All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 29, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:40
October 29, 2009, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Hey, folks, how are you?
Great to have you back as the week rolls on.
Rush Limbaugh, the Doctor of Democracy, America's Truth Detector, here behind the Golden EIB microphone for broadcast excellence, 800-282-2882, the email address lrushbo at EIBnet.com.
As you have probably heard, ladies and gentlemen, Nancy Pelosi just once again claimed that the House health care reform bill will not add one penny to the federal deficit.
Of course, this is absurd.
It will turn out to be absurdly untrue if this thing ever sees the light of day.
And when it does, when it does, when it is exposed as a total fraud, when she and everybody else supporting this are exposed as total liars about all of this being deficit neutral, about all of this covering all these people, about everybody getting all this health care for what they think will be nothing.
When all of that is exposed, shouldn't people like Nancy Pelosi, who lie to get such things passed into legislation, have to face some kind of real consequences?
This is nothing more than theft.
Are they not thieves?
They are stealing billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers, both taxpayers of today and tomorrow.
And you can't even say that they're enriched by their thievery because they do it to buy votes and more power.
And some of them do get enriched as a result of all this.
Why shouldn't people who steal billions of dollars have to go to jail?
If the small fry like Bernie Manoff have to go to jail, Manoff is chump change compared to Nancy Pelosi.
Chump change compared to Barney Frank and Harry Reid.
This is generational theft that is going on here.
I mean, look, let's step back.
Nancy Pelosi is the most radical Speaker of the House ever from one of the most radical communities in the nation, San Francisco.
She's pushing this newest proposal now.
She's never cared about costs before.
She doesn't care about them now.
She's never cared about economic reality before because she's insulated from it.
She is wealthy.
Her husband is wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.
She is George McGovern on hormones, steroids, and everything else.
And she sees this as the best way for her and her ilk to remain in power for decades.
Folks, both the Senate bill, Dingy Harry's little bill over there, and Pelosi's bill today are time bombs.
They are ticking time bombs.
They are designed to destroy private insurance companies and thus the economy.
And from their standpoint, and if you look at it from their standpoint, these are brilliantly conceived bills, and they're guaranteed to work.
They are going to do exactly what these Democrats intend.
If they are passed, only massive Republican gains in 2010 and 2012 can diffuse this time bomb because this stuff doesn't get implemented until after the 2012 election if it passes.
Now, of course, there's a new millionaire tax.
This is the same play from a tired, worn-out old playbook, Tax the Wealthy, a millionaire surcharge to pay for this.
Now, this is not only a joke, since there aren't enough rich people to pay for all this, but it's a diversion.
What this is intended to do is give the impression that most people are going to get something for nothing, that they're going to get health care.
Everybody's going to get brand new health care.
It's going to be cheaper.
It's not going to cost anybody anything.
And even if you are diagnosed today with a heart attack tomorrow, you're going to be able to get insurance.
And it's not going to cost you much because a couple of rich people are going to be paying for all of this.
It's all a sham.
Fact is, costs will go sky high for everybody.
Taxes will be raised on all people who actually pay taxes and pay for insurance policies.
Jobs are going to be lost with a bundle because employers will not hire because of the costs.
It'll instead fire.
Businesses are going to fire people in order to make ends meet once all these added costs, which she says don't add a dime to the deficit, are factored in.
So, yeah, tax the rich.
Tax and kill everything.
That's what this is about.
Tax and kill employment, kill private health care.
It's thievery.
And at some point, now that we've got mandates, there's nothing in the Constitution, folks, that allows Congress to mandate we buy anything.
Suppose that there was a mandate that everybody own a condom or everybody own a car or everybody.
What if you were told you had to?
That's what's happening here with healthcare.
We're being told we have to.
And if we don't buy it, and if we don't have it, we get fined by the IRS.
The IRS is going to be monitoring all of this.
Now, where in the Constitution is that permissible?
It isn't.
They don't care about the Constitution, and they don't think anybody's going to line up and throw the Constitution in their face.
It is just blatant thievery.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
There was something funny that happened today.
It's very hard to hear this.
Pelosi out there making her announcement of her retooled health care bill on public territory.
And I'm told Republicans were not allowed to even attend this thing, either on the steps of the Capitol where she is, or was, or even in the audience.
She got heckled by somebody, had a bullhorn.
I'm going to play it for you, but it's really hard to hear the heckler.
I'll tell you what he said after you listen.
Here's what our health insurance reform legislation will mean to American families, workers, and the economy.
Thank you, insurance companies of America.
This is why this legislation is important.
The heckler had a bullhorn and shouted, Nazi Pelosi, Nazi Pelosi, you'll burn in hell for this.
Nazi Pelosi, Nazi Pelosi, you'll burn in hell for this.
And she didn't miss a beat.
I mean, she said, thank you.
Thank you, Insurance Companies of America.
So she's trying to lay it off here on the insurance company showed up with a bullhorn.
Nancy Pelosi, you will burn in hell for this.
So, folks, believe me, there is a groundswell of opposition to this.
She knows it.
Harry Reid knows it.
They don't care.
They're going to ram it down our throats no matter what it takes.
Nancy Pelosi is the single person most responsible for deficits since 2007.
You can blame Obama, and I do, but nothing happens without it first starting on at least spending in the House of Representatives.
And she's run it since 2007.
Were there 1,990 pages?
1,190 pages in this new retooled, let's start over again, healthcare fiasco.
And I was watching on MSNBC after they finished their coverage of Pelosi today, and I need to check into this because I don't think I, well, I did see it, but I don't understand it.
Because I heard her say, and there is a public option.
And the crowd went nuts, of course, when she announced a public option.
But then I saw the MSNBC anchor ask his doofus White House reporter about a backlash when 90% of Americans learned they'll not be able to use the public option.
I just, I was reading closed captioning.
I was doing other things.
And I said, whoa, 90% won't be able to use it.
Then they were running a graphic saying her plan does not contain a robust public option.
Well, I know they've watered down some of the language here, but it's all for show.
The whole thing is a public, what is MSNBC talking about?
90% of the people will not be able to access the public options.
BS.
Nobody's going to have any choice but the public option before these people are finished.
There's no reason to do health care if it's not a public option.
To finance the bill, House Democrats plan a surtax on couples who make more than $1 million a year.
Leaders are also planning fees on medical device makers.
And we've talked about this.
That would add up to $20 billion over 10 years, according to another congressional aide.
The Senate has proposed $40 billion in fees on device makers, as well as levies on drug makers and insurers.
They're just going to tax everybody until they have nothing.
And it's not going to do anything as advertised.
It is not going to give health care to more people.
It's not going to make it cheaper.
And it certainly is not going to make health care any better.
It's going to make it worse.
Now, Bill Crystal today at the Weekly Standard suggests that Pelosi pulled the trigger on here on this.
She goes out there, does this today, makes a big spiel about the public option because Dingy Harry couldn't pull a trigger.
She's tired of waiting on him.
And in the process, she really is leading the Democrats off a cliff.
This is the great thing about this.
The Democrat Party is being destroyed by this.
People do not want this.
More and more, the only people that seem to want this are women who have more than four cell phones in their house.
Kellyanne Conway has some, it's funny as hell.
Some of the crosstabs and some of her latest polling went out and found out what kind of women support all of this health care.
If they spend $100 or $101 a month on themselves and every other member of their family and have things like a plasma TV, they still think health care costs are the most important thing.
It really is a great expose of the entitlement mentality that a lot of people have.
Here's the key fact that Crystal suggests in this bill, the allegedly deficit neutral status can be claimed, quote unquote, because of hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare cuts.
If it passes, these will be the largest cuts in Medicare ever.
And Bill Crystal asks, is the Democrat Party as a whole willing to go into the 2010 election as the party that slashed Medicare?
And my guess is they will because it will not be slashed by 2012 or 2010.
It'll be slashed after 2010 or after 2012.
Now, the tax increases will go in immediately.
That's how they also another little trick that they claim this is all deficit neutral over 10 years.
Well, they don't implement it for the first three years of those 10, but the taxes get implemented for all 10 years.
So all these massive tax increases, they say, will make this deficit neutral plus the Medicare cuts.
Pelosi will whisper to her members not to worry.
They can rescind the cuts next year.
But then, of course, the legislation will be a deficit buster.
One more thing.
Speaker Pelosi's once again, as on cap and trade, asking her members to walk the plank, absent any evidence.
There are the votes in the Senate to pass comparable legislation.
In fact, the reason Pelosi's pulling the trigger now is that Dingy Harry failed in his effort to get the Senate up to the starting gate first.
That was the point of last week's attempted dock fix, and it failed.
So now the Democrats in the House are walking the plank because Dingy Harry couldn't deliver.
And they're going to try to blame this on Republicans all they want, but they're not going to be able to get away with it.
And so Bill Crystal's question is this.
Will her caucus follow Nancy Pelosi off the cliff?
Back in just a second.
Ladies and gentlemen, hi, welcome back, by the way.
El Rushboat here, rhetoric in residence all across the fruited plain.
Now, this Pelosi business, Bill Crystal asking if Democrats in her caucus will follow her off the plank, you know, walk the plank, fall, go over to Cliff.
I'm going to tell you what I think.
I think Pelosi, for her own purposes, actually wants to get rid of the blue dog Democrats.
She doesn't like them.
They cause her problems.
She wants to thin out the Democrat herd in the House and rid herself of these blue dogs.
She's never liked them.
She needed them to get her majority.
But they give her problems.
Here's what's going to happen.
If she can convince enough of them to go along with her health care plan with all the fudgy language on the public option and so forth, she can convince them to go along with her plan and again go along with cap and trade.
She will have secured their votes and then she'll be happy as hell when they go home and run for reelection and lose.
After she gets the big agenda items, she doesn't care one whit about these people and their political future.
She'll have their votes.
She can cut them loose, further radicalizing her party in the House of Representatives.
Once the major agenda items are passed, neither she nor Obama care about these people.
It's about the agenda.
You blue dogs, I may be your best friend right now.
I may know more about what your future holds for you than you do.
And I'm telling you, all you got to do is look at old Mr. Cree Deeds and find out, look at how the White House is treating him.
Look at Obama going out, making a campaign appearance for him and basically saying he's ugly, he's a slob, but he's a fighter.
You think if they'll throw Cree Deeds under the bus because he's down double digits in a governor's race in Virginia, you think that they won't cast you aside the moment they no longer need you, all they want is your vote on this radical agenda.
And once they get it, they'll be happy for your constituents to send you packing.
Mark my words.
I know these people like every square inch of my glorious naked body.
She wants them to walk the plank.
The difference is she's not going to be on it.
She comes from a radicalized district.
Her district's never going to throw her out, no matter what she does.
And neither will Stenny Hoyers and any of the other leaders in the House.
But the blue dogs, you know, they're on precarious ground anyway because they're from conservative districts.
So they have a question.
They all have a question they have to ask themselves.
What do they want their future to be?
Do they want to lose reelection or do they want to lose re-election?
Because either way they go here, they're in trouble because if they buck Pelosi on this, if they don't go along with her and vote for this radical health care bill, and if they don't go along with her and vote for radical cap and trade, then they're effectively the walking dead in the House, but they might win reelection.
If they go off the cliff with her, They are not going to win re-election, and then they're finished, and she gets what she wants.
This, my friends, ain't beanbag.
This is very serious stuff.
Barack Obama today out at the Eisenhower executive office building, and he's talking to small business owners about health insurance reform and the economy.
And I actually think every sentence that he said to these guys began with F you.
They don't know it, but it did.
He's out there promising the millionaires, these small business owners, these millionaires, that it won't cost them a dime and all this is going to save them money.
He is insulting their intelligence.
We have a couple soundbites.
Here's number one.
I am gratified that our economy grew in the third quarter of this year.
The 3.5% growth in the third quarter is the largest three-month gain we have seen in two years.
This is obviously welcome news and affirmation that this recession is abating and the steps we've taken have made a difference.
While this report today represents real progress, the benchmark I use to measure the strength of our economy is not just whether our GDP is growing.
It's not.
Whether we're creating jobs.
We're not.
Whether families are having an easier time paying their bills.
They're not.
Look, you can try to cover up 10% unemployment all you want with a phony GDP number of 3.5%.
You can go out there and say you saved the economy, but there are no jobs.
Obama's gratified, but by his own benchmark, his economy is still failing.
Now, let me see if I can put this GDP number into context for you because it's phony.
It is a fake number.
Gross domestic product needs to be understood as the product of three things or the sum of three things, consumption by consumers, investment by business, and spending by government.
C I G. Consumption, investment, spending by government.
So they say the total GDP went up 3.5%.
But was there any new consumption by consumers?
No.
Was there any new investment by business?
No.
Was there spending by government?
Yes.
That's the G.
The increase is in G, spending by government.
There was no investment in business.
There was no consumption by consumers.
You've seen all the numbers.
Home sales down, consumer spending down.
There was no economic growth.
What happened here, you had the cash for Clunkers fiasco, and now the Edmonds.com bunch estimates that that program cost taxpayers $24,000 for every car sold.
And then there was that first-time homebuyers fraud.
All kinds of government spending, which was government borrowing.
So the government spending sector goes up and they say, oh, government grew by 3.5%, or the economy grew by 3.5%.
It did not.
Government grew.
All that's happened here is that money has been shifted from taxpayers today and tomorrow into Obama approval ratings today.
And we are back.
Rush Limbaugh here on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
I want to take another stab at this GDP thing because I was checking email during the break.
What do you mean, Rush?
You never have ever said that ghost domestic product increases in the past were fake.
You're just anti-Obama.
No, no, no, no.
I am anti-Obama, but don't you find this suspicious right before some elections hit next week?
We got this.
You know that this number is going to revised, be revised downward later this month, and nobody's going to pay any attention to it.
But folks, there is no economic growth, economic growth, at least in the private sector.
And that's what everybody cares about.
The private sector is where you and I operate.
The private sector is where you and I test the waters.
It's where we pursue the American dream.
Gross domestic product equals the sum of consumption by consumers, investment by business, and spending by government.
So the total goes up by 3.5%.
It seems like growth, but all the increase is in G, spending by government, financed by an increasing deficit.
It's fake.
Look at it this way.
It's called the Keynesian fallacy.
If I buy a refrigerator, that's a real transaction.
It counts toward C, consumption.
If I own a business and I buy a new machine tool or a forklift or whatever, that's real also.
It counts toward I, investment.
Real recoveries are led by consumption and investment, and there ain't any of that going on.
I'm sorry.
I wish there were.
Now, the Keynesian fallacy is based on the multiplier theory.
I've done my economic homework on this.
And it is that government spending causes growth.
That's what Obama believes.
That's what all these liberals believe.
Government spending is that's the engine.
They think government creates jobs.
They think government does all these wonderful things.
The private sector is where all the fraud takes place.
The private sector is where all the cheating goes on.
The private sector is where the real people get cheated by the big shots on Wall Street and ExxonMobil and big oil, big pharma, big whatever.
They think government is the engine.
And so when it grows, whoo baby, we're smoking.
Cool.
That's the Keynesian fallacy.
Now, government spending could cause growth if the money is spent on certain things like infrastructure and keeping us safe.
But then the growth that it causes comes from the consequences later, that increase in consumption and investment.
Now, this growth that they're talking about here today, this GDP number, is just an accounting trick.
Suppose I borrow $10,000 on my credit card.
And then I tell my wife, look, honey, here's the $10,000.
Our income is going by $10,000.
I just got a raise.
And then I go out and I spend that income on a new car or boat or whatever.
My wife, my girlfriend, whatever would hit me with a chair.
Borrowing money and spending it is not increased income.
It's sort of like baseline budgeting, if I can remind you of that lecture.
Let's say you go in and buy a car.
You're looking at buying a car and you want to spend, oh, $70,000 on a car.
So you go to some dealerships, start kicking the tires, look around.
You go to Mercedes, you go to Ford, you to Chrysler, go to GM, and the car you end up liking costs $50,000, not $70,000.
And you tell your family, we just saved $20,000.
When you didn't, you just spent $50,000.
It's the same thing here.
You borrow $10,000, you go spend it on something, and you tell yourself you got a raise, that your income went up.
That's what's happened here with this GDP number.
This 3.5% growth is all in government.
And as we know, government doesn't have any money.
Government's printing money.
We're running a deficit of $1.4 trillion this year.
We don't have any money.
So this growth is fake.
It is fraudulent.
It is phony.
It doesn't exist.
There is no growth.
And Obama himself even admitted it out there.
That these small business people, he's not lying to.
Here's another, the plain out false lie that he told the small business owners this morning in Washington.
Those who have a vested interest in the status quo who are claiming otherwise.
And they're using misleading figures.
So I want to try to explain as clearly as I can exactly what health reform would mean for small business owners like you and the workers you employ.
The first thing I want to make clear is that if you are happy with the insurance plan that you have right now, if the cost you're paying and the benefits you're getting are what you want them to be, then you can keep offering that same plan.
Nobody will make you change it.
I'm sorry, it is an out-and-out lie.
It is just an out-and-out lie.
There have been five health care bills floating around the House and the Senate, and every damn one of them makes it very clear that at the end of the day, there won't be any private health insurance available.
It may take five or ten years for all this stuff to phase in, but they're going to make the government option at first so cheap that employers are going to offload you yourself.
These small business guys, the first thing they're going to do is offload your health care to the government.
You're going to be thrown to the public option.
What do you want?
And Obama is lying through his teeth.
He knows it.
They know it.
I would love to have seen the faces of people in this audience.
These are small business people.
You may find some liberal Democrats in there, but they do understand dollars and cents.
And they do understand that when somebody from the government comes along and says, hey, you like what you're doing now, and you don't want to change it?
You're not going to change it.
And you don't have to spend any more money.
Meanwhile, Obama's talking about raising everybody's taxes, an excise tax, get this, this is from the Hill.
An excise tax on high-priced insurance policies might violate Obama's pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class.
According to the House Democratic whip, James Clyburn, Democrat South Carolina, said this last night.
He said, I do not want to see anything jeopardize the president's promise not to raise taxes on the middle class.
And that could very well get us there.
The House health care bill to be unveiled today will not include such a tax, but the Senate bill does, an excise tax on high-priced insurance, the Cadillac policies.
You who afford the best insurance policy, you're going to pay a tax for being able to afford it.
That's in the Senate bill.
And the Senate bill cannot have that provision removed from it and still maintain this fraudulent claim anyway that it's deficit neutral.
So Pelosi, let me tell you something, folks.
You look at Obamacare cap and tax, if a person doesn't make low six figures, plan on moving back in with your parents by the time they get through.
This Obamacare bill ought to be renamed the Move Back In with Mommy and Daddy Act of 2009 or 10, whenever they get it passed.
This is not a joke.
These bills, cap and trade, health care are going to destroy the housing sector.
They are disposable income killers.
Forget canceling cable and skipping rent, mortgage payments.
It'd be the only way to make up the difference.
We got a new phrase here for today's under-30 crowd moving on down.
Used to be moving on up.
We're moving on down.
There's no tort reform in this bill.
Say it a lot of money.
There's no portability of insurance.
There is no letting you buy insurance from other states.
No real changes at all in the things that would make sense and lower cost and permit more freedom in all of this.
And Obama, you know, this is a great example of this.
He's in a different world.
He is clueless.
He doesn't have any idea what the American people know.
He doesn't get it that more Americans each day understand that they will be forced to a public option.
He tells these small business guys that if they're happy with the plan they have right now, if the cost you're paying and the benefits you're getting are what you like, you can keep offering the same plan.
Nobody's going to make it.
It's just an outright lie.
And he doesn't know or doesn't care that more and more people understand what a fraud this thing is.
Radio news, I think it was CBS radio news this morning touting a study that estimates children without health insurance are 60% more likely to die than children with insurance.
In other words, children are going to die if we don't pass health care now.
Forget that we've passed S-CHIP, where we're insuring children all the way up to age 25.
We have S-CHIP, the Women and Children's Health Insurance Program, and we got that passed.
They got that passed.
And in that bill, children up to age 25, they are considered a child up to age 25 to qualify for this federal program.
And yet, there's a study estimates that 60% of children without health insurance are more likely to die than children with health insurance.
I tell you, folks, the outright fraud and lying that is going on here is breathtaking.
I got to take a timeout.
We'll do it.
We'll be back and continue.
Well, no.
Very simple.
Snerdley.
I can't believe you think I haven't explained this well enough yet.
Pelosi is protecting big labor.
She protects big lawyer.
No torrent reform.
She advances her ideology of big government by declaring war on the middle class.
That's what this really is.
This is a war against the working people of America, the taxpayers, whatever their income, you are in the crosshairs with all of their agenda, not just health care, cap and tax, whatever you call it.
All of us are in their crosshairs.
This is a radical bunch of people.
We'll be right back after this.
Sit tight.
Okay, I think let's go.
Let's go to the phones.
People want to weigh in on this.
Welcome back, by the way, Rush Limbaugh, highly trained broadcast specialist, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, as always, zero mistakes.
Mark in San Diego, great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Oh, hi, Rush, 19-year-old dudes.
I just wanted to mention this 20% cut they're talking about in Medicare is out of the gross.
My office, I'm a practicing family for a year.
Wait, wait, wait.
There's a lot of Medicare cut lingo going on.
What 20% are you talking about?
Well, I'm talking about the one they've been hitting around where they tried to pass the bill to raise it, another Medicare 21%, but it failed.
Oh, the docs, the docs.
You're talking about the doc fix thing?
Yeah, that one failed, but I think somewhere in there they're still talking about a 21% decrease.
You mean in reimbursements?
Right.
To doctors.
Right.
Well, of course they are.
Yeah.
I mean, that's gross.
That's about a 20% cut in my salary.
That's a 20% in the bundled fees that come in.
And since my off-profit overhead profit margin is only about 10% or 15% or less, it cuts off any profit.
Well, don't you underwait a minute.
I was talking to a hospital CEO, a major hospital in San Diego today.
He said they're 40% about Medicare, but this thing, if it passes, is going to be a disaster.
I'm predicting the whole system of hospitals will collapse, especially little ones.
I think it has to.
It has to collapse because without the profit motive and without any profit, why go on business?
Why do this?
But what you have to understand is that Obama thinks you shouldn't make any money.
It ought to be revenue neutral.
Your costs ought to equal your services and then your income.
These guys, and I'm not exaggerating this.
You doctors, you've been too rich for too long.
You amputate people's feet when you don't have to.
You take out kids' tonsils when you don't have to.
You have to understand Obama resents you.
This 20% cut in your reimbursement is by design.
They have to create the illusion that they're saving money.
The big thing is, though, there are $400 to $500 billion in Medicare cuts for patients, the recipients, for the elderly.
The Democrat Party is going to be, I mean, that's a serious cut.
And people are going to find out about that.
There's going to be a revolution.
Now, you know, I don't want to get caught up right now in the ideology of this.
I'm all for cutting bloated federal programs.
So, you know, a $400 billion cut in Medicare, to me, it's a problem because we've created the generation or two of people who depend on this.
And then, and yeah, you remember when Newt Gingrich was back in the 90s was proposing Medicare reform that saved a little bit of money.
Hey, we're saying that Newt wanted Medicare to wither on a vine, wither away on the vine.
It totally took him out of context.
And here they are stripping the vine.
And it's them doing it.
And it's their constituents that they're doing it too.
Now, privately, I'm all for the bloated programs being cut.
But Rush, but Rush, this is going to harm real people.
I know.
See, that's the catch-22.
We've created a generation of people who think they're entitled to this.
Maybe two generations of people.
But that 20% cut in reimbursements.
I mean, that's chump change compared to what's coming.
Look at the Clinton health care bill was something like 1,300 pages.
This is 1,900 pages.
And it's going to end up being even more than that because, you know, you've seen the previous bills like H.R. 3200, which this now replaces.
You see phrases in it like at the Secretary's discretion, blah, blah, blah.
That means a new law can be created by the Secretary deciding something.
Whatever, Secretary, talk about health and human services or what have you.
It's a disaster waiting to happen.
Here's Randy in Richmond, Virginia.
Great to have you on the EIB Network Hello.
Hey, Rush, how you doing?
Fine and handy, sir.
Good.
My question is this.
I haven't heard anybody talk about it, but why can't we revamp the current Medicare system to cover these people who are less fortunate and can't afford insurance instead of just doing a complete takeover of the health care industry by the government?
We could.
I have run the numbers on this.
The number of uninsured now is floating around 47 million.
But if you go in there and you examine all of the 47 million using census figures and other demographic data, what you learn is that the real number of people who want health insurance and can't afford it is 12 million.
We could insure those 12 million every year for $35 or $40 billion.
It's right there in the stimulus money.
It hadn't been spent.
So the question, why not do that?
Because that's not what this is about.
That's how they're selling it.
That's how these duped little liberals, average American citizen liberals, are running around.
They think their hearts are big and their compassion's overflowing because we're going to get health influence for the uninforred with their limbo who can't afford it.
There are a lot of people that refuse to buy it.
They're young.
They want to spend the money on five or ten cell phones and a couple plasma TVs and a Lamborghini rather than health care.
The real number is $12 million.
But that's not what this is about.
This is about seizing one-sixth of the private sector and putting it in control of liberal Democrats health care.
National health care is the simple, fastest way to regulate every aspect of everyone's life in this country.
We'll be back.
Hey, folks, Doug Hoffman has picked up a whole bunch of endorsements from important conservative leaders, Ed Meese, David Keene, the American Conservative Union, Brent Bozell, the Media Research Center, Alfred Regnery, the publisher, Craig Shirley, a whole bunch of them.
His financial coffers are swelling as well, Doug Hoffman.
It's New York 23 brief timeout.
We have barely scratched the surface here today.
I'm not kidding.
▲
Export Selection