All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 15, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:25
September 15, 2008, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Hey, folks, the hope is gone from the Messiah's campaign.
They broomed it.
No more hope.
No more change.
Change is real.
Changes now.
Change it's all that's gone.
Now they're in full-fledged panic mode, and Obama is simply a standard Democrat Party hack candidate.
Biden is the same.
Biden was just in uh Michigan someplace giving a speech, complaining that Bush didn't work with Democrats.
All he promised the new tone.
He promised to work with Democrats.
He didn't work with Democrats.
Lie after lie after lie.
Biden was up there ripping the U.S. economy, comments about which are coming up very quickly.
He was ripping the U.S. military.
Says a country's more polarized than at any time he's ever seen in his career.
I wonder why that might be.
Greetings, friends.
Welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh.
Great to start the week with you here at the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number is 800-282-2882 and the email address, L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
McCain and sorry, Obama and his surrogates are now out there attacking McCain's age.
They are desperate.
This is not good.
Bush beat Kerry in significant numbers in older voters, 60 plus, 65 plus back in 2004.
Older voters vote in greater numbers than uh than uh than other demographic groups.
And so the uh the uh the Obama campaign is really just starting to be a replay now of the John Kerry campaign, complete with acorn being involved in tremendous voter fraud in uh places like Ohio and Michigan, and then Biden.
He's the gift that keeps on giving.
He was in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Now, who do we know that was a presidential candidate from North Carolina, who recently had to withdraw from public life because it was revealed he's out there having an affair, numerous sleepovers, if you will, with uh with a tawdry uh other woman.
That would be the Brett Girl, would it not?
That would be John Edwards.
So where do we find Biden?
We find Biden in Charlotte, North Carolina, who came up with an interesting metaphor.
He was telling the story of how his granddaughters had a slumber party with Obama's daughters during the week of the Democrat National Convention, and Biden equated that that sleepover, that slumber party, to what he thinks Americans want.
He said, quote, I believe that uh it's a metaphor, a metaphor for what the country's looking for.
They're looking for a sleepover with people they like.
Joe Biden is equating himself and Barack Obama to people the American people would like to sleep over with where they come up with this stuff.
It's just it's the gift that keeps on giving.
All right, let's go to this market business here, folks, because let me just tell you one thing about this Lehman brothers business.
If you have, for example, if you have a 401k and it's being handled by Lehman Brothers, they file for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy today.
If you have a 401k and it's being handled by Lehman Brothers, it's fine.
You own the asset.
Lehman Brothers does not.
Just because they go south doesn't mean that your 401k, for example, goes south with them.
Here's this is to me, this is really not complicated at all, but it's sad in the sense that the correct lessons here are not going to be learned.
Have you noticed that it is government-regulated enterprises and government institutions themselves that are struggling and dragging down big chunks of the economy?
And I would include the drive-by media with that as an ancillary, but it's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack, and they are government-owned and operated, and they went south.
Uh, guess what happened?
All of these government-regulated enterprises like the home mortgage business and the financial business.
Every one of these institutions is being regulated by government.
There is no pure free market operating here.
The housing market was fine, folks.
The market was chugging along until Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack decided to prime the pump for the last several years.
Prime it they did.
They encouraged all kinds of mortgages that required little or nothing down, resulted in people buying homes that they could never afford, driving home prices beyond what was realistic.
What we have now here is not a crash in the home price business, the home value business.
We have a correction going on because the free market was tampered with here in a gross and obvious way.
And the look at I'm not making this up.
I mean, the uh the new standards that the government has now imposed on loans for homes is that the people getting loans have to show some ability to pay it back.
Prior to that, there was a this was the American dream.
This is about getting minorities and poor people who couldn't afford a house into a house.
It was Washington politicians, primarily liberals who run Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae buying votes.
As it always is, using the public till to advance their own careers and to enlarge their back pockets.
The market responds to this kind of government behavior.
The president and the Congress, they both did this, insisted that more mortgages be made to poorer and poorer people, which meant that people with few assets and an inability to pay, should the economy begin to sour, uh, get loans, and that's exactly what happened.
The dollar itself has been hurt by the government's massive debt entitlements, uh, all of these uh massive unfunded obligations, government guarantees of pension plans and savings accountants, all the rest.
I mean, when General Motors can't can't make the pension plan work, when Delta Airlines can't afford it anymore, there's a government agency that picks it up.
Who do you think's paying for all of this?
You are.
Except they're borrowing money because the taxes they raise from us is not enough to cover everything that they're doing here to try to manipulate and adjust these social concerns that they all have for the people who live in the country.
So you have massive, massive unfunded obligations.
Think Social Security and Medicare.
Just a name two.
All of this encourages irresponsible risk taking and distorts normal market conditions because everybody involved these institutions at some point thinks the government will bail them out if it all goes wrong.
And in the recent past, we've seen that that is the case.
And so the people that are in charge of these things are not being punished.
Their names are not in Kleaglights or marquee lights, as Ken Lay's was.
I mean, how come the people responsible for this are not being tarred and feathered like Ken Ray, Ken Lay and uh and the Bernie Ebbers at WorldCom and so forth?
Nobody's going to jail here, and I'll tell you why, because they're all liberal Democrats.
They're all appointed by liberal Democrats.
Chris Dodd, why is his name non-mention?
He was very much involved in the countrywide mortgage business, sweetheart loans and interest rates.
We can't have that.
We can't have Chris Dodd's name mentioned.
No, no, no, no, boy, can tar Ken Lay all he want and uh and Bernie Ebbers and all not that they shouldn't have been, but I mean what's good for the goose, good for the gander.
So easier credit, more and more money pumped into the system by the Treasury Department, extending and increasing the financial obligations of the taxpayer with all these out-of-control entitlements.
And yet they're now trying to lay the blame on the free market.
And how are they doing that?
How are they trying to sturdily tell me?
You tell how are they trying to lay the blame on the free market?
I'm going to give you the code language for this.
No, it's very simple.
When they talk about needing more regulation, we need to regulate this more.
They're telling you that the free market has screwed this up.
They're telling you that capitalism is bes is responsible for this.
So we need more regulation.
The people that destroyed the mortgage industry and plummeted the value of homes now run it 100%.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been totally 100% taken over, for example.
Mm-hmm.
What would happen if these companies crash?
What do you call what do you call Lehman Brothers?
They're going, they're going chapter 11.
I don't know if you'd call it an absolute crash.
This is another thing.
Too much of the financial community and the drive-by financial to the media department.
They're looking for a crash.
They're desperately Hoping for one.
I'm channel surfing around some of these investment business networks today hoping for one.
And the market opened down 300, it rebounded to minus 60, now it's down to 300.
It's not crashing.
What we have are sell-offs, profit taking and so forth.
It ain't crashing.
The market is not crashing.
But I look at everybody has a lot of nervousness about all this when these financial institutions start going this way, we've got to bail them out.
That's how they that's how they rely on continued support for the government being more and more involved.
What people have to understand is that it's government regulation and government involvement that's caused all this.
Now, I know it may be too late here in these particular instances to do anything about it, and it may be too late, period for uh for a while, but it's they're just gonna it's gonna keep happening.
This is not over.
Wait till the same thing happens to Social Security.
Wait till the same thing happens to Medicare.
That's just it's coming, and everybody knows it, but this current bunch in Washington is trying to pass that off and pat it so that it happens under somebody else's watch down the road, but it's coming the same kind of thing.
At some point, folks, we're gonna both those programs are going to reach the point where they're going to be bankrupt.
Either that or the American people are all going to face a 78% income tax rate.
And of course, that won't fly because people will simply stop working.
The dirty little secret is this is not a purely free market anymore, and the free market is not responsible for this.
Capitalism is not responsible for this.
Now we do have, and I will admit this.
I think that the temptation to keep up with the Joneses on Wall Street among CEOs and some of these uh some of these people that were paying them each other gazillion dollar bonuses when the companies uh did not report profits at the end of the year, this sort of thing.
This whole Northeastern culture, and I don't care if it's liberal, I don't care if it's you know the financial markets or whatever, but they're all trying to keep up with each other buying houses in the Hamptons.
They're all trying to keep up to each other on their on material possessions and uh and bragging about how the big their bonus was or what their total financial packages, the golden parachute is, and so forth.
And there have been a lot of people playing with money that's not theirs.
There's been a lot of people play because they knew the government would step in if it reached a crisis.
But because, you know, which which came first?
It's sort of like campaign finance reform.
Remember when all the advocates of campaign finance reform saying we need this, excuse me.
We need this because this system is corrupting good people, right?
We have a system here, too much money in politics, corrupting good.
No.
System was fine.
Corrupt people corrupt a system.
A system, by the way, designed by these very people who claim the system corrupted them.
So when you have the federal government involved, which is the point I'm trying to make, when you have the federal government involved in regulation and bailouts and so forth, it eliminates the whole notion of risk.
And it is risk that causes responsibility.
So there hasn't been any responsibility in any of this because the risk in these people's minds hasn't really existed.
Capitalism is full of risk.
The government isn't.
When does the government ever report a down business cycle?
The government always grows, does it not?
In fact, the government's not allowed to report a down business cycle.
So here you have people with their emotions running raw.
After 50 years of FDR to led attitudes about the benevolence of government, most people, I don't care about the theory, Rush.
I don't care what you're saying.
You may be right, but I can't afford to go bankrupt along with all these other people.
If the government's going to bail it out, thank God for the government.
Because if the government's going to save me, then thank God for the government.
That's the attitude that people have here.
What you don't understand is that this is going to keep happening, and a genuine, genuine crash at some point, is gonna someday, I don't think it's gonna be in our lifetimes, but it's some certainly in your kids or grandkids' lifetimes not gonna be averted.
Unless somebody gets a handle on this.
It's it's it's uh look at oil.
Oil was down to 95.96 bucks a barrel today.
The uh Dow Jones industrial average opened up at minus 173, down to now it rebounded a little bit, and then now down.
Let me check it here real quick.
But it will When the show started, it was down three at 250, 258.
So it's coming down from where it was about, or coming up from where it was 10 or 15 minutes ago.
The uh the dollar is now surging against the Euro and a number of other the peso, number of other uh currencies.
Wall Street firms are failing because they took on bad mortgages given to deadbeats who didn't deserve them, not because of Bush policies.
And who made them do this?
It was an act of Congress.
Maybe the president signed it.
Too many of these people in Washington want to pander, and that's exactly what's happening now.
But the thing that really distresses me is at the end of the day on all this, people are going to end up with a conclusion that capitalism doesn't work, that capitalism is what's flawed here, and it's not.
When they talk talking about regulation, as Senator McCain did in Jacksonville.
We need more regulation.
No, Senator, with all due respect.
We need some accountability for a change.
A quick timeout.
We'll continue with this right after this.
And we're back.
Setting the standard, dictating the pace.
Senator McCain in Jacksonville, Florida, said Wall Street turmoil underscores the need to overhaul the outdated and ineffective patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight in Washington, D.C. In a statement issued in advance of market openings.
McCain said he agreed that there should be no taxpayer-finance bailout of Lehman Brothers, even as the investment banking giant faced the specter of liquidation.
Meanwhile, Merrill Lynch was selling itself to Bank of America for less than half its uh recent value.
$50 million or some such thing.
And you know who's keeping a sharp eye on all this?
Abu Dhabi.
Dubai.
Well, you can't blame them.
They're looking at looking at opportunities here.
Senator McCain, but again, with all due respect.
Accountability is what's needed here.
Uh accountability by those in the government who are largely responsible for the policies and the corruption that did this.
It breaks my heart.
Folks, it breaks my heart to see capitalism get to blame here, even by people on our side who are running around talking about we need more regulation.
That's code language for the free market can't handle itself.
Accountability and regulations are not the same thing.
People want accountability.
I don't think they care much about all these regulations.
I mean, where's the look at this stuff is serious?
Where is the special prosecutor?
Where's Elliot Ness when you need him?
This is a monumental failure of government and government regulation and Congress, and they are passing this off as a monumental failure of the private sector.
To say that we need more government, more regulations, is to say nothing at all useful.
What we need is accountability.
Real reform, and I don't know about you, but I'm sick and tired of hearing about the word reform from every politician on the stump in this campaign.
Because the the word reform is a code word for more government.
And staring us right in the face, is the failure of government to deal with these kind of things by micromanaging it, by regulating it, by politicizing all these institutions.
Why is it we know Ken Lay's name?
But not the names of all of those people involved in this scandal.
I'll tell you why, because the names of people involved in this scandal are names like Dodd.
Chris Dodd, Connecticut.
Franklin Reigns, currently on the Obama economic team, had to leave Fannie Mae in embarrassment over fraud charges.
Jim Johnson, currently on the Obama campaign as an economic advisor with Frank Reigns.
He too used to Work at Fannie Mae.
For all the trashing of Halliburton.
Stop and think of this.
For five years we've heard nothing but Halliburton's rotten this, Halliburton's rotten that, Halliburton stealing this, Halliburton Cheney so forth.
The political class and the drive-bys.
The liberals have trashed Halliburton, but Halliburton never did anything like this.
Halliburton's big crime was to provide support for our troops.
Why not the same treatment toward Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack?
And again, I'll tell you why, because they are what they are and did what they did because of liberal politicians in Washington.
Republicans, you should know this.
Republicans are not good at telling their own story.
Republicans had called for reform for Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae for years.
They were beaten back by lobbyists for Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae who worked the Chris Dodds and the Barney Franks who oversaw them.
It was Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who oversaw these the banking committee guys.
These are government backed entities.
They didn't have to keep the same amount of core cash on hand to cover the loans they had out as free market banks were required to keep on hand.
You got you got banks in trouble, sure, but Freddie Mack and uh and Fannie Mae were on the floor.
And no one calls Dodd to explain what he was doing protecting these people.
And these outfits are making political contributions, over a million dollars in one instance to the uh Reverend Jackson and his monochrome coalition for crying out loud.
We'll be back.
There's lots more straight ahead, my friends.
Be patient.
I'm holding here my formerly nicotine stained fingers a piece from September the 10th.
Now this is five days ago.
I have been saving this piece.
Five days ago, it is a uh it's a blog post by a man named Robert Higgs at the UKindependent.com.
And I just told the uh trustworthy, very loyal and marginally helpful staff here, uh, ladies and gentlemen, that I doubt what I'm saying is mollifying anybody, which is quite a shame, because it doesn't get to the uh real world circumstances that people fear right now, but we do talk about the future in this uh program a lot, and that's what this piece is about.
The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, setting in motion the biggest government bailout takeover in U.S. history brings a grim sense of fulfillment to competent economists.
After all, what did people expect that water would flow uphill forever?
This financial mega mess is the same sort of event as the collapse of the Soviet Union's centrally planned economy, another economically unworkable Rube Goldberg apparatus that was kept going more or less badly for decades before it fell apart completely.
Along the way, of course, famous yet actually unsound economists assured the world that everything was working out splendidly in the Soviet Union as late as 1989 when the pillars were crumbling on all sides of the temple.
Nobel Prize winner Paul Samuelson informed readers of his widely used textbook, The Soviet Economy, Is proof that a socialist command economy can function and even thrive.
And to this day, this kind of garbage is being taught.
This is one year before the Berlin Wall came down.
A highly respected economist talking about how the Soviet socialist command economy can function and even thrive.
Now, in the future, we will see a similar breakdown of the U.S. government social security system with its ill-fated pension system and its even more inauspicious Medicare system of financing health care for the elderly.
These government schemes are fighting a losing battle against demographic realities, the laws of economics, and the rules of arithmetic.
The question isn't whether they'll fail, but when they'll fail.
And then how the government can no longer sustain them, their previous Ponzi scheme form, what will they do to alter them to salvage what little can be salvaged with minimal damage to the government?
And isn't that what's happened here?
Essentially, Fannie May and Freddie Mack go south.
What happened here?
Government takes them over to make sure there's no damage to them.
Government will do whatever it takes to see to it that there is little damage to it, damage defined as having to do with a little less money next year than they did this year, as one example.
Our political economy is rife with such catastrophes in waiting, yet the public always seems startled.
The public always seems outraged when the day of reckoning can no longer be deferred and another apartment collapses in the state's hotel of impossible promises.
What a great way to put it the hotel of impossible promises and an apartment now and then will collapse, loading onto the taxpayers more visibly the burden of sheltering the previous occupants.
Each of these times time bonds has at least one element in common meaning social security, Medicare, pension reform, whatever.
It promises current benefits, often seemingly without cost, but if it must acknowledge a substantial cost, it places that burden somewhere down the road in the distant future where it'll be borne by somebody else.
Call it democracy in action or utterly corrupt governance they are the same thing and by democracy in action what's he mean what he means is mob rule.
It's not talking about representative republic or a representative republic.
The architecture of the hotel of impossible promises is not arcane.
All competent economists understand these things Ludwig von Misis explained as early as 1920 why a centrally planned economy couldn't work as a rational system of allocating resources.
And yet today, ladies and gentlemen, the Democrat Party's presidential team is campaigning on the age-old liberal Democrat Party theme.
That only they can allocate resources fairly.
That capitalism is unfair inherently.
That wrong people end up with too much.
And the good people end up getting screwed and have much less than the corrupt, big, rich people.
And they're going to change that because they're going to get a hold of the government.
They're going to reallocate resources.
resources so that everybody's treated more fairly and throughout history when this has been tried to varying degrees it has always failed and yet that history doesn't seem to make an impression on very many people.
The reasons why Social Security especially Medicare and many other such government programs contain the needs or the I should say the seeds of their own destruction have been explained time and time again.
Are the politicians who construct these structures really such idiots they can't understand the logic of what they're doing not at all they're not idiots that they are not striving to create economically viable institutions that serve the general public interest and that is a dirty little secret everybody thinks that all these social programs,
all these entitlements are born of benevolence, that they are born of goodheartedness, big heartedness, compassion politicians who care for the downtrodden who want to make sure the downtrodden don't get too trodden down by the big rich people who are inherently unfair and mean spirited and extremist except when they're Democrats by the name of Chris Dodd and otherwise and yet they know full well that what they're doing is a scheme it is a Ponzi
scheme and it doesn't work.
Despite all these programs, who's getting rich off of them other than the people who design them and the people who lobby for them?
Who's getting rich off these programs?
The intent as they sell these programs is that you're going to be okay.
You're going to be fine.
You're going to be thinking.
Your lifestyle is going to go up.
Your lifestyle is going to be enhanced and increased.
Never happens because it can't.
It will not work.
They're not working in the public interest.
The people who design these programs, they are feathering their own electoral nests.
FDR, Social Security, the whole point of Social Security with FDR was to ensure never-ending power for the Democrat Party.
By identifying it as the party cares more about you is going to make sure you never have to suffer at all at any time for any reason even in your retirement.
And people bought it.
This then is how they feather their own In the only way they can in the context of our political institutions.
H. L. Mencken said back in 1940.
Politicians understand that votes are collared under democracy not by talking sense, but by talking nonsense.
By pandering.
And what are we getting today?
We're getting nonsense.
We're getting, we need more regulation in these markets.
Regulation and involvement with the government in these markets is what's killed them.
We're giving nonsense.
But they're not dummies.
They know that most people are going to look at the government as a savior in this situation because most people see government as an unlimited stash of money.
If you think that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's bust, remember, this is five days ago.
And this is this is written before all this stuff when Lehman Brothers hit.
If you think that Fanny and Freddie's bust is a big deal, just wait until Medicare comes crashing down, and then the wailing and gnashing of teeth will be truly unbearable.
Because the beneficiaries of Medicare and Social Security, these are the elderly.
They pay strict attention.
They think that they're still to this day receiving in benefits what they paid in.
You imagine the day when some new elderly come along and are told, I guess we don't have it anymore.
What do you mean?
And I've been paying for it all my life.
Just give me back what I paid.
Sorry, we don't have it.
As we've been um we've been doing other things with it.
Well, we haven't.
We'll we'll bail you out somehow.
Well, we'll we'll raise taxes or we'll we'll do something.
As that day rapidly approaches, notice politicians are doing utterly nothing to forestall it.
There was an effort to reform Social Security.
It lasted what, six months.
There is not one thing being done to fix any of this, folks.
Not one thing.
They're still papering over the big problem, which is government regulation and no accountability.
And of course, right on cue.
Right on cue comes the community agitator and organizer, the Lord Messiah, Barack Obama, the most merciful, who today said that the upheaval on Wall Street was the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression.
He's copying that from Greenspan.
It is yet to have an original thought, or he's copying it for the Clinton campaign of 1992, the worst economy of the last 50 years.
He's blaming it on policies that he said Republican rival John McCain supports.
Obama said the country cannot afford another four years of this failed philosophy.
Senator Obama, what the government can't afford is you.
We simply cannot afford you in any way, shape, manner, or form.
Financial, cultural, political, structural, what have you.
And we certainly can't afford people who believe that the solution to problems that they've caused is to promote the people who cause the problem.
Where is the accountability?
Where are the heads rolling?
Where are the investigations?
Where's the U.S. Attorney's Office?
Where's the special prosecutor?
Where are people looking into this like they do when it happens in the free market?
Where are the heads rolling?
Where are the people targeted for jail here?
You don't see it happening because their names happen to be people who are associated for the most part with the working Washington political class, which will do anything it can to see to it, that its institutions are not harmed.
Only yours.
Back in a second.
I think it's safe to say here, ladies and gentlemen, that uh houses for people who cannot afford houses is a failed experiment.
Sort of like the Great Society is a failed experiment.
I would say this.
This whole housing business is one of the biggest liberal failures since the Great Society.
Problem is the Great Society is not considered a failure in a lot of people's minds.
Uh Lehman Brothers, Chapter 11, bankruptcy today.
Obama has raised $395,574 from employees of Lehman Brothers.
That's second only to Hillary Clinton.
Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer did quite nicely too.
McCain is seventh among the firm's favorite politicians, although he is Lehman's favorite Republican.
Chris Dodd and Schumer raised a hundred, well, no, I guess McCain raised 145,100.
But uh clearly, Lehman Brothers gave big to Democrat candidates.
And they are heast while Sarah Palin today was in Golden Colorado on the stump, a campaign event.
She had a couple things to say.
One was uh the uh whole notion of bailing out Lehman Brothers.
I want to talk real quickly about the turmoil in our financial markets.
This crisis is an issue of real concern, not only for those in our financial markets, but for the people across this great country.
It's taking a toll on our economy, and that means people's life savings.
And I'm glad to see that in this case, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury have said no to using taxpayer money to bail out another one this time Lehman Brothers.
And you hear that, Chairs?
You hear the chairs and applause.
That's class envy speaking here.
And it's also understanding market economics.
Lehman brothers ought to go south.
They ran the place on their own.
Uh don't bail them out, don't regulate them.
Now she has to stay on message, and I told you McCain's in Jacksonville saying we need to reform the regulatory markets, so she got to go out there as a number two pick and basically say the same thing.
Our regulatory system is outdated and it needs a complete overhaul.
Washington has ignored this.
Washington has been asleep at the switch and ineffective.
And management on Wall Street has not run these institutions responsibly and has put companies and markets at risk.
They place their own interests first instead of of their employees and the shareholders who actually own these companies.
So John McCain and I, we're going to put an end to the mismanagement and abuses in Washington and on Wall Street that have resulted in this financial crisis.
Well, given, you know what the the given the tune she has to follow, it's not all bad.
She did a little bit better than McCain did uh instinctively.
The regulatory systems out, yeah, it is.
But it's not, we don't need to add to it.
It's not outdated because it's too big or too small.
It's outdated because it doesn't work.
The regulatory system gave us the problem, Governor Palin.
It needs a complete overall.
Yeah, but not by the people who screwed it up in the first place.
Where's Henry Waxman?
He's head of government oversight.
All these clown Democrats looking into impeaching Bush, going into war crimes for Bush, what the hell?
There's plenty of action to look at, except they have to investigate each other.
And they're I of course I'm not advocating complete laissez-faire, but when Washington, when you take the risk out of these markets, then you're taking away responsibility in running these markets.
And when the government gets in there and basically starts bailing everybody out, or promising to, or even partially, then you're eliminating a risk.
Look, they're letting Lehman brothers go, chapter 11 and unbailing them out.
That's a good sign.
But the whole notion, or like I've been saying, we got to regulate, we got a regular reform regulation makes it sound like the free markets, what not working here, sturdily.
I'll guarantee you a lazy fair free market would be much better than the government running it.
Central planning does not work.
Central planning gave us Soviet Union, central planning gave us North Korea, central planning gives us Cuba.
Tell me if you want to replicate that.
Don't give me this laissez faire business.
Nobody's talking here about that.
What we're talking about is eliminating central planning.
Anyway, let's go to the phones.
I'm gonna grab Nate in Cleveland, because Nate, I was in Cleveland over the week and I was up there for the Steelers Browns.
Oh, what an embarrassment.
Let's not talk about that.
No, let's do talk.
Let's do talk about that.
Because the people at Cleveland are great.
I was I was out on the field before the game on Sunday, and it would, you know, wind was blowing like a mother-in-law convention out there.
It's like 35 or 40 miles an hour.
And uh, and I was on the on the uh, I guess it's on the brown sideline, but we're to the tunnel where the Steelers come out.
Of course, Steelers are my team.
But those Browns fans were just great.
They were uh they were just they were shouting my name and supportive, asking me for order.
I was unable to hear most of them because of my hearing problem, but they were fabulous.
I was the first time I've been to that stadium.
I was a great time.
Well, Cleveland fans are the best sports fans in the nation.
Now I have to say that.
Well, see, that's that's another thing.
Uh I've heard this before.
How can you say you're the best sports fans in a nation when you constantly support and pay for a loser?
Well, exactly.
That's why we're the best, because even though all our teams are miserable, we still support them, we still love them.
We're not all fair weather fans.
All right, I'm just kidding you, but that's a good answer.
Uh, my question for you was um I was wondering if you could elaborate or explain how Barack Obama can take the stance and make statements like the country can't take another four years of economic policy like this when it wasn't until about two years ago when actually Democrats took over Congress that consumer confidence plummeted, gas prices have skyrocketed.
I just don't understand.
And my second question is with comments like that, and uh that they're blatantly false, and it's and it's obvious it doesn't take a genius to see this.
How could the American public buy into it?
I don't know if you're not gonna be able to do that.
I don't think they are.
I uh I'd be easier if you asked me, could you tell me, Rush, why Obama decided to tell the truth today?
Because it happened so little.
Uh, or Biden, if you could say, Rush, why are they telling the truth today?
It would take me much less time to explain that than to say they just lie.
It's a campaign.
They're running against status quo because they're the change mongers, the hope mongers, or whatever.
That's all that's all out the window.
They they're still imploding out there is the uh is the bottom line.
Look, Nate, thanks for the call.
I appreciate it.
Brevity is a solo whip, and you have mastered it.
We'll be back after this.
Okay, we'll get to the campaign next because there's a lot to get to in the campaign.
▲
Export Selection