All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 29, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:47
October 29, 2008, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
The race is tightening.
The pollsters cannot explain it.
The drive-bys are concerned.
Rasmussen down to three.
Gallup at two.
The battleground poll is at three.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
Rush Limbaugh in the middle of the week on Hump Day.
It's Wednesday on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
And the telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
Great to have you here, folks.
It's going to take all three hours once again to squeeze everything we have in.
As you know, the Messiah, the Lord Barack Obama, the most merciful, making a 30-minute paid stump speech tonight.
What are you frowning at?
Snirdly?
Forget what TV?
You watch an MSNBC?
Forget television.
I'm telling you, the polls are tightening up out here.
I know you can watch MSNBC and see they've got Obama with 6,000 electoral votes now, McCain with minus 40 electoral votes.
I mean, you can see all that.
But the polls are all over the place.
The pollsters themselves are having trouble explaining why this is the case.
The Rasmussen Report's daily presidential tacking poll for today shows Obama at 50, McCain at 47.
The first time McCain has been within three points of Obama in more than a month.
And the first time that McCain's support in the Rasmussen poll has topped 46%.
Obama has a five-point advantage among those who plan to vote, but say that something might come up to keep them from voting.
Now, this is an interesting aspect, too.
We'll get to in just a moment here, ladies and gentlemen.
Hang in there and be tough.
We've also got a Palestinian making robo calls for Barack Obama, talking about how great he will be for Palestinians and so forth.
We've got the video and the audio of that rather coming up.
Bill McInturf is one of McCain's pollsters.
A big story in the Hill.com yesterday.
McCain's pollster foresees a tight race on election night.
And as the program unfolds, I'll give you the details of what McInturf says.
It is very encouraging.
In the Washington Post today, pollsters are nervous.
I mean, they might be out of business next week if they get this as wrong as they make it look like they're going to be.
Accuracy of polls, a question in itself, is the story in the Washington Post today.
Skeptics challenge the assumptions that are being made.
Still, there appears to be an undercurrent of worry among some polling professionals and academics.
One reason is the wide variation in Obama leads.
Just yesterday, an array of polls showed Obama leading by as little as two points, as much as 15 points.
Steve Shire, political scientist, Carleton College, Minnesota.
I've been wondering for weeks whether the polls are accurately gauging the state of the race.
This is the borrowing from lingo popularized by Rumsfeld.
Shire asked, what are the unknown unknowns?
For instance, is the sizable cohort of people who don't respond to pollsters more Republican-leaning this year, perhaps because they don't want to admit to a pollster they're not supporting Obama.
This is some of the things that they are, they're pondering.
They can't explain why their own polls are so far off pab and why there's so much variance in all of these polls.
I was watching PMS NBC this morning, DNC TV, and they had some hipster on there from what is it, MySpace or MyFace?
MySpace.
Oh, it's Facebook and MySpace.
Okay, they had some hipster on there from MySpace.
Nothing against you people that use MySpace.
I don't know why you want to give up every private item about yourselves.
You'll learn at some point why you'd want to do this.
But feel free.
You know, have at it.
If you desire fame that much, then go for it.
They had this guy on there.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, we're going to have a youth vote out there and nobody's even calculating.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, it's going to be dynamic.
It's going to be huge.
We're going to have so many people, so many young people are going to be out there.
It's going to shock the world, the guy was saying.
And then I see the Las Vegas Review Journal today.
Three groups, colon, forecasts of voting lag so far.
Record turnout was seen for new voters, young voters, and Hispanics.
Analysts have predicted that new voters, young voters, and Hispanic voters will turn out into record numbers in this election.
But as Nevadans continue to flock to the polls, turnout among those three groups is lagging, at least in the early going.
Traditionally, older people, white people, and people who vote consistently tend to turn out at the highest rates overall, said a political scientist at UNLV.
What Republicans have been saying is that registration is only half the game, and they have the tried and true model to get people out.
This is David Daymore.
Now, he's got a point about this, folks, because every year the Democrats go on and on and on, and they give themselves fist bumps and they pat themselves on the back over all their new registrations, but yet they don't show up in the predicted numbers.
And his line that he used here is I remember using in 2004.
You go out and register all the people you want if you don't get them to the polls if they don't show up, and you can't get them all there.
Acorn says they've registered a million new voters.
Don't know how many of them are legal.
Maybe, okay, maybe 400,000 of them are illegal.
And the, what was it?
The majority of them are Democrats, of course, but how many of them are going to show up?
Now, I'll tell you what, if all these young people that are forecast to show up because they've been registered don't show up, I mean, Obama's got a problem here.
In other words, one of the problems Obama's got is why bother to vote when Barry has already won?
If you're watching television, this election's over.
If you're watching any of the media on television, it's over.
It's in the can.
Obama's got it made, so why bother to show up?
Why bother to early vote?
Doesn't matter.
They have got this a fait accompli.
I also think this, and Obama tonight in his speech, inaugural.
It's an inaugural speech.
It's going to be an inaugural speech.
The more this guy speaks, the better.
I want, if you watch this tonight, and by the way, folks, I will watch it.
There's an interesting dispatch here from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
They are located in Tucson.
And they did a survey, and they asked this, is Barack Obama a brilliant orator, captivating millions through his eloquence?
Or is he deliberately using the techniques of neuro-linguistic programming, a covert form of hypnosis developed by Milton Erickson MD?
A fundamental tool of conversational hypnosis is pacing and leading, a way for the hypnotist to bypass the listener's critical faculty by associating repeated statements that are unquestionably accurate with the message he wants to convey.
Now, who is it that's most affected by this?
Let me find a bit of a It seems that the people are most susceptible to being hypnotized this way are the highly educated and one other group.
Bear with me here while I well, I know it's in here somewhere.
It's a long little piece.
I'll find it.
But I do remember the highly educated are the most susceptible being hypnotized.
That would put me in the risk group.
But yet, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to watch this tonight because he doesn't hypnotize me.
In fact, if you do watch this address today, and I should tell you that in the third hour of the program today, I am going to give my pre-buttle to the Obama speech tonight.
I am going to do my version of an inaugural address or campaign speech on this program, and it's not going to cost me a dime.
I will come up in the third hour of the busy broadcast here today on the EIB network.
One thing that Obama is going to say in his speech tonight, we've been trying to solve these problems for 20 years.
Let me get the exact quote.
We've been trying to solve these problems.
We've been talking about the same problems for decades, and nothing's ever done to solve them.
Well, I have to tell you, in one regard, he's right.
We have been talking about these problems.
However, we've been doing all kinds of things to solve them.
And the things that we've been doing to solve them haven't worked.
And that's what Obama is promising.
More of the same that hasn't worked.
That will be a central theme of my inaugural address.
And if these young people aren't showing up out there, folks, you know, it's drastic time here.
Obama, I think he better start using some of his illegal campaign stash to give away some free P. Diddy CDs at the polling places.
Yesterday on this program, ladies and gentlemen, we once again dissected Barack Obama and his speech or his radio interview in Chicago in 2001 talking about how the Bill of Rights is negative rights as far as the government is concerned.
Doesn't give the government enough power to do things for you, to you, or whatever.
Obama, frustrated, thinks the Constitution does not do enough to allow redistribution, wants the courts to do it and so forth.
Mentioned then that Marcy Kaptur from Ohio was proposing a second Bill of Rights because the first Bill of Rights limits government.
So we need a second Bill of Rights that doesn't limit government, that takes the limitations away from it.
We have audio soundbite coming up of FDR from 1944 proposing a second Bill of Rights.
Now, first, on this hypnotic induction that the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons has put out, I've now double-checked this.
The people most susceptible to neuro-linguistic programming are young people and highly educated people, considered to be especially susceptible to hypnosis.
Now, I find it interesting, too, that many Jewish voters are supporting Obama.
He's a candidate who is endorsed by Hamas, has been called the Messiah by Calypso Louis, has been endorsed by Rashid Khalili, and of course, the governor, well, the chairman of the Parliament of Iran, the parliament leader in Iran, has also endorsed Obama.
And so maybe it is hypnosis.
Maybe it is.
And when you watch his thing tonight, I want you to watch it with a new perspective.
I want you to watch it in a different context.
I want you to watch it in the terms of understanding socialism as explained as a very benevolent thing and something that benefits everybody.
And I guarantee you, you will hear Obama in an entirely different light.
Now, speaking of this guy, the name Khalili Kashili, the Los Angeles Times has video of Obama praising Rashid Khalili, who is a professed supporter of Hamas and Palestinians, and he hates Jews, and he hates Israelis, and he hates Israel.
And the L.A. Times did a story on this back in April.
There was a dinner honoring this guy, and Obama toasted him.
And they won't release the video.
Now, bloggers are offering laid-off L.A. Times workers money.
L.A. Times laid off 75 people yesterday.
A bunch of people are offering a lot of money to former LA Times workers to somehow release this tape.
The mainstream media is not interested.
This is huge.
The media in the tank for Obama is suppressing it.
The more it gets out that it's being suppressed, and the more people desire to see this and hear about what it is, it's going to pose a big problem for Obama.
We've now got, what, six days to go before the election?
It's, you know, it's a serious thing who this guy is.
And they've been able to keep a lot of it under wraps.
Here is, by the way, speaking of that, an Associated Press video report of a Palestinian Ibrahim Abu Jayeb campaigning for Barack Obama.
Like many of Barack Obama's supporters, Ibrahim Abu Jayab is working the phones in the final days before the election in an effort to court undecided voters.
But Abu Jayab himself won't be casting a vote for his candidate.
He's making his calls from his home in the Gaza Strip.
He says he thinks Obama can bring peace to the Middle East.
The 24-year-old college student learned a few words of English and cold calls random Americans leaving messages asking for their support.
He's hoping the effort shows the world that there are young people in Gaza who want peace and are doing everything they can to achieve it.
So we've got a guy in Gaza, the Gaza Strip, making cold calls for Obama.
He doesn't know much English, so he's obviously calling in his native tongue.
Don't know what it is, but who the hell is he calling to do cold calls for Obama?
He says, hey, Abu Jayeb from Gaza trip.
And then after that, what does he say?
Vote for Obama, vote for Obama, vote for Obama, vote for Obama.
Probably that.
Vote for Obama, vote for Obama, vote for Obama, vote for Obama.
Who's paying for this?
Have you checked your credit card lately, folks?
Have you found like one woman did $174,000 charge to your credit card?
Oh, yeah, Mark Stein has the story.
One woman just won $174,000 charged to her credit card.
People using not her name, but just her number, her credit card number.
She ended up not being charged for it, but the Obama people got the money.
And nobody knows where it's coming from.
And this is just one example.
This is just one person.
All right, here's Marcy Kaptur yesterday in Toledo and a portion of her remarks where she is advocating a second Bill of Rights.
The Toledo Blade had it right.
The other day they printed what they call the second Bill of Rights.
Roosevelt talked about the right to a useful, remunerative job to provide a decent living.
He talked about the right of every business owner to trade with freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies.
Sound familiar?
That's really why we're here.
We're here in that legacy.
We're here to say we are all together in wanting an America that is job rich with health and retirement benefits that are earned and belong to all and are secure.
All right, that's Marcy Kaptur calling for the second Bill of Rights.
FDR called for this in 1944.
The resemblance to Obama is striking.
We have come to a clearer realization of the fact, however, that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence.
Necessitous men are not free men.
People who are hungry, people who are out of a job, are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day, these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident.
We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all, regardless of station or race or creed.
This is how long they've been fighting for this.
They never go away.
They never stop.
Of course, necessitous men are not free men.
For those of you in Rio Linda, necessitous men means people that need things.
People that are in need are not free.
Yes, they are.
This is setting the stage.
The government can eliminate your needs.
The government can free you from worry.
The government can solve all your problems.
This is why I always said FDR, the New Deal Social Security, was set up precisely to establish the Democrat Party as a majority party for the so-called downtrodden forever by making them wards of the state and then securing their votes because the Democrats are their sole means of support.
Here's another bite from FDR.
This is January 11th, 1944.
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industry, our shops, our farms, our mines of the nation.
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
The right of every family to a decent home.
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age and sickness and accident and unemployment.
Finally, the right to a good education.
This is an incredible thing, ladies and gentlemen, as you hear FDR basically spell out what the Obama agenda is today.
Second Bill of Rights, the right to earn enough, the right of every family to a decent home, the right to adequate medical care, opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
A brief time out, folks.
We'll take it and be back after this.
Do not go away.
Ha!
How are you?
El Rush Bow and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
800-282-2882, January 11th, 1944.
Franklin Roosevelt, this is a fireside chat, a radio fireside chat, by the way.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.
For unless there is security here at home, there cannot be lasting peace in the world.
If history were to repeat itself and we were to return to the so-called normal state of the 1920s, then it is certain that even though we shall have conquered our enemies on the battlefields abroad, we shall have yielded to the spirit of fascism here at home.
Folks, I don't know if you, are you hearing this?
This is just fascinating.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the icon to the left.
And by the way, by the way, they never say the era of FDR is over, do they?
No, we only have numbskulls on our side saying the era of Reagan is over.
But we never hear FDR is over.
And here's why.
They emulate FDR is the guiding light here for Obama.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.
Well, once again, the world views America.
We have to comport ourselves and structure ourselves in such a way that the world views us in a favorable light.
For unless there is security here at home, there can't be lasting peace in the world.
If history were to repeat itself, we were to return to the so-called normalcy of the 20s, which he called fascism.
The second Bill of Rights.
And by the way, this concept of the right to earn enough, the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
What is the right to earn enough?
Who's going to sit there and determine that?
It cannot be determined by any place other than the market.
Let me, folks, do you understand what the money you earn is?
It's not a welfare payment.
It's not a business owner or manager or corporation deciding to provide you enough income to provide this or that.
What we all earn is nothing more than our value.
What we earn represents the value of what we have done for somebody else or for ourselves.
You don't have a right to what that someone else thinks your work is good for, meaning a third party.
So here we have Second Bill of Rights, Marcy Capture yesterday openly advocating it.
We go back and we find FDR from 1944 and a fireside chat January 11th, basically spelling out the Obama campaign today.
And it is, I listen to this and I realize how consistent these people are.
They never stop.
They just keep plugging away.
And what they're plugging away for is the single largest oppressive government they can build.
When FDR talks about individual liberty, he, like Obama, is simply lying through his teeth.
Necessitous men are not free men.
Individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence.
And what he means by that is, of course, that if the government doesn't provide economic security and independence, then there is no individual freedom.
And that is the biggest crock I have ever heard.
If there is no individual freedom, even for poor people in this country, then how in hell's name do people escape poverty and make something of themselves?
And it happens every day in this country.
People from all walks of life, and there are far more middle class and far more poor people than there are rich people.
And most of the wealthy people and most of the highly achieved people, and I'm not talking about billionaires.
I'm most of the people, millionaires in your neighborhood.
They didn't start out that way.
They came from somewhere, and they did it in the country with the single greatest amount of freedom the individual has ever had in the history of human civilization, the United States of America.
And even back in 1944, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was doing his best to water down the basics of the founding of this country.
Just striking stuff.
I say, the battle is never going to be over.
The war is never going to be over because battles are going to be fought continually, over and over again, because this is who these people are.
You might say, well, why?
Rush, why?
How can you interpret that?
They're saying such wonderful things for people.
They want economic security and they want freedom and they want independence and they want people to not be hungry, so forth.
We all want that.
We all want the same things.
It's just this is not the way to provide it.
Folks, let me ask you again.
We've been doing FDR's method here since FDR.
FDR gave us Social Security.
FDR set the stage for national health care.
FDR set the history has credited FDR for bringing us out of the Great Depression with these programs.
These programs of his prolonged it.
What got us out of the Great Depression was World War II and ratcheting up an economy to manufacture the armaments and material necessary to fight World War II.
Everybody in the country was working around the clock.
Rosie the Riveter, as an example, even the women went into the factories, which was unheard of en masse back then.
And since then, what have we done?
We've compounded it.
We've had the Great Society.
We've had the war on poverty.
We have had numerous social programs built upon social programs.
We've had Head Start.
We've had WIC.
We have had AFTC.
All of the money, all the transfers of wealth from the producers to the non-producers should have cured all of these ills, should it not?
And yet, on a percentage basis, we still have the same percentage of people in poverty, the same percentage of people in the lower classes, the middle class, the five quintiles.
The percentages are pretty much the same.
None of this stuff has been wiped out despite all these efforts by the government.
And the people who have escaped the lower socioeconomic realms in our society are those who did not rely on government to do it.
This is the key.
This is the important thing.
They did not rely on an FDR.
They didn't rely on a Barack Obama.
They didn't rely on an LBJ.
They didn't rely on affirmative action.
They didn't rely on all of these redundant programs built atop one another in order to escape whatever it was about their lives they didn't like.
They used themselves.
They ended up being their best resource.
And I say to you again, as I said yesterday, you are your best resource for fulfilling whatever need or desire or ambition you have.
Your best resource is not somebody else.
I don't care if it's your parents.
I don't care if it's your family.
I don't care if it's your president.
You end up having to do it.
If you don't do it for yourself, nobody else is going to do it for you.
Nobody's going to come along and decide that a fair wage for you is $150,000 a year, and that's what you are automatically going to get paid.
That will never ever happen.
I don't care if Obama gets dictatorial control of this country.
That is not going to happen.
It cannot happen.
That's not what he wants anyway.
He wants all of us in as much need and dependence as he can get us.
He doesn't want prosperity for people.
He doesn't want wealth for people.
If he did, there'd be no limit on who gets a tax cut.
Your American dream ends at whatever the figure is today.
It's waffling now between $250,000 down to $150,000 in terms of annual income over which you get a tax increase and under which you get a tax cut.
The evidence, ladies and gentlemen, is scattered across the world, but it is focused right here in the United States of America.
Every effort to provide salvation for economically aggrieved, socially aggrieved groups with the Democrats has been applied.
We have spent trillions.
We have cared.
We have used our compassion.
And yet they still exist.
And they're still angry.
And they're still hopeless and they're still enraged.
And guess what?
They're still waiting.
They're still waiting for a magic man to come along and finally do it right.
There is no right way to do what FDR tried, what the Democrats are trying now, what Obama wants to try.
There's no right way to do it.
The evidence is worldwide that it fails.
All around us, we see people who have exceeded their own expectations.
We see people who have exceeded the expectations of their families.
We see people constantly who surprise everybody with their ambition, their work ethic, and their success.
Those are the people, by the way, under an Obama presidency who become the target.
They become the object of punishment.
Those who do not go the proscriptions of a government assistance program of any kind get out of whatever circumstance they're in that they don't like.
They use themselves as a resource.
They become successful and prosperous.
They open businesses.
They hire other people.
They try to grow.
They do everything they can.
They play by the rules as best they can.
They, they, the ones who actually use the individual freedom this country provides that FDR and Obama are lying about, they who actually use the freedom are those who prosper.
They are the ones who overcome.
Those who sit around and wait for a resource other than themselves to lift them up are forever going to be waiting.
If there's a recession, you don't necessarily have to participate.
If there is high unemployment, you don't necessarily have to participate.
The United States of America is one country where you can create your own job if you choose.
Don't have to.
You can stay unemployment or whatever and wait for something to come along that you like.
Or you may say, I don't want to leave town.
I don't want to leave where I am.
Fine and dandy.
Just understand the limits that all of us place on ourselves are self-imposed, folks.
In terms of our escape, we've all got shackles around us some way or another.
We all have government regulations in front of us.
We all have other things we have to overcome.
It's not a free ride and it's not an easy road, but the simple fact of the matter is that there are people who escape their circumstances each and every day.
And it's happened throughout the history of this country.
And it's interesting, those are the people that the Democrat Party wants to target for your hatred.
They want you to envy them.
They want you to distrust them.
They want you to resent them.
And they want you to think they need to be punished.
While everybody else that gets praised, everybody that the Democrats and the liberals and Obama sit down and say, these are the people who make their country work.
They're the ones that are waiting around for Obama to create magic, to wave a magic wand, to help them out of whatever mire they consider themselves to be in.
Yet all around them, they see people escaping, and they do resent it.
You remain the single best resource you have.
And you full well know, after listening to Obama, that the more you succeed, the greater target you will become.
Now, is this the kind of country we want?
Is this the kind of president we want to have?
Is this the kind of party we want having dominating one-party rule?
Is this the kind of that targets successful people and seeks to punish them?
I don't think so.
Brief timeout.
We'll continue after this.
Stay with us.
Hi, welcome back.
It's Rush Limbaugh and the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
McCain is now on the campaign trail demanding that the Los Angeles Times release the video of a party for a prominent Palestinian activist that Obama attended in 2003.
Now, the LA Times described the going away party for former University of Chicago professor and Obama buddy Rashid Khalidi in a story in April.
The story reported that Palestinians thought they might have a friend in Obama because of his friendships in that community, despite the fact his positions have never been particularly pro-Palestinian, says Ben Smith of the Politico, as I read from his account here.
The video could, among other things, show how Obama responded to a poem recited at the party accusing Israel of terrorism and warning of consequences for U.S. support for Israel, which has been described by some people.
Michael Goldfarb, a professor at Columbia University, is hate speech.
The election is one week away, and it's unfortunate that the press so obviously favors Obama that this campaign must publicly request that the LA Times do its job.
Now, there's also something interesting about this tape.
This party in 2003 features testimonials, ecominiums, ecomiums, rather, by many of Khalidi's allies, friends, and buddies.
Obama is there, he was an Illinois state senator.
Bill Ayers was supposedly there in 2003.
It was sponsored by the Arab American Action Network, AAAN, which had been founded by Khalidi and his wife Mona, formerly a top English translator for Arafat's press agency.
Now, the LA Times has the video, and they are sitting on it, and they will not release it.
Now, who knows?
We're left now to speculate why they won't release it beyond media bias, beyond being in the tank.
Maybe they don't want to see.
I mean, Obama's crafted this whole thing.
Ayers is just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.
Well, I thought he was rehabilitated.
Well, here, if he's there and on video in 2003, just five years ago, I mean, that puts the lie to everything Obama said about the guy.
Plus, you add to the content of what this dinner was all about, celebrating a Jew hater.
And if Bernadine Dorn happened to be there, they all signed a guest book or some, maybe not a guest book, the signatures were said to be, are said to be on some acknowledgement of greatness for this Khalidi guy.
And he is a friend of Obama's.
He's not some guy who just happens to live in the neighborhood.
So the McCain campaign is now demanding that the LA Times release this.
Let me grab a quick phone call here before the segment ends.
It's in Flint, Michigan.
This is Don.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Rush, good afternoon.
Thanks for taking my call today.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
My real concern about FDR's remarks are, the same as Barack Obama's, that FDR made those remarks while men were dying in Europe defending that very same constitution.
So I guess the Democrats, like you said before, have just remained ever so consistent on their theories.
I mean, I cannot believe that the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces in 1944 had the nerve to have a fireside chat and say that while men were dying in Europe.
Well, it's a great point, but you can't, I think, don't want to say that the FDR sought defeat of his own country.
Obama did.
You know, that is a fundamental difference between the two.
Obama and the Democrat Party of 2007, 2008 actively sought defeat of the United States.
FDR did not.
FDR, with these fireside chats, he knew we're going to win World War II.
He's pretty confident.
He's setting the stage for an expanded, even bigger government.
This is a guy that packed the Supreme Court or tried to.
This is the guy who was doing all of this.
All of this was done for the express purpose of establishing the Democrat Party as a monolith that would never, ever be defeated.
He wanted, here's a guy in 1944 looking at the American people and saying they can't do things on their own.
They're incompetent.
They can't overcome the obstacles out there unless we, the government, are helping them.
And of course, nobody overcomes obstacles when the government's helping you because the government ends up being your largest obstacle.
By the way, just to clarify this FDR thing, it was actually his inaugural speech.
Now I'm getting confused.
Fireside chatter inaugural.
It was in January of 1944.
A brief time out, folks.
Sit tight.
▲
Export Selection