All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 5, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:32
February 5, 2010, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings to you once again, ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limboy here.
You are tuned to America's most listened to radio talk show, a program which meets and surpasses all audience expectations every day.
Plus, it's Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
And lots going on today, lots in the news.
We never get a day off of the news.
With the Obama team constantly at a full sprint, monkeying around with the unemployment numbers big time in two different ways.
I, of course, have the details and will explain it to you as no one else can.
Open Line Friday.
Also, whenever you want to talk about on the program is fine, that's not the case Monday through Thursday.
Here's the number, 800-282-2882 and the email address.
El Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Socialism, viewed positively by 36% of the American people.
This is a Gallup poll.
More than one-third of Americans, 36%, have a positive image of socialism.
58% have a negative image.
Views differ by party and ideology.
A majority of Democrats and liberals saying they have a positive view of socialism compared to a minority of Republicans and conservatives.
On the Democrat side, let's see.
Let's see.
Looks like 61% of liberals think socialism is a great idea.
53% lean that way.
Only 20% of conservatives and only 39% of moderates believe that way.
So not a surprise here.
Here's the bottom line.
As Gallup reminds us, socialism is not a completely negative term in today's America.
About a third of Americans respond positively when they hear the term.
Some of this reaction may reflect unusual or unclear understandings of what socialism means.
Folks, this should not be too surprising to anybody.
I mean, our screws and our media, practically every institution in our culture does everything it can to provide a clear understanding of what socialism means.
It's practically taught, although not under that name.
Of course, there are some people who really do want to be taken care of by the government from the cradle to the grave.
Aristotle called them natural slaves.
Speaking of the, um, speaking of the, uh, scruel system, um, oh, we have, where's, I can't find it.
I thought this.
I thought I saved it.
It's the Obama administration.
It's the Teachers Union and the...
Yeah, Teachers Union, NAALCP, are suing to keep 19 underperforming schools open, saying that when they were closed, the people that made the decision didn't take into account the impact on the community.
And they said the students would be hurt.
The students would be hurt by closing down rotten schools.
This is the teachers' unions and the NAALCP.
By the way, Obama went last night to the Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Washington, and after listing his administration's accomplishments and vowing that our most urgent task is job creation, he then described a letter he received from a campaign worker who suffered from breast cancer and has since died.
Now listen to this.
I got a letter.
I got a note today from one of my staff.
They forwarded it to me from a woman in St. Louis who had been part of our campaign, very active, who had passed away from breast cancer.
She didn't have insurance.
She couldn't afford it, so she had put off having the kind of exams that she needed.
And she had fought a tough battle for years.
So his campaign did not offer health insurance to his people.
She had fought a tough battle for years now, and then all through the campaign she was fighting it, but she finally succumbed to it.
And she insisted she's going to be buried in an Obama t-shirt.
That's why he read the letter.
It told the ghoulish story.
And then, you know, everybody says it's about him, it's about him.
And this is just more evidence of it.
Byron York has the story in his examiner blog today.
And this is hilarious.
This is state-controlled Associated Press.
Scott Brown must work with Democrats to survive.
Brown's independence could face Senate tests.
Scott Brown says he's a different kind of Republican, a centrist, willing to work with Senate Democrats to fix health care in the ailing economy.
But his independent bent is likely to be sorely tested in a bitterly divided Senate where party loyalty is often at a premium.
There is also another AP story today about, oh, no, oh no, when Burris goes, there goes the diversity.
There's going to be an all-white club in the Senate again.
There aren't going to be any minority people.
Oh, no.
Oh, no.
How can this be?
They're 12% of the population and not one of them in the Senate is a minority.
Notice that their complaint is about skin color, not diversity of ideas.
Typical liberalism, typical of the state-controlled media.
It's the surface that counts, not what these people think.
Diversity, skin color, Senate somehow now not representative of America because there aren't people of a certain skin color in there?
What's Roland Burris doing for anybody now anyway, other than being replaced?
The Senate Democrats, Harry Reid, didn't want him, and I didn't hear the same AP accusing Harry Reid and the other Democrats of being racially motivated in not wanting Roland Burris.
And remember, they tried to portray this guy as a criminal, as an idiot, any number of things.
So, and here is, is Obama going to try to craft some room for himself in the center?
If so, Brown might be something of an ally.
If Brown wants to have a future in Massachusetts politics, he has to live up to being a New England Republican.
Fiscally conservative, socially moderate, independent-minded.
The only way, according to state-controlled AP, the only way for Mr. Brown to get re-elected is to become an ally of Obama.
That is a death knell.
It is an absolute, I feel for the New Orleans Saints.
You know, I'm sentimentally pulling for the Saints, but they're destined to lose because Obama's picked them.
He's worse than Clinton.
I mean, it's terrible.
He should just shut up.
He should not get into this.
I'm going to ask the Hutch what he thinks about this because the Hutch is black, and he'll have a more objective analysis of Obama's prognostication abilities.
That'll be in the third hour of the program today.
What could be more clear from last week's elections that the only way Brown's going to get re-elected is to join Obama?
I mean, this is just, it is so absurd.
If, you know, it's all over YouTube now.
We got it started yesterday.
Obama mispronouncing Corbin, corpsman, corpsman, twice?
Has he never seen the Marine Corps written down anywhere?
Has he never seen the Army Corps of Engineers written down anywhere?
Obviously, he doesn't pre-read these speeches of his that they put on the teleprompter.
Now, I guarantee you, if that had been George W. Bush, they would have made it fit right into the Bush is an Idiot template, and they would be laughing about it, and they'd be doing constant stories, and you would never, ever miss it, because they'd be looping that all of them.
They'd not touch it.
There'd be an uproar over this.
But of course, there's no uproar because the template of Obama is he's the smartest president we've ever had.
He's the smartest man that's ever lived.
He is post-racial, post-party.
He's all of these wonderful things.
And they can't do anything to deviate from the storyline or the template.
But see, they can't hide these things anymore.
Now there's YouTube, in addition to us in the new media, and they can try to suppress all they want.
They can try to make sure certain things don't become news, but they will always fail.
Anyway, getting Scott Brown to move to the left seems to be a new mission of the state-controlled media.
Reminiscent of their relentless effort to make George do it after President Bush gave his Read My Lips, no-due taxes pledge.
They kept urging him to break it.
And I'm going to make a prediction here that Scott Brown is going to get browbeaten into following the media's bidding.
He's going to get, and I don't know how he's going to deal with it.
I don't know he's going to hold up under it.
But I do predict that he's going to get browbeaten over it.
All right, let me get something out of the way here before we move on to other issues.
Last night, minding my own business, around 5 o'clock, 5.30, already working on today's show.
And I received a flash message from HR, chief of staff.
Sarah Palin's spokeswoman had just gotten off the phone with him, sort of in a panic.
She had said that the Politico was going to run a story saying that Sarah Palin's spokeswoman had ripped into me for using the R word.
And she had called to say, I didn't mention Rush in particular.
They kept asking me about Rush, and I kept answering generically.
But they kept asking me about Russia.
And I just wanted you to know.
So I soon saw the Politico story and the reaction to it.
And lo and behold, that's exactly how the Politico reported it.
If it's a contest between Politico and Sarah Palin's spokeswoman, I will believe Sarah Palin's spokeswoman.
No question about it.
Because the drive-bys have been trying to create this ever since it happened.
And it's so, you talk about transparent.
These guys are more transparent in their motives than Obama is.
And he's the one that pledged it.
So let's go to the audio soundbites.
Steve Doocy on the Fox and Friends show this morning said this about Palin and me.
Sarah Palin says she is not at war with Rush Limbaugh over Russia's use of the R word.
Rush repeated the offensive word on his radio show talking about Rahm Emanuel.
But Palin does point out the word is offensive no matter who uses it.
Now, last night on MS NBC, Richard Wolf was the guest.
I forget what this guy's famous for, for not knowing.
He's a correspondent.
He's written a couple of Obama books, or one Obama book, and working on another one.
And he said in Palin, here's the question he got.
In Palin's statement, she basically said calling people, that's not acceptable.
But she didn't actually say she thought Limbaugh had done that.
Am I more or less correct here?
What would have been consistent would have been maybe a Facebook entry along the lines of what she wrote about Rahm Emmanuel.
Are you capable of decency, Rush Limbaugh?
But the question here for her and for those who love her is this question of does she have the guts to stand up for what she believes in?
And no matter whether it's Rush Limbaugh or anyone else, because if you can't stand up to a talk radio host, then how are you going to confront Putin when he raises his head?
Oh my God, and they want to say that Obama is showing guts in standing up to people?
Okay, here's the last word on this.
A last thought on Rahm Emmanuel and Harry Reid.
I took some liberties.
For those uncomfortable with the favorite words of leading Democrats, Negro and retarded, I have a question.
Are you comfortable with the words or with Harry Reid and Rahm Emmanuel?
I'm uncomfortable with the men and the manner in which they use these words.
Words don't generally offend me.
I try not to give people the power to offend me.
But Harry Reid and Rah Emmanuel, they do offend me and they scare me and they worry me.
These men have cold hearts.
They are statists.
They have power over all of us.
They are trying desperately to exercise that power.
In fact, my friends, I am so uncomfortable with these men, I purposely chose to use a rhetorical tool, satire, S-A-T-I-R-E, to ridicule and humiliate them.
That tool is an effective blunt object in breaking through walls put up by state-controlled media to protect Democrats.
Satire.
For those of you in Rio Linda, here's the definition.
The use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
I used Harry Reid's words and Rom Emmanuel's words, not mine, to expose and punish their behavior.
I used satire to wash their mouths out with soap and made an uncomfortable point because the state-controlled media would have run any Republican out of office, as in George, Allen, and Macaca, if they had been caught saying what Reed and Emmanuel said, just as they're trying to run me off the radio for repeating what they said.
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for Saturday Night Live or late-night comics to treat Democrats the way they treat Republicans.
If some would choose different methods to expose Reed and Emmanuel, fine.
We share the same goals and both are useful in getting results.
Do not doubt me.
And aside from the state-controlled media, everybody involved got the point, and so did they.
Their outrage, totally fake and totally predictable.
I have a suggestion for Gallup on their socialism poll.
You people of Gallup need to go back, you need to scrap this poll, this survey, and you need to do it again.
And forget asking Republicans and Democrats and moderates and independents.
Just find taxpayers and non-taxpayers.
Just ask them and then find out what percentage of Americans like and support socialism, taxpayers or non-taxpayers, and you find a much more accurate portrayal.
Of course, I don't doubt that all that many Democrats and liberals like socialism.
So I guess it's not an offensive word to call them.
I mean, 30, well, we try to get every demographic listener's program, and I've always been a little touchy about using the word socialist.
But now that I know it's not a turnoff and in fact is something they actually enjoy, I will use it even more.
Probably will try to use it more than I use the word liberal.
All right, state-controlled media can only talk about how great is the unemployment rate, lower than expected.
Let's go to the audio tape.
The unemployment rate falling to 9.7%.
That is an improvement from the previous month.
It's better than expected.
The unemployment rate surprisingly dropped below 10% to 9.7%.
That's the good news.
Falling to 9.7%.
And that's an improvement from last month and better than expected.
That headline number is absolutely huge.
You can't underestimate that.
We haven't seen unemployment that low since last summer.
Yeah, except the problem is it's not accurate.
They did include the revised number of unemployed people up to 8 million instead of 7.
And they did include the first wave of Census Bureau hires.
And they're going to be hiring these workers all through June, and they're going to hire a million of them.
So you're going to see the unemployment rate drop because of that.
But keep in mind, those census jobs are temporary.
They're going to lose their jobs when the census work is over.
They did two tricks today, in addition to what I just mentioned to you.
In fact, Rick Santelli on CNBC this morning said that the level of manipulation on these numbers is intensifying.
Without the move to remove how many jobs there are in the marketplace, he says the rate would be 10.6% for January.
And let me explain what he means.
He was specific on the Obama administration lowering how many jobs are even in the total marketplace.
I think they took it from 136 million and changed down to 129 million.
So if there is a smaller universe of jobs, well, naturally, you're going to have a lower percentage of those unemployed.
They have been manipulating and doing everything they can to keep this number at or below 10%.
But of course, this is what's called the U3 number.
The U6 number includes, and this is the number that's around 17 or 18%, that is the number that includes people who have stopped looking.
And that number continues to expand.
These are the people whose unemployment compensation benefits have expired.
So this 9.7% number, we'll rate for the revisions as we always do.
And we'll pound the revisions to you when they come out.
The state-controlled media will, of course, ignore them.
But folks, it's just, it's not what it seems to be.
And I really wish it were.
I wish that I could wholeheartedly endorse this.
But everybody was stunned by this.
Not just the usual experts were surprised.
Everybody.
And I'm wondering.
I'll tell you why I was surprised because everybody was told that there was going to be a revision on February 5th that would add a million more unemployed from the last year than were originally reported.
So everybody was thinking, oh my God, it's got a skyrocket.
Now it comes in 9.7, down three-tenths of a point.
So I'm beginning to wonder if they set everybody up.
If all of that, the past couple days, about 800,000, almost a million jobs they missed, unemployed people they missed.
So now look what they've done.
They've created this pleasant, shocking surprise.
Why, even though 20,000 more people lost their jobs, the unemployment, and we are getting 800,000 that we forgot to count last year, why lo and behold, the unemployment rate still went down.
Whoa!
Are we great or are we great?
See, we've added 800,000 jobs or lost that we forgot to count last year.
In January, 20,000 more jobs were lost, and yet the unemployment rate went down three-tenths of a.
And yeah, we've lost 8 million jobs versus 7 million.
A million more jobs than we thought, and yet the unemployment rate goes down.
And of course, the state control media is not going to delve into it anywhere near like we have here at the EIB network, but they just lowered the number of available jobs to get a lower percentage.
Listen to this convoluted paragraph from Reuters.
While a sharp increase in the number of people giving up looking for work helped to depress the jobless rate, some details of the employment report were encouraging.
The number of discouraged job seekers rose to 1.1 million in January from 734,000 a year.
That's encouraging.
The number of discouraged job seekers rose 400,000.
And that's encouraging.
This paragraph is illiterate.
Yes, and we're back, El Rushball.
Open line Friday.
Get to your phone calls in a moment.
As far as the unemployment number is concerned, all the socialists care about is the headline.
They just want the headline because they know that that's what the on-camera anchorettes, Infobabes, and anchors and Ken Dahls are going to say.
And the same thing on radio.
Oh, unemployment rate down.
That's all the socialists want.
And that's what Obama got.
Now, the bottom continues to fall out of the stock market.
Well, it's coming back a little bit.
No, we've gone under 10,000.
And, you know, Europe may very well be pushing the markets down.
But if Obama had not launched his war on prosperity, you know, trillion-dollar slush fund, socialized car companies, budget blowouts, the attack on banks and all that, we would be better able to absorb the blows of international downturns.
And they're having some problems over there.
Greece, I'm told, is what really bothered everybody yesterday.
And Spain, Portugal are all saying that they're going to have much larger deficits.
Oh, and this is funny.
Paul Krugman, who looks like a ferret to me, he does.
It's a weasel-like, go get a picture of a ferret and get a picture of Paul Krugman.
We'll do that on a website.
You'll see.
And he's out there saying, our deficits aren't big enough.
Our deficits are not big enough.
We need even bigger deficits.
We need bigger than $1.5 trillion deficits.
We need to spend more.
And yet, in the next story is the concern in Europe over Greece not being able to repay some of its debts.
A lot of European countries are not going to be able to pay back the money they've loaned.
A lot of banks are not going to be able to get repaid by Eastern European countries.
And these budget deficits, these countries are warning Spain, Portugal are going to be even higher, and that's causing the market here to have a little pain.
I still say that if it hadn't been for what Obama's done to our economy, we could better absorb the blows of what's happening in Europe.
Obama has given the markets and the economy no margin for error here.
Now, every report now out of Washington roils the markets.
Every job gained or lost is magnified because everybody knows what Obama hopes to pass going forward.
He wants to pass more budget-busting legislation.
He's not giving up on health care.
He wants cap and trade.
Who knows what the hell else?
Investors are well aware of what Obama will never consider signing into law, and they're well aware of what he will sign into law.
And it's not just what this ideologue will sign.
It's what he would never put his signature on.
No tax cuts, no real budget cuts.
Only an ideologue would reject those tried and true solutions, especially given all of these big government failures, one after another for the past year.
So here's where we are.
Yep, see, right, even on Fox, Fox, January unemployment rate, giant, giant letters, giant font drops to 9.7%.
No, it really didn't.
But they got their headline, and that's what they want.
Here's the point, folks.
America is no longer in the driver's seat of our economic bus.
This is why there is all of these little silent protests, tea parties and what have you, effervescing out across the fruited plain.
We don't control our economic destiny anymore.
And as bad as the news out of Europe impacts our markets, imagine, imagine if we were to find out that the CHICOMs don't have the economic juggernaut that they claim to have.
What if Thomas Friedman is wrong, which would not be odd?
Word to the wise, never trust the information coming out of closed societies.
Never.
And ours is rapidly becoming a closed society.
Never trust information coming out of a socialist government.
And that's what we've got today in the unemployment numbers.
Take as an example, any jobs report the Obama administration puts out or any CBO budget estimates or assertions where the AIG bailout money went, closed societies run by socialists put out information to suit their own purposes.
And the same thing goes for the CHICOMs.
Now, the CHICOMs are putting news out there that they are rock solid, that they are experiencing all kinds of economic growth.
I hope it's true, but it doesn't look like it is true.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have here, what's the, let's see, this is from the Washington Times.
And again, this is to go along with the jobs report, which is totally manipulated.
Because the bottom line is more and more Americans are out of work.
Let me run through it for you.
We've added a million jobs that we didn't count lost last year.
Say 8 million instead of 7 million unemployed.
20,000 more jobs lost in January.
And yet, the unemployment rate went down.
Makes no sense, does it?
No, unless you do two things.
Unless you shrink the universe of jobs in the marketplace, which they did.
And if you don't count the people who've given up.
You're looking at 10.6% unemployment if you keep the same number of jobs available in the marketplace.
And you're up to over 18% now if you count the people who are no longer looking, in addition to those who are still working, are still looking that are unemployed.
So what's happened here, that last fact has become a loophole to create a phony unemployment percentage.
But that's what central planners like Obama do.
The facts always obscure their pronouncements and image, so they create their own facts, just like ClimateGate.
It's no different.
Look at the bottoms falling out of the whole climate change.
We now know it's all fake.
It's all made up.
Now, here's this story, headline for the Washington Times today with suspicious statistics.
China obscures economy.
Uh-oh.
Our problem with China's method of economic measurement is politically motivated fudging of the numbers.
But another is a different method of calculation.
Regardless of accounting details, Mr. Chang and Mr. Roski said other Chinese economic figures are inconsistent with Beijing's official picture of robust growth.
They couldn't admit to poor performance because the government believed it was necessary to maintain the image of a vibrant economy.
So the Washington Times is telling us that the CHICOMs are lying about their boisterous economic growth as well.
And if this becomes popular knowledge, I shudder to see what's going to happen on Wall Street.
So my question, is Obama creating a jobs gate?
Jobs data being manipulated for political purposes?
Who would doubt it?
We know that liberals and socialists will do it in the climate movement.
We know that they will do it everywhere.
The liberalism is a giant lie.
Socialists have to lie.
They have to obscure facts.
So Obama, and look, we got evidence.
Obama has been lying about created or saved jobs for over a year because there's no way to calculate a saved job.
So basically he's failing and he's showing us a forged report card with these job numbers that came out today.
Now Drudge found something from August 1st of 2003.
It's a release from the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi with the headline, where are the jobs, Mr. President?
This is August 1st, 2003.
This is two years, only two years after 9-11.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office.
The fact that President Bush's misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs is undisputable.
Since President Bush took office, the country's lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover.
And today, we learned that in July, nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.
Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families.
Now, remember, we're talking about 3 million jobs here, two years after 9-11.
We're at 8 million jobs here, and Pelosi is not sending out a statement, where are the jobs, Mr. President?
Now, the Congressional Black Caucus are beginning to ask, where are the jobs, Mr. President?
But they were slapped down.
You guys, you can complain to me in private all you want, but don't go public with it anymore.
You notice that my Anzatudi's in a wheelchair now.
I'm just saying, we'll be back after this.
And we're back.
It's Rush Limbaugh.
This is Open Line Friday.
Here's what's happened in Europe.
The European Union has put Athens, Greece, on an unprecedented short leash demanding deep fiscal adjustments and regular reports on the progress in slashing Greece's deficit to below 3% in 2012.
Now, imagine if the CHICOMs did that to us.
Imagine if the CHICOMs demanded that we go on an austerity program like the EU is demanding of Greece.
And that could be what's spooking the U.S. market, even the world.
We drive the world's economy, but we have lost control of our economic destiny, folks.
Our economic destiny is no longer ours individually.
And there's Obama.
There's Obama out there predictable, speaking again about how he saved the nation from depression.
Today's news suggests we're climbing out of the hole we found ourselves in.
No, I wish it were true, folks.
I wish it was true.
But it isn't.
Greece's deficit, by the way, is 12.7% of GDP.
That's what the European Union has found to be unacceptable.
And Greece has now pledged to reduce its deficit by four percentage points to 8.7% of gross domestic product in 2010 and thereafter to 5.6% and in 2.8% and 2% down to 2013.
12.7% last year was their fiscal deficit.
Obama's budget proposal, 1.6 trillion in the red in 2010, a deficit equal to 10.6% of GDP.
And they're demanding that Greece get down to 8% of GDP.
I guess if the ChiComs decided to do this to us, this is all predictable.
This is all predictable.
Proposed new small business tax credit, we've pulled the country out of depression, saved it from depression, climbing out of the hole we found ourselves in, climbing out of the hole that we inherited.
This is leadership from the young man child, somehow elected president of the United States.
Ladies and gentlemen, the clock is ticking for every one of us, making a decision on where and how to send flowers for Valentine's Day.
Yo, you haven't thought about it yet?
Here's a week from Sunday, right after the Super Bowl, one week from Sunday.
Now, at the risk of repeating myself, I'm going to let you in on a big secret.
Pro Flowers actually has lowered their prices this year on the delivery of two dozen assorted color roses.
Now, when you decide to buy flowers, of course, that's the most purchased product on Valentine's Day.
And by the way, as I told you last, I used to avoid Valentine's Day because I don't go with a flow.
Everybody does it.
That means I don't.
And it doesn't work, sadly, because the expectations on the other side are still there.
And you don't want to not meet expectations.
So, flowers have never been this easy to send.
Just go online to rushproflowers.com.
You'll find all kinds of Valentine's Day flower ideas, including the assortment of two dozen roses at a price that's been actually lowered from last year.
That's rushproflowers.com or call them 800PRO flowers.
And if you tell them you're listening to me, they will handle your needs immediately.
All right, to the phones we go.
Morris County, New Jersey.
Tom, welcome to Open Line Friday.
You're up first today, sir.
Hello.
Rush, I'm so pleased to talk to you, but I got a report.
It's a miracle.
It's an absolute miracle.
If I hadn't seen it myself, I'd never believe it.
State of the Union, Obama says we will have jobs.
And now, how long past it?
Say the unemployment numbers down.
Evidently, we don't need a jobs package now, Rush.
Well, that's one way of looking at it.
And if we, if we, you, we can also take the unspent portion of the stimulus, which is about 500 million, and use it for debt reduction.
But we're not going to do that.
Nope.
Nope.
I have to admit I was wrong.
I should have voted for him, Rush.
I had no idea the power the man had.
No idea of the power that guy had.
Yes, he had no need for a jobs bill.
That's exactly right.
No need.
Why Obama has saved us?
He has saved us.
Saved us from the hole we found ourselves in.
Joe, Boca Raton, Florida, welcome to the EIB Network, sir.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
I just have a couple of things to say.
First of all, I think your name should be Rush Limbully, because all you do is bully Obama, and you're such a critic.
Rush Limbully?
Yes.
Huh.
Secondly, I want to know why you are so against the single-payer health care plan because of socialism.
It's not socialism.
And my last question is: It most certainly is so when the government's paying, when the government takes over one-sixth of the economy, that's socialism, Joe.
It's not socialism, Rush.
They do it over in Canada.
They do it in places where they have the best health care.
And everybody that can leaves Canada to come down here for major surgery and average treatment, Joe.
That's not true.
What is it with you people in Boca Raton?
You have to have an encounter group session when Carrie loses.
And now you think single payer is not socialism?
It's not.
I have one more question.
Let me ask you, Joe, let me ask you: why don't you want to assume the responsibility of paying your own way?
Why do you want me to pay for you?
Why do you want your neighbors to pay for you?
Because the government is not the single payer.
The single payer is every one of your neighbors and every other citizen in this country who's going to have to pay because you don't want to.
Now, why don't you want to assume your own responsibility?
Do you buy your own food, or do you want me to buy your food for you, too?
No, I want to pay for somebody else who can't make as much as me.
I'm happy to do that.
Well, where do you draw the line on this?
What if somebody can't have the same kind of car you have?
Are you going to make up the difference?
They can have the same kind of car you have.
That's not true, Rush, but I'll tell you the last question.
What's not true?
What's not true?
I didn't say anything.
Was true.
I just asked you a question.
I'm saying that I believe that single payer would be best for the American who cannot make as much as you and I do.
That's all I'm trying to say to you.
And here, it's not getting through to you.
My last question.
You know something?
Single payer would be a step down for me and a whole lot of other people.
You'd have bureaucratic red tape.
You'd be waiting in long lines like they are in Canada and the U.K.
I can't.
I cannot.
I can't believe this.
So, can you tell me what my future holds ahead of me?
Are you a psychic?
Yes, I can because you're a liberal.
I know exactly what you're going to say before you're going to say it.
I know what you're going to do before you're going to do it.
This is unfortunately where Obama's put in the situation where he has Bush's funds.
He's trying to recover.
And you guys are blaming it on Obama, you and Beck and Sal.
The problem here is that, you know, you're a liberal, you're a socialist, and that way you don't have to deal with facts.
I have to deal with facts.
And the largest Bush deficit ever was $168,200 billion.
And already Obama's built that up to one point, so he did not inherit any of this from George W. Bush.
But did I come through with being rush limb bully?
Good, good.
I agree.
Try this headline: Canadian Premier's U.S. surgery a success.
A high office holder left Canada to come to the U.S.
He abandoned the wonderful single-payer system in Canada to come here for heart surgery.
Be right back, my good friend.
▲
Export Selection