All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 14, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:53
December 14, 2009, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Not that I care, ladies and gentlemen, but um I'm gonna pass this on to the uh on on this to you anyway.
On Wednesday, Time magazine, which is increasingly irrelevant, is going to announce uh its person of the year.
And their editor showed up somewhere today and uh revealed a short list.
Here's the short list for Time Magazine's person of the year.
Steve Jobs, Ben Bernanke, the Chinese worker, Nancy Pelosi, Stanley McCristal, Usain Bolt, and last year's winner, Barack Obama.
Now, what's conspicuously missing from this list is the American worker.
The American worker who's rising up against a socialist takeover of this country.
Instead, the Time magazine has got Chinese slave workers on its list.
Greetings, my friends, and uh and welcome Rush Limboy.
And a brand new week of broadcast excellence.
Great to have you here.
The telephone number if you want to join us, 800-282-2882, and the email address.com.
Now to quell a riot out there.
Uh those of you who are tuning in today at Rushlinbug.com, hoping to watch the program on the Ditto Cam.
The ditto cam is going to be dark all week.
But there's a good reason for it.
We have just received last week uh and have begun testing our new high definition HD Ditto Cam.
And we've got to install it this week, and it probably will take all week to do it because we can't do any the prep can only happen after 3 p.m. each day when we're through with the uh with the program, and it's gonna require all new cabling and conduits, uh resistors, diodes, transistors, uh uh dike uh just disgratificators of bunch of stuff, and it's uh it's gonna take a while to do it, but we'll have it back up and running as quickly as we can.
From newsbusters.
The government is monitoring Facebook and Twitter.
This is an editorial in Sunday's New York Times.
The government is increasingly monitoring Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites for tax delinquents, copyright infringers, and political protesters.
That's exactly what from a New York Times editorial yesterday.
A New York Times, I'm sure, is gleeful about this.
The government is increasingly monitoring Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites for tax delinquents, copyright infringers, and political protesters.
That means Obama.
Obama is the government now, and they're doing this.
Uh just wanted to give you a heads up.
CNN, 50%, the CNN poll, 50% of Americans are spending less on Christmas gifts this year.
Nearly half the country will spend less this season on gifts and charitable contributions are uh are gonna be down as well.
Well, uh a lot, let's see if I can find the word surprised in here.
A lot of Americans will be coming back.
Uh no, CNN doesn't say they're surprised, it's their own poll.
Uh they wouldn't say they're surprised their own poll.
I just I'm stunned because I thought everything was booming.
I thought everything was booming again.
I really did.
More Democrats are dropping out of the House of Representatives.
The blue dogs are starting to drop like flies.
Bart Gordon of Tennessee announced his plans to retire from Congress when his term ends in 2010.
Uh, and uh there's uh there's a let's see, another one uh Neil Abercrombie is quitting in Hawaii.
Now, Neil Abercrombie has been a socialist communist in the house long before the rest of them got there.
He is a crusader.
He is a leader, and he's quitting uh in order to run for the uh governorship of Hawaii.
So that's I think this is four or five that uh that I have counted now.
Is it nine now?
Nine Democrats, many of them blue dogs.
They know, I mean, folks, that they they they can see the handwriting on the wall.
Obama's approval number at the Rasmussen reports is down to 44%.
The spread on the uh on the index uh that that Rasmussen keeps is down to minus eighteen.
That's the difference between the people who strongly approve and strongly disapprove of Obama.
Obama meeting with bank executives today.
And this is this is uh this is his he's mad.
He's mad that these people are giving back their TARP money, paying it back so that they can be exempt from any restrictions on bonuses and uh and compensation.
He's asking bank executives to support his efforts to tighten the financial industry, while bankers are prepared to tell the president he should stop oversimplifying their concerns if he wants good faith collaboration.
He said it's on on television again last.
I don't think these people get it.
The magic of Obama's gone.
They can't quell what is happening.
They can't they can't stop the slide here by sending Obama out uh on television all the time.
The magic's gone.
The personality, the cult, all that stuff.
It's not working.
And the more he's on television, the worse is.
Steve Croft last night actually irritated Obama uh with his questions on Afghanistan and then the speech at the at West Point, the health care bills incomprehensible.
Here's one of the things Obama said uh about bankers last night preceding the meeting that he's having with them today.
Croft said it at three of the biggest banks, they're expecting a total of 30 billion dollars.
That's roughly what it'll cost the government to finance the surge in Afghanistan, and President Obama is furious.
I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of you know, fat cat bankers on Wall Street.
The only ones that are gonna be paying out these fat bonuses uh are the ones that have now paid back that tarp money and uh you think that's why they paid it back so quickly?
The people on Wall Street still don't get it.
They don't get it.
They're still puzzled.
Why is it that people are mad at the banks?
Well, let's see.
You know, you guys are drawing down 10, 20 million dollar bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it's gone through in decades.
And you guys caused the problem?
And we got 10% unemployment.
Why do you think people might be a little frustrated?
I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street.
The only ones that are going to be paying those those fat bonuses, fat bonuses are the ones that are now paid back the TARP money.
The people on Wall Street still don't get it.
It's Obama who doesn't get it.
Isn't it funny?
Isn't it funny, uh, ladies and gentlemen, how constantly we hear about how much money bankers have made during the recession, but only recently has it been reported by USA Today how federal employees' salaries have skyrocketed during the last two years.
And there's a hell of a lot more federal employees than there are bank CEOs.
But look, anybody who has been following Obama and his career, meaning his words, his is his career is nothing but a collection of words.
Either that he has spoken or that he has ostensibly written in his two books.
That's his career.
Words.
If you want to understand Barack Obama's career, it's words.
And if you followed his words, you would long be aware of his attitude towards capitalists.
Let's take a look, page 8283.
Dreams from my father, one of the books he supposedly wrote.
Late that afternoon.
No, it's time for reverb.
We have added reverb, and uh when when uh when uh when I'm speaking as Obama or following Obama, I'm gonna sound just like Obama.
Late that afternoon, Marty picked me up in front of my new address.
We headed south on the skyway.
After several miles, we took an exit leading into the southeast side, past rows of small houses made of grey clapboard or brick until we arrived at a massive old factory that stretched out several blocks.
That old Wisconsin steel plant.
We sat there in silence, studying the building.
It expressed some of the robust brutal spirit of Chicago's industrial past.
Metal beams and concrete rammed together without much attention to comfort or detail.
Only now it was empty and rust-stained, like an abandoned wreck on the other side of the chain link fence, a spotted mangy cat ran through the wheat.
All kinds of people used to work in this plant, Marty said as he wheeled the car around and started back down the road.
Blacks, white Hispanics, all working the same jobs, all living the same kind of lives, but outside the plant, most of them didn't want anything to do with each other.
And these are the church people I'm talking about, brothers and sisters in Christ.
We came to a stoplight.
I noticed a group of young white men in their undershirts drinking beer on a stoop of Verdoliac poster, Eddie Vidoliakes uh Hung on one of the uh windows.
Several of the men began to glare in my direction.
I turned to Marty.
So what makes you think they can work together now?
They don't have any choice.
Not if they want their jobs back.
Once we get the unions involved, Marty said we'll have a base to negotiate from.
In the meantime, we just need to stop the hemorrhage and give people some short-term victories, something to show people how much power they have once they stop fighting each other and start going after the real enemy.
And who's that?
Marty shrugged and said to Obama, the investment bankers, the politicians, the fat cat lobbyists.
Those are the people Obama identified way back in his book as his enemy.
And note what his buddy Marty described as more or less exactly what Obama has sought to do with his own community organizing, first in Chicago, and now on the national stage as president.
And both Marty and Obama envision the same allies, the same churches, the unions, and the same enemies, the investment bankers and the fat cats.
Never mind that it is those very fat cats who actually create the jobs that are in those government funded job banks.
So the point is there's nothing surprising to me when I hear Obama latch on to and lamb-based fat cat bankers.
He hates them.
He blames them for every problem.
You know, the Great Britain just announced a uh a bonus tax.
A 50% bonus tax.
This is double taxation.
You're gonna get a tax on your bonus if you live in the Great Britain of 50%, and the effort, the purpose is to eliminate bonuses.
Now, from Fortune magazine is a bonus tax in our future.
Though the UK's leave levy seems unlikely to spread to these shores, a bonus backlash could yet hammer U.S. banks.
The odds aren't on its side, but a bonus tax could happen in the U.S. too, which would be double taxation.
The UK this week slapped a 50% tax on bankers' bonuses above about 40,000.
That is taxing what is already taxed.
And if Obama could do that here, he would do it.
But you have to ask yourself look at New York City if you want to find out how many little guys will get hurt when these bonuses end.
I imagine people who get the bonuses use them to buy big stuff and give big chunks to churches and charities and pay for tuitions.
Those bonuses get spread around.
It's called trickle down.
If the bonuses aren't paid, if salaries are uh compensated, wages uh are capped, uh it's it's gonna have a devastating impact on an already fledgling economy.
Okay, folks, we're off and running.
A brief time out, we'll be back after this.
What better proof do we need that uh global warming climate change is not about science than this quote from Tony Blair, who's the former prime minister of the uh of UK.
He said the world must take action on climate change at Copenhagen, even if the science is not correct.
What more do you need to know, my friends?
Even if the science is not correct, we need to take action.
There is absolutely no science involved in this whatsoever.
And and uh for all this talking, you can see it in the media, all this talk about the the civil war in the Republican Party, like the drive-by-sate-controlled media just love jumping all over my comments about Mitch McConnell and the uh uh the sense I was making about the fact that Republicans were were, you know, not doing everything they could to stall this, so they're running around all weekend.
There's a civil war in a Republican Party and Limbaugh's running the show, and that's deaf now.
Tell you where the civil war is.
The civil war is in the Democrat Party, and it's over health care.
Lieberman is officially out now.
Claire McCaskill says that she will not sign on to this if it spends more money.
If it doesn't save money, she's not gonna sign on to it.
So I don't know about McCaskill, but but but Lieberman sounds pretty locked in, and that means he doesn't have his 60 votes unless he can get Olympia snow.
And the Republicans seem to be holding pretty firm on this.
The news of the day is that uh the health the health care vote that Reed has is in a in a big mess.
Let me give you some headlines as an example.
Senate health care bill would allow insurers to limit coverage for seriously ill patients.
Now, what have we been hearing for the past two weeks?
We've been hearing the past two weeks that you're gonna get coverage for existing preconditions, and that no matter how sick you are, you're going to get treated.
However, there's a loophole.
There's a loophole in the Senate health care bill that would let insurers place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses like cancer, which uh has prompted a rebuke from patient ad advocates.
So the patients, people, American citizens realize they're being lied to, left and right, the Lieberman story.
Senate Democrats who thought they had found a workable compromise, learned otherwise from Joe Lieberman over the weekend.
Lieberman threatened Sunday to join Republicans in opposing health care legislation if it permits uninsured individuals as young as 55 to purchase Medicare coverage.
Now I want to Mike, let's move to the top of the sound bites.
Um rather than uh go to the Croft interview, because this is the dirty little secret that we've known on this program for years, expanding Medicare.
We've played you audio sound bites of Obama saying throughout his career of words that expanding make uh Medicare to and lowering the mandatory edge, which you can qualify.
Remember, Medicare is broke, and just a year ago, people were talking about raising the eligibility age in order to save money.
Now everybody's talking about Obama, others lowering it to 55, which would break the system, but it is the way that they see to get the two uh to single payer.
We have a newly discovered audio tape of Obama.
This is in 2007 on the campaign trail, admitting that he was considering a Medicare Plus plan.
This is in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on April 3rd, 2007.
Let's say that we let's say that I proposed a plan that uh moved to a single-payer system, let's let's say Medicare Plus.
Essentially, everybody can buy into Medicare, for example.
Okay, so he's thinking about it back in 2007.
Let's go back further, February 16, 2004, in Urbana, Illinois, on a radio show.
Obama said this.
At the federal level, what I'm looking at is a very specific proposal that would provide health care coverage for all children who need it all across the United States, would allow 55 to 64 year olds to buy into the Medicare system.
And I think that if we can start with children and uh those persons 55 to 64 that are most vulnerable, then we can start filling in those holes and ultimately I think uh move in the direction of a universal health care plan.
Universal health care plan.
We've played all these sound bites for you, but now this is coming out of the woodwork again because here's the timeline.
Last Sunday, a week ago yesterday, Obama goes up to Capitol Hill, two o'clock in the afternoon for a pep talk with Dingy Harry and other Democrats in the Senate, saying, basically, win one for the Gipper here.
You gotta do this for me.
Do this for me.
The next day, Dingy Harry comes out and says, I'm dropping the uh the uh public option, and instead we're looking at expanding Medicare to people 55, maybe all the way down to 45 years of age.
So it looks like Obama went up uh and and proposed that.
Now, in addition to that, back in 2007 at an SEIU health care forum, this is his buddies, the unions, the Service Employees International Union, and and by the way, when he's in front of these people, his buddies, the people he trusts, he tells them exactly what his plan is and what his hopes are.
This is what he said in March of 2007.
My commandment is to make sure that we've got universal health care for all Americans by the end of my first term as president.
I would hope that we can set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort.
But I don't think we're gonna be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately.
There's gonna be potentially some transition process.
I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.
Now, this is what's being planned on Capitol Hill.
This is what the Senate is looking at doing.
And uh Obama has not put his name to any plan so that he can blame this all on other Democrats if and when it ever happens.
But we have these tapes.
We've got these sound bites, and we're gonna be forever playing them because this is Obama's plan coming out of the U.S. Senate.
Dingy Harry is doing his bidding.
Let's go back Even further, 2003, AFL CIO conference while campaigning for the U.S. Senate.
I happen to be a proponent of single payer universal health care plan.
A single payer health care plan.
Universal health care plan.
That's what I'd like to see.
I happen to be a proponent of single-payer.
Universal health care coverage.
A single payer.
Health care claim.
Universal health care claim.
That's what I'd like to see.
That's what they have in Cuba.
So let there be no doubt.
All of this is smoke and mirrors.
We're headed for single payer.
We're headed for universal health care.
And we're using it.
We're going to expand Medicare, do whatever we can to get it, and it's Obama's plan.
It is his desire, even though he has not put his name on it.
And this is what Lieberman and I'll bet you quite a lot of other Democrats are getting nervous about because they know the Medicare program is going bankrupt soon.
A brief timeout, my friends, El Rushball.
Off to our rousing start on a brand new Monday, back after this.
And we're back, Rush Linbaugh, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations on a daily basis.
A thrill and a delight to have you with us.
Now don't forget we're talking about expanding Medicare to uh to 55 uh years of age.
And let's not forget we have the S Chip program, the state children's health insurance program, and that insures children up to the age of 25.
Children up to the age of some people say that it it actually uh uh insures children up to age 37, but regardless.
We have only a few short years they haven't gotten their hands on yet.
Children up to age twenty-five, let's leave it there, and Medicare at fifty-five, and an expanding.
Now, Jennifer Rubin at Commentary Magazine, one of the blogs posted uh uh a couple days ago, did Harry Reed kill Obamacare?
A lot of people now beginning to really think that the bottom has fallen out of this.
She writes this Senator Harry Reid threw a long bomb in an act of desperation, recognizing that there was no deal on the public option, Reed resuscitated the old liberal gambit of expanding Medicare.
But the questions and the contradictions came flooding forth.
How was this to be paid for?
Wouldn't the buy-in cost be too expensive?
How could we dump millions of older, sicker people into Medicare while slashing $500 billion in funding from the program?
It frankly makes no sense.
At the end of last week, a flurry of objections and criticism from senators, the Medicare Actuary, editorial pages, previously supportive business groups, doctors and hospitals, together with shockingly negative polling on Obamacare suggests we may have finally reached a point when doing nothing makes immense political sense for lawmakers.
The public is not clamoring for health care reform, and they might even be pleased with lawmakers who insisted that their leaders not jam through anything right now.
In a sense, Harry Reid clarified what many suspected was going on.
The Democrats had ceased trying to craft a workable bill and had decided to pass something, anything, that they could get done before Christmas and fix it later.
And by choosing an approach so obviously hairbrained, Reed deprived his party of the pretense that they were engaged in serious lawmaking.
From the Heritage Foundation today, the battle over Obamacare's obituary has begun.
Last month, Pelosi ran through her version of Obamacare almost a week before the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid could issue its nonpartisan and independent analysis.
For supporters of the President's plan, it's a good thing that she did that, because the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services report eviscerated almost every single promise the president has made about his plan.
According to the report, Obamacare will one raise health care costs.
Two, cause millions of Americans to lose their current health coverage.
Three, this is the Medicare Actuary now making these claims after studying the Pelosi bill, forces millions of Americans to pay fines and still receive no health insurance, causes millions of seniors to lose their Medicare Advantage plans, places millions of Americans on welfare, jeopardizes Medicare access for all seniors, worsens health care access for the poor.
It's a debacle.
It is a disaster.
All it does is benefit Obama and the Democrats.
Now, on Friday of last week, the Medicare Actuary, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued another report, this time on Harry Reed's bill.
And the verdict was pretty much the same.
I guess it was worse.
And everybody's sitting around touting CBO, but this is the Medicare actuary that has to make all this stuff work.
And their analysis of Harry Reid's bill is one, health care costs would rise by 234 billion.
17 million Americans would be forced out of their existing health insurance.
19 million Americans would pay 29 billion dollars in taxes and fines and still receive no health insurance in return or care.
33% of all Medicare advantaged customers would lose their health care plan.
18 million Americans would be put on welfare.
The $500 billion in Medicare cuts would force 20% of Medicare providers to become unprofitable, thus jeopardizing access to care for all seniors.
And seven, the explosion in Medicaid recipients would exacerbate existing health care access problems for the poor.
Folks, when you go through this and you read the devastating effect effects of this, and then you you take that and you look and listen to Democrats touting this.
As some of the greatest stuff that's ever happened to the country from Obama on down, it's like that Senator White House from Rhode Island last week.
We have a responsibility as citizens, folks, and it's very simply stated, it's it's gonna be tough to pull off.
Most of us are raised to believe that our government is good.
I mean, hell, we're the United States of America, and the government is basically people we send there.
We elect them.
Uh we'll have our arguments now and then because our candidates are not always going to win, and we'll have to put up with the uh other party being in power for a while, but it's still we have faith in the government.
And you know that people have faith in the government because despite every failure of the federal government, any time somebody comes along saying the government's got a plan to fix this, a lot of people instinctively support it.
So let's use Senator Whiteacre, for example, last week.
We had a couple sound bites where he's out there complaining about me on the Senate floor, asking, how do I know?
Will shillion uh William Shatner asks me in an interview, how do you know?
How do you know about?
How do I know?
Well, I study it.
It's been my life, it's my career, it's my business to know.
But the question, how do you know is being asked of the wrong people?
I can't raise your taxes.
I can't find you.
I can't put you in jail.
But these people can, and they're planning on it.
So we have to start asking, Senator Whiteacre, who the hell are you?
Who the hell are you, or who the hell is Olympia Snow?
Who the hell is anybody up there to rewrite the health care delivery and insurance system in this country?
Who the hell are these people?
This is not why we send them there.
To create a crisis, to have a uh come up with a problem-solving solution that only exacerbates the problem, then they come back and blame the banks or blame us for being greedy, uh, using our credit cards too much, and they say we've got they got to fix it because we're doing something wrong, and we we always are deferential to these people.
And it needs to be the other way around.
If there's any deference, these people need to defer to us.
We are more informed than over half the people voting on this bill.
We know what's in it more than those who are going to vote on it know what's in it.
And the reason is we care about what's in it.
They really don't.
They're just trying to establish a monument for themselves in Obama.
They're just trying to get something done.
They just want something that says health care reform, signed into law, Barack Obama, early 2010.
That to them is the achievement.
The resulting disaster, they don't care about.
If they cared about resulting disasters, they would fix all of the broken programs they've implemented in the first place in all of the previous decades in this country's history.
So here we have this independent group analyzing both the Pelosi bill and the Reed bill.
And as I read through this, it's an unmitigated disaster.
It is irresponsible.
It's almost criminal.
We have to ask the question who the hell are these people and what do they think they're doing?
This is this is more than just your average partisan politics.
This is insidious.
And so now people are starting to write the Heritage Foundation headline.
The battle over Obamacare's obituary has begun.
Jennifer Rubin is the bloom off the rose.
As the Democrats finally be seen now as people who are not really serious about crafting this legislation, but just a bunch of pawns trying to get something done so they can say they got something done.
Now, the week before the Senate began debating Obamacare, CNN conducted a poll, found that Americans narrowly opposed the plan, 49% to 46%.
Now that the Senate has been debating this for two weeks.
And the Medicare Actuary has issued two devastating reports on what the impacts of Obamacare would be.
Opposition to the plan has skyrocketed.
This Friday's latest CNN poll showed that 61% of Americans now oppose Obamacare.
Only 36% support it.
And still, still Senator Whiteacre and Senator Stabenau, I and Senator Reed take to the Senate floor to denounce me for opposing this.
They take to the Senate floor to denounce me for encouraging the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell to just stop this.
We don't need health care reform right now.
We just need to stop this.
That must be the objective.
Stop this, stop it, stop it.
We don't want to fine-tune it.
There's nothing in this worth fine-tuning.
There's nothing on the margins that could improve this.
This is a dead skunk.
There is no way you can beautify or bring back to life a dead skunk.
No one would even try, and that's what this bill is.
And the arrogance and the condescension that we get from elected officials in Washington about they're the only ones that know what's going on.
They're the only ones that have the intelligence, the foresight, the experience and knowledge to fix this, is just a bunch pap.
These people are partisan hacks who have an entirely different motivation in enacting this health care reform plan the people in this country think of their motivations.
Now that people are starting to catch up.
And I want to tell you something else.
How does this poll move from 49% opposed to 61% opposed?
When the state controlled media does not do one critical story on health care, does not do one critical analysis of it.
How does it happen?
Well, I raise my hands, uh, ladies and gentlemen, and so do many in the in the so-called alternative or new media.
We do know what we're talking about.
The people we are talking about either don't know what they're talking about or they are lying to us about what's in the plan.
Either way, it is they who are disrespecting us.
Remember Mrs. Clinton and that shrill shrout during the uh shout during the uh presidential primaries.
I think she's up in New Hampshire, and she really loses it, talking about how it's patriotic to dissent in the face of power, dissent from presidents in power.
And nobody's gonna let uh uh her ability to dissent be taken away from it.
Now dissenting from this, you get called a denier or a hate monger, uh, or something else.
So my dream would be that I could wave a magic wand, and that the first attitude every American would have whenever any politician proposes something is suspicion and curiosity.
Why?
It's time to stop giving them the blank benefit of the doubt that they are engaged in things for our benefit.
They are engaged in things for their benefit.
They need our money to accomplish it.
Who are they?
Who anointed Senator Whitacre an expert on anything?
I don't know what he's an expert on, except I do know he's not an expert on the health care system, reforming it, rewriting it, implementing a new one, or what have you.
What I do know is he's a Democrat Party hack who is simply advancing an ideology with this, while telling people this is for their own good, we got to do this to save the economy to save the health care system.
I react with suspicion every time I see one of these people show up on television.
It's just my nature now.
Well, Russia sounds like you hate government.
No, no, no, no, no.
See, that's that's how they always do it.
Hate, no, I don't hate government.
I want it to be good.
Just like I want everything to be good.
I want it to be the best it can be, and it isn't.
I'm into excellence.
I'm into the pursuit of it.
I'm into goodness.
I'm into good things.
Don't want to sit here and have to fight every damn hour of every damn day to save the greatest country on earth.
It ought not be necessary, but it is.
And one of the things that makes it necessary is a misplaced sense of trust and worship in elected officials as though they are the political equivalent of Hollywood movie stars.
They're dunces.
They've gotten away with crafting this image of themselves as smarter and better and everybody else.
When I look at it, I don't see what qualification Obama has to rewrite our health care.
Who the hell is he?
He has a career of words.
Well, Russia's president.
Yeah, he's president, he's got elected, but what right does that give him to take over one-sixth of the U.S. economy?
Who are the people that are placing all this trust in the brilliance of Obama to do this?
When's he ever done anything like this?
That had that that's worked.
He can't point to a single thing.
He's simply saying, do it because I'm Obama.
And I'm special.
Guy's so in love with himself, it's sick.
I got to take a break.
I'm a little long here, but I think that monologue was worth it.
Back after this.
Now look, folks, I'm by no means saying it's time to start celebrating here by any stretch of the imagination, but liberalism and socialism are unraveling all over the place.
The climate talks over in Copenhagen have fallen apart a bunch of times.
People are having heart attacks on the podium.
Al Gore is saying five years in the old the Arc the Arctic ice is gone.
He said that five years ago.
The uh developing countries walked out of the talks, uh, and then they came back.
They staged a mass walkout, then they came back.
But it's a mess over there because the the uh the truth about the the the website at the East Anglia University Climatic Research Unit been taken down.
All of the data.
Look, how in the world?
You know, folks, it's just it's it's just common sense to me.
How how in the world can you have uh a set of global warming statistics and numbers?
If you do not provide people the original data on which everything is based, how come you will not show that data?
I mean, you it it's just it's it's patently obvious to everybody now, or more and more people what's going on.
And let me go back to this bank business and Obama saying uh that he he wasn't elected to bail out a bunch of fat cats.
Because I think if anybody caused the problem, it's not the banks.
It was people like Obama and his foot soldiers in the federal government who enforced his diktats.
Or dictates, if you want to pronounce it that way.
Who was it that made the banks loan this money to people they knew would never pay it back?
It was Barney Frank, it was Chris Dodd, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, who ran those into the ground?
It was the federal government.
Who was it that came up with these policies that required lending to these people?
And who wants those policies continued?
Administration officials described the meeting as a continuation of discussions the president initiated earlier in his tenure, and the latest push for lenders to take greater responsibility as the nation combats an economic crisis that began on Wall Street.
Were these continuations of the discussions where Obama said that he alone stood between the fat cat CEOs and the people with pitchforks?
Remember that's what he told to him.
He made people take loans at those banks.
Many of those banks did not want to take, they were forced to sign the money.
Now, here's a uh a statement from uh one of the bankers not identified.
Actually, uh person helping prepare one of these bankers for the meeting.
Obama can say what he wants, but we're not going to go back to the kind of lending that put us in this mess.
Well, that's what they think.
These guys are starting to get a backbone.
That's what they think.
But Obama runs a banking system now.
He's making it perfectly clear he runs the banking system.
And giving loans to his constituents who will never pay them back is going to continue to be a top priority, i.e., acorn.
That's exactly this is it's just that the banks are just another source of a slush fund for Obama.
That's why he wants to run them.
And he's gonna damn well make sure that they continue to loan money to people that can't pay it back, because that's how he thinks he's gonna get even with people who have not made rich or poor people rich.
He's got a chip on his shoulder about this country, and he's going to punish the people he thinks have achieved illegally and unfairly.
Make no mistake about it.
I think the liberals are beginning to see the writing on the wall with health care because they know if it fails to pass the Senate this year, then there's going to be all kinds of fingers being pointed at Democrats by Democrats to explain why it failed.
And that's going to cause dissension.
Also, this there's a new study out.
More Democrats than Republicans believe in ghosts and talking with the dead and in fortune tellers.
When you believe in nothing, you'll fall for everything.
And that explains Democrats.
And we will be back.
▲
Export Selection