Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Freedom is awaking from its coma.
Yes, you heard right.
Oh, hi, Wendy.
Dawn's not here today.
Wendy's here.
And I hadn't said hi, so I just did.
Freedom is awaking from its coma.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB network in three full hours of broadcast excellence.
Straight ahead.
Happy to have you all with us.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
The email address, lrushball at EIBnet.com.
Nancy Pelosi says she does not have the votes to pass health care reform in the House of Representatives.
She made that announcement not long ago.
House Dems do not have votes to pass the Senate bill.
Don't have the votes.
It's amazing.
It's an amazing thing what one election can do.
Just one election.
I have always said that elections have consequences.
Dow Jones Industrial Average falling, plummeting down 200 points in the last half hour since Obama, well, it's been dropping all day, actually, but took a big plunge when Obama announced his latest reforms, restrictions, penalties, and punishments on America's banks.
We'll have details of that as the program unfolds before your very eyes.
Freedom awakening from its coma today because of a huge, huge, huge Supreme Court decision.
Huge.
I cannot tell you how big this is.
And the decision.
It's a 5-4 decision.
The decision was written by Justice Kennedy.
And what it does, it removes limits on independent expenditures that are not coordinated with candidates' campaigns, meaning corporations and not-for-profits can spend any amount of money they want running ads.
And there's no limit as to when those ads can be run.
So McCain Feingold takes a huge hit today.
Now, the question of campaign contributions directly to candidates was not part of this decision because it was not before the court.
So the issue was issue advocacy ads by nonprofit corporation, Citizens United in this case.
But it covers all nonprofits and all for-profit corporations.
And I'm going to go through it here pretty much line by line just to show you how profound this decision is.
But I've got to mention a couple of things here.
Paul Krugman, in his blog at the New York Times, I mean, the liberals are coming out of the dark places that they hide to agree with me that Obama has been a failure.
They just cannot give up on health care.
And there's a great piece today.
Actually, yesterday, it was by James Taranto, best of the web, Wall Street Journal, Opinion Journal Online, saying, don't listen to the media.
They're the last to give it up.
There's no way healthcare in its present form is going to see the light of day.
And Pelosi confirmed that by saying she doesn't have the votes in the House to pass the Senate bill.
And the Senate bill is what they were trying to ram down the House's throat.
But here's Paul Krugman.
He wasn't the one we've been waiting for.
Healthcare reform, which is crucial for millions of Americans, hangs in the balance.
Progressives are desperately in need of leadership.
More specifically, House Democrats need to be told to pass the Senate bill, which isn't what they wanted, but is vastly better than nothing.
And what we get from the great progressive Hope, the man who is offering hope and change, is this.
He quotes Obama.
I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements of the package people agree on.
Basically, Obama giving up, saying, whatever we can get, we'll take.
Krugman says, run away, run away.
Maybe House Democrats can pull this out even with a gaping hole in White House leadership.
Barney Franks seems to have thought better of his initial defeatism, but I have to say, I'm pretty close to giving up on Obama, who seems determined to confirm every doubt and others ever had about whether he was ready to fight for what his supporters believe in.
He is not the one we've been waiting for.
And we have Mort Zuckerman, who owns the New York Daily News and U.S. News and World Report.
He's done everything wrong.
Another piece.
Mort Zuckerman saying Obama has failed.
Obama punted on the economy and reversed the fortunes of the Democrats in 365 days.
He has misjudged the character of the country in his whole approach.
There's the saying, it's the economy stupid.
Well, he didn't get it.
He was determined somehow or other to adopt a whole new agenda.
He didn't address the main issue.
Mort, he did.
What do you think the slush fund stimulus bill is?
They did.
They didn't do it over a long period of time.
They rammed it down in two weeks, but he thought he dealt with it.
And he's had job summits.
What are you people going to, when are you going to figure this out?
When are you going to start listening to me?
This is the you leftists who are unhappy with Obama.
I predicted all this.
And now everybody joining in line, everybody joining the chorus, he's not the one we were waiting for.
Obama's failed.
They're all disappointed.
Here's more from Mort Zuckerman.
This health care plan is going to be a fiscal disaster for the country.
Most of the country wanted to deal with costs, not expansion of coverage.
This is going to raise costs dramatically.
Mort, he doesn't care about health care bill.
He doesn't care about health care.
He doesn't care about health insurance.
He cares about control, Mort.
He wants to private or socialize one-sixth of the economy.
What is so, I mean, you could have written this a year ago.
You knew it.
Instinctively, you knew it, but your hopes and dreams and your cult-like devotion forced reason out of your cranium.
In the campaign, he said he would change politics as usual.
He did change them.
It's now worse than it was.
I've now seen the kind of buying off of politicians that I've never seen before.
It's politically corrupted.
It's starting at the top.
It is revolting.
Five states got deals on health care.
One of them was Harry Reid's.
It's disgusting, just disgusting.
I've never seen anything like it.
The unions just got him to drop the tax on Cadillac plans and a health care bill.
It was pure union politics.
Daniel Henninger has a great piece on just that today in the Wall Street Journal.
Even that is not the worst part.
He could have said, I know, I promise these things, but let me try to do them one at a time.
You want to deal with health care?
Fine.
Issue number one with health care was the cost.
You know, I think it was 37% or 33 who were worried about coverage.
Fine.
I wrote an editorial to this effect, focused on cost containment first.
But he's trying to boil the ocean, trying to do too much.
This is not leadership.
I don't consider this a triumph.
I consider it a disaster.
I can't predict two things two years from now, but if he continues on the downward spiral he's on, he won't be re-elected.
In the meantime, the Democrats have recreated the Republican Party.
And when I say Democrats, I mean Obama.
In the generic vote, the Democrats were ahead something like 52 to 30.
They are now behind the Republicans, 48 to 44 in the latest poll.
Nobody has ever seen anything that dramatic.
Mort Zuckerman is livid.
Halt Krugman is livid.
They're all over the place on the leftist blogs.
They are livid, especially out of health care.
Healthcare has gone down the tubes.
And yet here's Obama out announcing today that he's really going to get tougher on the banks.
He's not going to put up with this anymore.
He's not going to put up with them using depositors' money to make financial risky investments like do hedge funds and so forth and so on.
They've got to stick to the business of banking.
And he's going to see to it that they do that.
So he's still trying to capitalize on what he thinks is a universal hatred for bankers and banking, just like he proceeds on the belief that there is a universal hatred of insurance companies and big oil and big pharmaceuticals.
You got to hear this.
Scott Brown shows up in Washington today, folks.
This is hilarious.
It's hilarious and predictable.
I told Cookie I want a montage of the questions, the initial questions that he was asked.
We, who have covered Senator McCain for a while, have heard him say that a lot.
Is there any sort of tips, Senator McCain, perhaps you'll be giving him on how to be a maverick here in the Senator Leclerc?
Democrats have historically relied on New England Republicans to negotiate on various issues that New England Republicans have generally been the most amenable to deals on various issues.
Where do you see potential for common ground with Democrats in the majority?
Now the Republicans have 41 seats and a legitimate seat at the table.
How would you like to move forward on legislation working with the Democrats, perhaps better than the two parties have so far this morning?
That's the first series of questions.
Those are the first questions Scott Brown was asked today.
And by the way, you get any sort of tips, Senator McCain, giving him on being a maverick.
If anybody needs to give somebody tips on being a maverick, it's Scott Brown telling McCain how to do it.
There's the real maverick, if you want to talk about it.
The real maverick is Scott Brown.
But you see, all these media people, I can boil it all down.
What are you going to do to help the Democrats?
What are you going to do to work with the Democrats?
And by the way, every one of those questions came from the, you heard it, female.
The chickification of the news.
Every one of them.
What are you going to do to work with a Democrat?
How are you going to make the Democrat succeed?
How are you going to cross the aisle?
New England Republicans have always helped Democrats.
How are you going to do that?
Here are just a few of a sampling of Scott Brown's answers on working with the Democrats.
I have 85% of the delegation in Massachusetts are Democrats.
I actually voted for a health care bill in Massachusetts, and it was a great bipartisan effort.
So it's clear that I wanted coverage for everybody in Massachusetts.
And we have 98% of the people insured there.
The bill that was being pushed in Washington was not good for Massachusetts.
I'm open to looking at every single bill on its merits and making a decision based on that.
And my first interest is going to look as whether it's good for my state, and then obviously if it's good for the country.
Now, he says we have real problems like the economy and al-Qaeda trying to kill us.
But Scott, personal aside, the Democrats do not want to work with you on either of those.
They do not want to work with you on the economy.
They want you working with them.
People want good government.
They want transparency.
We've got al-Qaeda trying to kill us.
We've got very serious tax and spend problems.
We've got some real fiscal issues and job questions, and we're not solving them.
We're talking about things that are really irrelevant.
And that's what I'm hopeful that, based on the messages I've heard from all the delegations, whether they be Republican or Democrat, I think they get it.
And I'm hopeful they get it.
And I'm going to try to remind everybody that we can do better.
Yeah, well, good luck.
But there he's playing it straight down the middle, which is a very smart and wise thing to do.
John Kerry, just a couple weeks ago, who, by the way, served in Vietnam, who is 71 years old.
No, his wife's 71.
I don't know how old the lurch is.
All I know is the lurch could not make the oceans boil.
I mean, the lurch couldn't make, I mean, couldn't cause a ripple in a bathtub, even getting in it.
Now, just a couple of weeks ago, Kerry was out there saying, we're not going to pass, we're going to pass this bill before he's seated.
We're going to delay.
He was all part of that chorus that was going to delay Scott Brown being seated.
Now he's done a total 180 in just two weeks.
And the reporters, you know, he started after he met with McCain, he went and met with other senators, including Senator Kerry, who said this.
You have to work across the aisle here to make things happen.
Americans don't just elect Democrats and Republicans.
They elect people to be responsible for the people's business.
Isn't it amazing what one election does?
Just one election.
Reporters this morning asked if Democrats are courting Scott Brown.
Unidentified reporters said, you feel you're being courted by Democrats as a possible swing voter.
I've always had great respect for Senator Kerry, always.
We have worked together on other issues.
I know we're going to work together on issues in the future.
I have a great relationship with the delegation because of my years at the State House.
If I see a bill that is good for my state, I'm going to vote for it.
And that's my first priority.
I look at the bills first, determine how much they cost, if they're going to benefit my district and the state.
And I'll take it that way.
I'm going to continue to be the same type of voter I've always been.
So again, playing it down the middle here of being non-committal and certainly non-provocative.
He realizes he's dealing with loaded question.
He's not going to give them the meat that they want.
There are a bunch of sharks circling out there, and he's not going to bleed for them.
Now, I want you to hear this from Jeff Toobin.
He is the legal analyst at CNN.
And the left is just a gog.
They are beside themselves that freedom is coming out of its coma today, is awakening from its coma with this Supreme Court decision, which I'm going to get into after the break.
But I want to show you how upset that Toobin is and the left really are.
Toobin is in crisis here.
It's really not just the 20-year-old ruling from 1990.
It's more like 100 years of regulation of the way corporations are prohibited from being involved in the political process.
It's really bigger than 20 years.
It's more like 100 years of precedent being overturned.
It basically says money is speech and corporations are people, both of which are debatable propositions, but both of which seem to be popular at the Supreme Court at the moment.
What's debatable about corporations are people and money is speech?
Those two things are inarguable.
That's what the court said by five to four with Kennedy, who is, you know, he's the swing vote.
He wrote the opinion here.
That is significant.
So we'll tell you, and he's right, by the way, this turns over 100 years of precedent.
And you know how anti-corporatist the left is.
You know how they hate corporations.
They despise.
This, folks, is causing ulcers.
I can't tell you what this decision is doing today to these leftists who just a year ago, they had such high hopes that they're going to have every CEO in jail and every soldier in jail.
And it's just, it's in one year, in one year, because the people of this country are not socialists.
The people of this country still have roots to freedom and entrepreneurism and liberty.
And nothing, the left, Obama, nothing can snuff that out.
Well, the economy unexpectedly continues to go to hell.
Jobless claims, unexpectedly.
They have to be doing it to tweak me.
They have to be doing this to tweak me.
This is a full year of unexpectedly jobless claims going up, or surprisingly, or what have you.
All right.
Ladies and gentlemen, get this.
This is from the Speaker's website, Speaker of the House, and it's from yesterday.
Americans are responding with generosity and compassion to the devastating earthquake in Haiti, donating their hard-earned money and time, which can literally mean a difference between life and death to many Haitians and others.
Today, the House unanimously passed legislation to provide an immediate benefit for those who have already given and an incentive for those who are considering a charitable contribution.
The legislation allows individuals making a charitable contribution after January 11th and before March 1st to victims of the earthquake in Haiti to claim these charitable contributions on their 2009 tax return.
So, the House has unanimously passed a bill to accelerate tax deductions for Haiti relief.
So, they know if you want more of a good thing like donations to Haiti, you lower the taxes on it.
So, they know this.
This Supreme Court decision is, I'll tell you, it's a defeat, ladies and gentlemen, for the fascists, the statists who seek to control our property, our bodies, and our speech.
It is a defeat for Senator McCain.
The muzzle is off the American people now because they, in fact, can spend the money on advocacy ads prior to the general and primary elections.
And it is a 100-year-old precedent that has been overturned.
It is solid in that respect.
Citizens United produced an advocacy commercial about Hillary Clinton, which they ran or wanted to run before the primaries.
The question was whether it violated McCain Feingold's ban as some kind of a political commercial.
The Supreme Court said such advocacy by Citizens United and other groups is protected constitutional speech.
But the opinion addresses more than that.
The court says the law provides an outright ban backed by criminal and civil sanctions, including nonprofit corporations, to either expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates or to broadcast electioneering communications within 30 days of a primary, 60 days of a general election, these would be felonies, and the court struck these down.
The court struck down all the limits on where you can advertise, when you can advertise, and how much you can spend on this advertisement.
I'll go through the rest of the ruling here in a summary form when we get back from this time out, which will be sooner than you know.
Hey, welcome back, El Rushbaugh, Talent Online from a God.
Ladies and gentlemen, more analysis here of the SCOTUS decision today on campaign finance reform.
The court says that the McCain-Feingold law provides an outride ban backed by criminal and civil sanctions, including nonprofit corporations, to either expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates or to broadcast electioneering communications within 30 days of a primary, 60 days of a general election.
Would be felonies, the court struck it down.
Laws prohibiting speech, even via corporations, are subject to the highest scrutiny, which is strict scrutiny.
It's not enough to broadly claim that a certain form of speech is corrupt with little more.
The government may not impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers, or based on the wealth or lack thereof of the speakers.
You got to understand, folks.
See, I know liberals.
I know these cockroaches.
And I'm telling you, this just has them boiling today.
You add the fact that everything's falling apart and going wrong for Obama.
I mean, you go back to one year ago, almost to the day.
Hell, it is one year ago to the day.
No, it's one year plus a day.
One year plus a day.
Nevertheless, you know what?
They thought they were in power in perpetuity forever.
They had their Messiah, and it was going to change this country forever.
And now, the American people have said no way.
They have learned what this was all about, saying no way.
This court decision has these people fuming.
The government may not impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers, or based on the wealth or lack thereof of speakers, the public has the right.
The court said the public has the right to obtain all kinds of information from the widest number of sources.
Now, these are not direct quotes, but my summation, but this is what the court is saying.
Simply because speech has taken on a corporate form does not give it any less protection under the First Amendment.
All speakers who communicate via broadcasting and other outlets amass funds from the economic marketplace to fund their speech.
So the idea that money somehow does not equal speech, the court's saying, look at everybody who communicates via broadcasting and other outlets amass funds from the economic marketplace to fund their speech.
There can be no dispute of that.
But it's now the law of the land.
Under the government's reasoning on corporate restrictions, wealthy media corporations would have their voices diminished to put them on par with other media entities.
There's no precedent for this.
There is no, it's not constitutional.
This is liberalism itself has just been struck down.
This whole notion of fairness based on who has more than somebody else or who has less than somebody else is bigger than somebody else.
There is no precedent for advantaging certain corporations and disadvantaging others respecting speech.
Speech is speech.
There's the First Amendment.
It doesn't matter how much money you have or how big you are.
There is no restriction permitted on it.
They are really hammering away here, folks.
This is pretty sweeping.
This is landmark, I would call it.
The law's purpose and effect is to prevent small and large corporations, for-profit and not-for-profit, from presenting facts and opinions to the public.
There is no constitutional support for this.
Struck down.
The law's purpose, this is McCain-Feingold are talking about.
McCain-Feingold's purpose and effect is to prevent small and large corporations, for-profit and not-for-profit, from presenting facts and opinions to the public.
There is no constitutional support for this.
So it's, you know, I think back.
One of the things that Senator McCain always said was, well, you know, money corrupts the system.
Money, these good people come to Washington and money corrupts them.
We have perhaps the most corrupt presidential administration I've seen in a long time.
What does money have to do with it?
Is it not their ideas?
Is it not their desires that are corrupting them?
Is it not who they are that's corrupt?
By the way, another reason you know this is a great, great piece of Supreme Court reasoning is that Chuck Yu Schumer is livid.
Chuck Yu can't, he's beside himself over this.
Chuck Yu doesn't like the Constitution.
Only his endless speeches are worthy of protection.
Here's a quote from the opinion.
When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he may or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought.
This is unlawful.
Excellent point, justices, and it applies equally to talk radio.
Let me read this again to you.
When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear.
That means fairness doctrine, you can't listen to Limbaugh.
He's controversial.
He's got a monopoly, and you can't trust him.
The Supreme Court says, you can't censor anybody on that basis.
It's unlawful.
They struck it down.
There's a lot more to this, ladies and gentlemen.
But the important thing here is it's a 5-4 decision, and Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion for the majority, which is significant.
It's as good a decision as anybody could have hoped for.
It's sweeping, and it is landmark.
Now, I want to alert you to something happening out there, going back to Paul Krugman and going back to Morton Vuckerman, who are both best guys, not the one we've been waiting for.
Turns out, you know, they're genuinely upset here.
But you heard Kerry two weeks ago, John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, wanted to delay the seating of Scott Brown so that health care would pass.
And now, two weeks later, why he's the voice of the middle of the road.
And all these Democrats are.
Now, this is what I want to talk about.
Because I can see this starting to happen.
Kerry's comments a moment ago that I played.
Democrats, in fact, grab soundbite number four so that people will be able to hear immediately what I am referencing.
This is Kerry talking about how senators have to work across the aisle, which that the last thing they want is to cross the aisle.
They want us crossing the aisle, but they don't want to cross the aisle, and they never do.
You have to work across the aisle here to make things happen.
Americans don't just elect Democrats and Republicans.
They elect people to be responsible for the people's business.
Okay.
Now, the Democrats folks are really, really good at changing their skin to fit the current environment.
They are gifted chameleons.
Their insides do not change.
Their core liberalism, statism, socialism does not change.
But their external appearance and their manner of speaking and the contents of their speech does change.
They are faking it.
Do not fall for any of this middle-of-the-road stuff that you're going to get from Harry Reid, who met with Scott Brown or Lurch or any of these people that you know are liberals.
They have not changed.
They fake it.
They'll do whatever they have to do, even if it's take a couple steps back to move another step forward.
They will say anything they have to have to say to assuage the voters and to assuage people like Krugman and Vuckerman.
Now, Krugman and Vuckerman are generally angry.
And so the Democrats, you know, John Kerry, somebody will call them up.
You know, you're right, and we'll see the errors of our ways.
Remember after the 2002 midterms, after the Wellstone Memorial, those 2002 midterms, which were big for the Republicans, I think it was 2002.
Yeah, it was midterms, 2002.
Remember, the values voters in the exit polls came out of the woodwork.
And the Democrats, oh, yeah, well, for the two weeks after that election, yeah, we're going to have to do better with values voters.
We're going to have to reach out here, and we have to be willing to talk about this stuff on the snuff.
And that was fakery, too.
It just went on for two weeks, and then they forgot about it, hoping that people would remember the original position that they had stated after the election.
But we know exactly what happens when they have power.
We are seeing it now just how we saw it in the past with LBJ.
What you're seeing, what you have seen this year with Democrats, supermajorities everywhere is who they are.
Pay no attention to their attempt to change their skins today.
They lie.
They hide.
They try to make you think that there are things that all information in history proves that they are not.
They want you to believe and look at them in a certain way.
They don't want you to see their radicalism.
That's the mistake they've made in their arrogance and conceit.
We've seen it on display for a year.
Now they're going to try to tell you that what you saw wasn't true, that what you saw wasn't real.
They're going to bank on the fact that you will swoon over their new attitude of complacency and niceness and congeniality and smiles and so forth.
You got to be on the watch for this, folks, because they are seductive and they have the press to amplify that effort to seduce.
We all want to get along.
We all want to work across the aisle.
Well, we do want to get along.
They want statist type of power.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Don't go away, folks.
Sometimes some of you people in the email amaze me.
I checked the email during the break.
Rush, how do you know the Democrats don't mean it this time?
They really have gotten the scare of their life.
Folks, look, if liberals only changed for two weeks after 9-11, all it took was for two weeks for them to revert to who they are.
What in the world makes anybody think that the Scott Brown victory is going to cause a permanent change?
I can't believe, folks, don't doubt me on this.
You've got to be aware of what's happening here.
Just that simple.
This from the Associated Press, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said today that she lacks the votes to quickly move the Senate's sweeping health overhaul bill through the House, a potentially devastating blow to President Obama's signature issue.
A potentially devastating, here is how the speaker said it.
I don't see the votes for it at this time.
Now, I mean, the members have been very clear in our caucus about the fact that they didn't like it before it had the Nebraska provision and some of the other provisions that are unpalatable to them.
But there is a recognition that there's a foundation in that bill that is important.
So one way or another, those areas of agreement that we have will have to be advanced.
Let me tell you the way I see this.
The way I see this is that nobody who stands for re-election really wanted to sign this bill, really wanted to vote for it.
Pelosi exempted.
But you notice how fast the raps the rats are deserting the shit ship after one election.
After one election, everybody's running away from this bill faster than I've seen anybody run away from a bill at all.
I guarantee you, this is worse than you and I even know, because it's going to be impossible to put this whole thing back together as it was.
They've got their out now.
Nelson never wanted to vote this thing, and he never wanted to take that stupid deal.
Same thing with Landrew.
They had to take it because they're scared of Obama.
They got Rahm Emanuel leaning on him.
Talking about this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to get what FDR wanted.
We got to do this for Obama.
We've got to build the monument.
This is the greatest thing for our party.
If you don't do this, you're going to lose re-election.
But none of them wanted to do it, or not clearly, not a whole lot of them wanted to do it.
The way it manifested itself, as big as this thing got, I guarantee you, folks, I'm not saying Democrats aren't who they are, and I'm not saying that they're not huge statists.
But for Pelosi, it was just yesterday, or maybe Tuesday, where Pelosi said, by hook or by crook, we're going to get this done.
There will be health care reform.
She was defiant as she could be.
And all these Democrats before Brown actually won the election, oh yeah, if we have to do whatever we have to do, if delay certifying his election, delay seating him, Senate rules in charge, whatever we have to do to push this thing through.
And then yesterday Obama comes out and says, we're not going to jam this through until Scott Brown is seated, meaning they're going to jam it through at some point.
But all these rats are deserting the ship so fast that it tells me that who, at least the ones publicly deserting, wanted no part of this at any time and are really happy to be freed from the shackle.
strengthen their hand.
The Democrats were...
Well, uh, no.
No.
Snerdley just asked me if this takes the albatross off of them and strengthens their hand, meaning since this has fallen apart, that health care will not be something dragging them down a shackle around their ankles.
Let me tell you something.
People are not going to forget this because it's not just healthcare, Snerdley.
It is the arrogance.
It is the willful ignoring of the will of the people.
It is all of this spending.
It is all of this debt.
And the people of this country know that the Democrats own all of it.
It is not the Republicans.
The Democrats own this.
So no, hell, they just asked to raise a debt limit, another $1.9 trillion yesterday.
So the debt limit is over $14 trillion now.
Now, listen to, this is a political story.
Sour swing voters desert Democrats.
As they did in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial contest last fall, sour swing voters overwhelmingly supported the Republicans.
Now, you swing voters, you moderates, you independents, now that you supported a Republican, now listen to the way they talk about you.
All they don't have of this reverence for you as they always used to.
They loved you when you moderates for voting Democrat, but now you're sour.
Now they come up with all of these horrible words to describe you.
The words I've seen to describe these independents are angry, sullen, sour, neglected, dissatisfied, racists, hicks.
You know how I would describe the independents?
And you moderates, here's how I would describe you.