All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 22, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:34
September 22, 2008, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plain.
Rush Limbo, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Telephone number if you want to join us, 800 282-2882, and the email address L Rushbaugh at EIB net.com.
China's food safety crisis widened Friday after the uh industrial chemical melamine was found in milk produced by three of the country's leading dairy companies, prompting stores, including Starbucks, to yank milk from their shelves.
The recalls came as evidence is mounting and adding chemicals to watered down milk was a widespread practice in China's dairy industry.
Now, I believe it was Barack Obama who said that we should emulate China, did he not?
Their infrastructure after the Olympics, he said, Whoa, look at that infrastructure.
Look at all the money they've spent building that country.
We should emulate China.
What parts of communism is it that Obama likes?
Was it the part where they poison their own people?
Nationalized milk farms don't seem to be doing any better than any other nationalized business.
But I'm sure nationalizing the mortgage and health care sectors under Obama will work out much better.
We're talking about 700 billion to a trillion dollars here on this bailout.
Do you know how many trillions we've spent on a great society in a war on poverty since the 60s?
Try a transfer of wealth of about six million, or trillion rather.
Six trillion dollars, and have we wiped out the problem?
The problems?
No, we have not.
Speaking of the Chicoms, you know what they did today, their state-run party newspaper ran an editorial saying that we gotta have a new world order in the economy.
That pegging the world economy to the United States is a mistake and the world can't afford to be dragged down by what we're doing here.
By bailouts, by government-run economic institutions, the ChICOMs of all people.
And there's good old Barack Obama who wants to emulate them.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, as I was saying, the far left, the left, the Democrat Party, sees this economic crisis as an opportunity to change the nature of this economy.
The problem is that we have a Democrat candidate who wants to nationalize the private sector.
Let me give you this details of this.
Just got this over the course of the break at the top of the hour by Bill Salmon at Fox News.com.
Barack Obama, who lamented Friday we have not managed our federal budget with any kind of discipline, is nonetheless promising to spend $50 billion on a United Nations anti-poverty program that critics say will drive up American debt.
So this is how Obama wants to solve the economic problems.
He wants to give the corrupt rat hole known as the United Nations $50 billion of our money to fight poverty.
That's going to really help U.S. American debt.
And that's not just once.
He wants to do that every year.
The UN's Millennium Development Goal wants to cut poverty in half by 2015 by distributing wealth from countries like the U.S. and giving it to those less fortunate.
Go talk to people, responsible leaders in Africa, who are begging the world to stop this.
Because it is preventing education, ambition, inspiration is preventing African citizens from learning to take care of themselves, which is exactly what the UN wants.
Everybody knows that wealth transfers don't work.
By the way, Snerdley said, you know, during the break, why why, after listening to your brilliant explanation of this in the first hour, why should I even bother paying off my mortgage?
I mean, I could just not pay it.
I go into default and the government's going to let me keep the house.
Snerdley, the odds are that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack didn't buy your mortgage because your mortgage probably not subprime.
Let me ask you, do you have to put a down payment down?
Do you have to pay closing costs?
Do you have an ARM?
You got a flat rate.
Well, then I'm sorry, you don't qualify.
You got to keep paying.
You you you were you did th that's exactly right.
Snerdley, you did things right.
You followed the rules, and you better pay, or they're gonna come take your house away.
And if Barney Frank gets his way, some subprime person is going to be put in your house.
If you default On it.
That's what Barney Frank's trying to set up here.
So yeah, if you've got if you got a legitimate mortgage that's not subprime, the odds are that Fannie Mae Freddie Mac didn't buy it.
And even if they did, they packaged it differently than they did the subprimes.
So we've got we've got a Democrat candidate who wants to nationalize the private sector.
We have a Republican candidate who is more populist than conservative.
In case you missed this.
Last night on 60 Minutes, Senator McCain said that he would name Andrew Kumo, the New York State Attorney General, son of Mario the Pious, to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Now, Andrew Kumo ran HUD under President Clinton.
McCain said, I've admired Andrew Kumo.
I think he's somebody who could restore some credibility, lend some bipartisanship to the effort.
Kumo didn't comment.
From the village voice in August of this year, August 5th, the headline, how the youngest housing and urban development secretary in history gave birth to the mortgage crisis.
In 2000, Andrew Cuomo required a quantum leap in the number of affordable low to moderate income loans that two mortgage banks, known collectively as government sponsored enterprises, would have to buy.
The GSEs, government sponsored enterprises, don't actually sell mortgages to borrowers, they buy them from banks and mortgage companies, allowing lenders to replenish their capital and make more loans.
They also purchase mortgage backed securities, which are pools of mortgages, regularly acquired by the government sponsored enterprises from investment firms.
Cuomo's predecessor, Henry Cisneros, for the first time in December 1995, took a cautious approach in moving the GSEs toward a requirement that 42% of their mortgages serve low and moderate income families.
Cuomo raised that number to 50%.
Dramatically hiked the government sponsored enterprises' mandates to buy mortgages in underserved neighborhoods and for the very low income.
Part of the pitch was racial, with Cuomo contending that Fannie and Freddie weren't granting mortgages to minorities at the same rate as the private market.
William Apger, Como's top aide, told the Washington Post, we believe there are a lot of loans to black Americans that could be safely purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack if these companies were more flexible.
Well, guess how they got the flexibility?
Hello, Janet Reno.
Hello, Bill Clinton.
Hello, Jamie Gorellick.
Now, while while many saw this demand for increasingly flexible loan terms and standards as a positive step for low income and minority families, others warned that they could have potentially dangerous consequences.
Franklin Rains warned that Cuomo's rules were moving Fannie into risky territory.
Well, he went there.
He went there and found a way to score huge, but the point is.
The McCain campaign ought to quit running against Christopher Cox and the SEC and start running against Democrats on Capitol Hill, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and so forth.
Let me give you a brief history lesson, ladies and gentlemen.
Two years ago.
Two years ago, the Democrats, great fanfare, took control of both the House and the Senate, promising great changes and great advances.
So on January 5th, 2007, just about the time Pelosi and her cronies took control of the House, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is 12,400.
The New York based conference board said its consumer confidence index was 110.3.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics had the unemployment rate at 4.6%.
And according to CNN gallon and gasoline in January 2007 was about $2.20 cents.
Last Thursday at about one o'clock Eastern, the Dow had had a bottom of 10,500 before Paulson and Bernanke intervened.
That's about a 15% drop in the Dow since Pelosi and the Democrats took over Congress.
And we could go on.
The conference board's latest take, consumer confidence, 56.9, a drop of 48%.
The unemployment rate in August at 6.1%.
An increase Bureau of Labor Statistics of 33%.
Gasoline prices at about $3.70 a gallon, 68% increase.
What changed?
What changed?
Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd took control of the House and Senate banking committees.
Representative George Miller, Democrat California, Senator Ted Kennedy took over their respective labor committees.
John Dingle, Democrat in Michigan, Jeff Bingaman, Democrat in New Mexico, became chairman of the energy committees.
There has been not only no oversight from the Democrat-controlled Congress on any of these things.
There has been an active effort to prevent oversight while at the same time blaming capitalism and the fact that there has been no regulation.
They want as many of you thinking that capitalism brought this about when in fact all roads lead to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack and the Democrats who enabled them and ran them.
They keep saying that people didn't believe in regulations.
This was a policy imposed by law and enforcement on the private sector.
So you've got Obama wants to nationalize the private sector.
We have a Republican candidate who's more populist than in conservative.
What we want is change.
Change the chairman of the banking committees in Congress.
Get rid of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
They are a disgrace.
They are lying about their roles in all of this.
They shouldn't be anywhere near addressing this problem now.
They should resign from their posts.
And the Republicans ought to demand it day in and day out.
To sweep this thing under the rug is some sort of bipartisan failure or some kind of private sector meltdown or what have you removes responsibility from the kingpins behind this.
And the tendency is of the Washington governing class to circle the wagons and protect themselves.
At this, you get to a juncture like this, party is not going to matter.
Barney Frank and Chris Dodd need to step down from these committee chairmanships, and they need to be demanded that each day by the Republicans.
Here's a Barney Frank quote.
He says that the private sector got us into this mess and the government has to get it out.
He said, Here's the quote.
The private sector got us into this mess.
The government has to get us out of it.
We do want to do it carefully.
The private sector didn't get us into this mess, Senator Frank or Congressman Frank.
You did.
And your party.
So here they are demagoguing and demanding protections for homeowners while trying to prevent a cascading meltdown that'll ruin everybody, including homeowners, just like they do on social security privatization.
By the way, Obama's out lying about that now.
Obama is telling seasoned citizen groups that John McCain would have had their social security money in the stock market today.
It is an abject lie, and the Washington Post, all kinds of people are calling him on this lie.
Even when McCain supported privatization, the bottom line was.
If you're born, if you're born was it after, was it after 1950 or before 1950?
If you're before 1950, your money doesn't go to the stock market.
You do not have the option of investing it yourself.
Your money stays right where it is in the Social Security so-called trust fund.
It's an abject out and out lie from the uh Messiah's campaign.
All right, a brief timeout.
We'll come back and continue, folks, right after this.
Areas in Green Bay.
I think Obama is going everywhere McCain goes a day or two later, and he is lying through his teeth to whoever he's speaking to there.
During the commercial break here, he just said that everybody knows that this problem occurred because of lack of oversight and no regulation.
And, of course, the doofuses in his audience.
Most expensive commodity we have in this country is ignorance.
Audio soundbite time, ladies and gentlemen.
I mentioned earlier they joked about incest in the Palin family on Saturday Night Live.
We have two soundbites for you.
Let me set this up.
The skit.
is New York Times reporters in the newsroom discussing Palin stories.
They set it up this way so they can claim they were making fun of the media, not Sarah Palin.
What about the husband?
You know he's doing those daughters.
I mean, come on, it's Alaska.
He very well could be.
Admittedly, there is no evidence of that.
But on the other hand, there is no convincing evidence to the contrary.
And these are just some of the lingering questions about Governor Palin.
This is this is so over the top.
I mean, I I think even regular Saturday Night Live viewers are sending emails and making phone calls to NBC.
What has happened to NBC?
I mean, it just seems perverted and corrupted at what ever did the only thing that seems to be free and clear so far is NBC sports.
But they're on the verge.
But you've got my God, this, and you've you've got what's going on at MSNBC.
Here's the second bite.
This is uh later on at the end of the skit, they say this.
In 2009, Howland Gwathmi Moss V was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his Times series on unproven yet undisproven incest in the Palin family.
Sadly, he was to die three months later, run over by a snow machine driven by a party.
Mild laughter and applause.
So incest in the Palin family, subject matter for Saturday Night Live Skit.
This past Saturday night, Todd Palin.
You know he's doing the daughters.
New York Times reporter sitting around there.
Saturday Night Live people say, hey, hey, hey, we're making fun of the media for being so out of touch what goes on with Alaska.
Oh, not working, guys.
Nice try, but that does not cover it.
Now, the interesting thing about this is I think if you look at the Emmys last night, you hear what Laura Lenny did?
Well, now get this.
Now, Laura Lenny, you know, she's an idiot, as most of these people are.
By the way, this is the lowest rated Emmys telecast ever.
These people refuse to get the message.
People do not, and and they were apparently all of the award recipients last night were given free reign to talk about the presidential campaign, one way or the other.
Laura Linney played Abigail Adams in the John Adams miniseries on HBO, and it won a lot of awards.
So she goes out there.
But I think we have let me see if I've got it.
I think uh let me see.
Just didn't hang on, hang on.
is...
...
and Uh no, we don't grab grab 24.
We'll play it anyway.
Um 24 and 25.
But what we've got, but Laura Linney, she played Abigail Adams.
She went out there and um made some comment about how honored she was to play such a successful community organizer as Abigail Adams.
Now, Kirk Ellis, uh the writer of the John Adams miniseries, praised the founder's ability to speak in complete sentences.
This is a slam at George W. Bush.
Uh, thank you, Tom Hanks, Gary Getzman, Michael Lombardo, Colin Callender, for giving me this amazing opportunity, this amazing opportunity to talk about a period in our history when articulate men articulated complex thoughts in complete sentences.
All right.
All right, all right, all right.
That's a slam at Bush.
Well, remember this, ladies and gentlemen.
Uh I also want to thank uh uh uh the uh this uh uh uh yeah uh uh uh is uh is uh of their work uh uh uh we uh uh uh I'm so what do you think of this, Kirk Ellis?
What do you think of this?
This is the Messiah, Barack Obama from a 40-minute press conference, unrepeated, eight minutes of uhs, ands, you know, uh uh uh uh inability to complete a complex thought in a complete sentence.
Bozos out in uh in Hollywood.
As I was saying, I don't think that They understand the damage they're doing to their own causes with these things.
Saturday Night Live not helping Obama with this stuff.
Sixty thousand people showed up to see Sarah Palin over the weekend at the villages, which is it's a predominantly Republican retirement place, a little bit north of Orlando.
Sixty thousand people.
This was uh nobody has seen a crowd larger.
And people who saw her appearance Saturday afternoon and the villages and say she's getting better and better and better.
So while they put her down, while they make jokes about incest in her family, keep in mind who's doing this.
The compassionate understanding tolerant left.
Oh, and by the way, the Nags, the now gang, they endorsed Obama Biden.
They emborsed endorsed a ticket without a woman on it.
Well, I mean, no surprise, but we should know.
Okay, don't forget, folks, Spanish language trans and I'm gonna move this to the third hour.
Because I got to get some phone calls in here and some other things uh in the news besides the news of the bailout.
The Spanish language translation of what I actually said that was lied about in the Obama TV ad for Hispanics all over the country to hear.
In the meantime, we're gonna go back to the phone, start with Mark and Houston.
I'm glad you called, sir, you're next, and it's great to have you here.
Thanks for having me, Rush.
I just like to say that the term backed by the full faith and credit of the federal government.
I would like to see that that term banned from all books and removed from any and all negotiations because I now know that what that really means is that I personally, because I'm a taxpayer, I am the guarantor of that transaction.
Yeah, but you always have been.
I did not know that.
I always I was taught in the city.
Well, where do you think the where do you think government gets its money?
I understand Rice, but I always thought that that was something that stood for something that meant something positive, not by the full faith and credit of the federal government, meaning that we you know we are going to take care of this.
They are going to back it.
Now I realize that's a money grab opportunity, and that allows people to take risks.
But I know how to fix this.
Let's narrow it down to one hundred people.
That's only one hundred people that we can hold responsible for this.
Forget about Congress.
Let's deal solely with each state deals with their two sent senators, and that will now pull these people's feet to the fire.
Uh I'm not sure I understood all that.
Uh he wants to fire every senator.
Is that was that uh it's not just the senators that are responsible.
It's Barney Frank.
You guys you're gonna have to listen here.
I mean, I'm I don't want to sit here and have to repeat things I've been talking about for an hour.
You cannot just ignore Barney Frank and some of the other people involved in this.
It's not just in the uh in the Senate that we had an oversight problem.
You've got to go back to the Clinton administration.
We've got to mention names like Janet Reno.
You go, well, what can we do to her now?
You've got we if we're gonna fix things like this, we have to understand who's responsible for them.
Janet Reno, Jamie Garellick, all these people from the Clinton News, Andrew Cuomo, that is necessary to understand his role in it because McCain wants to name him chairman of the Security Exchange Commission, Joe Inannapolis.
Glad you waited, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Thank you so much.
Rush Meghan Navy Town did this too.
Appreciate that, sir.
I am a uh mortgage banker.
In fact, I might be the only mortgage banker in America who does not own his home currently.
I did hold the bigger.
Well, now wait.
You you have to explain that.
I sold my home directly before the boom.
Oh, oh, I thought you meant you lived in it, but you didn't own it.
I do not own my new my my I have a condominium now in Annapolis, but I uh did own a home before I sold it directly before the boom, and of course, after the boom, uh uh housing prices went so high that it eliminated me from the market because of course, being in the mortgage business, there wasn't a whole lot of chance my income was going up at that juncture.
Yeah, well, see now that's another aspect of the because you know the the the the overvalued price of homes is a central factor in what happened here because of the bank rolling and the and the supporting or the support for all these worthless mortgages and so forth, with everybody running into the market to buy a house.
What happened to the supply of houses?
It shrunk up, so The price of housing went sky high.
Absolutely.
And that led to ARM crises with people on their mortgages and so forth.
And I know they took the pledge and understood that it could go up, but when it did, they weren't able to handle it.
Uh and then and then if what what's happening now in the home price business, correct me if I'm wrong, is this a major correction here?
Prices are now starting to stabilize what the market really would set them to be as opposed to this this mess that existed with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Well, you are absolutely correct, and of course I get very concerned as a non-homeowner at this point that people will step in in terms of government when I say people and try and correct it.
Of course, politicians always want to have the economy look good if they're in office, and they always want it to look bad when they're not in office.
Uh and when the housing prices were going up, nobody was doing anything.
Um except for trying to encourage it with lower rates and that sort of thing.
Government was already involved with Fanny Freddy, as you have discussed uh at great length and very accurately, I might add.
Um so nobody was doing anything now that it's crashing as it needs to, in effect, uh everybody's complaining and blaming Bush and the Republicans.
Yeah, they are, and of course the Republicans are not out defending themselves in any of this.
But while the well, you you use the word crash, but in California, first time home buyers are up on a tremendous almost almost twenty percent, because prices out there are stabilizing and people can afford to get into the housing market now for the uh for for the first time.
Anyway, uh Joe appreciate the call.
Thanks much.
Uh Laura in uh Newman uh Newman, Georgia.
Nice to have you with us here.
Hello.
Hey, how are you today?
I'm pretty good, thank you.
Uh I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed uh your explanation, uh all roads lead to Fanny and Freddie, the explanation of the current financial debacle.
It gave me a much better understanding of what's going on.
And uh I think you need to repeat it every day.
What did you think?
I'm curious.
What what before you heard my explanation, what did you think the problem was?
Well, I I thought that it went, you know, it related to redlining and good, but I just could not understand how big it it had gotten.
I mean, you know, I just couldn't I it's hard for me to grasp the amount of money, and I guess I don't really understand the sheer number of people involved.
And you know, you would think if someone is writing a mortgage, they would want to give it to people who could pay it back eventually.
See, this is this is one of the fundamental problems that people are coming to grips with.
Yeah, most people when they go borrow money have to prove that they can pay it back.
They have to show a net worth statement, uh, income, all these all this evidence.
It's it's tiresome.
And it's invasive, depending upon the uh amount of money you want to borrow and for what reason.
The loans we're talking about, these people didn't have to prove they had jobs.
I I think you you can't relate to that.
No, I cannot.
I remember the seventies when interest rates were so high.
I do too.
And I thought that uh I would never be able to own a house.
I just really thought I mean it was we uh my husband and I made a move and we sold a house and moved to a place where houses were a good bit more.
And it was, you know, quite a shock, and interest rates were so terribly high.
I mean, it was depressing.
I thought, well, we'll never own a house again, but we do.
So it's not all bad.
Well, see, look it.
Here's the here's the there's some positives here.
I don't I don't want to be totally negative.
I mean, it people don't want to hear the positives right now, but we're learning that you can't lend money to people who can't pay it back.
Whether we're gonna keep doing it is another matter.
What's at stake here, folks, is the takeover of the U.S. economy by the American left.
That is what is at stake here.
And you might be saying, Well, where's the Bush administration on this?
Hey, I I could only guess, but the last thing I think any sitting president would want to leave office on is an economic situation like this.
So whatever it takes to get this off the books for a while, uh and and uh and and look at there are some people, folks, who believe that something drastic has to be done because if if we just let it go and crash, that too much is gonna crash and it's gonna hurt a whole lot of people.
But who is it that's telling us this?
The people telling us this are the people who want control over this.
There's a big idea at stake here.
It really is.
It is whether or not socialism works.
Can the government be the provider, the guarantor, the protector of everybody for their wants and their needs?
This is what's being said.
We know intellectually, we know historically it doesn't work.
It has never worked.
At least it doesn't work pre creating prosperity.
It creates tyranny.
It works for people at the head of the chain on something like this, but it doesn't create prosperity for people.
So it's a these are these are to me very, very crucial questions.
You know, the arguments that we have in this country over how to manage our affairs.
I mean, you could be charitable, and you can say that people on the left and people on the right want the same things.
I used to think that, but I don't anymore.
But for the sake of discussion, you can say we want the same things.
We want a prosperous economy.
We want educational opportunity for kids.
We want a safe, crime-free neighborhood.
We want economic opportunity growing.
We want access to plentiful supplies of energy, all the basic things here that have defined the country.
The argument has been how to provide them.
The liberals think the government should be in charge of parceling these things out because they'll do it in a more fair way.
Conservatives say no, the government doesn't create diddly squat.
It's the private sector that creates all this and rewards risk and rewards people who work hard and so forth.
And that's that's the argument.
I really don't think the left wants and has the same vision for the country anymore that uh that they once did.
I think this is a radicalized Saul Alinsky Democrat Party that JFK would not recognize, that Hubert Humphrey would not recognize, that Robert Strauss from Texas would not recognize, that Pat Brown, the governor of California, would not recognize, that Morris Udall would not recognize, that Scoop Jackson would not recognize.
I mean, none of these old Democrats would recognize this.
This Democrat Party, this party has been radicalized, it has been taken over by the Alinskiites, and their purpose is to destroy the country as it exists and remake it.
And you say, well, how why why would people want to do this?
They don't like it, folks.
I can't explain the psychology of liberalism.
I think it's a disease, but I can't explain it.
I don't have we don't have time to try to understand it.
We don't have tr time to gather our thoughts at why are we doing this and why are they because frankly I don't it's like my case, I don't care that they hate me.
I don't care to understand why, it doesn't matter.
The fact that they do is what is.
And the situation right now is these people have to be defeated.
Now after that, we can put them on the couch.
Try to figure them out.
How can you live in the greatest place in the history of humanity and hate it?
It's not rational.
We try to understand this applying the same belief systems to our own belief systems and it doesn't work.
We don't have hatred for the country.
Don't understand it.
It's irrational to us.
They try to rationalize their irrationality is a very, very frustrating thing.
In the meantime, they have a golden opportunity here.
I mean, look what they have nominated a 100% empty suit with no experience, no qualification, no nothing, except he comes right out of the Alinsky Rules for Radicals School, which is all about taking down the existing power structure and blaming the United States for imperialism being too powerful,
being too rich, being too wealthy, being too unjust, being too unfair, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And they're on the cusp here of grabbing in both hands a trillion dollars worth of money to sit here and nationalize the uh the home mortgage business.
The very people that wrecked it seek now to control it.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
You remember that uh two-minute ad that we played last week, Obama's quasi presidential address.
I went back through that, ladies and gentlemen, because a lot of that had to do with his uh four part solution for dealing with the financial crisis.
And I want to go through Obama's four part solution here for you to uh reiterate the uh brilliant comments that I that I just made.
And in investors business data, they are running some killer editorials lately.
IBD.
Just amazing.
Point number one, Obama calls for subsidies to working families.
Now keep in mind, this is his solution to the whole bailout thing that we're talking about.
The idea that these people have a limitless amount of money to spend is just front and center.
They don't think there's any limit whatsoever on what they can spend.
Listen to these items.
He calls for subsidies to working families to beat high food and energy prices.
Now, the very basic fact is that high food and energy prices are not helped by subsidies but by more supplies.
He doesn't, I I honestly think that he hasn't the slightest clue about economics.
I don't think he does.
I don't think he can speak on his.
I think he regurgitates what he's been taught what he's been told to say.
I don't think the guy has an original thought.
I think ever since he turned himself over to the street mobs in Chicago and the heirs and right types.
I think he ceased to exist as how whoever he was.
But subsidies?
We're going to pay people to go out and buy supplies of energy and food that are not increasing because Obama is not doing anything to increase those supplies economically.
The real solution is to force a Democrat Congress to allow domestic drilling for oil.
If we allow domestic drilling for oil, you can say goodbye to rising gas and food prices.
His second point, called mutual responsibility and reciprocity, calls for banks to subsidize bad borrowers to protect homeowners and the economy.
Well, the truth is this would eliminate personal responsibility, and this is exactly what they want to do.
They want to eliminate personal responsibility so that you transfer it to the government.
The government will be guarantor, protector, defender, and all of these things.
Third, he seeks new oversight and regulations of our financial institution.
What that means is forcing new bureaucracies and regulations into the private sector, the very phenomenon that has made navigating the health care industry such a delight.
And fourth, no kidding.
Look at all the mountains of regulation HIPAA, whatever else is out there that you have to go through just to go to the doctor.
He wants more of that throughout the private sector.
And this is the killer.
This is the PAs, the decisions.
He seeks to empower unelected foreign entities to the same globally coordinated rescue effort.
But Bernanke and Paulson have already done the heavy lifting as the rest of the world has done next to nothing.
One more global bureaucracy won't make America's financial system any healthier.
And then he also wants to pay $50 billion a year from the United States to the UN to wipe out worldwide poverty.
By the way, some of you earlier may not believe that Janet Reno.
This is involved in pressuring lending institutions back in the Clinton days.
This is from the Cybercast News Service.com.
Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began trying to combat redlining, a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others based on economic status.
Clinton administration said no loan is exempt, no bank is immune, said Attorney General Janet Reno, for those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.
Now look, let me say something about redlining.
Redlining in and of itself is horrendous.
You just decide because of the way somebody looks or where they or where they live that you're not going to give them a loan.
You know, that's that's that's not good.
But you don't fix that by giving everybody that's no not capable of paying it back alone.
That's it's it's exactly what we did with affirmative action.
We started punishing people who had not committed any crime whatsoever.
We started elevating people with no accomplishments, no achievements on the basis of past transgressions.
They tried the same thing here with redlining.
And look at where it got us.
The Clinton Reno threat of vigorous enforcement pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown.
One economist told the Cybercash News Service, banks, in order not to get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldn't have been getting mortgage loans in the first place.
And then the banks could just sell the loans off to Fanny or Freddie, uh, who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, because that's what Fanny and Freddie were uh were set up to do.
Anyway, got a brief time out.
Lots to do in the next still a monologue on the poll from AP on race and white Democrats not voting for Obama, and our Spanish language translation response to Obama's lying ad last week.
Hey, you think if Saturday Night Live did a skit on incest in the Obama family with his kids as the uh recipient?
▲
Export Selection