All Episodes
Previous Next
March 29, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:47
March 29, 2010, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, America's Anchorman is away and this is your undocumented Anchorman sitting in.
Great to be with you.
I'll be here tomorrow and Rush returns Thursday.
Rush returns Thursday.
We have been trying to tease out of you some best estimates as to where he is.
He had to fly 18 hours to get there.
It's a 15-hour flight back, so you can factor in the tailwinds on the return flight, work out which part of the planet he's on.
And as Rush said, he's going to scout out potentially viable health systems, still functioning health systems, anywhere on the planet.
Good luck finding one.
He may be at one of those atolls that's re-emerged in the Pacific now that Barack Obama has lowered the oceans, as he pledged to do in his first term.
By the way, that's pretty much the first election, the only election pledge he's kept so far.
As you recall, when he won the Democratic Party nomination, he announced that this is the moment when the rise in the ocean levels began to fall away again.
This is, remember King Canute?
King Canute was on the beach, and his courtiers said he had such power, so he told them to take the throne down to the beach.
He sat there, and he would command the waves not to come in.
But the waves did come in, and they soaked his loafers.
And King Knut was trying to show to his courtiers that the king was not all-powerful and could not do anything.
And if Barack Obama had been like an old-fashioned king like that, the minute these democratic courtiers of his started saying, oh, you can do anything, Your Majesty, King Barack, you can make the oceans recede, he would have said no, no, no, and would have demonstrated that he is just a mere mortal.
But of course, King Barack isn't a mere mortal because he has made the oceans recede.
Apparently, or at any rate, the sea levels aren't.
You remember the Barako, the Al Gore movie where suddenly the water comes in and flash freezes New York Harbor the day after tomorrow?
And it's an amazing film, actually.
Dick Cheney gives a speech.
The Dick Cheney figure gives a speech on Tuesday saying there's nothing to this climate change business.
And then on Wednesday, New York City is flash frozen.
And that's the scenario we were looking at.
But now with Obama in, the oceans have begun to recede.
By the way, have you seen this story?
This was reported over the weekend that the biblical plagues, they've now done a survey tracing the biblical plagues to climate change.
You know all the plague of frogs they had in Egypt?
I think this was the time of Ramesses II.
Apparently they got the old climate change scientists to work on it.
And what do you know?
It turns out that the climate, that all the plagues, the biblical plagues and the plagues of Egypt afflicting the world during the reign of Ramesses II turned out to be due to global warming.
Biblical plagues really happen, say scientists.
Researchers believe they've found evidence of real natural disasters on which the ten plagues of Egypt, which led to Moses freeing the Israelites from slavery in the book of Exodus in the Bible, were based.
But rather than explaining them as the wrathful act of a vengeful God, the scientists claim the plagues can be attributed to a chain of natural phenomena triggered by changes in the climate, triggered by changes in the climate.
So you can mock climate change.
You can mock it and you can be a denier.
You can be like Rush does.
You can mock these guys with the driving around in the hybrids and all the rest of it.
But you're going to laugh the other side of your face when the plague of frogs shows up, aren't you?
Because plague of frogs isn't going to be covered by Obamacare.
You wake up, there's like frogs squatting all over you and they're leaving their slime all over you and you go to the emergency room, they're not going to cover plague of frogs under Obamacare.
You can make all the jokes about it, but we now know, scientists have proved that Ramses II, the Pharaoh Ramesses II, who ruled Egypt between 1279 BC and 1213 BC, and led to the abandonment of the city, these plagues, were all caused by climate change, undoubtedly brought on, I would say, by his excessive carbon footprint.
I mean, I don't know what SUV Ramses II was driving in those days, but I would think the average big shot pharaoh would have a hell of a carbon footprint.
So climate change, which is responsible for everything, is now apparently to blame for the plague of frogs that should be showing up any day now.
So don't worry.
Don't worry about it.
Don't worry about the plague of frogs.
There's a story on Yahoo News.
What is this?
CQ politics?
That's Congressional Quarterly, isn't it?
Congressional Quarterly.
So this is like a very authoritative publication.
Political economy, the panic timeline.
There's a lovely line in this.
It says, quote, it's not the end of the world.
That will come a bit later.
It's not the end of the world.
That will come a bit later.
If you're wondering exactly when, like if you're planning when we need to abandon the city as they did in Ramses II's day, it looks like it's going to be about 2029, because that is the point when America will have no more IOUs to call in.
There was a front page headline in the New York Times last week trumpeting that the end of Social Security was nearer at hand than anyone had ever thought.
Now, this is before we've added the Obamacare to it.
And if you notice, that's why it comes back to that poll that I quoted just before the top of the hour.
84% of people, Americans, 84% of Americans think the middle class are going to have to pay more money and suffer financial consequences in order to reduce the deficit.
But they don't want anybody touching Social Security and Medicare.
Okay?
That's fine, but you can't make the two halves of that statement add up.
You've got to touch Social Security and you've got to touch Medicare.
Except we can't touch Medicare now because we've just universalized Medicare.
We've Medicared everybody.
And there would be no way, there is no way that any of this can be reduced unless there is a dramatic increase in taxation.
This is really the dishonesty, I think, of the liberal view of big government, that it's not prepared to make you pay for it.
This stupid poll accurately sums up the contradiction in the way people think about these things.
Oh yes, we like Social Security, we like Medicare, we just don't want to pay for it.
And that's the delusion of big government everywhere they try it.
So there's two things you can do.
Even if you were to start taxing people to cover the unfunded liabilities now, it still wouldn't make, you would either have to tax them to the point of total societal collapse or you're basically going to have to cut back these programs.
So if you've got a candidate, and this is the only candidates we should be interested now, if your candidate isn't talking about fewer government agencies with fewer employees on smaller salaries administering fewer programs, he's not serious.
Because the point is this stuff is unaffordable and can never be afforded.
And it has other consequences too.
Why is there such a rise in personal debt?
Because it's not just government debt in this country.
We have now unprecedented levels of personal debt.
Why is that?
Why is that?
That's because when government takes, as it does in some jurisdictions here, certain states here, you're already paying 55% of your income to the government.
Now think about that.
We think that's entirely normal.
We think that's entirely normal to say if you make $10,000, we're going to give $5,500 of it to Barney Frank and Henry Waxman.
Once you've accepted the psychology of that, anything is possible.
Anything is possible.
Like in show business, for example, you have an agent.
You have an agent.
And some agents will take 10% and some will take 12.5%, depending on what country you're in.
Some will take 10%, some will take 12.5%, some will take 15%.
But if you had an agent who wanted to take 55%, you would want to go and work in a different market because you would not go along with that.
Yet we think it's entirely normal now to say, oh, here's your $10,000.
And you go, oh, yeah, that's great.
It's only a check for $4,500 now because the government's taken all the rest.
And that is what it is right now.
And it's still not enough to pay for this stuff.
So what rate would it have to be?
What rate would taxation have to be not to have a deficit, not to have a national debt, not to beggar your children, not to beggar your grandchildren?
What rate of taxation would it have to be?
That's where big government is fundamentally dishonest.
Because big government, the whole rationale of big government is not to make you pay what this stuff really costs.
Because if it did, you wouldn't go along with it.
And I mentioned the levels of personal debt.
Why is that?
Well, it's because back in the old days, back in the old days, when you, okay, you didn't keep 100% of your income because the government still had to maintain an army and do the roads and have a volunteer fire department and one or two other things.
So you paid 90% or maybe you kept 90% or you kept 85% of your income.
And so you had to take on less personal debt in order to buy accommodation and to live and to live.
And now we have a situation where because, partly because the government takes so much of your money, you have less discretionary income and so you take on more personal debt in order to fund not just your accommodation.
We're not talking about mortgages now, but if you look at the levels of credit card debt, people fund vacations on debt.
People fund electronic purchases on debt.
The level of personal debt would go down significantly if government got smaller and allowed you to keep more of your money.
These two things are connected.
But they boil down to that phrase of Charles Moore's that I used in the last hour.
We're spending too much of tomorrow today.
There isn't enough tomorrow to cover our spending today.
We've spent tomorrow.
It's gone.
It's gone.
There's no tomorrow.
We've already cleaned out tomorrow.
It's not just that the cupboard is bare today, but next decade's cupboard is bare and the decade after that.
And that is why we need candidates.
We don't just need a guy with an R after his name.
We need candidates who are explicitly committed to smaller government with fewer agencies, fewer employees, lower budgets, running fewer programs.
Because if they're not offering that, they're not being serious.
This is global Armageddon.
This isn't Greece.
HR, with his usual blithe insouciance, saunters on when we came on before the show and goes, oh, you know, this is the fast track to Greece.
Greece can be Greece because when Greece goes belly up, it can stick the tab to the Germans.
It's run out of Greeks to stick it to right now because they retire at 55 If you're in certain dangerous professions like bomb disposal, which we talked about a couple of weeks ago here, like bomb disposal experts or hairdressers, which are regarded as dangerous professions, you retire at 50.
So Greece has run out of Greeks to stick it to, so it's sticking it to Germany.
Germany is going to be bailing out Greece.
If Germany were to go barely up, Germany would look to America to bail it out.
In effect, the United States did that in the 1940s and for 60 years now has covered the defense costs of the German states.
So Germany doesn't have to spend anything on defense.
It can spend it all on health care.
It can spend it all on social programs because America pays for the defense of Germany.
So Greece can stick it to Germany and Germany can stick it to Greece.
When America goes belly up, who does America stick it to?
Who does America stick it to?
The whole racket, the whole racket will come crashing down at that point because there is nobody left to stick the tab to.
And as I said, we can't even rely on sticking it to our kids and grandkids because, in effect, we've already spent that money.
We've got to roll it back and we've got to roll it back urgently or it's all over.
On that cheery note, we will pause to earn a few pennies to keep us going for just a little bit longer and return with your calls at 1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein, in for rush on the EIB network, angry white male Monday.
We've been talking to all you haters, haters out there, homophobes, racists, misogynists.
Bring it on.
We're not going to get out the new age wind chimes and calm you down here.
We like to wind you up and get even more angry.
Let's go to George in Chicago.
George, you're live on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're in Chicago, so I guess you were, what, a community organizer?
I don't think there's any other kind of employment out there, is there still?
Are you a community organizer?
No.
Okay.
Not really.
You're not.
Okay.
A nice, quiet American.
Really?
That's a nice, quiet American.
That's the code again, isn't it?
That's like code for racist hater.
I'm not a racist and I'm not a hater.
I love everybody.
Okay.
Europeans.
Okay.
Okay.
Well, it's a privilege to talk with you.
You probably get that a lot.
Actually, you'd be surprised at how rare it is, but it's a privilege to talk to you, George.
You looking forward to Obamacare?
Oh, please.
Not really.
Speaking of health care, and I call it the plague of the 21st century.
Right.
Why isn't it that the president, the vice president, senators, House of Representatives, their staff, and all that, why aren't they in this wonderful health care system?
Why are they exempt?
Because we are now ruled by what James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal calls the Obama clatura.
I mean, we accept it now, and this is the argument advanced by so-called moderate Republicans that we have ruled by experts.
That's what David Brooks, the House Conservative at the New York Times, said when the Obama administration came in on January 20th last year, that this is the most expert group of experts that any know-nothings like us have ever had the privilege of living under.
So it is entirely appropriate that as they are a ruling class, a class of technocrat experts, that they should not be bound by the same petty laws that they pass for the rest of us.
They can pass a law for you, George, in Chicago, and they can pass a law for me in New Hampshire.
But there's no reason why such a skilled and gifted class of ingenious technocrats should have to be bound by these humdrum laws themselves.
That is the reality of the situation there.
Well, it must be reality, but I don't get it.
I really don't get it.
It's this silly bill and whatever goes with it, but they're exempt from it.
I don't understand.
That's right.
And it's fundamentally un-Republican as well, because what's the point of having a republic of citizen legislators if you then effectively say we will have a privileged ruling class that will not be bound by the laws it passes for the rest of us?
It is an abomination and an affront to Republican government.
Let's go to Barbara in Mount Juliet, Tennessee.
Barbara, you're live on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Great to have you with us.
Oh, thank you, Mark.
Thank you for taking my call.
It's a pleasure to talk to you.
I was just wanting to get your thoughts on the possibility of the VAT tax and if they have to do that, how do they possibly sell it to the country that it's not a tax?
Well, a valued-added tax, which is what they have in Europe, and people think of it like a sales tax.
It's not.
It's much more complicated than that because they effectively levy tax at every stage in the production, in the production process.
But what the advantage of it, and in Europe, by the way, they take it seriously.
You know, in Europe, you are not allowed by unless the European Union in Brussels gives you permission, individual nations are not allowed to lower the rate of value-added tax.
It can go up, but it can never come down.
That's how it works there.
And in Scandinavia, for example, it's 25%.
Now, they won't introduce it at 25% here, but they're going to have to introduce it fast because they need another revenue stream.
And it's always easier to introduce a new tax than to increase an old one because you can say, well, if we have 10 taxes, they'll all be low, rather than having one tax because it'll be high and people will object to it.
But it doesn't work like that in practice because all these, you can see it in states and cities too, that when people, when they say, oh, we'll introduce this tax and it'll enable us to keep the others low, they all do, they all go up.
Instead of having five low taxes or ten low taxes, eventually you have five or ten medium rate taxes and then five or ten high taxes.
And I think they will introduce it and they will introduce it as a measure of financial necessity.
And they may even do it the way they do it in Europe, where the tax is not, you know, here when you go into a store and buy a Mars bar and it's whatever it is, 75 cents, and they add on the 8% sales tax or whatever, according to what state you're in, you know at the point of sale that you're paying a little amount in tax.
They don't do that in Europe.
It's all factored into the straight, the total price, so it's disguised.
And that's why VAT is so attractive to Obama because he needs urgently another revenue stream, a new fresh revenue stream.
And even then, it's not going to be coming close to anywhere near what it's going to cost to pay for all this stuff.
But you're right, Barbara, value-added tax is coming soon, and you better look out for it.
Mark, sign in for Rush.
More straight ahead.
Yes, America's Anchorman is away.
Your undocumented anchor man sitting in.
Rush is going to be here Thursday.
He'll be back Thursday.
I'll be here tomorrow.
Who's going to be in on Wednesday, HR?
Mark Davis.
Mark Davis is here Wednesday?
Okay, so I'm here tomorrow.
Mark Davis Wednesday, and then Rush is back on Thursday.
And don't forget, if you guess where he has gone to check out healthcare systems, you could win your very own Rush Limborg Guess Hos.
We had the first suggestion of Fiji, Fiji.
Somebody thinks Rush may be checking out the healthcare in Fiji.
Let's look at some of the actual costs involved here.
People say, well, can't, you know, this is the United States of America.
Can we not just print money to get out of this?
Now, I think the U.S. has even less ability to print money to get out of the hole than other countries do.
If you're in Greece, you can print money.
Even to a certain extent, if you're in another G7 economy, you can print money.
But America, the dollar is the global reserve currency.
You cannot print money.
The United States has less flexibility to debauch its own currency than Robert Mugabe does in Zimbabwe.
Nobody cares what Robert Mugabe does to his currency, but there's a lot of people around the world in the global economy who care very much about what the United States does to its currency.
So you can't just print.
The United States has less flexibility to print money than Robert Mugabe does in Zimbabwe.
So that ain't going to happen.
Because if that happens, it's all over.
Then the Chinese yuan or whatever will become the global currency because the dollar has simply decided to debauch itself.
The Moody's, who rate countries like the way they do any other kind of potential business risk, have already published a paper warning that exploding U.S. government debt could cause a downgrade of Treasury bonds.
Robert Samuelson writes about this in the Washington Post.
And he points out that just six days later, after this warning, that the AAA rating that the United States has could be downgraded, just six days later, the House of Representatives passed President Obama's healthcare legislation costing $900 billion or so.
By the way, this $900 billion or so, did you notice that every time the bill was costed out under the so-called Congressional Budget Office, it always came in just under a trillion dollars.
It was always, I think the final amount was something like $999 billion, $999,099.
It comes in just under a trillion every time because for whatever reason, the CBO seems responsive to the feeling that it wouldn't be good if they got a trillion-dollar price tag on this thing.
And what I love about this, this Congressional Budget Office, I love the way people say, oh, well, the Congressional Budget Office has scored the numbers.
They score what they get.
They score what they get.
A reader wrote to me a couple of days ago and he said, basically, the way the CBO works is this.
If Congress says we're going to cover the cost of this thing by selling two-acre lots on the dark side of the moon, the CBO is obliged to take that at face value and simply report the revenue that would be generated if they were to sell two acre lots on the dark side of the moon.
The basic insanity at the heart of the bill can never be questioned.
So the CBO, you might want to, when people come up with CBO numbers, you might want to ask the CBO whether the CBO have ever run the numbers on the potential savings if we got rid of the CBO and replaced it with a children's musician with an assistant in spangled tights and he just plucked numbers at random out of her cleavage.
Because that would be as accurate as anything that is going to come from these CBO numbers, which are scored essentially according to the political criteria that they are given by Congress.
Let's go to Jeff in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Jeff, you're live on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Terrific to have you with us.
Well, thanks, Mark.
I really am just excited.
It's our first-time caller.
I love Rush, but I really like it when you host.
That's not a good thing to say.
I was going to be here tomorrow, but I think that's just been cancelled.
Rush, I love, I love, this is my hobby.
I couldn't handle this.
When Rush was away, you know, with his little troubles in Hawaii over the Christmas period, and I did whatever it was four or five days in a row, by the end of it, I was thinking, wow, this is like hard work.
Like three hours a day, five days a week for 20 years.
And people get mad at Rush because he takes a couple of days off to go and scout out quality health care in Fiji and Papua New Guinea.
Three hours a day, five days a week for 20 years.
That's serious.
You've got to be good to do that.
Jeff, what is your point?
Well, I'm on a mission today because the Republicans and conservatives, and unfortunately, some of the talk show hosts that are conservative as well, are just killing me by stupidly agreeing that the free preventative care and removing the pre-existing conditions exclusion are fantastic ideas.
Right, right.
They're all fantastic ideas until you show someone how much it's going to cost.
Right.
So let's say, okay, preventative care.
Let's say a certain percentage of us go out and get colonoscopies.
Right.
$1,800.
Right.
Well, you just got to do the math, divide that by 12.
Well, it's worse than that, though, Jeff, because we're doing all these things as third-party transactions, either through insurers or through the government.
And by definition, a third-party transaction will always be more expensive than if it's just between you and the doctor and you're writing a check.
That's just the nature of a third-party transaction.
Exactly.
Yeah, but being an insurance agent, I totally agree with that in terms of it's got to cost more because of the nature of the insurance.
But no, wait a minute.
You say you're an insurance agency.
Okay, now we've been told that preexisting conditions are no reason to deny insurance.
So in what sense is it insurance anymore?
If I come in to see you and I say, I'd like to buy some health insurance, by the way, and they say, okay, what pre-existing conditions have you got?
And I say, I've got everything.
I'm disease-riddled.
I've got tertiary syphilis from head to toe.
Everything about me that could be wrong is wrong.
And the government says you are not allowed, in effect, to evaluate that risk in the way you would have before the government decided to take away your freedom to do that.
In what sense are you then still an insurance agency?
Not.
In fact, I won't be probably in about two years just because of the way that this is going to happen.
But you've definitionally destroyed insurance.
It's no longer insurance.
So there's no way it can cost any less.
Right.
So it's just impossible.
The whole thing is impossible.
But the point is, is like, look what will happen next year when your health insurance companies will come back and say, well, to cover those colonoscopies, everyone's got to pay $100 more per month.
Yes, because it's the same as if the government said, well, you're allowed to get car insurance after you've crashed the car.
In other words, you drive it up the interstate, you flip it over, and it's burning there, and then you go to the payphone and we call Jeff in Minneapolis and say, I'd like to buy some car insurance.
And you say, okay, what kind of car have you got?
And you say, well, it's a Ford Chevy burnt-out wreck lying on the middle of the median of I-95.
And you are obliged by law to insure that.
What's it going to do to all the people who insured their cars before they flip them over on the interstate?
It's going to send the cost of their insurance way up, isn't it?
Exactly.
But, you know, this whole thing is totally designed to say, okay, look, we gave the insurance companies a chance.
They're coming back with huge rate increases again.
They've either left the market or have raised premiums so high that we have to step in now.
It's designed to make the insurance companies fit.
No, and that is also the point.
When left-wing commentators say those of us on the right are being hysterical here because this still preserves the role of private insurers, you are right, Jeff, that that's not the point.
This is we're halfway across the bridge to the other side of the river where the government healthcare single-pay utopia that Barack Obama is in favor of is.
And the intermediate stage is to impose such mandates on private insurers that in two to five years' time he'll be able to say, Well, look, Jeff of Minneapolis has gotten out of the insurance business entirely.
Insurance agencies won't cover this stuff anymore.
Private insurance has failed.
We have to go to a single-payer government system.
This bill is only the intermediate stage, right?
Totally.
It's the mechanism for taking apart one by one everything that people are thinking.
We went through a thing where we talked as a group, and someone came across and said they were so glad that health savings accounts were spared.
They said, you can't be serious.
Look at how the bill's designed.
They don't have to fight that fight right now because they know they have the mechanism in place.
They can quietly dismiss that with a pinstroke, and it's over with.
This is where it is.
But don't miss, folks.
Jeff made an excellent point that we shouldn't forget.
This is the intermediate stage.
It's burdening private insurers so that they can no longer function as what is an insurer.
An insurer is an evaluator of risk.
But the government now says you can't evaluate risk.
The guy comes in riddled with disease.
You've got to cover him anyway.
So in a couple of years' time, private insurance will not be functioning, and that's when the Democratic Party will say we have to move to the next stage.
It's the only one that's left, and that is single-payer.
Thanks for your call, Jeff.
Mark Stein in for Rush.
More of your calls straight ahead on the EIB network.
The famous Tea Party spitting movement.
They're currently going over it on TV frame by frame now.
As Mike was saying, it's like the Zapruder thing of the Kennedy assassination.
They're freeze-framing it.
Do we have Expectorant?
Do we have saliva?
Yeah.
Yeah, it's all going.
It's always something, isn't it?
The Republican National Committee is in trouble for spending $2,000, running up a $2,000 tab at a bondage-themed nightclub in West Hollywood.
Michael Steele, Republican National Committee chair, is having to defend his expenditure of $2,000 at this bondage-themed nightclub in West Hollywood.
You know, I don't know.
Maybe there's an issue here.
Maybe they shouldn't have spent it.
But in many ways, it's symbolic of what's happening.
The whole of America sometimes seems to me as if it's turning into a bondage-themed nightclub.
Let us go to Cynthia in HR, where is Cynthia on Rush's list of most favorite girls' names?
Number 13, no, number 13.
No, it ought to be way up.
Let's get it into the top 10.
It's number seven or six with a bullet, Cynthia, one of my favorite ladies' names from Bel Air, Maryland.
You're live on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Great to have you with us.
Well, Bel Air, Maryland, birthplace of John Wilkes Booth, our contribution to the nation's heritage.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
You know, this is what they're talking about.
The overheated rhetoric.
Well, actually, I have a little more, which is you would have thought that Michael Steele, of all people, would have avoided the whole chains theme.
That's right.
Yeah, that's another.
You could take Michael Steele.
That's right.
He can't wait.
The minute he starts working for Massa Republican, he can't wait to get into the chains of the Bondage Nightclub.
Oh, dear, dear, dear, Cynthia.
Great to have you with us.
Well, that one was irresistible.
Yeah, you might as well take it.
Take a swing at it while swinging it.
Now, are you one of these racist, homophobic, misogynist, angry white guys out there who are itching to do the John Wilkes Boog thing?
Well, not entirely.
I did march with the Tea Party, and then I marched the next month with the March for Equality for gays and lesbians because I've been in most of those marches since the late 80s.
I'm a conservative lesbian.
I became a fiscal conservative during the 2008 campaign.
Right.
So you're a fiscally conservative lesbian.
So you, you don't, do you find any homophobia at the tea parties?
Do you get treated nice when you go down there?
Well, actually, I started a blog in January of 2009 called a conservative lesbian.
And then I went to CPAC.
And I was expecting to get beaten up because I would have been in a leftist convention.
Right.
But I was actually treated extremely well.
I was embraced by the other right-wing bloggers.
And in fact, Stacey McCain, who actually opposes gay marriage, was very helpful in mentoring me.
And so I have stood by him and the character assassinations that they've tried because he's been so effective against the bloggers who are trying to take Sarah Palin down.
Yeah, and this is the whole thing.
They don't really want to discuss the issue.
They never want to discuss the issue.
They just want to steamroll at you.
They just want to damn you as a hater.
They just want to damn you as a racist because it's a lot easier than getting into a discussion of the policy.
But now you are basically signing up with the Tea Party crowd for the whole fiscally conservative thing because you don't want Obama spending your future.
Is that right?
Well, yes, capitalism is what we have to have for the maximum amount of opportunity.
And I'm 56, my best, and I've been a caregiver first for my late life partner.
We were together for over 20 years, and she died of complications of multiple sclerosis in 2004, and now I'm caring for my father.
But when I want to support myself, if I were to take a job based on my resume, I would be working at Walmart, and I can't support myself on that.
But I'm a writer, and I believe that I can make an excellent income as a writer and an entrepreneur.
But I need a capitalistic society in order to do that.
Yeah, that's true.
So capitalism.
In a way, the spending thing is so obvious because this is going to destroy us all.
And it doesn't matter whether you're black or white or gay or straight or whatever, because you're going to be screwed if this thing isn't reined in.
And that's why it's a uniter.
That is why they are so desperate to say that, oh, no, it's just angry white men.
But you're saying that as a fiscally conservative lesbian, you're happy to stand with the angry white male, racist, homophobe, misogynists, or whatever Frank Rich is saying about them this week.
Because on this issue, on the Tea Party issue and the insane spending of the Democratic Party, they're on the right side of history.
Oh, absolutely.
And frankly, also, I want to shift the discussion about whether or not gays should be equal to one that isn't religiously motivated, but one that is held in terms of the Constitution and its conservative values, because I think when we reach down to the commonality about that, there will be a big shift.
Okay, Cynthia, I've got to run because we're pushing up against the end of the show.
But it's great to talk to you.
And I'm glad to hear that when you go to CPAC and when you go to tea parties, you have a good time with all the other conservatives down there.
Great to hear from you.
Bel Air, Maryland, birthplace of John Wilkes Booth, but she doesn't mean anything by it.
Mark, signing for Rush.
More to come.
Hey, I've had a rollicking time these last three hours, but I've got to run.
The Border Patrol's waiting for me, and my hernia operation at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal has just been brought forward to October, so I want to get there early so I can get in line for a bed in one of the more comfortable corridors.
But it's been great being with you.
I will see you tomorrow.
Mark Davis is in on Wednesday, and stand by.
Rush returns.
15 hours flying time away, but Rush will be back on Thursday.
▲
Export Selection