All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 22, 2009 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:47
December 22, 2009, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 Podcast.
Stop the music.
Ladies and gentlemen, you are listening to me.
Rush Limbaugh.
You know that.
This the most recognizable media voice throughout the world.
But this you should also know.
Rush Limbaugh has been named radio personality of the decade by a leading trade publication, Media Week.
In the December issue Best of the Decade feature, Media Week observed.
No radio host or personality comes close to Rush Limbaugh in size of audience or volume of political discourse.
The man manages to stay in the headlines, no matter who's in the White House or who is gunning for him.
And I did not have to pay anybody for that vote for that award, folks.
It came in over the transom last night.
Didn't even know about it until I was told by somebody else.
But nevertheless, thanks to Media Week, a leading, probably the leading, industry magazine and uh website.
In addition, not it didn't have to go to their dinner either.
I don't know if they have a dinner.
Normally when you get an award like this, you're gonna go to their dinner and accept a uh and make a speech or something.
Now, Media Week also named Steve Jobs as marketer of the decade, the Sopranos a TV show of the decade, Rupert Murdoch, the media media executive of the decade, YouTube, the website of the decade, Wired, the magazine of the decade, Apple, the brand of the decade, Larry Page and Sergey Brennan of Google, the media entrepreneurs of the decade, and I, L. Rushbaugh, the Limbaugh personality of the decade.
Great to have you with us, folks.
And Merry Christmas.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email address L Rushbaugh at EIB net.com.
Last night on the Senate floor.
New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez.
It is our solemn duty to put aside our ideology to turn off Rush Limbaugh and leave politics in the cloakroom.
Our vote on this groundbreaking legislation, comparable to Social Security and Medicare.
Stop it.
That's all we need to hear from the guy.
He's just a buffoon.
But here we are.
They got their rolling.
I mean, they have uh they're on track now for their Christmas Eve at 9 p.m. vote.
And still, Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey has to tell the Republicans, stop listening to me, stop being ideological, ideological, which is all the Democrats are being here.
Pure 100% ideology.
I got a uh I got an email note from a friend today.
Is it hopeless?
Is it over?
What do we do?
I I I'd like to go out and raise some money, but everybody's tapped out.
So raising money's not what's necessary right now.
We've had two rallies in Washington.
It's obvious that uh that that members of the Democrat Party in both the House and Senate don't care one way or another about what the public opinion of this is.
That's been obvious for a long time.
I still think, folks, what you ought to do is just pound these people with emails, phone calls, faxes, whatever.
Pound every damn one of them at their offices from now until hell freeze is over, before, during, and after all of this.
Just keep pounding them.
Uh it that it'll make you feel better, and who knows, it may have some effect some point down the road.
But this is just outrageous what is all happening.
What we are learning, there are unrepealable aspects of the bill, particularly a uh a medical exchange plan that really sets the stage for the government takeover of health care.
It cannot be repealed.
There's no a rule has been violated, constitution has been violated.
There is so much of this that is illegal, and somebody's gonna have to bring the charge, and I expect that if it's if it's uh if it's done, if somebody does challenge this, it's gonna have to come from some of these states that are being left out of all the goodies.
In New York, Bloomberg is fit to be tied, Patterson's fit to be tied.
Uh, and in uh in uh Italys, Georgia, I mean they're being left out, a lot of states are being left out of this.
So uh a lot more detail in this as the as the program unfolds, but ideology, the reason Menendez goes to the floor of the Senate says, do not listen to Rush Limbaugh is because ideology is the only way we're gonna beat this.
Ideology is the only way people in mass numbers are gonna be made to understand just what this is and what it's about.
Now we can go through individual aspects of the bill, which we will do today, but that's been done ad infinitum.
Uh and it just it it it it ends up sounding like mishmash.
People hear it it all runs together.
Uh the ideological approach, this is liberals, this is what liberalism is.
Liberalism means the loss of economic prosperity and individual freedom and so forth.
That's the message.
Menendez knows it, and that's why he is uh uh asking people to to to not listen to me.
Dingy Harry invoked Rodney King on the Senate floor this morning.
There's a lot of tension in the Senate.
I would hope that everyone would go back to their gentlemanly ways.
And uh I would hope that uh say this gentlemanly ways.
I've said to a number of people, uh, Rodney King.
Let's just all try to get along.
So we need to do it.
This is a very difficult time the next uh uh day or so, and let's try to work through this.
Which is a uh which is a laugh.
We're we're dealing with some of the most hand-handed, hard-handed ideologues, mean spirited extremists to come down the pike.
And this is what they always do.
When the going gets tough, can't we all just get along?
Can't we just can't we just stop all this partisanship thought Obama was going to handle that?
Mitch McConnell agreed with him.
Let me just add to my good friend the majority leader.
He and I have an excellent relationship.
We speak a number of times uh in the course of every day and have no animosity whatsoever, and we are working on an agreement that will give certainty uh to the way uh to end this uh session.
And hopefully the two of us together can be uh recommending uh something that makes uh sense for both sides in the not too distant future.
All right, there's the Republican leader in the uh in the Senate.
What, Mr. Snertley?
What?
Well, I I I played that not to just infuriate you, I played it to uh to inform you.
Uh go back to this email that I got.
Uh in fact, you know, I ought to print out the reply.
I'm trying to remember the reply.
The email I got was from somebody who's really been invested financially in trying to stop this, has been raising a lot of money, and was asking me if uh if uh if all is lost.
And uh I'll I'll I'll find the reply to the email after the break and uh and and share it, share it with you.
Um now here's l let's go ahead and stick with this.
Let's go to Soundbites 4, 5, and 6.
Uh this is yesterday on this program.
This is me.
Now, Snurdley just said to me violate the rules.
Violate the rules.
They've just stood the Constitution upside down.
You think they give a rat's rear end about violating a Senate rule on when reconciliation can and can't be used?
Here's Senator Jim Dement, Republican South Carolina last night on the Senate floor.
There's one provision that I found particularly troubling.
And it's under a Section C titled Limitation on Changes to this subsection.
And I quote, it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
This is not legislation, it's not law.
This is a rule change.
It's a pretty big deal.
We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a Senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.
And this is not how Senate rules are made.
Now, this is um, you know, the language is tough, but this is how dictators operate.
This is how people who know that nobody wants what they're offering operate.
People who have power and who do not, and who are very well aware that they're running against the wishes and against the grain of the people they supposedly govern make it impossible for those people to do anything about it in an illegal way.
This is not how you change the rules of the Senate.
Dement continued.
I'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a Senate rule.
I don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill.
If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future Senates.
I mean, we want to bind future Congresses.
This goes to the fundamental purpose of Senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future Congresses.
Okay, that's Jim Dement on the floor of the Senate last night.
Now, why are they making this provision unrepealable?
It's what we're talking about here is the independent Medicare Advisory Board, making it impossible or difficult for future Congresses to legislate in that area to change this.
Because uh Bill Crystal points it out, the heart of the bill is the attempt to get control of health care permanently in the hands of federal bureaucrats who would allegedly know better than doctors and patients what's good for them and who would cut access to care and the quality of care so there's more money left over uh for various big government liberal social programs down the way.
But this is just outrageous what is happening.
I was I was telling Snerdley this morning.
Usually on our last day of the uh last show of the uh of the year.
We're not dealing with this kind of stuff.
The Congress has gone home, nobody's messing around with liberty or freedom.
They're not they're not passing new laws, and we yuck it up and we have some jollies.
And it just doesn't seem a whole jolly time here given what is at stake.
But nevertheless, we're gonna try to combine both elements in the uh in the program today.
But uh Jim Dement is is is upset, but of course, this doesn't get carried much outside the Senate floor by the state-controlled media.
So aside from people uh like you in this audience and uh and readers of various conservative blogs and so forth, vast majority of the American people have no clue about this yet.
Brief time out, we'll come back and continue with all of the rest of our program stay right where you are.
It's very simple, folks.
When Barack Obama and the Democrats win, America loses.
Big time.
Now here's the uh here's the email that I uh uh that I received.
Dear Rush, I still think with sufficient public outrage we could stop the vote in the House, but it's proving an incredibly hard to raise the money we need to reach and mobilize the people who are not in your audience.
Everybody's tapped out and resigned.
Do you still think we'll prevail?
Here's what I wrote back, and it was a stream of consciousness reply.
I said, dear such and such, I said yesterday that no amount of public outrage would matter.
And I believe that.
We've never seen this before.
We've never been involved in anything like this before.
The main reason public outrage won't work is not the public's fault.
It's a combination of mainly a dictatorial frame of mind the Democrats all have now.
And the Republican Party just refuses to get emotionally engaged here, are outraged by it.
Their responses are barely above a flat line.
And I can point you to Mitch McConnell's uh very gentlemanly remark and reply to Harry Reed, who asked if we can all just be like Rodney King and just get along in the midst of the destruction of the U.S. health care system.
We're obsessed with being polite.
And I know why.
It's because we don't want to anger the moderates.
The moderates are afraid that if we start criticizing Democrats or Obama, that they'll run away to the Democrats when they're fleeing Democrats in droves now.
Now, there have been two attempts to rally people at the Capitol in opposition to this.
And the reason was that emails, phone calls, and faxes were not having any impact.
It was theorized that bodies on the ground, boots on the ground, people in the faces of members of the House and Senate was what it would take to make a difference.
But those two rallies failed because they essentially didn't happen.
Who knew about it?
The mainstream media didn't report them.
Nancy Pelosi made sure that the vast majority of people who showed up at these rallies never got anywhere near the Capitol.
The Democrats knew that all these protesters are being asked and cajoled to show up, so they were able to tell themselves it wasn't genuine.
And the uh and the numbers reported were not all that repressive.
I mean, the the peasants didn't show up with any pitchforks.
And so the Democrats, they listen to all this and they hear all this hubbub and they listen to all this opposition, and they know they're getting it, but they didn't see a whole lot of it in Washington.
And it's it's uh because it wasn't permitted to get close to them.
I'm I'm not do not misunderstand me.
The people that showed up did a great thing.
I'm just saying that the game was rigged before they even got there.
And I told this person to send me the email, I'm going to urge people today to continue to flood members'offices, especially their local ones, when they go home for the Christmas break.
But we we're we're we're dealing here essentially with people who have a dictatorial frame of mind.
The public opinion is irrelevant.
It doesn't matter.
The election to them is still a year away.
If this were next September, October and all this is happening, you'd have a entirely different dynamic going on.
The inside the Beltway commentary, it still doesn't see this as anything other than just another day at the political office.
I was watching the Fox News All-Stars last night during the roundtable discussion.
And you had you had uh uh Steve Hayes from the Weekly Standard, Charles Krauthammer, and Mara Lyerson.
And Hayes and Crowdhammer were involved in the guts and the gory details and the ideology, and they were spelling out exactly how atrocious all this deal making was, all this whoring, all the bribery, all the prostitution that was going on, all the buying of votes, all the buying off states, all the buying of governors and so forth.
And they are making, I mean, they're scoring big time points as Mara Lyerson, who I think I like her, I've met her a couple times, but she's typical of the inside the Beltway media crowd.
There's nothing special about this, other than it's a huge piece of legislation for Obama.
But there's nothing going on here that doesn't always happen.
This is what legislation is.
Senators buy votes, they trade votes, they do this.
This is it it was perfectly understandable to her that legislation had nothing to do with constituents.
It was perfectly understandable to her that legislation had nothing to do with the substance of it.
Legislation was all about process.
And the people studying this and reporting on this in the state control media, that's their obsession, the process of it.
Will Obama win?
Can Obama secure a victory?
Can Obama reform health care?
They haven't dug into the guts of this, and they ignore people who have.
This will destroy the country as you and I know it.
This will destroy the greatest health care system in the world, as you and I are aware.
This will forever change the relationship that you and I have with our doctors.
Because the government's going to be a very powerful middleman.
There are death panels back in this bill, and that this is what Harry Reid says cannot be repealed.
We are going to ration care.
We're going to make sure that uh only the approved people get the kind of care that might prolong life.
It's all in there.
None of this matters.
It's all about the process.
It's all about the political victory.
Can Obama bring it home?
Meanwhile, the country is undergoing one of the most major transformations since its founding.
I went and looked up a number of things that the founding fathers found outrageous and that were the tipping point for them.
And they were, I mean, the things that caused them to rebel and found this country, and they were nothing compared to what is happening in this piece of legislation alone.
I know people think money fundraising is important, and it always is.
But if you have to raise and spend money right now, if you have to raise and spend money to raise temperatures on this, after all this time and all this effort.
It seems unnecessary.
It seems like money would not be necessary.
If you look at all the polling data, you don't need to make more people aware.
There's not one poll that shows a majority anywhere in favor of this.
I've always thought pounding the individual provisions in the bill is okay, but it's the wrong way to go because it all becomes a blur.
I hit this ideologically at all times.
And what Harry Reid has done in limiting CEO salaries of insurance company execs, limiting shareholder profits and operating expenses.
If you, if you're just joining us and you missed that yesterday, David Axelrod assuring the left that are that are upset that they're going to be forced to buy insurance from a private sector insurance company.
Don't worry about it, he said.
Oh, really?
That they didn't take TARP money.
What gives you the right to do that?
They're just doing it.
They are going to limit shareholder profits and police operating expenses, eventually that drive them out of business, which is the ultimate aim here.
Now that is there's no other definition for this than pure fascism.
Which is ideological and it needs to be called as such.
Harry Reid has has written language Saying many of the provisions of the bill cannot be repealed.
This whole thing is un-American.
It is unconstitutional.
And it's not time to be polite with this.
It's not time to be gentlemanly and let the Democrats have their sway on this.
There would have been people with pitchforks at the Capitol if elected officials had felt and expressed the same degree of outrage and anger that their constituents feel and are expressing.
In the end, however, I still think, I still think there's a chance for defectors somewhere along the line, and I think at some point they're going to have to resort to a mechanism whereby they get 51 votes instead of 60, because I think at some point in the Senate they're not going to be able to get 60, and the House is a whole nother uh ball game.
But the fight is not over even if it does pass.
Our guys ought to be leading the protests, carrying the pitchforks.
Instead, they're saying things like they're concerned, they're disappointed, surprised.
That doesn't cut it because that doesn't provide leadership and leadership.
The uh is necessary.
People need an outlet and a vessel for their anger in their own party.
Back in a second.
I am L. Rushbow, America's truth detector and the doctor of democracy here at the Limboy Institute for advanced conservative studies.
Not one Democrat senator with integrity or courage.
Not one.
It would only take one Democrat senator out of sixty to object to all this, this horrendous piece of legislation, and it would die.
Just one Democrat senator out of sixty to show some integrity, show some courage.
And nobody anywhere thinks it'll happen.
It's not even being discussed.
Now, what does that tell you about Democrats?
And yet it is always the Republicans who are portrayed as closed-minded, walking in lockstep.
What a laugh.
We now see what walking in lockstep is really all about, and we see what actually is important, and it's not the country.
To the phones, Tom in Etontown, New Jersey, your first.
Great to have you with us.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Have you heard about Parker Griffith, the Democrat in Alabama?
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, he's uh changing parties.
He's uh he's in an increasingly Republican district.
He voted against the stimulus.
This is northern Alabama, I think the Huntsville area.
And uh he is switching to the Republican Party, his office said this today, as uh as a piece has another blow to Democrats facing a potentially tough midterm election, sixty-seven years old, narrowly elected last year from uh northern Alabama.
That yeah, includes Huntsville and Decatur.
Uh Obama lost the district badly.
So, but but this this guy's been voting pretty conservative all along, and I it in the past these kinds of party switches have been indications of huge important trends.
Do you think this could be an opportunity for the good Democrats who want to save their political careers, the jump ship and switch over to the GOP?
Well, it depends on the context when you look at this or how you look at this.
Um what's really going on in the House now with Democrats is not saving their career by switching parties.
They see what's happening in the Senate and they want their goodies.
They want, they want Pelosi to give them some dollars for their districts so that they can get re-elected as Democrats and have some insurance against their vote for this.
That's that's what's really happening.
The Senate has set the stage now for uh the House members start acting the same way, say, hey, wait, where's mine?
So we have this is the this is effectively the fifth resignation.
We have four Democrats have resigned, saying they won't run in the House, and uh and Parker Griffith now makes it fifth given he's gonna stay but uh but switch parties.
It's a huge positive.
It indicates a uh uh a tremendous trend, and I think the internal polling the Democrats have must be horrible and indicative.
But it it right now that doesn't matter to them.
They are willing.
I uh here's here's the folks.
I think uh let me try to explain something to you.
We we have took me a while to figure this out.
The Democrat Party, ideologically, the radical left that runs it is so much more committed to what they believe in than our party is.
They are willing to lose their majority to get this passed.
They are willing to lose their majority in the House.
They are willing to lose their majority in the Senate.
They have wanted this for 100 years.
For 100 years, the American people have opposed it.
The American people oppose it by great percentages even now.
They don't care.
They will lose elections.
They will lose their majority to get this.
This is why Dingy Harry is flouting the Senate rules by writing in the legislation something he cannot by rule do.
And that is say none of this is repealable.
They are fully prepared to lose their majorities.
They're fully prepared to lose a lot of seats to get this done.
That's what they're that's that's that's their commitment.
I'll tell you something else they believe.
They believe that even if they lose the majority, that the Republican majority that would replace them doesn't have the guts to repeal this after it's been passed, because at what'll happen in the next year after Obama signs this, folks, you gotta get ready here.
If this gets signed into law and Obama starts touting it during the State of the Union show, you are going to get a nine to ten month onslaught on how never has anyone in government done so much for you.
Never before has so many so much been done for you, never before has uh Washington have politicians cared and accomplished so much for you.
It is going to be a propaganda onslaught.
And you're gonna have the full-fledged support of the uh of the repeaters in the state control media repeating how wonderful it is, what a great achievement.
Why it took it took a great man like Barack Obama to finally make this happen.
It's gonna make you want to puke.
It's going to all be lies.
The reason that they will do this is obvious.
I mean, the first one's the propaganda reason.
The second is to set up re-election in uh in November by making it difficult for the Republicans if they do win to repeal it, because by that time people will have been lied to for so long and told what a great thing it is.
How are they gonna explain away the taxes?
Mr. Snartley asks.
Let's wait and see on those taxes.
Everybody says that the taxes get implemented immediately.
I wouldn't be surprised if the taxes get delayed until the second half of next year, maybe a little bit after 2010, if they're willing to delay the so-called benefits in this until 2014, well after Obama theoretically has been re-elected.
I can see them putting on look if they get this, if they get this is a hundred-year quest.
I mean, this is like this is like Karl Marx converting the world to communism, as far as these.
This is such an achievement you cannot believe.
This is how committed they are to it.
So I I have no doubt that they might delay the tax increases for a while to avoid those hitting prior to the election, or do it in such a way that only the rich get hit.
The so-called rich get hit, and then they go out and tout that and say we're setting the stage here for your future insurance premiums to be lower and your health care coverage to be better.
Why should they stop lying?
Why do we expect them to change who they are?
This is why I say this.
Hold the opposition to this, if it's to ultimately be successful is going to have to be ideological.
People are going to have to understand what liberalism is and why.
Here's this next story in a normal day.
In a normal day, I would be laughing myself silly with this story.
This is akin.
Remember up there in Port St. Lucy.
Some babe walks into Mickey D's.
They're out of chicken McNuggish.
She calls 911 thinking Obama's gonna be on the other end of the line, fixing the problem.
911, because of no chicken McNuggets.
This is from Boston.
Police say a frustrated Boston woman called 911 to say that she couldn't get her 14-year-old son to stop playing video games and go to bed.
Police spokesman officer Joe Zanoli said Monday the mother called for help around 2.30 in the morning on Saturday to say the teenager also walked around the house and turned on all the lights.
Two officers responded to the House, persuaded the child to obey his mother.
Zanoli says the mother's 911 call over video game obsession was a little unusual, but by my no means is it surprising, especially in today's day and age when these kids play video games and computer games.
The Boston Herald first reported the 911 call saying the kid was playing the popular grand theft auto game.
Why?
Whatever happened to call dad.
What the hell ever happened?
Called Dad, whatever hella happened.
You get yourself into bed, or I am going to spank your little butt raw.
Well, then the child services people they call.
I'm sorry, can't do that.
You call 911 now.
You know, yeah, they did call dad 911 government, nanny.
Now here, and this takes me into yet another fear that I have about all this.
There are a lot of things that worry me about about the transformation of the country with this health care, the relationship between uh us and our doctors, and the relationship between us and our government.
But there's also another aspect of this, and that is the relationship between us and us, between citizens.
We will from now on be rivals.
We will be competitors for federal money for health care for our children.
Uh permission from federal powers that be for each medical visit and procedure.
And this is going to destroy uh, folks, the traditional American live and let live attitude toward everybody because it will inevitably become me against you.
When services are fewer, when costs go higher, and it's your kid, you're going to become competitive with your neighbor when you have to go in and negotiate with some federal bureaucrat to see that it's your kid that gets treated.
And that's where we're headed.
This massive new entitlement is going to obliterate tolerance.
This whole notion of live and let live.
The way to summarize that is tolerance, and there isn't going to be any more of that.
Every American is going to be looking at neighbors with jealousy, resentment, and anger at whatever medical care he or she receives, because not everybody's going to get the same.
That's the way socialism works.
It never ends up that way.
There is never equality of outcome.
There is never sameness, even though that's the objective.
There are going to be differences, and it's going to lead to big, big problems.
Every American is going to end up being extremely judgmental about the behavior of fellow citizens.
Yeah.
That would in any way be considered risky because the attitude will be you're taking money from my family's future medical care.
So whereas now we have a bunch of nanny special interest groups who run around and say, we got to do something about obesity, we're going to have citizen-on-citizen confrontation.
You better lose weight.
You're costing me money, you're getting health care that I should do, but it's going to be a mess, folks, and it's by design.
It is pure 100% chaos.
Do you know that in this health care bill, I think by 2016, which is just seven years from now, families with an income of $96,000 will get subsidized medical care and insurance.
$96,000 you will get subsidized insurance and medical care.
Okay.
That tells me that the objective here is to get everybody on the dole to make everybody as dependent on government, which Democrats in charge in perpetuity as possible.
So I'm checking the email here during the EIB obscene prosperity timeout.
And naturally, even though I have just been named the personality of the decade by Media Week, and even though I'm 21 years behind the golden EIB microphone, 21 and almost a half now, and even though I've been the latest opinion on it documented to be almost always right, 99.5% of the time, there are still people who say I don't know what I'm talking about.
Come on, Rush, what do you mean delay the tax and they have to delay the tax.
No, not necessarily.
The taxes can easily go up.
They could uh they just bury them.
You know, withholding is a great trick.
When you never see your gross, and when you never write the check, you really don't know all the taxes you're paying.
This is why people get upset about their property taxes, because they know it.
Many people have to pay them in independent of the mortgage payment.
Not everybody, but enough due to get upset about it.
Uh they're gonna go up, they'll be buried, nobody will see where they're going.
Uh, and they say this is money for the military.
It's it's money to fund the war on terror.
We're we're paying the deficit down.
Expect that to be a big theme, too.
After this passes.
Deficit reduction.
We're gonna have to do that.
Uh, Trino, trying to find out where tax money goes is is really bad.
And if you think this is this this rush repealing that Republicans are gonna be easy repeal this.
No, but people are so fit to be tied.
I look, I hope you're right about that, but I just you you look at Social Security.
Look at what the Democrats do and have done historically every election, have accused Republicans of trying to cut your social security.
They have accused Republicans of trying to take you, kick you out of your home.
They accuse Republicans of Medicare cuts.
Now imagine health care gets passed.
And imagine the Democrats come, the Republicans want to take your health insurance away from you.
The Republicans want to kill everybody, not just the seniors.
I mean, you can see how this all sets up, and you see why that they're not really concerned if they lose their majority.
Not that they want to, but they're not concerned about this level of commitment.
I I just got a note hey, you you you're wrong.
We're committed.
We were so committed, we didn't vote for McCain last year because we were we were we were loyal.
I said, okay, fine.
Yeah, I did vote for McCain.
And I'll tell you something else.
Well, how do I do this in a uh in a in a diplomatic way?
I know that a lot of people were fed up with the Republicans of 2006 scandal.
They weren't listening to constituents.
They were spending like crazy, although nothing compared to now.
And so we were pure.
And we got rid of them.
We didn't vote.
We allowed the Democrats and the Independents to elect Democrats.
We allowed people like Mark Foley to uh that story to shape our opinion of all Republicans, and now there aren't the Republicans to stop the Democrats anywhere.
We don't have the votes to stop them in the House.
We don't have the votes to stop them in the Senate.
So, and I'm even guilty of this.
It is a little disingenuous to complain about the Republicans because they can't stop it with votes.
I do wish they had a little bit more energy.
I do wish they had a little bit more verve and ideological fire in in uh in rallying troops because there are ways to stop this outside of their votes.
If they don't have the votes, then there are other ways to do it.
At any rate, I'm a broken record on that.
Uh listen to this last night on PMS NBC.
Tom Friedman, New York Times, describes returning to the United States from Copenhagen.
You know, it's scary, but it's a sign of the times.
So I stay at the Crown Plaza Hotel in Copenhagen, which is near the conference center.
They had a monorail running back and forth all day.
If you want to go into Copenhagen, it came every ten minutes.
My cell phone, I could call home, call my office, call my wife anytime anywhere from Copenhagen.
I come home, I landed in Newark Airport.
Richard, it it's like flying from the Jetsons to the Flintstones.
You know, um, your cell phone, you know, goes out half the time on the Acela from Newark to to Washington, D.C. We need nation building at home now.
What the hell?
Uh these elitist snobs just hate this country so much, want to turn us into Denmark.
Look, nation building, we need to nation build at home now.
What the hell was the stimulus package to be about?
What was porculus?
What's the whole what's Obama's whole agenda supposedly about?
Anyway, fastest three hours and media underway.
The first one almost in the can will be right back.
Sit tight.
And we are back, El Rushbow and the EIB network.
I look, folks, I'm not trying to dispirit you, but reality is reality.
There's no question that these rallies, the Tea Party movement, don't do not get dispirited.
Those worked.
Those were spontaneous uprisings.
They did slow this down.
They wanted to get this done in August.
They had tremendous impact and tremendous power, but those are spontaneous things.
Those are not the long view.
The long view here is replacing current Republican leadership.
There isn't a there is a conservative ascendancy, and it requires the election of genuine conservatives next November to retake the party and then roll this stuff back because Congress cannot make itself unrepealable.
It just won't stand.
▲
Export Selection