All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 14, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:43
August 14, 2009, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I got the one o'clock cigar fired up.
The La Floor, Dominicana, Double Ligaro Chisel.
I got my golden EIB microphone.
And I got Friday, baby.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
That means if we go to the phones, you can talk about whatever you want.
That's not the case Thursday.
We go to phones to program content's all yours.
That's a that's a huge career risk.
Nobody else in media takes a risk like this.
I am confident because I love you people.
Here's the telephone number, 800-282-288-2, the email address.com.
I got I got an email yesterday from a woman.
I think it was uh uh in the L Rushwood EIBNet.com and do it.
Might have been the website subscriber account, but regardless, woman said, hey, I just posted a response to this on this website.
So I clicked on it, and it that there's some it let me get the I kept it here.
Uh what did it be uh uh hmm?
It's it's uh calories count.com.
Calories count.com, and it's amazing.
Somebody, I don't know who, doesn't matter.
It's it's an it's a non-political website, but they somebody analyzed my weight loss, which is now 82 pounds.
I started on March 9th, this is uh August 14th.
Weight loss is now 82 pounds.
Uh and they analyze and they say can't do it.
They say he could not have lost that much weight this fast.
It's not possible.
And yet here I am.
I'm on television, I'm on the ditto camera right now.
You can see it.
Everybody can see it.
I it is amazing to me to listen to people analyze my diet and say it can't be done when I have done it.
And they totally misunderstand my jokes about exercise and not doing any exercise.
Uh and and they purposely misrepresent when I say this thing is so complicated I can't explain it to you.
Meaning, all right, for for lunch today, I had quick weight loss chicken salad.
Does that help you?
No, you need the recipe, right?
I can't give you the recipe.
I don't have the recipe, and I'm not gonna go start giving out recipes.
I don't know how many calories it had.
It doesn't matter.
They then say that I said I had 1,500 calories a day, which is it averages about that.
They say you can't lose as much weight as he did every 50.
So then they start speculating that he had gastric bypress surgery.
And I'm sitting here and I am stunned.
I mean, I've always lost weight fast.
I've I've uh it's it's a trait.
This diet I've never lost weight faster than this one.
But intellectually, it just puzzles me.
These are just average ordinary Americans posting in this website, it can't be done.
There gotta be, he's gotta be lying about something.
And I'm not.
I mean, you've those of you who watch this program daily on the Ditto Cam have seen the change.
I have been here every day.
I didn't know there's no.
I mean, it's just it's preposterous that it can't be done.
Or and if it if I did do it, it can't be healthy.
Meanwhile, Jay Leno lost 12 pounds over a month or something.
I mean, people magazine does this glowing, what a great story.
What a great thing, Jay.
12 pounds.
In the old days, I could have done that, you know, with a couple trips to the bathroom.
12 pounds in a month.
Oh, what a gr oh man, Jay Leno, leave must have done a lot of exercise and so forth and so on.
Oprah Winfrey, New York Post paid six earlier this week.
Apparently she had some of the girls from her school in Africa in New York.
And they went out gorging.
They went to every sweet shop, they went to every fast food shop.
I mean the the the New York Post followed them around apparently, and it was sympathy.
So sad.
So sorry for Oprah.
Lost control again.
Uh she was with the kiddies, and then just, and then here I am losing the 82 pounds, and I don't even know what number of days it is now.
I haven't run the numbers since March 9th.
You can add it up.
Uh But it's just it just it just I don't know for some some reason it intrigues me that otherwise intelligent people I know they have to be intelligent can look and see me and say it didn't happen.
That I could not lose as much weight as I say I have, even though it's irrefutable.
Anyway, enough of that.
Nancy uh uh uh Andy McCarthy's piece has now been posted at National Review Online Nazis for me, but not for thee.
Why shouldn't socialized medicine prompt comparisons to national socialism in Germany?
And I'm gonna read excerpts of this.
It's a great great piece.
But as promised, Ronald Reagan in 1961.
Operation Coffee Cup, the whole thing is ten minutes.
We don't have all ten minutes of it, but Operation Coffee Cup campaign against socialized medicine as as it was then proposed by Democrats.
And here is uh uh just a portion.
We have three sound bites of Reagan from a recording that was distributed by the American Medical Association.
Back in 1927, an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism.
But he said, under the name of liberalism, the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine.
It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project.
Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it.
Ronald Reagan.
And by the way, Norman Thomas is the grandfather of Newsweek reporter Evan Thomas, and he was an avowed socialist.
Here's the second of our three clips of Reagan.
Let's also look from the other side at the freedom the doctor loses.
A doctor would be reluctant to say this.
Well, like you, I'm only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf.
The doctor begins to lose freedoms.
It's like telling a lie, and one leads to another.
First, you decide that the doctor can have so many patients.
They're equally divided among the various doctors by the government.
But then the doctors aren't equally divided geographically.
So a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town, and the government has to say to him, you can't live in that town.
They already have enough doctors.
You have to go someplace else.
And from here it's only a short step to dictating where he will go.
This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being.
And that provision was part and parcel of Hillary care.
A signing doctors regionally, assigning them geographically.
It went so far in Hillary's health care bill as to assign what specialty they would learn.
Doctors were going to be totally controlled, and it would be no different in this health care bill if Obama and Reed and Pelosi and Waxman get what they want.
Here's the next one.
You and I can do a great deal.
We can write to our congressmen to our senators.
We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms.
And at the moment, the key issue is we do not want socialized medicine.
Write those letters now, call your friends and tell them to write them.
If you don't, this program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow.
And behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country.
Until one day, as Norman Thomas said, we will awake to find that we have socialism.
And if you don't do this, and if I don't do it, one of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it once was like in America when men were free.
I tell you I get chills up my back.
I feel like I'm listening to my dad.
My dad said the same thing to me.
You boys are gonna be slaves.
Ronald Reagan and my dad, they grew up in the thick of the Cold War.
They knew who communists were, socialists, and they know what their intent was.
And they were scared to death for my brother and me over what would happen if they weren't defeated.
Here's Ronald Reagan in his 1961 warning of the dangers of socialized medicine.
That's how far back.
The left has been trying to get it, and he's right.
It's it's it's it's a parallel in a way to global warming.
The environmentalist wackos have made great inroads because who wants a dirty planet?
Who wants to destroy the planet?
Who can possibly oppose people who say they're trying to save animals in the planet?
But the same public who can oppose a plan that's going to get health care for everybody.
Now, so far they've been beaten back.
For fifty years, they have been beaten back, but they never stop.
The lesson here is they never stop.
And there are plenty of Norman Thomas's round today.
They don't call themselves socialists, they don't even call themselves liberals.
They call themselves progressive now.
But when Norman Thomas said, the American people would never vote for socialism, but under the name of liberalism, the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program that's no different than Rahim Manuel saying we have to take advantage of this crisis.
It's no different than Obama lying through his teeth about what the health care plan contains.
It's what the left always does, folks.
It's what they always have to do.
They can't be open.
You would reject everything they say they want to do if they were open and honest about it.
So the battle never ends.
Well, battles end.
The war will never end.
Remember, the history of the world is communism, socialism, totalitarianism, statism.
That's the history of the world.
That's the history of mankind.
The United States of America is the exception.
And that is part and parcel.
How you define American exceptionalism, founded on liberty and freedom.
And the knowledge that those traits, the liberty, freedom, all come from our creator.
And there are people who, for their own aggrandizement in power, want to snuff that liberty out.
That's just the way it is.
And they've always been here in America, too.
But they've never gotten as close to realizing their dream as they are now.
They own the White House.
They own the House of Representatives.
They own the Senate.
They must not own all of those at the elections of 2010.
But they're never going to go away.
They'll come back under the guise of some other issue or name trying to advance the agenda.
It's just who they are.
I don't care about their motivations, don't care to try to explain motivations, it's just who liberals and socialists are.
And after they own the White House, and after they own the House of Representatives, and after they own the Senate, and after they own the Pentagon, and after they own everything else in government they can populate.
They will then own you.
And that's what Reagan was trying to warn of back in 1961.
Open line Friday, Rush Limbaugh serving humanity to all corners of the world.
To Oklahoma, here is Dustin.
Dustin, nice to have you, sir.
He's 23 years old.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Thank you, Rush.
Hey, uh, I've heard a little bit about what is wrong with the health care uh plan, but what is right with it and can it be fixed?
Now, uh what are you asking what's right about the American health care system or what's right about the health care reform plan that Obama's trying to to uh pass?
Yeah, what's right with with his plan, if anything, I mean, is there anything that can be taken from that and made into something good?
No.
Well, I'm I'm sorry, I'm the ignorant American.
I don't know, uh I don't know what exactly he's talking about.
I just hear a little bit here and there.
Let me tell you why.
I mean, you that's a legitimate question.
It's it's sort of a variation of question.
Russ, is there anything good you can say about Obama?
Yeah, he's going to Martha's Vineyard and he rented a house owned by a Republican.
See, I can say good things about Obama.
The reason this plan's bad is because this plan has nothing to do with health care.
This plan does not improve health care.
It does not, it does not extend health care to people that don't have it, it doesn't do anything.
It's advertised.
All it does is put the government in total control of every aspect of your life, Dustin.
Um the government's gonna determine what diseases are treated, how much is spent treating them, who gets treated.
Uh it's it's it's there's there's nothing there's nothing in this that is redeemable at all.
Even, you know, you've heard probably that there are 47 million uninsured Americans.
That's just horrible.
How can a country like ours have that many uninsured Americans, right?
Right.
Okay.
The uh House bill has been analyzed by the Washington Post and the Congressional Budget Office.
This monstrosity, 1,017-page bill, after it passes, ten years after it passes, there's still 17 million uninsured Americans.
It doesn't even accomplish its primary advertised objective.
But the reason it's bad, and the reason there's nothing in it that's good, is because the government is going to be totally in charge of it.
And the government there's nobody in government that understands health.
Obama's never been a doctor.
Obama's not a businessman.
He has it it's none of his business what you eat, what kind of car you drive, it's none of his business where you go to school.
It's none of his business, period, how you live.
It's none of his business if you choose to smoke.
Right.
If you're not breaking the law, it's nobody's business what you do.
And we need these people have the power with this plan passes to regulate behavior based on the impact your behavior will have on our health care system.
I guarantee you there's nothing about it that's any good.
But it's it's socialism.
It is it is liberalism.
It expands the government at the expense of your liberty.
I I don't I don't I'm not interested in cherry-picking what might be a you know a page or two in here that have some good ideas because the whole thing has got to be stopped.
Okay.
You know, uh I do I do building maintenance, and if they run a building like they run the uh health care system, it's just gonna be a man.
Well, did you hear the president the other day?
He was out doing a town hall meeting, and one of the one of the falsehoods that he's telling people, he says, now, and I want you to understand the logic of this.
There's two parts here.
The president says, first thing, our health care system is broken, it's gotta be fixed.
It's just immoral and unjust.
We've got to do something about it, right?
Right.
Then he says, if you like your insurance plan and like your doctor, you get to keep it.
Well, now wait a minute, Dustin.
I thought he just said the whole system's broken, yet if you like yours, you can keep it.
That those two don't go together.
The second thing is he said that he wants a government option in insurance to compete with all the private insurance options that people have to keep the insurance companies honest.
Uh now, in in making uh people have been objecting to this, he said, hey, look, a UPS and FedEx are doing fine, and the it's a post office that's in trouble.
Now, this was one of the most unfortunate things for him he's ever said.
He just told the American people that a federal agency, the post office, is in debt, it's not doing well, it's a mess, that private sector companies delivering packages are doing much better than a government plan.
And yet he went ahead and made that comparison.
The reason he did it is because he's he's trying to convince people that their private insurance plan will remain intact.
It will not.
83% of people who currently like their health care plans through their employer will lose it and have to go to the government option within five years of the program passing by design.
The president himself has said numerous times since 2003 that he's for a single-payer system, which is government-controlled health care.
So, just in a philosophical sense, Dustin, your instincts are right on the money.
Your your analogy, but if you you do building maintenance, they run a building like they run the health care system, uh, it'll be a disaster.
Your instincts are right on the money.
There is nothing redeemable in this plan.
There is nothing redeemable of putting Barney Frank or Henry Waxman or Nancy Pelosi in charge of your life.
Well, they wouldn't be on the same health care plan themselves, would they?
No.
They will they will exempt, they will exempt their will be no government-run health care for them.
Their health care insurance and doctors will remain private sector as they are now.
Um they've got great health care options uh as elected officials.
But the big mistake people think that that's a government-run plan.
It's not.
It's government paid for, us taxpayers, but Senator Kennedy didn't go to some government doctor.
Right.
Senator Kennedy went to a private hospital, private doctor.
Right.
The government doesn't run any of those health, and And but they're gonna run ours if this uh if this thing passes.
So you got a good head on your shoulders.
You follow your instincts out there.
All right, thank you, Rush.
All right.
That's uh that's I I like that question.
Is there anything good in the health care plan?
See, you know what that question is it it it illustrates the desire that a lot of Americans have can't we can we just get along.
Is there just can't find something to say good.
Everybody in this case, bottom of my heart honest, there's nothing in this bill worth having.
If we have to take everything else along with it.
It may be a couple good ideas.
I don't know, but they're not worth having if all 1,016 other pages are filled with the garbage that they are filled with.
No, no, this has to be stopped.
You don't compromise with socialists, you beat them.
You don't compromise with people who want to take your freedom away.
You beat them.
Are there any hate groups on the left?
There are.
Are they ever the subject of uh network news reports?
Has uh Brian the repeater Ross ever gone out there and done a report on left wing hate.
No!
In fact, when we hear about left-wing hate groups and what in their work, we're supposed to marvel at the art.
It may be offensive, but we are supposed to marvel at the art.
Southern Poverty Law Center.
You know how much these people had 220 million dollars they're worth.
They got 33 million dollars in donations in 2007, I don't have the year in front of me, but the Southern Poverty Law Center.
230 million dollars, 20 million dollars, whatever is the quarter 501c3.
Last thing I'm gonna say about this, it's finally posted a national review online, Nancy uh uh uh uh Andy McCarthy, Nazis for me, but not for thee.
If this week's fashion on the less, uh it is this week's fashion on the left, and among such fashionably contemplative moderates as Mort Kondraki to blast Rush Limbaugh for comparing Democrats to the Nazis.
It's no surprise the Obama hardcores are misrepresenting the sequence and substance of events, but I would have hoped that Kondraki would at least have noted that Russia's comparison, even if Kondraki thought it unwise, was neither gratuitous nor demagogic.
To recap, the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi started this episode by comparing American citizens who oppose Obamacare to the Nazis, shamefully asserting that her political opponents were donning swastikas, as she put it, and as if that were an accurate representation of the typical naysayer.
Pelosi's California crony Barbara Boxer simultaneously ripped Obamacare dissenters for their Brooks brothers suits.
It's not altogether clear where on the twill the swastika goes.
Pelosi's tactic was the shop worn smear that we on the right have dealt with for six decades.
There is no conceivable substantive connection between opposing Obamacare and German national socialism.
They are antithetical.
By invoking the Nazis, Pelosi was patently slandering dissenters as racist thugs.
And I want to add one more time here.
Because they've got this report on ABC that uh from the Southern Poverty Law Center that I and my posting of that swastika-like Obama logo on my website somehow is ginning up hatred for Obama.
It seems it would be ginning up hatred for me, but the point is I'm not the guy that surrounds myself with Jew haters.
There's no bigger supporter of Israel than I. Not Obama, me.
The anti-Semites, the people that hate Jews, they're not part of my circle.
They're not part of my life.
It was our president, Barack Obama, who surrounded himself with such people.
I never hear word one from Brian Ross at ABC on the Southern Poverty Law Center about Khalidi or Jeremiah Wright or Bill Ayers or any of the rest of them.
It's not I who urge dealings with Iran at the expense of our ally, Israel.
So, Mr. Ross, you and the Southern Poverty Law Center trying to tie us on the right to Nazis when you've got a man in the White House who has surrounded himself with anti-Israeli people and anti-Jew people.
You need to rethink this, Mr. Ross, and be very careful.
When you start allowing propagandists to throw around accusations.
Now back to McCarthy, Rush responded.
The response did not smear Democrats.
He repeatedly qualified.
No one was saying Obama is Hitler.
Nobody was saying Pelosi's Goebbels, or that the Democrats were engaged in the genocidal barbarity of the Third Reich.
The comparison Limbaugh drew was a substantive one between the Democrats' proposal for socialized medicine and the German installation of socialized medicine beginning with Bismarck and reaching its shocking conclusion with Hitler's National Socialism, a transcript of what Russia actually contended is here and it's linked and so forth and so on.
Now, whether you agree, whether you agree with the comparison of limbaugh made, and I happen to think it's undeniable, Rush was also making a larger point that it's not only fair argument, but essential argument.
There is a trajectory of socialism.
Regardless of the good intentions of many socialists.
As Rush framed it, you take something like health care, which is traditionally understood, as within the uh the ambit of individual liberty and free choice.
You move such things into the ambit of state responsibility as the welfare state emerges and grows, on the theory that it's government's responsibility to ensure everyone's needs by redistributing resources, and as more things are moved from private to public control, the state by definition becomes totalitarian.
And inexorably the totalitarian state gets bad leaders, and the society comes to reflect the policy choices of those leaders.
Now we can argue to the end of time about whether that trajectory really exists and whether it's inevitable here, but however you come out, it is an argument very much worth having.
It goes to what kind of society we're going to be, to what the proper disposition between the citizen and the state is.
Nazi Germany is a useful historical example of socialism rum amok.
The genocide and terrorism ultimately practiced by the Nazis were horrible.
That goes without saying.
But national socialism went on for twelve years.
It was the last stage in a progressive nationalization of German society.
And there was a lot more to it than genocide and terrorism.
It cannot be that because there was genocide and terrorism, the socialist aspects of national socialism are outside the lines of acceptable political discourse.
Indeed, if that were the case, Jonah Goldberg's book, Liberal Fascism, one of the most important political books of the last quarter century could not have been written.
And given its immense popularity, it doesn't look like Americans are as convinced as Mort Kondraki seems to be that these comparisons are verboten.
Now, this is this is where it really gets interesting here, folks.
Stick with me.
Let's put aside the left's slanderous propensity to taint conservatives with Adolf Hitler, who was patently a man of the left.
Until recently, progressives, liberals seemed to find comparisons to national socialism quite worthy.
When at least in the telling, those comparisons worked in the left's favor back in April.
While Americans were hotly debating the merits of Obama's stimulus, the Wall Street Journal's James Toronto called attention to a very interesting economic analysis offered by David Leonhardt of the New York Times.
The segment Toronto highlighted is worth rehashing.
This is from the New York Times in April.
In the summer of 1993, sorry, in the summer of 1933, just as they will do on Thursday, heads of government and their finance ministers met in London to talk about a global economic crisis.
They accomplished little and went home to battle a crisis in their own ways.
More than any other country, Germany, Nazi Germany, then set out on a serious stimulus program.
The government built up the military, expanded the Autobahn, put up stadiums for the 36 Berlin Olympics, and built monuments to the Nazi Party across Munich and Berlin.
The economic benefits of this vast works program in 1933 Germany never flowed to most workers because fascism doesn't look kindly on collective bargaining.
But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries.
Corporate profits boomed and unemployment sank, and not because of slave labor, which didn't become they're praising what the Nazis did in April in 1933 in the New York Times.
As a justification for Obama's stimulus.
They are praising Germany's stimulus in the New York Times by citing 1933 Germany.
And McCarthy's point here is that when the left wants to, it will cite what they think are positive aspects of Nazism, national socialism.
Harold James, an economic historian says that the young liberal economists stunt studying under Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment.
Young liberal economists debated whether Hitler had solved unemployment.
What the hell's happening today?
Young and old liberal journalists and economists are telling us the recession is over.
That the recovery is on its way.
I did not know this, by the way.
I had missed this story in the New York Times in April.
I didn't know this until I read Andy's piece this morning.
I didn't know this.
David Leonhardt, New York Times, the summer of 1933, just as they will do on Thursday.
Heads of government and their finance ministers met in London.
More than any other country, Nazi Germany set out on a serious stimulus program, and they praise it.
And yet, Pelosi and Durban and Obama's henchmen are running around calling all of us Nazis.
When the New York Times ran a story praising Obama's stimulus by comparing it to Hitler's.
After all due qualifiers about how terribly uncomfortable he felt invoking lessons from the Nazis, if the story goes on in the author of the New York Times, I don't like doing this, I don't like doing this.
He somehow summoned the inner fortitude to make the obvious explicit.
The New York Times writer wrote, here in the U.S., many people are understandably wondering whether the $800 billion stimulus program will make much of a difference.
They want to know the stimulus work.
Fortunately, this is one economic question that's been answered pretty clearly in the last century.
Yes, stimulus works.
It worked in Germany.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, um, we're going to link to Andy's story at National Review Online, and we're going to put this on the free side so that you can all see this throughout the weekend, spread it to as many people as you choose to.
The New York Times, in support of Obama's stimulus plan, cites the success of the stimulus plan instituted by the Nazis in Germany in 1933.
Yes, stimulus works.
As James Taranto observed whatever you may think of the merits of the New York Times writer's argument it was appropriate for him to make it.
The wisdom of Vel Nona policies adopted during a decade of Nazi socialism cannot be off the table simply because in the end the Nazis were monsters.
We may find the seeds of their monstrousness in these policies, we may not.
But the thought that we oughtn't talk about them is absurd.
Certainly that's what the left concluded when it came to defending Obama's economic program without any teeth gnashing from Mort Kondracki and our other beltway chaperones.
National socialism is banned from the right's case against socialism, but it's somehow acceptable when leftists use it as a smear.
Or when the left's own nuanced geniuses, after their very thoughtful consideration, decide its invocation is suitable for mature audiences?
I don't think so.
Nazis for me, but not for thee.
This is just incredible.
The New York Times to support Obama's stimulus cites the success of the Nazi National Socialist stimulus in Germany.
Yes, stimulus works.
Back after this.
Okay, Coco has posted the link to Andy McCarthy's piece, Nazis for Thee, but not for me.
It's at the top of the page in our little orange yellow banner there at Rush Limbaugh.com.
Betty in Friendswood, Texas.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hello, thank you, Rush, for all you do to keep us informed about the facts about our government.
I wanted to make a comment before I ask a question, and that is that I thought the president was supposed to be a president of the United States, and it's unconscionable that he is out there trying to send his his mob gangs and and um egg horn and all those people against the average American people who want to speak out for their freedoms.
You're exactly right.
Uh this administration.
Well, it's Obama's track record.
Obama's opponents are not debated.
They are swept away.
Obama clears the playing field.
This is the natural tendency of an authoritarian of an egoist.
Uh he is both.
But it is.
It's it's amazing to see the White House attacking over half the American people and impugning them as Nazis or as an unruly mob.
It's it is the most amazing thing.
And the question the question I wanted to have is he has all organizations that he's been doing for years and years, and it's pretty hard for us to fight against those kind of organizations when we're not as organized.
But remember, they went after and started class warfare against industry, the automobile industry, the financial industry, and they were quite successful in creating that uh class warfare.
What about them, the Congress and the President, who live in the mansion in their fancy houses, drive their big cars, have their airplanes to travel all over the country, Obama out there traveling all the time, uh taking his family on vacations at the taxpayers' expenses.
And they expect us excuse me, I'm nervous, but they expect us and are telling us we have to drive around in green cars, that we have to cut back on our uh utilities, that we have to cut back on on health care, that they have to ration this and do all those kind of things when they're doing all of that, and I think if the people could really make a comparison about how they live and what they're expecting us to do, that there would be some protest against that.
I think that's part of this.
I think I think all of what you said is being noticed.
The imperial nature of all of these elected officials, uh I I think all of it's being noticed.
I I think these um you you see it.
You know, people are standing up at these uh town hall meetings, so uh ostensibly about health care, and they're raising all kinds of other questions as well.
Fear not, Betty.
Your fellow citizens are are up to speed on this.
That's why I'm enthused.
This is genuine.
This is genuine.
This is not faked, it is not manufactured.
That's another thing the White House is saying.
Now you people are all a bunch of uh phonies.
You know, that you're just a bunch of mind numbers robots and you're being manufactured, your rage and your outrage being manufactured when it's the White House that's sending out behavior memos.
It's the White House that's organizing, as you say, acorn and their union people to go out.
There is no passion for Obama's plan.
That's what has to be manufactured.
The passion opposing this plan is real and genuine, and he can't do anything to change that.
He is only exacerbating it, by the way, with every town hall meeting that comes across as staged and faked, with him refusing to be specific when people have read the House of Representatives bill or have had enough of it read to them or told to them, when he doesn't get specific, he seems detached.
Not even on the right day in the calendar.
It seems like Obama, when he goes out talking about this, it's last summer during the campaign.
And that's exactly what's going on.
He is campaigning for an issue, and that's why in a campaign you have opponents.
And right now, strange as it is to say, the opponents, Barack Obama faces, are a majority of the American people.
Stop and think about.
you want to hear something hilarious.
Congressman Gene Green from Houston, Democrat from Texas, is requiring photo IDs from everybody entering his town hall meetings.
Okay.
Fine and dandy.
However, Representative Gene Green has voted against bills that require people to present a photo ID before they vote.
But don't show up at one of his town meetings without a driver's license.
You won't get in.
Such rank hypocrisy.
So predictable.
▲
Export Selection