time out here.
Come back right after this.
Don't go away.
Snerdly is sitting here still, stunned and amazed that I would advise the previous caller, John from Houston, to skedaddle.
He said, I can't believe that this guy would let Al Gore in a movie stand in the way of a babe.
That's exactly the trap.
That's exactly the trap, Snerdley, the babe trap.
You put up with all the stuff that you don't want to put up with.
It just is.
No, no, you may tune out what she has to say later, but it may be too late by that.
Tuning out may not get you anywhere.
Next thing you know, you're Barry Goldwater.
I mean, you just write.
You know what I mean?
Barry Goldwater.
You come out.
Don't.
Don't.
It's just.
Plus, can we deal with the general, the intellect here?
The intellect characteristic.
Somebody's going to watch a piece of propaganda, believe it, and go gaga over it.
Fine, fine, fine.
You know, just wave goodbye when you see them in a rearview mirror.
Bob, in, where is this?
Waireka, California.
Welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Rush Mega Dittos from a fellow golfer at the top of the Golden State.
Nice to have you with us, sir.
Rush on this alternative minimum tax.
Yes.
My wife and I are retired.
We got an AGI adjusTedros income of about $90,000.
Gives us a 15% federal tax bracket.
Last year, we had some stock, and it was only paying three-quarters of a percent in taxable income.
So we said, let's sell off some of this and put it over into munis and avoid that.
Good move.
Good move, really.
Yeah, it was cool, except what little we sold put us up over $300,000.
And of course, the 15% capital gains applied, which is fine.
That's what they keep telling us.
But they take the whole thing then and move it over into the alternative minimum tax.
And our tax that we paid then was 28% on every nickel that came in our house.
Every nickel?
Every nickel.
Not the dollars over your $90,000.
Well, they add all of that together.
And when they go into the alternate minimum tax, all of a sudden we have over $320,000 available for them to apply it to.
How much of the $210,000 when you sold the stock, you converted immunis?
When did you do that?
You know, six.
So you I guess you had no choice.
You had to take that as capital gains income, as income.
Yeah.
Well, he talked to our accountant and he says, oh, sure, you know, 15% to prepay your taxes and tend to the state and all that good stuff.
We did it.
And then when he sat down to compute our taxes, oh, by the way, Bob, we need another $30,000.
So I sat down and figured it all out when we got our returns back.
And we ended up paying 28% total on every nickel that came in our house.
Well, they can talk all they want about the 15% cap of gains, but it doesn't really apply if you have anything more than a couple of bucks.
Well, it depends what your floor income is before you improve.
But it was only 90,000.
I mean, the best way, the best way to eliminate the alternative minimum tax from affecting you is out-earn what the floor for it is.
Yeah, that's right.
Which is half a million dollars.
Yeah, that's right.
But that's easier said than done.
I'm great that you called ahead.
People able to hear that story.
I'm sure it's 20 million families that are being affected in a similar way by this.
We've got to run, be right back, and close it out after this.
All right, we have to skedaddle.
We have to scoot.
We have to get out of here and start working on tomorrow's program, ladies and gentlemen.
We have another iPhone to give away tomorrow.
And whatever else pops up between now and then, you can count on the fact that we here at the EIB Network will be on top of it.
▲
Export Selection