All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 14, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:05
January 14, 2009, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, greetings and welcome back.
Rushlin Boy and the fastest three hours in media here behind the golden EIB microphone.
Nice to have you with us here, folks.
Here's the phone number.
If you want to be on the program, hey, we'll get, we're going to try to get to a lot of phone calls this hour, but there's a lot, a lot to do as well.
800-282-2882.
Email address, lrushbo at eibnet.com.
All right.
I think this is worth pointing out, ladies and gentlemen, reminding people, that is my observation of the TARP law as written.
As far as I know, I am the only one who made anyone aware of what Democrat, the Democrat Congress authorized in legislation authorizing TARP.
And that, let me just read it to you once again.
Section one, the short title, Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
Section two, purposes, provides authority to the Treasury Secretary to restore liquidity and stability to the United States financial system and to ensure the economic well-being of Americans.
That was the law.
That's the bailout law.
That's Section 2 purposes.
Treasury Secretary has the authority.
He is a czar.
He's a dictator.
And we haven't heard from Hank Paulson in two weeks or three.
Where is he?
Treasury Secretary to restore liquidity and stability to the U.S. financial system and to ensure the economic well-being of Americans.
That is a leap.
Our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, doesn't even say that.
Here's the longer section number two, purposes.
The purpose of this act are, one, to immediately provide authority and facilities that the Secretary of the Treasury can use to restore liquidity and stability to the financial system of the United States.
What exactly is the financial system of the United States, and why does one man given the job of restoring it as if it needs to be restored?
Does this mean that Paulson can impose tax cuts?
Does this bill give the Treasury Secretary the authority to impose tax cuts?
He's a dictator here.
Here is Section 2, or paragraph 2 of Section 2, the purpose of the Act, to ensure that such authority and such facilities are used in a manner that A, protects home values.
Is your home value protected?
Protects college funds, protects retirement accounts, and life savings.
Have you looked at your 401k lately?
Have you looked at your life savings?
Is anybody protecting any of this as the TARP law empowered, directed, authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to do?
Is it not getting worse?
And isn't President-elect Obama telling us it's going to get even worse?
Now, part of one thing you have to consider is that I think these dire forecasts, they're shooting way low.
So that when it doesn't get that bad, guess who gets the credit?
Lord Barack Obama, the Messiah, the most merciful.
When it doesn't get as bad as he says, wow, what a great guy, what a great president.
At the same time, when he says how bad it's going to get and how much worse it's going to get, that's also designed to have you acquiesce to government and say, fix it, whatever you have to do, fix it.
And right along those lines, ladies and gentlemen, the most amazing story.
I found it today at Politico.com.
A majority of voters say their confidence in the federal government's ability is faltering, is failing, according to a new Public Strategies Incorporated political poll.
62% of respondents say their confidence in Washington has decreased over the past year, while only 8% said their confidence has increased.
Less than a third of those polled said their confidence in the federal government remained the same.
Poll was conducted December 20 or 17th or the 21st, 1,000 people.
When asked which issue should be the biggest priority, despite the glaring lack of confidence, voters want action to aid the economy.
You see, this is how this works.
They don't think the government's succeeding.
They don't think the government, but they want the government to do more because there has developed over generations way too much reliance and faith in the federal government that is totally unwarranted, unjustified by the facts and by the evidence.
When asked which issue should be biggest in priority, 45% listed an economic stimulus package with a focus on employing out-of-work Americans.
Now, where else is 42%?
Get this one.
42% feared the government will not go far enough to increase taxes on corporations.
Do you note the disconnect here?
Number one priority, government priority creating jobs, but 42% fear the government won't raise taxes on business enough.
That's depressing.
That is downright depressing that there are that many people in this country, apparently, who think their route out of this problem is increased taxes on business.
So I guess we're to assume here that the purpose of this poll was to say the American people indeed don't trust business.
They trust government, even when they say in the poll they don't trust government, to create jobs.
Back to the Treasury Secretary.
Paragraph B: purposes of the act are to preserve homeownership and to promote jobs and economic growth.
The stock market's down 229 right now.
I would think with all this stimulus activity going on and all this great news about what's going to happen in the future, the markets would be way up, but they aren't.
Paragraph C: The purpose, maximize overall returns to the taxpayer of the United States.
So the bottom line here is that the Treasury Secretary, and I think I'm the only one that continues to point this out, the Treasury Secretary has sole authority to do all of this, and it's going to be Geithner.
And then there's a kabuki dance going on between Bush and Obama over the remaining $350 billion.
What do Bush and Obama have to say about it?
The Treasury Secretary has authority over this.
Let's go to the audio sound bites.
Barack Obama Monday afternoon, a montage of when he met Mexican President Felipe Coleron.
Today, I called President Bush to trigger the second half of what's known as the TARP program.
I felt that it would be irresponsible for me with the first $350 billion already spent to enter into the administration without any potential ammunition, should there be some sort of emergency or weakening of the financial systems.
Should there be?
There already is, and we have a bill to prevent it.
The Treasury Secretary is in charge of it, and it's getting worse.
The original bailout hasn't done anything.
The budget deficit for the first three months of fiscal year 09, which ends in January, was going to be $418 billion.
And we're on our way to a $1.2 trillion budget without Obama's additional billion dollar or trillion dollar stimulus package.
And by the way, the gasoline price, the oil price is $35 today per barrel.
The gasoline price, depending on where you live, is well under two bucks.
Isn't that a stimulus?
Shouldn't that be a stimulus?
So look at the effect of that oil price drop and the corresponding gasoline price drop has the effect of a tax cut.
Why aren't the people spending?
Why isn't there increased demand?
And that leads to another monologue I've got coming up, and it can basically sum it up this way without having to go through a huge monologue.
Much of what we see as downside today is driven by a lack of confidence, a withdrawal of the average Joe and Jane from the marketplace.
That's all it is.
Joe and Jane are not spending.
And neither are Mrs. Rich Joe and Jane.
They're not spending either.
They have been convinced to not have confidence in the U.S. economy on purpose.
So even a huge drop in the gasoline price from just last August at $4 to $1.65 is not resulting.
That's a huge increase in disposable income.
And people, now we got the story.
Well, they're saving it.
They're saving too much right now.
Other times they don't save enough.
They're saving too much.
They're not putting it into the marketplace.
That's okay.
The Treasury Secretary has the ability to fix all this.
And Obama wants the $350 billion now.
Barney Frank has changed his tune.
Last week, Barney Frank was all for not releasing TARP without oversight, but now he wants to give it to Obama.
Very important.
And what we're being told apparently is that because George Bush screwed it up, Barack Obama can't get to use it.
You listen to some of these people and you'd think the TARP was an animal that had been going around biting people.
The TARP doesn't have a heart or a mind.
The TARP is a set of tools.
The question is: will Obama do it better?
We believe he definitely will.
Really?
Well, the TARP funds are the direct responsibility, sole authority of the Treasury Secretary.
It's not Obama's right to ask for it right now.
Barney trusts the Obama people because they're not barred by ideological restrictions.
I trust the Obama people, and they are not barred by these ideological restrictions.
You know, there's a difference between Democrats and Republicans.
To some extent, it's whether or not you think the free market can be left entirely on its own and will do everything right, or whether you need some intervention.
The free market be left entirely on its own.
When was the last time that was the case?
Government's been meddling in it for years and now has really stepped in it.
What do you think the problems derive from, folks, if not the government taking over the private sector?
Ha!
We are back.
Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Now, this next story, this is just creepy.
This is just creepy.
Ladies, I want your attention on this.
This is from ABC's News, Eyeball News in Washington, WJLA.
Many people who like to stop and play with newborn babies, or many people do like to stop and play with newborn babies, but now some adult women are playing house with fake babies.
Some women are even going as far as taking day trips with the fake babies, taking them to the park, out to eat, and even hosting birthday parties for them.
49-year-old Linda is married with no children of her own.
Now she says she feels like a mother because she has reborns.
Reborns are dolls made to look and feel like the real thing.
Reborns with a capital R.
I guess it's the name of the doll.
I don't think you'll find them at Walmart, but you can check.
Linda said, it's not a crazy habit like, you know, drinking or some sort of, something that's going to hurt you.
It's like a hobby, and it doesn't really hurt anybody.
These women are paying big bucks for the hobby.
$100 to a few thousand dollars for a reborn.
For reborn owner Lachelle Moore, the fake babies fill a void.
What's so wonderful about reborns is that they're forever babies, said Moore, who has two grown children and grandchildren.
There's no college tuition.
There's no dirty diapers.
There's just a good part of motherhood.
In her Kansas City home, in her Kansas City Moore, Lachelle Moore even has an elaborate room for her dolls.
She organizes birthday parties, bakes a cake, and even invites guests.
Psychologists say there could be a problem if and when these women stop interacting socially with others in their life, and it could be a problem.
Now, this is just creepy.
But we must, ladies and gentlemen, we must allow for something here.
It is quite possible that some of these women have had boyfriends like me.
You know what I'm thinking?
No, there's nothing about sex here.
This is about reproduction.
I'm thinking, guys, it might be a good idea to go out and buy a stash of these things and have them to pass out.
I know, I'm just kidding, snorkel.
I know they're, like I said, it's creepy.
By the way, ladies and gentlemen, can we all agree that many aspects of the Obama administration are simply recreations or continuations of the Clinton presidency?
Can we also agree the Super Bowl is coming up on February 1st, and that will be the end of many fun and exciting weekly office pools?
Well, we need something to continue the office pool game because, you know, for a lot of people, when football season ends, it's worse than the month of February setting in living in the northern climes.
It's just, it's depressing.
It is, it's withdrawal time and nothing to look forward to for a lot of people.
That's why we need to recreate or to create new subjects for the office pool.
And I have some ideas.
Normally, as you people know, I don't like to talk about myself much.
But here are some interesting questions, some poll questions for your office pools after the Super Bowl.
And it would be around Obama and what is effectively going to be the third term of the Clinton administration.
A sample question.
How long will it take Obama to board Air Force One and to call a radio station carrying my show and complain that I have three hours unstopped, undebated, to tell people what I think, and he has no way to respond to it?
How long will it take Obama to tell a horrid racist joke about me at the White House correspondence dinner?
How long will it take Obama to blame a domestic terrorism incident on me?
If this is the Clinton administration redux, and it likely will be, How long before Michelle Obama conducts her own press conference under the portrait of Abraham Lincoln in the White House because of something I have said?
How long before Obama sees me at a restaurant and hits on my date?
All of these are valid office pool questions.
And we'll have more of these for you as the end of the football season approaches.
Back to the phones we go.
As I say, people are always patiently waiting, and I regret that we don't get to them quicker than we do.
This is Betty in Winchester, Indiana.
Nice to have you on the program.
Hello.
Thank you, Rice.
I enjoy listening to you.
Appreciate that.
I was listening to your reborn, and I thought, he's got to be kidding on that.
So I went on my computer, and there it is.
Yeah, it's right there.
It's a orangutan baby doll, and it's $140.
Yeah, but the thing about the human reborns is apparently same size, they feel, look, like real babies, and that's why they're so expensive.
Well, yeah, but they've got some for like $60.
You know, you've got to have different price points here because we're in an economic recession.
Well, you couldn't prove that by people around here that you're spending this kind of money.
They even have some that they breathe.
It's called a realistic breathing baby doll.
So truly real.
And I'm thinking, oh, this is.
Well, then why were you shocked at the story about the reborns?
I don't know.
I guess just because you got nothing better to do than buy baby dolls and have, that's what little girls do to have birthday parties for baby dolls.
I don't know.
At my age, I've just gotten to the point where I think nothing surprises me anymore, but then I get a surprise like this.
So anyway.
Would it be over the top, ladies and gentlemen, to suggest maybe a charitable donation of a bunch of these dolls say to Planned Parenthood as gifts to their customers and clients?
Because I saw the other day, Planned Parenthood is down 20%.
They're looking for bailouts.
Oh, no, That's not what it was.
The Madoff scandal.
The Madoff scandal has resulted in Planned Parenthood getting 20%.
Maybe it's a little bit more donations.
Yeah, so you go into Planned Parenthood as a customer.
You walk out, let the deed's done, they give you one of these reborns.
Well, no, you can't.
I don't know.
No, no, you don't take it that far, Snerdley.
You're asking irrelevant questions here.
What happens if they change their mind if they take the doll?
You know, we're not talking about them ordering it.
What do you do when you go to Planned Parenthood?
What do you go in there for?
Tell me the word.
You go into Planned Parenthood for an abortion, all right?
It's a traumatic thing, right?
We've heard all about this.
So to save you and to make you feel better as the client when you leave, give you a reborn.
That's what I meant.
Where did Snerdley go?
And I was suggesting this because the Madoff scandal has resulted in a 20% reduction in funds for the poor people at Planned Parenthood.
Hey, let me change subjects real quickly to Obama for a second.
I want to go back to this dinner that he had because one of the things we're hearing about the dinner with the conservative pundits last night was that they did say tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts.
And Obama said he's open to ideas that work, right?
Which, you know, is just as PR, smoke, and mirrors.
But how about this?
I'm going to give Obama a I'm going to give Obama a test here.
I'm going to offer him an idea.
Let's put it this.
I'm going to offer him an idea without having to meet him personally.
Here is how Obama could test the idea of a tax cut without actually doing it, which is his modus operandi.
He's going to sign an executive order closing club get mo, but it's not going to close.
Right?
All right.
He doesn't have to mean it.
And it's right up his alley here.
He doesn't have to mean it.
He doesn't even have to propose it.
But if Obama was truly open to ideas on how to spark an economic recovery, all we'd have to do is on a weekday morning, give an interview and say that he's open to across-the-board tax cuts.
All he has to do is say that he's willing to look at that as an option.
And then we see what the market would do.
What would the market do if Obama says he is open to across-the-board tax cuts?
Not going to touch capital gains and might even lower it.
He's going to reduce, he's open to reducing the corporate tax rate.
He's open to keeping the Bush tax cuts and having them renewed in 2010.
What do you think the market's reaction would be?
He could get the market up.
He could do it like that without ever having to actually lower the taxes.
Now, if the market sinks a few hundred points, like it did with his FDR plan, then I guess the economic activists in the private sector don't care much for that approach.
But if the market was to jump hundreds of points, then Obama might seriously want to consider tax cuts.
You know, float the balloon when the markets are open.
Gauge the reaction.
It's all it would take.
He wouldn't have to really even do it.
And of course, he won't do it because what I just described is exactly what would happen.
From the CyberCast News Service, America does not need a new New Deal or a stimulus package to rescue its economy, said Dr. Burt Folsom, professor of history at Hillsdale College.
And Stephen Moore, columnist with a Wall Street Journal, they argued this at the Metropolitan Club in Washington.
Real tax cuts would lift the economy, they say.
And of course, can you imagine?
I want you to stop and think of this, folks.
Imagine if, I know this will never happen, but just imagine if it did.
I just want you to pretend here.
I mean, we've been doing that for the last year with the presidential campaign anyway.
We're pretending we're buying into all kinds of PR.
So pretend this.
Pretend that they canned the income tax for one year.
Just pretend that they, okay, if you don't like it, they eliminate the income tax for six months.
Imagine what that would mean to you.
Imagine how much more disposable income you would have, money you've earned, and what you might do with it, and thus what that might do to the economy.
Just pretend.
I think it would be a fascinating exercise.
Several internet complaint boards are filled with comments from credit card customers coast to coast who have noticed a mysterious charge of about 25 cents on their statements.
The charge shows up on statements as coming from Adele services in Melville, New York.
No business by that name listed in Melville or registered to any business anywhere in New York for that matter.
Two theories of what's going on have advanced on message boards and among consumer advocates.
Somebody's trying to find out whether an illegally obtained credit card number will work before making a bigger charge, or they're trying to rip off tiny amounts from tons of people.
It is not clear how the numbers got in the hands of the people making the charge, but consumer advocates say it is most likely through either a data theft or somebody using a computer to generate numbers.
It's easier to steal $1 million or $1 from a million people than $1 million from one person.
Once again, we hear these stories left and right.
All of these sophisticated data theft stories.
You might want to go check your credit card receipt and see if there has been a charge that makes no sense for 25 cents on your statement.
And you might even ask yourself, well, so what?
25 cents, what am I going to do about it?
What do I care?
It's not worth the hassle to call somebody.
There is a way, ladies and gentlemen, you can prevent all of this from affecting you.
It's called Life Lock.
You don't have to pay hundreds of billions of dollars to get your life protected, and you certainly don't want to lose your identity and all the cost associated with trying to get it back.
Identity thieves have threatened businesses with large-scale data breaches of millions of consumer records.
And now this appears to be a new tactic.
25 cents charged to as many people as possible.
Could be a dry run.
You need to check your credit card receipts.
After you do that, call LifeLock 1-800-440-4833.
Use the promo code RUSH.
You'll get 30 days absolutely free.
They will prevent this from happening.
Means it won't happen.
They'll stop it before it happens.
If something slips by, they're liable for a million dollars in paybacks to you.
That's how confident they are they can protect your identity.
That's LifeLock.
You go to Lifelock.com.
Do the same thing.
Use the promo code Rush or 1-800-440-4833.
30 days absolutely free.
Costs hardly anything.
And then you are worry-free.
Back after this.
We are back.
Rush Limboss serving humanity, executing assigned host duties flawlessly.
Zero mistakes.
People who get less than seven hours of sleep at night have a three times higher risk of catching a cold than people who sleep eight hours or more, according to a study at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh.
Well, I never get seven hours of sleep.
Never.
I always get much less than that.
And I seldom get colds.
I sometimes get flu and bronchitis, but I seldom get colds because I use Zycam.
This ought to boost Zycam sales even more than I can.
And how many of you have time to get more than seven hours' sleep?
It's a time problem.
I mean, I don't have time to get more than seven hours sleep.
I'm going to sleep when I die.
I don't want to sleep.
Now, I hate going to bed.
I literally hate going to bed.
Zycam can overcome this supposed risk of not getting enough sleep.
First time, I used it yesterday.
I shook so many hands in the White House yesterday, and I got back to the airport, got on the airplane, and put on the antibacterial lotion, and then I grabbed Zyka's throat was a little dry.
You never know.
Whenever I suspect any symptom of a cold, the first thing I do is go swab both nostrils and then penchant of five seconds like that with Zykem Swab works.
It works.
Sean in San Jose, California.
Hi.
Yes, Lord Rush.
It's an honor to speak with you.
Thank you, sir.
You know, actually, first I got to say, before I get to my point, that being on hold in your program is actually one of the most enjoyable things.
The tracks you guys play are downright hilarious.
So keep that up.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
What is this, you guys, though?
The entire EIB crew, I guess.
I'd put it that way.
Okay.
So that can be a good idea.
So if that's what you think happens, then I'm not going to waste time arguing.
Yes.
Now, the point I wanted to make is regarding Obama's stimulus and what he's been talking about with rebuilding infrastructure and doing all this stuff with the roads and construction.
I think that's actually going to lead to a huge spike in illegal immigration.
And I think, you know, if you point to the example for that, it's what happened in Atlanta, which was the last big public infrastructure project we had to build the stadiums for the Olympics and things like that.
There was a huge influx of illegal immigrants that came.
And then since then, the city of Atlanta has been dealing with huge problems with the immigration, with gang activity, and all these problems.
And, you know, to say that we are a country like we were in the 20s and 30s, that a stimulus package to do construction is going to help every common man.
I just don't think that can be.
I get your point because these are still jobs Americans won't do.
Unemployment is not that high, not like it was in the Great Depression.
However, there's another element to this.
I saw a story today, I haven't gotten to it yet.
The U.S. military is warning of the total collapse of Mexico.
The potential total collapse of Mexico as a government, as an economy, as a country.
And if that happens, where are these people going to go?
One other thing I want you to think about.
We've been talking about the TARP funds and the, we've had audio soundbites today from Barney Frank and Barack Obama, who are eager to get their hands on the money, even though it's the sole property of the Treasury Secretary.
And what are they saying?
They're saying there needs to be new pressure.
Now, listen to me.
Look at me on this.
New pressure on the banks to lend because the banks are not lending.
They're not lending money because they're so over-leveraged.
I mean, they'll lend money to people who, without question, have enough assets the bank could steal if they defaulted.
But the average American can't, they say, Ken, you can buy a car, but the banks won't lend.
Now, Obama, Barney Frank, the banking queen, are all out there demanding that the banks lend.
They want new what?
Oversight.
They want new accountability standards.
Isn't that what got us in the problem we're in in the first place, folks?
A bunch in the Congress who know nothing about the financial business telling banks to whom they must loan money?
Isn't that how we got here with the subprime mortgage business?
With people like, well, from Jimmy Carter through Clinton, on up to Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac telling lending, and Acorn telling lending institutions they have to loan money to people that can't pay it back.
Well, now, aren't we revisiting that territory here all over again?
Isn't the message from Barney Frank and these people to the banks, you won't lend money, you must lend money.
Barney Frank knows better how to run a bank than a banker does.
Chris Dodd knows better how to run a bank than a banker does.
Barack Obama knows better how to run a bank than a banker does.
They're not lending money.
Varney Frank and Obama would say, yeah, but we gave them money to lend.
We gave them the Treasury Secretary has the authority on how it's used.
You guys didn't write a law that says they have to lend it because somebody could challenge that constitutionally.
However, this is the danger.
When the government gives you money, they do have some say-so over how you use it.
In fact, in most cases, if somebody gives you money, they're going to try to exercise some control over either how you use it or when you give it back or how you pay it back.
One of those things.
When somebody gives you something, you owe them big time.
Even though you think it's not a loan, you get a gift.
In areas here we're talking about, you're in for it.
But aren't we creating, aren't we just redoing the same thing that got us in all this mess in the first place?
Letting incompetent, unqualified members of Congress tell the banks what they must do and how much they run their business.
So we're not bailing out banks.
It's clear now.
We're not bailing out banks.
We are taking control of them.
That's what Barney Frank wants.
The Associated Press today tested before taking power.
President-elect Obama privately delivered a pre-inauguration veto threat to fellow Democrats saying they would not deny him use of the remaining $350 billion.
Die-Fi doesn't want to authorize it.
So he's warning them of a veto.
This is all designed to make him look like the centrist in opposing his party.
We have much more on this tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection