All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 1, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:38
February 1, 2010, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.5% of the time.
Probably going to be there for at least a couple years.
I mean, to move it up another tenth of a point is going to require at least 18 months of perfection.
When you get that close to perfection, you've got to be perfect for a long time to move it up.
So we'll see.
We get these audits in every couple of months or so.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program, the email address, El Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Senators Lindsey Gramnesty, Saxby Chambliss, Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, and John McCain will introduce a bill tomorrow that cuts funds for federal trials of 9-11 conspirators.
Hmm.
So that's Blanche Lincoln's a Democrat.
Lieberman is an Independent.
The others, Gramnesty, Chandler, McCain, of course, are Republicans.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, we had a call earlier today from a woman, and she's got a point that she's afraid that people might not understand the problem with the deficit, because in her case, look, milk costs the same, gatholine costs the same.
Going to a movie costs the same.
People tell me the deficit's out of this world.
I don't know how it impacts me.
So I explained it to her.
And I told her, I think a lot of people now may not specifically understand it, but they know it's wrong.
And that's why Obama is below 50% in his approval.
That and the health care bill.
And the health care bill, a large part of it is we don't have the money for it.
We don't have the money for anything he's done.
We've got a $1.6 trillion deficit this year.
That means we're spending $1.6 trillion we don't have.
Americans understand being in debt because most of us are.
Americans understand that.
But here's something to help put this in better perspective and context.
It is a story from the AmericanThinker.com.
And when you people travel on airplanes, they still give you little bags of peanuts and you don't get any peanuts?
Well, wait a second.
They sell it.
I mean, you've got them there.
They sell them to you, right?
You got people.
And you have little tiny plastic cups of Diet Coke, right?
You do.
Or whatever beverage you want for now.
And then, but before that, you got to strip down to your underwear and be cavity searched.
You know, while Mohammed al-Sheikh Al-Tari gets on board with hardly any examination whatsoever.
So try this.
Doug Ross has been on this story, broke some news yesterday about the millions of dollars, millions, that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has rung up in travel using military aircraft.
Now we learn from Doug, and this is Doug Ross, that it appears Pelosi is using military jets to facilitate the personal travel of her children and grandchildren.
No member of Congress involved, just the junketing of her kids.
Since Pelosi took over as Speaker in 2006, she has rung up millions in military travel expenses.
And worse still, she also appears to have requisitioned entire flights for the personal use of her children and grandkids.
That is unaccompanied by any member of Congress.
Her kids, her in-laws, and her grandchildren are utilizing entire military passenger jets for their routine travel needs.
I think she has spent over $2 million ferrying her family around.
This is not to mention the $1 million it costs to send her congressional delegation over to Copenhagen for that climate, that bogus climate meeting.
I'm also told that of that $2 million, $150,000 to $200,000 of it is food and alcohol.
Catering for her kids and grandkids.
While everybody else buys peanuts if they're lucky and gets, you know, smidging a little beverage here and there.
And then if you ask for more, you are shot a dirty glance.
Who do you think you are?
February 22, 2007, military jet requisition for the sole travel needs of her son, Paul Jr.
13 April 2007, a military jet utilized for the unaccompanied travel of the Speaker's daughter, son-in-law, and grandson.
October 30th, 2008, a military jet requisition for the Speaker's daughter and son-in-law, Peter Kaufman, to commute between San Francisco and Washington.
Now, military flights cost between $5,000 and $20,000 per hour to operate, depending on the airplane.
Pelosi only reimburses the government between $120,000 and $400 per flight.
Taxpayers pick up the rest of the tab with tax dollars.
It's all perfectly legal, or is it?
Even if it is, perhaps we need to start asking why a politician's children and grandchildren should have their travel subsidized at taxpayer expense when there's no other business being conducted by virtue of the flight.
I mean, no member of Congress is going someplace.
I talked with John Boehner back last fall.
He was down in a fundraising thing.
We went out and played golf.
And he told me that members of Congress are not allowed to fly on corporate jets, period.
They're not allowed to do it.
Especially corporate jets owned by somebody else that they would reimburse.
They cannot do it.
Even he, and here's Pelosi requisitioning these military jets for her kids and her grandkids, and $150,000 of all the, and this is $2 million in the two years she's been speaker, and $150,000 of it is for catering, alcohol, and food.
$5,000 to $20,000 an hour to operate, depending on the jet that she's using.
I don't know, $20,000 an hour, you've got to be flying almost a $747 for that, maybe a $767, $750.
Yeah, that's, but certainly she can't be requisitioning a Boeing 757 for three people.
Well, I guess she could.
You know, these people really do think of themselves as elite above all of us, royalty.
But while everybody else is engaged in a recession and everybody else is worried sick over losing their house and losing their job, and people may be concerned about deficits and so forth, here's somebody who's not.
Here's somebody who doesn't have to be worried about it.
And it's not because she's paying for it herself.
Oh, and I should add, she and her husband are multi-millionaires.
They could pay for it themselves.
Now, it may be the law that all she has to reimburse is 200 to 400 bucks, maybe the price of a coach seat.
It doesn't make it right.
But she's got the money to do it herself.
This is what infuriates me.
Aside from the poor judgment and the entitled attitude, she's got the money to do it herself and is still making the government, the taxpayers pay for it.
She and her husband are not poor.
They are wealthy, multiple times over.
That's just infuriating, and people need to find out about it.
We will keep people informed.
And because of that, here's Lek Vowenza.
This is last Friday in Chicago at a campaign event for Republican gubernatorial candidate Adam Anjivesky.
And this is what he says, a portion of his remarks.
The United States is only one superpower.
Today they lead the world.
Nobody has the doubts about it.
Militarily.
They also lead economically, but they're getting weak.
But they don't lead morally and politically anymore.
The world has no leadership.
The United States was always the last resort in hope for all other nations.
There was the hope.
Whenever something was going wrong, one could count on the United States.
Today we lost that hope.
So, Lek Vowenza, the United States no longer leads the world morally, and we are moving toward socialism.
By the way, this Chicago, these Illinois elections, there's a bunch of primaries there tomorrow.
And it's, I don't want to jinx things here, but it could well be that the Republicans are going to score big time tomorrow.
And there's a particular candidate that's being described as the Scott Brown of his race, of his contest.
And there's a story here.
I've got it somewhere in the stack that's from a UK paper that you would never, ever see in the drive-by media here.
It's about how people in Chicago are totally disillusioned, not happy with Obama at all.
You'll never see it outside of this UK paper.
Also, there is the most fascinating story from the Associated Press.
It came out yesterday.
It is a story I have never seen in my life about unemployment.
Formula shows why it's so hard to cut the jobless rate.
It is a story that gives Obama all the cover in the world.
And remember, ladies and gentlemen, when we were not in a recession in 2007, the media said we were.
And we were at 5.2% unemployment, up from 4.7.
And they started the train wreck news on how people were losing their jobs.
Oh, how horrible it was.
Now here we are at 10, 10.2% unemployment or 17%.
And we get a story from the AP, it's just so hard.
It's just so hard.
It's so hard to have the jobless rate.
It's just so hard.
When will you hear this?
I'll have it for you.
Plus your phone calls.
All coming up when we get back.
Hi.
Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Folks, the relentless call by liberal politicians for yet more government control has a lot of citizens correctly and properly worried.
If that includes you, you ask what you can do.
You can learn.
Become the go-to person in your family or in your group of friends that has all the answers.
Become a champion of liberty.
And the first step in doing that is to understand the U.S. Constitution.
It's not taught much.
You can do that for free at ConstitutionTownhall.com.
You know that over 25,000 people around the country registered for Hillsdale College's recent constitutional town hall.
25,000.
And it provided a thorough understanding of our timeless first principles and how to revive them.
And I got so many emails from people who thought it was fabulous.
So they're keeping it open by popular demand.
Hillsdale College is keeping constitutionaltownhall.com up so that you and your friends can still watch.
It's a free seminar.
And you walk away after just a few hours with a thorough understanding of our first principles of American liberties and how to preserve them and where they came from.
Every Hillsdale student is required to study and understand the Constitution, but most Americans don't have the good fortune of attending Hillsdale.
So Hillsdale is bringing the Constitution to you.
And I really, if you didn't catch it this past Saturday, it's still up there.
ConstitutionHall.com.
Urge your friends and your colleagues to go and just watch it.
Learn how to revive our freedoms.
Learn what you can do.
Groups and classrooms around the nation are doing it, and you too, right from the comfort of your own home on your own schedule.
It's a shame it's come to this.
It is a shame that it's come to having to teach the Constitution.
It used to be the job of the education system.
But the Constitution presents a problem to people like Obama.
And so it is mistaught as antiquated and old-fashioned and needs to be modernized with the times.
Now, on my show during the coming year, you're going to hear from Hillsdale students.
You're going to hear how educated they are.
You're going to hear how their college is helping to save America by defending liberty.
You can join Hillsdale College in the effort, ConstitutionHall.com.
It's free.
It's a seminar free.
No strings attached here.
They really care about people learning about the Constitution or relearning it.
ConstitutionHall.com.
It was Judicial Watch that uncovered the documents detailing Pelosi's use of Air Force aircraft.
And here are the numbers.
$2,100,000 in personal travel, $101,429 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and adult beverages.
Now, you could feed a lot of hungry kids for $2,100,000.
You could really make a dent in problems in Haiti for $2,100,000.
Here's some details.
Speaker Pelosi used Air Force aircraft travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,000 per flight.
The average cost of an international congressional delegation flight.
The average cost of an international congressional delegation flight, $228,000 of the 103 Pelosi-led congressional delegations, 31 trips included members of her family.
This is obscene.
This is obscene.
It is a violation of her oath.
It is taking advantage of the taxpayers during a period of time where we are in recession, economic downturn.
It's just, these people are going to have to be held account.
This is just not right.
It's pure and simple as that.
It just isn't right.
Who's next?
Milton Delaware, Gerald.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
You're up next on the EIB network.
How are you today, sir?
Excellent to outstanding, sir.
Thank you.
Well, that's the best way to be.
I want to comment on something you talked about earlier in your show.
And it's just simply this.
With Obama putting all the wealthy and all the people with all the great monies in his crosshairs, doesn't he think about the backlash and the repercussions and everything that's going to come as a result of that?
I mean, these people have got millions of dollars to spend, and does he expect them not to spend it against him and the folly of the people who advise him?
Well, you have to understand what he's doing here.
He's doing two things.
He is relying on the fact that most people don't earn a quarter of a million dollars or more.
And in a time of recession, he is hoping to capitalize on an emotion of hatred that they have for the people who make that much.
Obama is hoping that he'll get kudos for getting even with these people.
He's not going to make anybody's life any better who makes less than $250 a year.
He just wants them to be happy that people who have more than they are are getting screwed.
The second thing, and this is more important, Gerald, he is redistributing wealth.
He is destroying it for the express purpose of redistributing it to his buddies, primarily the unions, government and teacher unions, private or public sector unions and minorities.
He's returning the wealth of the nation to its quote-unquote rightful owners.
All that aside, I only have one statement to that.
I don't see near that amount of money per year as my income.
But I see that if these people of wealth don't do something about him, we are in trouble.
I know I'm going to do whatever I can as modestly as I can because this man needs to get out of the way.
Well, he's killing this country.
I totally agree.
I totally agree.
Let me tell you something about the wealthy, though.
They're not going to complain.
They will not complain.
I once watched this week with Brinkley.
When Brinkley hosted it, it was back in the early mid-90s.
Andy Grove of Intel was on when Bill Clinton had just announced a limit on corporate salaries and their deductibility as a business expense of $1 million.
And they asked Andy Grove if he thought this is the right policy.
He said, I'm not going to sit here and complain about the amount of money I make.
And I don't want to get into these social concerns over that.
I'd love to tell you about Intel and what we're doing.
They don't want to talk about it because these people that are wealthy do not want to be seen as complaining.
They think that will only fuel the fire to raise their taxes.
Now, they might work in other ways quietly to try to defeat it and so forth.
And look at, I guarantee you that the vast majority of other than those in Hollywood have the same attitude about this that you do.
And they're going to be working hard to find ways around the new tax increases, whatever they are.
And these particularly, and there are going to be more to come, but this is going to come from sunsetting the Bush tax cuts, which is a tax increase.
Pelosi says it's not, but it is a tax increase if your rate, if your top marginal rate is going to go from 36 to 39, which is big.
As I say, when you couple this with state taxes and Medicare tax increases and so forth, you're going to be over, in some states, over 50% of your income.
Over 50% of your gross is going to be taxed.
But I just don't see, I mean, the wealthy complaining about it to themselves, but I can't see them complaining about what's going to happen to them.
I can see them maybe, this is going to destroy the economy.
This is going to hurt my business.
I'm never going to be able to hire people.
We're not going to be able to grow our business.
Might do it that way, but they're they're not going to complain about the impact on them because that nobody's gonna have any sympathy for them and the if, as I say, if they do complain, it's just gonna spur other people to support raising taxes on them, and we'll get back to your phone calls here just second.
We want to play you something interesting from the talent portion of the Miss America pageant on saturday night.
This is uh miss District Of Columbia, Jen Corey, and she is singing a song many in this audience are probably familiar with, albeit with different lyrics.
Uh, it is Puccini's Omeo Babino Caro.
Her version ran about a minute.
Here it is, and that was Barbar Chennault Laws.
She's from Dallas.
The uh English language version of uh Puccini's Omeo Babino Caro, and that was uh miss District Of Columbia, Jen Corey, who sang previously.
I thought many of you who watched the pageant probably recognized the uh, the melody but didn't know the actual words in Italian.
We translate into the English, Barbara Chennault Law did.
By the way, I want one one thing about this 250 000.
I made a bit of a mistake.
Yeah, if she if if, if miss District of Columbia got the words to that right, she might be Miss America today, you never know.
No no no no, just just kidding.
Just kidding.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars is not wealthy, and I know that that the you families 250 000 uh you're, you're not wealthy, wealthy.
But Obama calls the Democrats have always called those kind of people wealthy uh, and they will.
A 250 000 family four.
They will complain about their taxes going up and they, you know, but I, I do think, depending on how much coverage their complaints get, it will still spur people who don't make that kind of money.
Oh really, you're complaining, i'm out of work and you're complaining about a tax improvement.
You gotta be.
They got to be very careful about about how this does um, but the you know a lot of small businesses in this category of 250 000 and I think Caller wanted them to organize and do something.
A lot of people want somebody else to do something.
Here's Virginia, HIGH Rolls, New Mexico.
Great to have you on the EIB Network.
Hello, hello.
I am so honored to talk to you.
Thank you very much, um.
I wanted to mention first I called to talk about the redistribution of wealth and how I think it's going on already, but I was going to mention to you that i'm also a meteorologist and I don't believe in global warming.
Thank, a man-made gold, exactly right.
Yeah, exactly um, i've done a little looking into it and i'm thinking perhaps some minor fluctuations in the magnetic field could cause a little bit of global warming in the northern hemisphere, but man-made no way.
Thank you.
And if anybody ever asks you say what ended the ice age?
Global warming and there were no people there.
Something had to end it.
That's right, exactly Exactly, that was global warming.
Maybe it was man's first experiments with fire.
I'm not sure.
Anyway, I just wanted just a kind of a statement.
I found something out in this redistribution of wealth, and I'm terribly nervous.
I apologize.
No, I understand.
I've been where you are.
And I was talking to someone who was filing their taxes, a young couple, and he makes about $15,000 a year, you know, not much.
But they have two children, right?
And he paid, I asked him how much he paid in his income tax, and he said $143.
And I said, well, how much are you getting back?
And he said, $7,000.
And I was like, what?
Well, there's earned income credit.
They have two children.
They get Medicaid.
They get food stamps.
They get WIC, which is, I think, like milk and cheese and things like that for the kids.
So I added it up and I kind of came out with a rough estimate of about 32, anywhere between $32,000 and $35,000 this couple makes.
And I don't have that much disposable income.
I just find it, I'm shocked because it's already happening.
It is already happening.
And your example is the exact intention that Obama has.
That couple is not going to object to any policy.
That couple's not going to object to any increase in taxes.
They're going to favor increase in taxes because they know they're going to get the money.
I'm just, I'm floored.
I have lumps on my head from banging it against the wall.
Well, you know, I got into big trouble.
I got into big trouble April 1st in 1989 when I suggested that the poor start paying their fair share of taxes.
And I got caught all kinds of hell for that.
But seriously, this is Obama's intention.
He wants more and more people to be in that category that you just described.
And I have not in the last 10 years ever gotten a return anything back of anything I've paid.
Well, it's actually good because if you had, that just means they're keeping your money for a year with no interest.
Right.
But I'm actually thinking of doing less work.
And I hate that thought.
Less work because I'm so worried about the tax increases that are coming.
Yep.
Less work, and you get yourself in that couple situation.
Have an income of $15,000 a year and have a disposable income of $32,000.
Yep.
Well, I appreciate you taking my call.
By the way, have you ever tasted government cheese and milk and butter?
Well, actually, the cheese is pretty good.
I remember when I was a kid, when I was a kid, I don't know how this happened.
My dad brought home some government butter, butter that was for welfare recipients.
And it was the best butter I'd ever tasted.
It wasn't even close.
It was astounding to me.
When we were eating margarine, they were eating butter.
Is that what you're trying to say?
No, it was better than real butter.
I mean, their butter was, it was just, it was better than what you got at the store.
Yeah.
And it was in big round tins, not in sticks.
And I said, boy, this is, you know, my dad did a lot to educate me on what this was really all about in the welfare community, the welfare world and so forth.
I mean, and the milk, too.
I don't know where he got it because we were not on welfare.
I think one of the farmers that was involved in producing it gave it to him.
And he made a point.
This is better than what you can get at the store, son.
Just better.
Government just is better.
They have whatever the standard requirements of it are.
Don't know, but he made that point.
Look, Virginia, you did great.
Couldn't even tell you were nervous.
I'm glad you called.
Thank you so much.
Here's a headline, woman steals co-workers' identity.
From the Middletown Press, a Chester woman arrested and charged with stealing a co-worker's identity and using the information to commit various computer-related crimes.
Lisa Solak, 37, arrested on a warrant after a police investigation into alleged identity theft.
A woman at Tri-Town Position Plastics told a cops that she suspected Solak, who sits next to her at work, of trying to ruin her life.
The victim became suspicious after she noticed three emails from the internet dating site match.com saying her profile had been approved.
The alleged victim didn't sign up and didn't set up an account.
And when she viewed the profile online, she discovered somebody had used her personal information, including her social number, and to create the account.
The profile contained personal details, including where she worked and her dog's name.
So Solak appeared in Middletown Superior Court to face a slew of charges, including third-degree identity theft, computer crimes, and all that, and it needn't have happened.
If the woman at Tri-Town Position Plastics had had lifelock, simply wouldn't have happened.
We save these stories.
Every time Snerdley scours the internet, he sees Lifelock story, brings it, and raises Lifelock on it.
Now, nobody's going to stop identity theft.
100%.
But when you read articles like this, Life Lock, Life Lock, Lifelock, and this would not have happened.
The odds are very good it would not have happened.
LifeLock helps protect your information.
They don't sell it.
Don't wait, folks.
Their identity alert systems, the best there is.
You will find out.
If somebody's trying to steal your identity, you'll find out as Lifelock catches them.
1-800-440-4833.
10% off your membership if you use my name.
Promo code Rush.
1-800-440-4833.
A U.S. missile test that mimicked an Iran strike has failed because of a faulty radar.
Sent a couple rockets up there.
We're going to try to intercept them, and the radar botched, and the test therefore failed.
It was one to mimic an Iran strike.
All right, to the phones, Corona, California.
Jackie, thank you for calling.
Great to have you with us, madam.
Hi, Rush.
Wow, this is really a treat.
I'm so excited to talk to you.
Thank you.
I have to tell you that three years ago today, I was diagnosed with breast cancer.
So now I will have a far better memory of February 1st than I did before.
So this is really exciting to get to talk to you today.
Well, thank you.
I'm sorry to hear that, though.
Well, you know what?
I've come through it with flying colors, and I'm still here, and I praise the Lord for that.
And, you know, you just look forward.
And I know the Lord has my days in his hands.
So I'm just excited to be healthy and excited to talk to you today.
This is like such a treat.
And everybody that knows me is freaking out for me right now because I'm probably your number one fan.
Well, congratulations on a good result.
Thank you.
Well, I know I have to keep it quick because Snerdley told me to stay focused.
Although you've been talking about so many great things today, it's hard to stay focused on one thing.
But I think, you know, the thing that we're seeing right now, Rush, is people just want America back.
They want to get back to the simple ideals of what America stands for.
And unfortunately, what we're seeing with so many things that you talked about today, liberals are sold out to their ideals.
They're not sold out for America.
And, you know, candidates like Scott Brown, he's a servant.
He's an American.
He's not going to Washington so he can fly his family on jets all over the world.
He's going there to serve America.
And it's so refreshing.
And go ahead.
Oh, go, you finish.
Well, I just think it's really refreshing.
And I'm hoping we're going to start seeing more candidates understanding that that is what people want.
Well, that's the key.
You know, that really is the key.
Do Republicans understand what happened here?
We'll have to wait and see.
Based on what's going on in Illinois, I'd say they do.
Now, Fawada Jami has a piece.
I'll save this for tomorrow.
Wall Street Journal, the Obama spell is broken.
This is all about how the people that voted for Obama, it's over.
Nothing that they thought they were going to get, have they gotten.
Jackie, thanks much for the phone call.
I want to share some of this unemployment story with you because this is just unbelievable.
From the Associated Press, the economy's 5.7% growth last quarter, fastest paced since 2003, was a step toward shrinking the 10% unemployment rate.
There's just one problem.
Growth would have to equal 5% for all of 2010 just to lower the average jobless rate for the year by one point.
Now, any growth we've had is a fluke.
And if they took out all the government growth, there wouldn't be any other kind, but they never mentioned that.
But they do say the economists don't think 5% growth for all of 2010 is possible.
Most analysts say economic activity will slow to 2.5% to 3% growth for the current quarter as benefits fade from government stimulus efforts and from companies drawing down less from their stockpiles.
That's why the Federal Reserve and outside economists think it'll take until the middle of the decade to lower the double-digit jobless rate to a more normal 5% or 6%.
Another way of looking at it, a net total of about 3 million jobs that have to be created this year to lower the average unemployment rate by one percentage point for 2010.
Yet even optimists think that the creation of 1 million net jobs is probably out of reach this year.
This shows why it is such a hard thing for our new young president.
Joblessness also represents a danger for Obama's party.
And that sentence is the reason the article was written, because it does represent such a danger.
And the rest of the story talks about how hard it will be, how impossible it may be.
Don't think Obama can do it.
It may not be, if this were a Republican football file, you don't know.
I don't have to tell you what the story would be.
Get this, folks, from the Washington Post on Saturday.
Education Secretary Arnie Duncan called Hurricane Katrina, quote, the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans, unquote, because it forced the community to take steps to improve low-performing public schools.
This, according to excerpts from a TV interview made public on Friday, Hurricane Katrina, the best thing that ever happened to New Orleans public schools.
Whoa.
▲
Export Selection