All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 21, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:42
October 21, 2009, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Hey, have you heard the latest news out there, folks?
Well, the latest news out there is that the taxpayers are not going to get their money back on the bailouts.
They just announced this today, that we're not going to get the money back on a bailout of Chrysler or General Motors.
We're not going to get the money back on TARP.
That's news to me, but whoever thought we were going to get our money back?
And by the way, what does that mean?
The taxpayers get their money back.
The taxpayers, even if the taxpayers got their money back, they're not writing us a check for it.
It's going back into the treasury.
We're going to continue to spend it.
The taxpayers will not get their money back.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB Network.
Great to have you here already.
The middle of the week here on the fastest week in media, fastest three hours.
The special inspector general for Treasury's financial sector rescue is a guy named Neil Borofsky.
He oversees the $700 billion TARP program.
And he says that the cost to taxpayers will be a lot greater than the government's letting on.
And we're not going to get our money back.
The bailout has several hidden costs.
Now, inspectors general are supposed to be independent and they can say whatever they want, but this guy's not long for the world.
One is the hard cost of borrowing money to fund the rescues of banks and other companies.
Oh, by the way, Obama's bailing out some more banks, smaller banks and what else?
What is he?
Small businesses.
More bailout cash.
More failure, topped upon more failure.
Now, the other costs, hidden costs, according to Borofsky, less tangible but no less important, the danger that comes with rewarding companies that took excessive risk and the loss of the government's credibility with tax.
That's a hidden cost?
A hidden cost.
All this is the loss of the government's credibility with taxpayers.
Obama's numbers are plunging.
Half of the country, even CNN has a poll.
Half the country oppose Obama's policies.
Half the country.
His approval index at Rasmussen is minus 13.
That's between the strongly approve and strongly disapprove.
The strongly disapprove are 13 points higher than the strongly approve of Obama right now.
You can't just think of the TARP program in terms of dollars and cents, Borofsky told CNN.
We try to bring attention to these other costs, which have the potential to dwarf the monetary loss in dollars.
To be sure, the monetary loss will be substantial.
Borofsky cites the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the TARP program will ultimately cost taxpayers $159 billion, which is BS.
It's going to cost us $700 or a trillion.
A $700 billion bailout, we're not going to get any money back from it.
That's $700 billion ultimately cost.
We're going to get $159 here.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know, folks, that they've now officially said that we're not going to get our money back.
Taxpayers will not get their money back.
Borofsky also said this.
I think we're already seeing the political costs of people losing trust and faith in their government, such as the palpable anger this summer in response to healthcare.
It requires a certain amount of goodwill to support extremely important and expensive programs like bailouts.
How long has this guy got for government service?
How much time left does this guy have?
Hidden cost is the possible loss of trust between the taxpayers and their government.
There is they lost my trust.
Oh, hell, yes.
I lost my trust decades ago.
I mean, this is just my trust is being, I mean, lost trust is just being compounded now.
This is such a joke.
It is such a joke.
And speaking of jokes, there's an hilarious story today, the first of a two-parter.
Jim Van de High and Mike Allen at the Politico, Obama's strategy, marginalize critics.
We went to the Politico website where Jim Van de Hauy posted a video about the White House's ongoing efforts to silence me and the GOP.
This is what he said.
The White House is systematically set out to try to marginalize the most powerful voices in the Republican Party, including Rush Limbaugh, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Fox News, and the insurance industry.
All of those are pillars of the Republican Party.
And if you look at what the White House has done over the last six or seven months, they really do try to sort of push them away from the mainstream of America and try to push them out of having influence in Washington.
And they think that this House will weaken the Republican Party.
This is absolutely hilarious.
Now, I know these guys are well-intentioned.
But two things here first.
What is really happening here?
We have the White House, the president and his aides targeting individual private citizens, targeting a news network.
That means they are targeting the First Amendment, targeting private citizens and so forth.
And they can attack the Republican Party all they want, but what's a talk show host.
Now, here's a paragraph.
With a series of private meetings and public taunts, the White House has targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the biggest spending pro-business lobbying group in the country, Rush Limbaugh, the country's most listened-to conservative commentator.
And now with a new volley of combative rhetoric in recent days, the insurance industry.
And not to leave them out, but Fox News is in there as well.
And then they conclude here that we have been marginalized.
In the first of the two-parter here today, they conclude that we have been marginalized.
They even have a passage in here in this story that Republican Party very worried about being defined by me and other boisterous voices.
So here's a two-part series on how the Republican Party and conservatism is dead because the White House is marginalizing its critics and the Republican Party's listening to conservatives.
Meanwhile, every poll shows the Democrats are going to get whipped in the next election.
They're going to get whipped in a gubernatorial race next week or whenever it is in Virginia.
New Jersey is a curious toss-up.
And we haven't talked about this yet on this program, but I intend to, District 23, upstate New York, where the Republican Party has nominee as somebody, a woman, Didi Scazafosa, she might as well be a Democrat.
She might as well be a Democrat.
And the Republican Party, Newt's even endorsed her.
There's a guy, Hoffman, who's coming on strong on the Conservative Party ticket, and he's coming on strong, and he may, in fact, win up there.
There are all kinds of signs that Democrats are in huge trouble, and they know it.
So according to the Politico, the White House is targeting its critics.
And it's working.
The Republican Party being defined by us, and thus it is doomed in doing so.
But look at the political landscape.
Obama's numbers are down.
His agenda is down.
The Democrats are falling apart on health care in the House.
Conservatism is in the ascendancy.
Conservatism is on the rise.
Now, they admit that my show is on fire, but that I have been marginalized.
I'm a fringe character.
Fox News, a fringe network.
We have been isolated from the mainstream.
But our successes, I mean, we're going gangbusters out there, but we, in terms of real America, we are a bunch of kooks.
It seems to me what we have here is a bunch of propaganda.
And they quote Carville in this piece.
We knew we're going to be building up Limbaugh.
Remember, they did that poll, he and Greenberg said, and they made the leader of the Republican Party.
And they said, we knew we were going to build up Limbaugh, but we knew we were going to hurt the Republican Party doing that.
We're going to hurt the Republican Party.
The Republican party is hurting itself.
The Republican party is not listening to me.
I don't doubt that the Politico is right that the Republican party would like to have me less impactful and forceful.
If you look at the candidates they're getting behind folks, they're in big trouble.
I got a golden opportunity here that they are blowing sky high by trying to be Democrat white.
And maybe they figured that's what they got to do in a congressional race in New York State.
But it seems to me, folks, as I gaze at this, that Obama and his party are being defined by its radicalism.
And that's why they're really upset.
You'll see, Obama gets to play Mr. Cool.
Obama's Joe Camel out there.
And he gets to look at himself in the mirror.
Man, I'm cool.
I'm the guy.
I'd ever lose my temper.
Everybody loves me.
I'm Mr. Perfect.
But everybody that he's put into his administration is a fringe radical kook.
Two of them praising Mount Seitong.
Others are Marxists.
And people say, did Obama know?
They are Obama.
This is what everybody's missing.
Except Politico has actually done a story today on how Obama is employing the rules for radicals of Saul Olinsky.
They really, I have the story right here coming up soon in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers.
And they use and they cite the Alinsky rule.
I forget the number, but it's pick the target, isolate it, and freeze it and so forth.
And they say that's what the Obama administration is doing.
I don't know where they got that idea.
Notice how late to the case they are.
We're almost here, what, almost 10 months in the Obama administration.
We've been talking about Linsky's rules for radicals for over a year.
Finally, they're getting into it because it works.
If they're going to do a story about how the Obama administration is marginalizing me, the chamber, Fox News and so forth, other talk show hosts.
Well, they have to go to Rules for Radicals to see how it's being done.
So if you're going to go to Rules for Radicals, you can't say that Obama is Mr. Cool, Mr. Middle of the Road, Mr. Moderate, Joe Camill himself, while the rest of his radicals out there he didn't even know about, they are him.
He is Van Jones.
He is Ron Bloom.
He is Anita Dunn.
He is Mark Lloyd over at the FCC.
He is all these people.
He just knows that if he spoke like they do, and he thinks like they do, make no mistake, or we wouldn't have half of this stuff happening or any of it happening.
If he spoke like his aides are speaking, he'd be toast.
And since video is surfaced and audio serviced of the aides and what they're saying, it is becoming quite clear how radical the Obama administration is and how radical the Democrat Party is.
And that's what seems to me to be noteworthy here, that the party and Obama is being defined by its radicalism, by its personnel, by its policies, by its rhetoric.
It is Obama and his party, his party.
They're the ones that are in trouble.
They can't do much of what they want while they control Washington, but they will face setbacks.
They can do a lot of what they want that I misspoke.
But even that, they're having trouble on the signature issue, not because of Republicans, but because of fallout within the Democrat Party, particularly in the House.
There are big warning signs in the House of Representatives over revisions to the new basic health care bill that they have there.
I'll have details of all this coming up as the program unfolds.
But it is, you know, they're going to face setbacks in the next election.
The question now is how big.
So anyway, folks, I will wait eagerly for part two of the political investigative journalism in which they will conclude that conservative talkers and me in particular are bad for the Republican Party and that I and we are exactly what the White House wants, which of course explains why they attack me and want to use the FCC to silence us.
So that'll be part two tomorrow about how we and I am destroying the Republican Party while conservatism is in an ascendancy and Obama is in deep, deep trouble in the polls.
And my friends Obama, while the rest of you are starving and deciding whether to eat dog food or cat food and wondering where my job is coming from as you read from the AP, there ain't going to be any new jobs.
Even Mort Vuckerman is out with a piece today.
Mort Vuckerman, the CEO and publisher of U.S. News and World Report, basically saying that we're not going to have any new job creation going along with what the AP said because the auto industry and all these things, they're not ever going to come back.
They're dead forever.
We're going through a transformation.
So 10% unemployment is the new norm.
While Obama's out at $17,000 a plate, $33,000 a plate fundraisers, and I tell you, folks, wait till you hear.
He has got me on his mind and it is eating it alive.
We'll have all that for you, plus much more when we come back.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882.
Don't go away.
Fight to power.
Iceland Brothers, one of my all-time favorite bumper rotation tunes.
Okay, to the audio soundbites, let's go back to January 16th of this year.
The Wall Street Journal had just asked me to join a cadre of fellow commentators asking me to write 400 words on my hopes for the new administration and President Obama.
And this is what I said to you, my devoted and loyal audience, in explaining my reaction to the Wall Street Journal.
I don't need 400 words.
I need four.
I hope he fails.
Well, what are you laughing at?
See, here's the point.
Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say.
Look at even my staff.
Oh, you can't do that.
Why not?
Why is it any different what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails?
Liberalism is our problem.
Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here.
Why do I want more of it?
I don't care what the drive-by story is.
I would be honored if the drive-by media headlined me all day long, Limbaugh Colon, I hope Obama fails.
Somebody's got to say it.
And so, you know, the rest.
The rest is history.
So that's January 16th of this year.
Last night in New York City, October the 20th, almost, what is it, 10 months later, or nine, whatever, but close to a year later, Obama is at a fundraiser for the Democrat National Committee.
What I reject is when some folks decide to sit on the sidelines and root for failure on health care.
Or they root for failure on reforming our energy system.
Or they root for failure on getting the Olympics.
I mean, who's against the Olympics?
What's up with that?
You know, that's a sad thing, isn't it?
But I've been marginalized.
Now, the political today, I've been marginalized.
I mean, they've got me out there on the fringe along with Fox News, the Chamber of Commerce, and Obama just roaring away.
I mean, he's getting whatever he wants.
Nobody's stopping his way, and they've marginalized me.
And yet here it is 10 months later, and the guys still can't stop talking.
And the money's already raised, by the way.
He doesn't need to say this to get people to write the checks.
They wrote the checks to get in there.
So, by the way, I don't think that I'm on the sidelines here.
I mean, I'm not in the hallowed halls of some Washington monument, but I'm not exactly on the sidelines here.
Yeah, I do want health care reform to fail.
I don't want health care to fail.
I want to preserve the greatest healthcare system the world's ever known, ours, and I want to improve it.
Failure on reforming the energy system?
Yep, I want his energy plan to fail.
His energy plan is going to make all of us poorer.
It is not going to increase the supply of energy at all.
It is not going to save the planet.
It's nothing more than another trick to make people think that they ought to do this because they are destroying this planet.
And so we've got to pay higher taxes and we've got to reduce our living standards.
You know, Bill Clinton said even we're going to have to, we're going to have to really slow down our economy here to save the planet.
That's exactly what they have in mind.
Well, I don't want to slow down the economy.
I want a roaring and growing economy with people working.
And we're not going to have that with Obama's energy plan.
And the Olympics, well, everybody knows our glee at that.
It was not that Chicago's not getting the Olympics.
It's that it was so humiliating.
Got 18 votes.
Daly sends the Chicago machine, otherwise known as the Obama administration, over there to personally seal the deal.
And they botched every aspect of it.
They didn't poll the committee first.
Usually before you send them.
I mean, presidents, they involve themselves in matters of great sincerity.
Our president became a laughingstock.
And it had to be a shock to everyone involved because the people in the International Olympic unit, I mean, these are not exactly the world's most stellar citizens themselves, but they are the target audience for Obama and his fringe radicals who think the world hates us.
And only now because Obama's president do they love us.
Well, I guess they don't because he wasn't enough to seal a deal and get the Olympics.
Yeah, Rio de Janeiro now is literally, it's up in flames.
I mean, sometimes all you can do is laugh at this.
Serving humanity, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes so far, and there won't be any because I don't make them.
Rush Limbaugh at 800-282-2882 and the email address, LRushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
Ladies and gentlemen, I, Rush Limbaugh, live in Barack Obama's head, rent-free.
Listen to this next soundbite.
He just got through referring to me, not by name, of course.
He doesn't understand people who want him to fail.
What's up with that?
Here's the next bite.
Sometimes Democrats can be their own worst enemies.
Democrats are an opinionated bunch.
You know, the other side, they just kind of sometimes do what they're told.
Democrats, y'all, thinking for yourselves.
I like that in you, but it's time for us to make sure that we finish the job here.
We are this close, and we've got to be unified.
Well, there's a gold mine of stuff in this bite.
Obama is now suggesting that the Republican Party is a bunch of mind-numbered robots taking marching orders from me.
This is the 21-year-old playbook that they have used regarding me.
And of course, Democrats think for themselves, but he also admits here that we've got to be unified.
His party is falling apart, folks.
The state-controlled media doesn't make it look that way, but his party is falling apart.
Now, I have a question.
Where is and when is the commander-in-chief going to act like the commander-in-chief?
Here he is, up there being purely ideological in a campaign mode at a fundraiser in the midst of what his vice president has now called a depression, and he's yucking it up.
And he's taking pot shots at me in Fox News, the Chamber of Commerce.
We are his number one enemy.
He can't let go of us.
I live in his head rent-free.
Meanwhile, we have tens of thousands of Americans fighting a war in Afghanistan that Obama himself said is crucial.
Yet today he's campaigning for corzine in New Jersey after doing a fundraiser with millionaires last night.
I wouldn't much care, obviously, but for the fact that he's leaving our soldiers on the battlefield without the support that the commanders have asked for, and he just doesn't seem to care that someone's child or husband or wife or father or mother is facing down this enemy without the support they need.
He just doesn't seem to care.
Oh, they got to marginalize me, a private citizen talk show host.
They got to marginalize Fox News.
They got to go after the First Amendment and people who are using it to dissent from the radicalism represented by Obama.
When will this president look at me, put aside his ego, say, I like that in you.
I like the fact that you think for yourself.
I like that in you.
When will this president put aside his max headroom ego, his arrogance, his political agenda, and do the right thing just once?
You know, I get attacked here for taking off now and then to play golf.
I do.
My own audience is stick to the issues when I want to talk about football.
I get attacked when I go out and take a day off to go play golf with my buddies.
We have a president who plays golf all the time.
He travels all over the place, playing politics, doing this and that and all the rest, but who is never criticized for failing to do his job.
And that includes supporting our troops and winning this war.
And they're still saying he may not be able to make a decision on this even after the runoff and the results from the runoff, which is November 7th, I think, and the results will be weeks after that.
So we've got soldiers dying in Iraq.
He doesn't care.
He has absolutely no concern about it.
Victor Davis Hansen today in the corner, National Review Online, voting present is not an option.
While our narcissists in chief is frozen gazing at his perfect image in his private pool, choices have to be made in Afghanistan.
Consider.
We have a Democrat-controlled Congress that by and large has supported since 2004 the Kerry Obama-Hillary Clinton narrative of a good war in Afghanistan as opposed to the bad war in Iraq, supposedly shamefully neglected by George Bush's neoconservative adventure in Iraq, but also vital to the security of the U.S. and one entirely winnable if only we allot sufficient resources.
B, we have a proven commander in Generals McChrystal and Petraeus and their circle of subordinates.
They crafted a winning counterinsurgency strategery in Iraq that defeated the terrorists, ensured stability for the fragile country.
I saw a story up there on Drudge that our troops in Iraq are.
What are they doing?
You're not right when I want that.
Oh.
They're taking Salsa classes.
Our troops in Iraq are bored.
They're taking Salsa classes, which is a sign of the success of the strategery in Iraq, that the troops they're aboard, they're not bored in Afghanistan, they're getting shot at.
They need supports, support troops, and they're not getting them because our president doesn't care.
We have thousands of battle-hardened, experienced veteran soldiers and their officers who know far more about the Middle East in general and counterinsurgency in particular than was true when we first deployed to either Afghanistan in 01 or Iraq in 03.
The Islamic world is much less enthralled at bin Laden and his advocacy of suicide bombing and terrorism than it was five years ago, according to polls anyway.
The president has a domestic opposition entirely unlike that of George Bush's that is eager to support Obama to fulfill his promise to win Afghanistan by devoting more resources to the effort.
We have a media mesmerized by Obama that will withhold criticism of him in Afghanistan in a way that was simply not true of the Bush effort in Iraq that nonetheless proved successful.
We have a split public, but one far more amenable to a surge in Afghanistan than was true in late 2006 of the proposed surge in Iraq and H, we should be bolstered by our success in Iraq and the enemy demoralized by its failure rather than vice versa.
So given the above, and given that George Bush made a far more difficult choice that saved Iraq, it's hard to figure out why Obama cannot make a simple decision to send troops requested by commanders on the ground.
Well, see, Mr. Victor Davis Hansen, it's simple to you.
It's a simple decision to us, but it's impossible for somebody so inexperienced and so feckless as Obama.
Because he doesn't care.
Mr. Hansen, he doesn't care about the troops on the ground in Afghanistan.
He cares more about getting propagandized news articles in the mainstream press demonizing me and the Chamber of Commerce and the insurance industry and Fox News.
That's what he cares about.
He cares about my saying I hope he fails.
It's still on his mind.
He cares about making sure his radical left doesn't abandon him over health care.
And that's why Afghanistan represents a problem to him.
Because if he ramps up the war in Afghanistan, he fears losing his radical left.
But basically, we have a commander-in-chief here who refuses to act like one.
So you can actually say, where is the commander-in-chief?
By the way, I'm going to go back to my first item of the program today, the bailouts, and how we're not going to get our taxpayers not going to get their money back.
Never forget, the automobile bailout was a Democrat idea, and they promised we'd get our money back.
This is from the Washington Post on November 11th of 2008, almost a year ago.
Obama asks Bush to back rescue of automakers.
President-elect Obama yesterday urged President Bush to support immediate aid for struggling automakers and back a new stimulus package, even as Congressional Democrats began drafting legislation to give the Detroit automakers quick access to $25 billion by adding them to the Treasury Department's TARP program.
It was a Democrat idea, bailing out the car companies.
Democrat idea, and they promised we'd get our money back.
We haven't.
So, next time he starts whining about all this mess that he inherited, it's time for people to start reminding him: you voted for every dollar of that mess, and you thought Bush wasn't spending enough.
You can't say you inherited a mess.
You voted for it, Mr. President.
And now you've turned the mess that you voted for, supported into an absolute disaster.
It's more than a mess now.
And now he's running around.
He must love this mop analogy.
And I think I figured out why he loves the mop analogy.
He's running around talking about cleaning up the mess with his mop and so forth.
I have a story.
The Wall Street Journal's even been checkified today.
The Wall Street Journal.
Are you ready?
Wait for it.
Wall Street Journal today with a story on how the more housework you do, the more enjoyable sex will be in your relationship.
The Wall Street Journal.
Now, maybe that is why Obama's talking about his damn mop so much.
You know, I may have misspoken here a moment ago.
I'm still trying to figure this out.
I said that Politico ran a piece highlighting the Obama administration's use of the Olinski rules for radicals, and I don't think Politico did that.
I think it's a Heritage Foundation story that I see that they are explaining it, but I have to read it a little bit more carefully because I'm not sure that the Politico has done this, so I have to go to their website and check and see.
Anyway, I want to grab a couple of phone calls here before we move on to other things.
Jerry in Vancouver, Washington.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Major Diddles Rush.
I've been listening to you since KFBK.
Well, that'd be in 1984.
That's all.
That's forever.
Yes, sir.
I would like to expand on your mood yesterday.
Sure, you elaborated that even the golf balls were going to have to help your therapy.
And you are so important to all of us.
And when you left the show yesterday, it wasn't just me that felt despondent.
People around me, we talked about you really are important to keep our spirit going.
And we just really need you to keep the flag waving for all the rest of us.
Really?
Now, I admitted that I was in a bad mood yesterday, but had I not admitted it, would you have known it?
I did focus a different, I did sense a different mood yesterday.
Yeah.
But our only hope is the encouragement that you, especially you, are giving us.
And if there's no hope for you, we're going to leave all the rest of us.
This is why Obama is trying to marginalize me.
You are not marginalized.
I gave you a lot of money.
I know that.
This is why they're trying to sort of, but the press is considering, they think that we all have been.
Look, I considered opening the program today with an apology for my mood yesterday.
No, don't apologize.
Don't apologize.
Let me know how important you are to us.
Well, I mean, but you left the program despondent yesterday because of my mood.
It is not my intention to make anybody despondent.
As you know, this program's signature is good cheer, inspiration, upbeat confidence, and optimism and so forth, even during the darkest days, such as we are in now.
And I just, yesterday, I most, I come in here in bad moods now and then.
It doesn't happen much, but on those days, I cover it up.
Microphone goes on, and Mr. Professional shows up, and then I trash something after the show and get it out of my system.
Yesterday, I was just livid about, and it's not anything you know anything about.
It had nothing to do with the, I mean, the news yesterday just made it worse.
But I was just, you know, I've been keeping a lot of stuff inside me for a long, long, about nothing in the news, folks.
And I just exploded.
I had to.
Well, we feel for you, too.
What was that, sir?
We feel for you, too.
You're in it with us, but you're our leader.
Well, I thank you.
I appreciate it.
And I, you know, I just, I figured yesterday, honestly, the best policy.
Here I am.
This is how I am today, but apparently not.
And I sure wish I wasn't one of those golf balls that you probably were hitting around yesterday.
Let me tell you something.
I went with some friends to the, I didn't play golf.
I went to the range with a new teacher, Simon, came in, and I got there a little bit before he did.
And I just, I got my bag.
I took it out to the range, got the bucket of balls, threw the bucket of balls on the ground, and I just started swinging.
I didn't care about technique.
I just, and I was bombing the ball.
I was bombing it.
I said, whoa, maybe I ought to make this my swing.
I wasn't worried about any fundamental.
All I could do, just hit it.
Just hit it.
You know, I was swinging so hard, my abs when I woke up this morning felt like I've been doing sit-ups.
That never happens after I play golf.
And I was just, I was, I was into it.
But it was good.
How do I know what sit-ups?
Because I had to do them when I was in high school, Sterdley.
He's asked me, how do I know what sit-ups feel like?
You ever heard of high school football?
I've had it in sit-ups before.
Yeah, it's been 50 years, but 40.
Anyway, thanks for the call, Jerry.
Appreciate it.
Kate in Fairfield, California.
The Kate.
Speaking of KFPK, one of my favorite callers from my days back there.
How are you, Kate?
Well, I'm doing very well, Rush.
How are you?
Very well.
Thank you.
It's so good to talk to you.
Hey, listen, I listened to Fox News last week and I heard about Newt Gingrich endorsing that woman.
I can't even remember her name.
There's no use to remember her name.
I call her that woman, who is not Republican in any way, shape, or form.
She's pro-abortion.
She's pro-higher taxes.
Why is Newt Gingrich endorsing this woman?
And how do we get the message across to the Republican Party that we're sick and tired of this?
Can I tell you something real quick?
Yeah.
I'm a Catholic.
I think you know that, okay?
When Catholics come to me and they say, we want married priests and we want women priests and we want homosexual marriage, I say, go and be an Episcopalian, okay?
You want all that?
Go be an Episcopalian.
If you want higher taxes, if you want pro-choice, if you want these things, go be a Democrat.
Don't call yourself a Republican.
Don't do that.
It's so annoying.
It's so irritating.
Yeah, I hear you.
This business with the Republican Party, we have, as you well know, because you're a regular habitual listener.
Yeah, we've been addressing it.
I can tell you exactly what's going on with the Republican Party.
It's the social issues.
The elite country club Republicans don't like the pro-lifers in this party.
It's all about that, make no mistake.
There are other minor little things, too.
I think they never have, even during the era of Reagan, the people running the Republican Party today were embarrassed of him because he didn't have the right pedigree.
And they thought, well, Democrats think he's an amiable dunce.
Oh, my God.
But they loved the results they got.
And they loved going to the conventions because everybody was winning.
But they're not the Republican Party, you know, the people that are trying to run it now are not and never have been conservative.
Now, I don't know.
I don't know about Newt and this woman, but look, even the Wall Street Journal has caught on to what's going on here in this New York 23.
Republicans are telling themselves that a political wave is building that could carry them to big election gains next year.
Well, judging by their performance so far in a special election in New York, they deserve to wander in the minority for another generation or two.
Democrats want to portray this race as a familiar moderate conservative GOP split, but the real issue is why the Republican, Ms. Scazafava, is a Republican at all.
She has voted for so many tax increases that the Democrat is attacking her as a tax raiser.
She supported the Obama stimulus.
She favors card check to make union organizing easier, or at least she did until a recent flip-flop.
And she's run more than once on the line of the Working Families Party.
The GOP will wander in the desert for two generations if they keep nominating candidates like this.
No, folks, look, everybody, what were you in a bad mood about then?
It just had a crescendo with everybody asking me for money, asking me to promote this, to promote that, as though my lot in life and my duty is to publicize what they are doing.
It all hit a crescendo combination of other things.
But anyway, we got other things to do.
We'll get started with all the rest of the show.
Don't go anyway.
▲
Export Selection