All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 7, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:45
December 7, 2009, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
Doing so happily and doing so proudly, Rush Lynn Baugh, the EIB Network.
Great to have you here.
The telephone number if you want to join us on the phone.
800-282-2882 and the email address L Rushbaugh at EIB net.com.
My friends.
I was just in Snerdley's uh office.
I'm watching Obama try to take credit here for a great jobs report that shows 10% unemployment and said the uh he said that uh hey the bank bailout's not gonna cost nearly as much as we thought, so we're gonna spend that money on future job creation.
It's a slush fund.
TARP is a slush fund, and so is the economic stimulus, a slush fund.
Neither were intended for their stated purpose.
At any rate.
When I'm watching Obama, he's sitting there in the White House, and I realized I had not yet received, I'm sure it's an oversight, because I I get invited every year.
I've been invited every year for the last eight years.
I I've not been invited to the White House Christmas party that's thrown annually for the media.
And I saw last week that there are going to be like 17 or 19 different White House parties this year, with the last party being a party thrown uh for the residents staff.
Uh uh I I've been invited uh I'm sure it's an oversight because I've been invited every year for the last uh eight years, and I thought, well, maybe I could crash it.
Show up and make them not let me in.
And then start, you know, raising all the hell.
Well, you let a couple other people in here without their names on a list in not long ago.
Why not me?
I'm in the media.
I've been here for the last eight years.
Social security information is on fire for me.
The Secret Service knows all about me.
Yes, uh pop quiz.
What is the most prevalent greenhouse gas in Earth's atmosphere?
A methane, B carbon dioxide, C water vapor, or D tropospheric ozone.
Again, what is the most prevalent greenhouse gas in Earth's atmosphere?
Methane, carbon dioxide, water vapor, or tropospheric ozone.
The answer is C, water vapor.
Water vapor is the single most prevalent greenhouse gas.
We cannot regulate water vapor.
Uh water vapor is also uh uh it therefore it is the largest contributor to whatever greenhouse effect there is.
And of course, the notion that the greenhouse effect is bad is what has uh settled into the uh community thinking on this.
This is from the Wall Street Journal Environment section, page R9.
Uh and it's uh it's in a story of hot air from politicians, uh is is E. Uh ABCD and E, the most prevalent greenhouse gas, but that's just a uh a uh w uh you the question is can we tax water vapor?
The Democrats can tax anything.
That's where we're headed.
We're gonna.
Here here's let me let me let me find the soundbite.
Let me let me find uh Nancy.
Here we go.
Audio soundbite number 16.
Nancy Pelosi, last Thursday, Capitol Hill.
She held a news conference.
Reporter said if unused TARP money goes for job creation, and that's what Obama's talking about.
Hey, the bank bailout costs much and remember, most of the banks were forced to take bank bailout money.
Remember?
They were sequestered in a room at the Treasury Department and given three hours to sign it.
So they want to pay it back now.
They want to pay it back because they want to get out of the shackles of government control.
They're not paying it back because they have uh have recovered from a crisis.
The whole thing is a myth.
Everything this administration does is a myth.
So reporters, oh wow, we have unused TARP funds?
Are you gonna sit for job creation?
Does that mean uh uh uh a tax on financial transactions is off the table?
I believe that the transaction tax still has a great deal of merit.
Their concern that many of us have uh others have had is that it will send transactions overseas.
Well, let's see.
But the fact is what we're talking about is a global transaction, something that we would do in conjunction with other G nations, whether it's G8, G20, whatever the current G number is, and uh uh because it is really a source of revenue that has really minimal impact on the transaction, but a tremendous impact on helping us meet our needs.
And I think uh there would be a market among American people to say that we're all participating in the economic prosperity of our country, and we're all pitching in to continue that prosperity.
We're all participating in the destruction of economic prosperity, uh, Madam Speakerette.
And I'll tell you what else.
This is a 150 billion dollar global tax on every stock transaction.
Everyone.
And they think it's going to raise 150 billion dollars a year because it is it is her belief that people aren't going to stop buying stocks because of the because of the uh stock tax.
It it's well, every time you every time you raise taxes on an activity, you get less of that activity.
There's there's no there's no question about it.
At any rate, uh, we move on because there are other things I want to talk to.
This is from the Kansas City SCAR newspaper today.
Kansas City School District has about 1,000 employees too many.
And this is after they cut 500.
After a stormy summer in which the Kansas City School District shed more than 500 employees, its remade human resources department faces another huge task with about 3,000 employees.
The Kansas City School District still has about 1,000 more people than most districts with enrollments of about 17,000 students, said Steve Harris, the new assistant superintendent for human resources.
That means that they had a bureaucrat for every four students.
We ran the math here.
Thirty, eight hundred state education employees divided by 17,000 students, equals 4.47 students to each employee.
And yet, when we hear about the need for cuts, what do we always hear?
We've got to cut teachers.
We have to touch, we have to cut textbooks, we have to cut all kinds of horrible, horrible things.
I I ran into a story.
This was uh Sunday in the New York Times.
It's a it's a story by Matt Bye.
It's called uh Cable Guys.
After Walter, and it this explains so much.
There's one little paragraph in here that explains a whole lot.
After Walter Cronkite died earlier this year, Frank Makowitz, the one-time Democrat operative, recalled in the Washington Post how he had proposed that George McGovern select Cronkite as his running mate during the 72 presidential campaign.
Now, Cronkite was one of the most admired men in America, a known skeptic of the war in Vietnam.
And yet McGovern's other advisors unanimously rejected the Cronkite gamble, not just because they feared he would say no, but also because the boundary between journalism and elective office was so absolute at the thought of merging them struck aides as too desperate a ploy.
Cronkite was totally outside of politics, as Mackowicks described it.
Voters and party leaders, it was thought could no more accept a newsman as a Democrat spokesman than they could imagine a politician broadcasting the evening news.
Now it seems that Cronkite's brief moment as a vice presidential contender may have been the first inevitable step down that treacherous path.
Today we're not at all surprised to hear names like Chris Matthews and Lou Dobbs tossed around as candidates for higher orifice.
And while it used to be that only political aides of notable talent like Bill Moyers and Pat Buchanan and George Stephanopoulos, and well, Chris Matthews could make the tricky transition from politics to TV news.
Now it's politicians themselves.
Joe Scarborough, Mike Huckabee, who find themselves ensconced as hosts on a cable TV set.
The door between politics and television news now isn't merely revolving.
It spins so fast and so continuously that a fair number of people no longer seem to belong neatly to one side or the other.
Is Sarah Palin at this point a politician, or is she the star of some frontier family reality show?
In fact, she seems to realize that the changed environment allows Her to be both at the same time.
It's not hard to understand why political figures are lured into the realms of punditry or even outright entertainment, for one thing, in an era when the bidness of campaigning never really stops.
The incursion of politicians into the news media enables officeholders who are between jobs to stay in our faces.
Look at John Kasich.
Now, this isn't a strictly political phenomenon.
It is now become routine.
Fired baseball managers, fired football coaches, sign on with the SPN or some other sports broadcasting division for a year or two, where they can make a bunch of money pontificating while also positioning themselves for the next big job opening.
A fast-moving culture demands constant visibility.
You can't just leave the scene for a while and expect the phone to keep ringing.
Now listen to this next.
And if Rush Limbaugh makes $50 million a year, commands the loyalty of some 13 million listeners, it's 22, by the way, Matt, and routinely scares the striped ties of every Republican congressman in Washington, then why wouldn't your average politician aspire to be in Russia's chair rather than say Mitch McConnell's.
And now you know, uh ladies and gentlemen, why I always say everybody wants to be me.
And why everybody in politics is in the media.
Everybody wants to be me.
But the problem is, when you ask the question, why wouldn't your average politician aspire to be in Russia's chair rather than, say, Mitch McConnell's?
Yes.
Because they can't.
What I do is the result of a specific talent and skill set combined with hard work, which is something that eludes most politicians.
You can be a moron and be a politician.
And a lot of politicians show up at a hundred grand a year and end up with 50 million anyway when they leave.
It's amazing how that happens, but it has been known to happen.
So I saw this.
This is a little tiny little story.
Lamenting the and I'm not even on television.
Hey, Todd, but all these other people are on television.
I'm not even in television.
Just radio with the uh fleeting and rare TV appearance.
But why wouldn't people want to sit in my chair?
All right, a quick timeout.
We'll get more of your phone calls when we come back after this.
Sit tight, my friends, on the EIB network.
If you are a new listener to the EIB network since this time of year ago, you're listening to Manheim's Steamroller.
They are part of our Christmas bumper music rotation this time of year, and I assume by now everybody's heard of Manheim's steamroller, but if you haven't, and if you like Christmas music.
Stuff is so great.
It is so nice.
Chip Davis uh is Manheim's streamroller, three or three or four other people.
They're on tour right now.
I don't have the uh tour we're they were they here at the Cravis was they're gonna be here next week.
Manheim steamroller at the Kravis Center next week.
Well fabuloso.
If they come to your town, we'll get a list of where they're gonna be, and uh because if they do a great show as well.
Anyway, Heritage Foundation, folks, has an impactful news headline on their site today.
Uh they point out that the Senate is set to raise the debt limit of the country again from twelve point one to thirteen point six trillion.
That's a plus twelve percent increase before the debate over the health care plan is resolved.
Now, can you imagine the debt to our national government if that bill is the two and a half trillion dollars that some say it'll be?
Uh here's another example of the Heritage Foundation's work and why it's so important in the national debate over issues.
If you go online to Askheritage.org, they are the ones keeping track of our debt and what percentage of the national budget it is and will become.
Their researchers have taken it out for the next 40 years.
You can see it.
Now name another group of conservative, thoughtful, smart researchers looking out for the nation That way.
I mean, a lot of them are trying, but the Heritage Foundation has the smartest people, they do it the best.
When you are a member of the Heritage Foundation, and there are now nearly 600,000.
And I would love to tell you how many of those 600,000 are you, as a result of uh being informed about it on this program, but I am not braggadocious.
But it's a significant number.
Six hundred thousand of us are now members of the Heritage Foundation, and when you are, you are supporting this thinking and bringing these issues to the forefront.
Heritage Foundation argues for smaller government, not one that would allow the debt limit to be fifty percent of the size of the nation's economy.
You don't have you ever have you ever been in debt?
Do you realize what uh impairment that is on your freedom?
You realize what an impairment that is on your liberty.
That's where we're headed as a nation.
You remember how good if you ever were close to being bankrupt or just broke.
I've been broke a couple of times.
You know how you feel when you get out from under it all?
Liberated.
We're not headed in that direction as a nation.
We're headed in the opposite direction.
And the only way to get free and clear is for these people to start raising taxes on us left and right.
And that's something that must not happen.
So the Heritage Foundation will continue to make their impact, but only with uh with your support.
You can become a member today very easily.
Go to AskHeritage.org and make yourself a member.
Get yourself involved.
Ask heritage.org.
Ken in Detroit, I'm glad you waited, sir.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Yeah, Rosh.
Um I'm just calling from the nice uh chilly uh side of uh Michigan.
We're getting some snow over here now.
Yeah, I wanted to comment that uh Barack Obama is uh really showing his uh deceitful uh nature by uh attending this uh conference on climate change in uh Copenhagen when you have all those emails that came out recently uh showing that the uh man-made global warming and climate change that's been promoted by Al Gore and the United Nations as well as others is uh being a uh tall fraud,
uh something that even a child in elementary school is capable of uh understanding.
When uh you have the president of the United States continue to hold uh to this uh fraudulent uh science, uh this is just something that's unforgivable.
Well, it's because it's not about the science.
Well, no, it's about power, it's about uh control.
Exactly right.
And they're just look at the only way to understand this.
See, they that that's why I came up with the description of the two universes.
We really live in two universes.
The universe of lies and the universe of reality.
And they're not in the universe of reality.
Everything the left is doing is predicated on a fraud, a series of frauds or hoaxes or lies.
It's the only way they can succeed and perpetrate things clout and they and they cloak uh their fraud and uh and and the hoax in compassion, saving the planet, saving the polar bears, not disappointing the children.
Uh insuring the uninsured, providing the best health care for the sick and the elderly, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's all it's all smoke and mirrors.
Of course he would go.
Of course he's gonna go.
He's not going to announce that he has been influenced by this.
But that's why, you know, serious scientists need to demand a quick investigation into this because it's all of science that stands to be tainted by it.
Pierre in uh in Quebec, Canada.
Nice to have you on the program, Pierre.
Hello, Rolf, how are you?
Very fine, sir.
Thank you.
Uh, two questions for you.
Right.
But first, uh great piece you did with Bill Shatner there.
Oh, you like that.
Thank you.
Oh, I loved it.
And the look on your face when you hold that Remco A. M. radio?
Yeah.
Priceless.
I haven't, I haven't seen the thing.
I forgot to watch it.
I T voted the replay at 2 a.m.
Oh, but I uh I do invite everyone to go have a look at it.
That it's the look on your face when you hold that radio is just like the most precious thing in the world for you.
Well, it is.
It's uh it's called Remco Caravel.
My parents gave it to me when I was uh I think it's single digits, and it broadcast on an AM signal, any AM signal on the band just set it for an AM signal, there wasn't one in your town, it broadcasts throughout your house.
Uh, and they'd listen to me on the radio play disc jockey.
Right on.
Question I got for you about uh the uh the meeting they're having right now.
Uh in the past so far you got countries like China, Canada, and the U.S. that didn't set real set targets as far as green uh gas emissions are concerned.
Uh now that the same players finally have uh the first evidence of water uh weather fraud with those email that just came out.
How come now in Copenhagen, the same countries that are doing uh that are doing everything their power to come out of it with uh concrete solid targets like they never wanted to do it before, and now they have a chance to prove it was a hoax.
Now they want to set up targets.
So my first question to you is what happened to change their mind like this, 180 degrees around.
Uh in their attitude and second question could that attitude just be a big smokescreen to take people's attention away from the healthcare debate, the economy going nowhere.
Well, and Tiger Woods' favorite car.
I uh uh I'm crying.
Tiger Woods favorite car.
You uh uh what is Tiger Woods?
You're asking me what Tiger Woods favorite car is.
No, no, no, no, no.
We're just trying to drag you in.
Oh, you're gonna drag me in.
All right.
In the first place, you have to tell me what China and India have they have not changed their opinion on it.
They're not gonna play ball.
They're not gonna reduce their emissions, they're not gonna reduce their economic growth.
Well, that's what they're saying right now, especially China.
They're saying now that.
Well, of course, the Chicons are Chicons, the Russians will probably agree too, but they never agree to whatever they agree to.
They never keep the agreements, they just they just do it to get us to sign up.
The Chicons are no more gonna slow down their carbon emissions than the Russians are.
Oh, they could they can't say any they can't say anything they want, they'll never do it anyway.
They got nobody watching.
So look at the only idiots that are going to reduce their carbon emissions are us.
Because the whole design is to fleece us.
And Tiger Wood's favorite car, hell, I don't know.
I don't even know what cry.
We have the uh we have the soundbite here.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, this morning in DC, on the Senate floor, dingy Harry.
Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all Republicans can come up with is this.
Slow down.
Stop everything, let's start over.
You think you've heard these same excuses before you run.
When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said, slow down.
It's too early.
Let's wait.
When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote.
Some insisted they simply slow down.
And this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone.
Regardless of the color of their skin.
Some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats.
We hear today.
This is uh outrageous.
This is not ignorance.
This is outrageous because Harry Reed knows the Republican Party was born in the fight against slavery.
That's how the Republican Party came to be.com for many people,
rural is synonymous with hick, hayseed, low income, pro-life, limited economic opportunity, and poor schools.
However, a recent study found that much of rural America is actually prosperous, particularly in the Midwestern plains.
Researchers just had to look at things differently to see the prosperity.
The study announced uh last Wednesday, and based on data from the year 2000 analyzed unemployment rates, poverty rates, half-screwed dropout rates, and housing conditions to identify prosperous communities.
The result?
One in five rural counties in the United States is prosperous, doing better than the nation as a whole on all of these measures.
Yeah, those bitter clingers just continue to surprise everybody, don't they?
I wonder how Obama would feel about this.
Now it must be said that uh since the uh study used data from the year 2000, the findings do not reflect uh the the country's recent months of financial turmoil.
But it was 2000.
Get this.
They announced in the UK today some government office that is um was set up to study UFOs as being shut down.
However, not in Denver.
In the Los Angeles Times a couple of days ago.
Forget high sky unemployment and those two wars overseas, Jeff Peckman has more earthly concerns.
For one thing, if extraterrestrials were to descend on Denver, what's the best way to welcome them?
Thanks to Jeff Peckman's tireless efforts and taste for the limelight, Denver voters will be asked in 2010 to approve what no electorate has approved before, an extraterrestrial affairs commission.
This week, Denver officials announced that Jeff Peckman had gathered about 4,000 valid signatures needed to place the issue before the 350,000 registered voters of the Colorado State Capitol.
If approved, the city would promote harmonious, peaceful, mutually respectful and beneficial coexistence between earthlings and extraterrestrials, in part by developing protocols for diplomatic contact.
Its seven members would include an expert in taking testimony who have survived direct personal close encounters with aliens.
What is Spielberg going to be first up to testify here?
And in what certainly is good news for residents of Colorado Springs or Boulder who might feel left out, the initiative says members who are not Denver residents may participate from anywhere in the universe.
When Jeff Peckman first launched the commission proposal last spring, I mean that's all the time it took to get this done.
It prompted some s civic sniggering even as he hit the talk shows, including David Letterman to promote it.
Ballot plan wants E.T. to dial 303, wrote the Denver Post, but now that it's on the ballot, embarrassing just about everybody except Peckman.
Councilman Charlie Brown said, What would a commission demand of us as a city?
They want to go to a conference on Mars?
If so, we'll pay for a one-way trip.
Charlie Char Charlie Brown is opposed to the uh the extracharestrial affairs commission.
Lucy and Linus have not uh weighed in on this.
And this from Blackvoicenews.com.
The uh the headline, Black Unemployment Reaches Great Depression Levels.
How's that hope and change working out for you?
What is being portrayed as a direct rebuke of the White House's lack of response to the deepening unemployment meltdown, Representative Maxine Waters, chair of the powerful Financial Services Subcommittee, killed a scheduled November 19th vote on President Obama's financial regulation reform bill.
Instead, Waters called on the administration to do more to put the nation's most vulnerable workers back to work.
The black unemployment rates officially 15.7% nationwide compared to 9.5% for whites.
Tiger Woods, uh not factored into these numbers.
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are troubled by by what they believe is the lack of response to the economic situation that is confronting them on the part of the administration, therefore they don't feel that they could, in deference to the various constituencies that they resent or represent, it says resent here.
Vote for passage of not laughing about the statistic.
Let it be known, not laughing.
I got an idea.
You know it would be a nice gesture.
I mean, here we are in the midst of recession.
I don't care all this talk about, well, you know, we've got we've got uh 10% unemployment, the best unemployment news we've had since 2007.
How about this?
If union bosses cut union dues in half until we reach full employment again, uh somewhere between four and five percent unemployment, wouldn't that be a nice gesture to make?
Start it right now, in time for the holidays.
What a small yet wonderful Christmas present this would be.
The only thing Stopping union bosses from helping their members in a down economy is the depth of appreciation they have for working men and women, their brothers and sisters.
So, given the support that union bosses have for cap and trade and for politicians who advocate Obamacare and taxing union health insurance policies, a reduction in dues, a dues cut would be a hedge against future financial pain for their own members.
The people who pay the salaries of those who have delivered so little.
I wonder how many union workers go to bed every night hungering for lower dues, lower taxes, so they can enjoy a little bit more of the money that they've earned.
The fact is union workers have to suffer a double tax.
The taxes we all pay, and then the money they pay to their unions, the union tax, the dues.
And what are they getting in return for these taxes?
Less disposable income, double digit unemployment, and they're being sent on assignments to beat up people at town hall meetings.
And by the way, folks, more taxes are cut well, they are.
More taxes are coming.
Everything will dramatically escalate in price with cap and tax and Obama care.
Jobs are going to be lost, hours will be cut.
A bonus will be limited to uh what you find in a box of Cracker Jack.
So why not help out the workers who foot the union's bills.
Is it is it the money being thrown down the rat hole known as the Democrat Party?
What a shame.
I mean, those are the people who are about to confiscate what little money union members still have.
Union dues are being confiscated to support Democrats who are going to raise taxes and lower the lifestyles of the very union members who are paying for the Democrats to succeed.
And that is if they still have a job after all of this.
The wave of unemployment coming from states laying off their workers as the stimulus slush fund runs out will be staggering.
So I think it's I think it'd be just a really nice gesture.
If uh that stern guy at the SEIU and and uh John What's his face, uh Sweeney, and uh what's the other guy that runs the uh Teamsters, Hoffa Jr. or the and then the mine workers you know, cut union dues in half.
Start now at Christmas time.
For the good of your own people.
Uh let's see.
Oh, there's a story I'm not going to have any comment on.
I'm not saying a word about it.
Uh quick timeout, we'll be back.
Don't go away, folks.
Sit tight.
A story at Forbes.com.
A story that just infuriates me.
The case for private jets.
Executives sound off on their fight to make solo business travel acceptable again.
The industry is battling back, fighting to educate the consumer, executives, and especially Capitol Hill, on why the corporate jet is not just a luxury for the few, but a necessity for business.
Now, given what we know about these spoiled rotten people up on Capitol Hill, they know full well what corporate travel is all about.
They all take it.
Although there are some very stringent rules, some of them are not allowed to now.
The uh uh at least when anybody can see them doing it.
But I mean, this is just disgustingly embarrassing.
The United States of America, an entire industry has been impugned by no less than President Obama.
And it's taking its toll business wise, and so now there's a a series of letters from executives at various manufacturers, the National Business Aviation Association, um, the aircraft owners and pilots association, several corporate chiefs.
Hey, look, we like to make our case for using our jets, which they bought and paid for and which they pay to use.
And the aviation, the general aviation industry has a lot of people at work in it that are employed by virtue of these planes flying around.
But yeah, here we have here we have executives involved in general aviation, begging, making their case to Capitol Hill in what is supposedly a free society, to fly around on their own airplanes.
Chris in Charlotte, North Carolina, great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, Met Tio Diddle.
Thank you.
Great to hear you today.
Um, I just wanted to rec be one of the many, I'm sure, to recognize that today is Pearl Harbor Day.
Um it was the second worst attack on U.S. soil, and I haven't heard a whole lot mentioned about it in the news.
I certainly haven't Obama say much about it.
Um it's it's I think it's appropriately fitting that uh the first day of the Copenhagen fraud climate hoax happens on December seventh.
Uh December seventh, uh FDR said a day that will live an infamo, as he said it.
Um we're being attacked again.
The point.
We are being attacked again, this time by the international community with a program called Cap and Trade and silly ridiculous carbon emission restrictions based on total fraud science and hoax science.
Uh we live, you know, we've had a couple of callers from the military in the well, actually more than two in the last two to three weeks, and they've all said, Chris, that the U.S. military today is not your military from World War II.
It's not it's not led by the same kind of people.
It's not constituted for the same reasons.
And we have an administration now and a a federal bureaucracy populated with people who believe that the U.S. military is the focus of evil in the uh in the world.
That's why you're not hearing a whole lot of talk about Pearl Harbor.
There aren't that many survivors in Pearl Harbor, even from World War II that are still around to go talk to.
But it's a shame.
Uh yeah, I had the the honor of uh working uh an honor flight up to Washington one Saturday.
We took some World War II vets from I think it was Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
They were going up for the day.
I don't know if you're familiar with honor flights.
Um, but it it was just the most remarkable day.
They they were so appreciative, and they were just it was so touching to take them up there.
They they just deserve that and more.
Uh those folks have done more for us than we could ever imagine.
And more than we could ever repay them for.
True.
The um it's not just Pearl Harbor Day, though.
I mean, the the the current crop of media and American leftist is trying to erase the memory of nine eleven.
Right.
Oh, yeah.
So don't fight as I'll get out.
I'm a flight attendant, and I don't forget that.
Every time I go to work, I mean, I'm always vigilant, as I I hope most of my co-workers are, because I feel like there's so much um what's the word?
People are forgetting about it.
It's you know, generations change and the the whole attitude on war now is uh uh different than it used to be.
I'm glad you called and mentioned it because uh this is uh uh this program is one of the lone outposts.
There then not the loan, there's several still remaining, but where the U.S. military its past valor and and efforts constantly celebrated and uh and and remembered.
So I'm glad, Chris, that you called and mentioned it.
Kevin or Kelvin, I'm sorry, in uh Stanbury Point, Iowa.
Great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hi, thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
Um my question is how can how can economists comment and predict on the economy and especially unemployment, I've been hearing about right on the eve of cap and trade and health care legislation.
An even better question is why is there ever going to be any serious employment taking place when employers do not know what all this is gonna cost them.
Absolutely.
So what predictions are you referring to specifically?
Future pred just any every month when we get the numbers, experts were surprised.
That's where we're unexpectedly shocked or what have you.
Well well, all the experts talk about how much of the economy this will affect, but they're all making predictions on unemployment, and I don't understand how they can not knowing what the effects are gonna be.
Well, uh it's a good question because then they e well they're trying to they're trying to calculate the effects, but they never do it dynamically.
They they'll say, okay, we're gonna raise taxes, 150 billion dollars on on stock transactions.
Global stock transactions will raise 150 billion and it it won't because there will be fewer transactions take place, so the tax revenue will be less, just like the income tax revenue that's projected to increase with tax cuts or in uh tax uh increases never materializes because when you tax an activity, it slows down.
So look at all of this th th th the predictions into the future about the economy and so forth uh from people who are on board with the Obama agenda can't be believed anyway.
They're sugarcoated to hide the disaster that awaits.
A new Gallup approval number is out for President Obama.
Forty-seven percent.
Forty-seven percent uh approve, forty-six percent disapprove in the latest Gallup presidential approval tracking poll.
Forty-seven percent approval rate in Gallup.
They they struggled hard, folks.
They worked hard to keep it up there at 50%, but reality has uh has descended even on Gallup.
Okay, we're off to a rousing start and a great week.
I'm glad you were with us, folks.
We'll take a brief 21 hour break here.
Back before you know it, same time tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection