All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 1, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:44
September 1, 2010, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Great to be with you.
America's Anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman.
Remember, it is racist to inquire about my immigration status, even though large parts of my body are overwhelmingly white.
So don't even think about it.
Rush is going to be back on Tuesday.
There's a best of Rush Labor Day, Labor Day Best of Rush, that's right.
And Mark Davis will be here on Friday.
I love being here.
Today, it's Wednesday, so it's Uyghur Wednesday.
we should have some Uyghur stories.
The HR is complaining that the Uyghurs have been quietly...
They've not been so quiet...
They've just attacked the Chinese military police in Xinyang.
And so the Chinese are cracking down on the Uyghurs.
But for some reason, I don't even know how this started now, but I think several guest hosting stints back, I had a Uyghur story, and then a couple of weeks later I had another Uyghur story.
And then it started getting, well, I'd be giving speeches, and people, I'd say, get to the end of my speech and be on whatever it would be.
It would be on, you know, Canadian agriculture, say.
And I'd have been giving a presentation on Canadian agriculture for 90 minutes.
And then at the end of it, I'd say, any questions?
And people would stand up and say, do you have any good Uyghur stories?
And so like, I became like, you know, your go-to guy for Uyghurs.
And I was in Bermuda over the summer where President Obama liberated four Uyghurs that had been kept by George W. Bush in Gitmo for his own personal amusement.
And President Obama liberated these Uyghurs and released them to Bermuda.
And I thought, I'm so sick of giving speeches on Canadian agriculture and people talking to me about the Uyghurs afterward, asking me questions about Uyghurs.
I've got to get out of this country.
So I went to Bermuda.
Everywhere I go in Bermuda, the first thing people want to talk about is the Uyghurs.
They're mad about the Uyghurs.
I looked for the Uyghurs, by the way.
I think they're in the coronation suite at the Hamilton Princess Hotel.
I didn't see the Uyghurs, but I was asked about them everywhere I went.
People are mad about the Uyghurs because Obama, Bermuda is a British colony, which is to say it doesn't have privileged relations with other sovereign states.
And Obama basically went behind the British government's back and cut a deal with the local government in Bermuda to drop off these four Uyghur terrorists or alleged terrorists, which is the equivalent.
If you're wondering why the British government are mad about it, imagine if you woke up in, you were Obama, say, and you woke up and you read in the Washington Post that the British government had released 200 convicted IRA terrorists into, say, St. Thomas or Guam.
That is how that is why the British are mad about the whole Uyghur thing in Bermuda.
So we will try to keep you up to date with some Uyghur developments.
But yeah, actually, I do, I haven't checked the Hurricane Earl updates, but I'm not sure whether it's going to hit Bermuda and sweep the four Uyghurs as they're sunning themselves on the beach out to sea, wash them back to Gitmo.
But we'll keep you up to date with Hurricane Earl tracking insofar as it impacts the Uyghur population.
We were talking in the first hour about the President's ridiculous speech.
Ridiculous in part because of the way he introduced this ludicrous comparison between what we were unable to spend on domestic spending because we'd spent so much on the Iraq war.
Now, there are grounds for supporting the Iraq war, grounds for opposing the Iraq war, but the cost is nothing to do with it.
It's entirely irrelevant, completely irrelevant to the big picture.
We've spent in total on the Iraq war about 0.7 of a trillion.
He spends that in nothing flat.
If you add up all he spent in his first 18 months, without even looking at the long-term implications of it, you're talking about something like $4 to $5 trillion.
And it's fascinating to me, this level of spending, which is astonishing and unprecedented.
Within the next few years, and I would say well within a decade, the United States will be spending more of the federal budget on its interest payments than on its military.
In other words, it will be spending more on debt service than on the armed services.
According to the CBO's 2010 budget outlook, by 2020, the government will be paying between 15 and 20% of its revenues in debt interest, whereas defense spending will be down to between 14 and 16 percent.
Now, we're not talking about paying down the debt here.
We're just talking about paying the interest on the debt.
You're not reducing the debt.
We're just talking about the interest payments on the debt.
And even this, even all this, is just premised on a combination of resumed economic growth but continued low interest rates.
And if the Obama economy remains as impervious to his charms as it's proved so far, and if interest rates rise even slightly, I would imagine we'll hit that 20% for debt interest much sooner.
And what does this mean in practical terms?
It means in practical terms, we're going to be spending more just in interest payments to a lot of foreign debtors like the Chinese than we are on our military.
That's not because the Pentagon is such a great bargain, by the way.
America accounts for, I think, something like 43% of global military spending.
But that's a good way to look at it.
That's a good way to look at the insane level of federal spending.
That within a few years, America will be spending more in the interest payments, just the interest payments on its debt, than China, Britain, France, Russia, Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, India, Italy, South Korea, Brazil, Canada, Australia, Spain, Turkey, and Israel spend on their militaries combined.
And we will be advancing very quickly from a nation of aircraft carriers to a nation of debt carriers.
Now, if you look at the CBO figures, they are talking about the interest payments on the debt rising to 36% in 2030, 58% in 2040, and then up to 85% in 2050.
So we'll be spending more than the planet's entire military budget just on the interest payments of our...
Now, that's like when you get your MasterCard or Visa statement at the end of the month, and you decide not to pay off any of the debt, but just to pay off the little bit of interest on it.
Or that's when you're paying off a mortgage, but you're not paying off any of the principal, you're just paying off the interest on it.
The debt is just going to continue to rise and rise, and just covering the interest payments is going to cost us more than the Pentagon.
But you don't have to worry about 2050, because whatever goes by the name of America under those conditions in 2050 isn't going to be worth talking about.
The way to think of it is this, that by May this year, we had some $4 trillion of our debt, which is about half of it, was owned by foreigners.
And somewhere between two-fifths and half of that was held by the Chinese.
Now, if you look at that, we spend about $660 billion on our military.
The Chinese spend about $100 billion on theirs.
So what that means is by about the year 2015, America will be paying the entire cost of the Chinese military.
Who pays for these aircraft carriers that China is developing?
Who pays for these new missiles that China is developing?
You do.
The scandal isn't that American, as Obama said last night, you know, what he thinks is the big scandal, that American taxpayers' money paid for the U.S. military to invade Iraq.
The scandal is that American taxpayers' money is going to be paying for the Chinese military to invade Taiwan.
That's how crazy it is.
We will now, I would say, by 2013, 2014, the American taxpayer will be funding the entire Chinese military.
So the People's Liberation Army, which is the largest employer on the planet, it's bigger even than the United States Department of Community Organizer grant applications.
It's huge.
The People's Liberation Army, biggest employer on the planet, will be entirely funded by U.S. taxpayers.
And as I said, when they do take Taiwan, it will be suburban families in Connecticut and small businesses in Idaho that will have paid for it.
This is the scandal.
And it is outrageous that Barack Obama is trying to somehow argue that the financial hole we're in was caused by the Iraq war.
The Iraq war is a very tiny little bit of extra on the top of the swollen domestic spending and the borrowing necessary to pay for it.
And that is what is going to kill America.
That is what is going to unbalance America.
We can afford to wage wars costing 0.7 trillion dollars over seven years.
We cannot afford to spend on rubbish, on nonsense, $4 trillion and raise only $2 trillion in revenue and borrow the rest of it and borrow the rest of it from the Chinese.
And there's a big difference because wars eventually, as Obama says, there comes a time when combat operations end, you have to turn the page, blah, blah, blah.
Wars end, entitlements don't.
Entitlements are the real quagmire.
Entitlements are the quagmire without end.
And they're bad because of what they do to the citizenry, because people's sense of entitlement lingers long after the entitlement has ceased to make any sense.
That's why, even though when they introduced all these government pensions and government old age security programs in an age when average life expectancy was basically in the late 40s, when Bismarck introduced the first scheme in Germany, I think life expectancy in Germany was 48 and you got your pension when you were 75.
Now basically we've doubled life expectancy and people expect to be able to retire and live for a third of their entire adult life on being funded by some form of government one way or the other.
It's the domestic entitlements are going to unbalance this country.
And the question really is not just, I mean, it's clear there's not enough money in America to spend to pay for this.
The question is whether there's even enough money in the world to pay for this.
When American taxpayers are funding the entire cost of the Chinese military simply through the interest payments on the debt, then you've got to wonder whether Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama size government is going to outspend not just America, but the entire planet.
So we'll talk about some of the implications of that and lots more, including your calls straight ahead.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein, Infra Rush on the EIB network.
Let us go to Don in Archdale, North Carolina.
Don, great to have you with us on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're in pretty much the straighten the path of Hurricane Earl, aren't you?
Well, no, we're a little further inland than that.
This is about the middle of the state.
Oh, okay.
So we should be out of the target zone.
Well, be careful.
Put the shutters to your windows.
You don't want the hurricane blowing any stray Uyghurs through from Bermuda.
I don't have any good Uyghur stories, but I did read your book, America Alone.
Yeah, that's good.
I don't think that it may be a Uyghur-free zone.
I can't remember, but we'll put some Uyghurs in there for the next edition.
I think that was before the Uyghurs came to public attention there.
That's true.
It's all Uyghur.
We're the all Uyghur all-the-time network now.
It's a whole new programming format.
Everyone's going to be doing this soon.
MSNBC will be copying it.
You wait and see.
They always do.
Don, what else did you want to talk about apart from Uyghurs?
Well, I was thinking about Obama's segue from the Iraq war to the economy, and I told your screener, I hope that doesn't mean he's going to focus like a laser on jobs now, because the last time he did that, we got health care reform.
Yeah, yeah.
I think he's using health care reform math here.
Cut once and spend twice.
Right.
If I understood the speech correctly, the money we're going to save on the Iraq war is going to pay for more aggressive stance in Afghanistan, and it's also going to help fund our economic recovery.
That's right.
That's right.
So all this 0.7 of a trillion, which is like a rounding error in most of Obama's budgeting calculations, 0.7 of a trillion is like miscellaneous for him.
But this is now going to fund just not increased activities in Afghanistan, and it's going to fund the creation of all these new jobs here in the United States, and it's probably going to fund cap and trade.
Green jobs.
Did he say anything about green jobs last night, Don?
I don't think he specifically mentioned green jobs.
I don't recall anything about that.
Well, I think that's great because you can burn.
I'm not sure if I'm going to generally mention energy policy.
Oh, yeah.
Because if you remember, the last time he spoke from the Oval Office was when he did his big oil spill speech when he got off.
It was a bit like this speech.
He got bored with the oil spill, like he got bored with talking about Iraq and moved on to other things.
And he said, you know, as we speak, people are going back to work installing energy efficient windows.
This is what is breathtaking about this guy, in a way.
He's supposed to be there talking about this massive oil spill at the Gulf, and he's talking about, oh, what an interesting new window treatment you're putting in your home.
His inability, I would say, to focus on anything other than these kind of narcissistic, self-indulgent, liberal feel-good distractions.
So you don't expect anything to come from the green jobs racket then, Don?
No, I don't get any income from that.
In fact, nobody does.
That's one of these things where they set these things up.
If you're ever in Vancouver, they've got on something called the, I think it's called the Eco-Friendly Highway from Vancouver to wherever they had the Olympic Games.
They've got this thing which is supposedly an eco-friendly car wash.
So that instead of having your car washed by bad, old, old technology, it's washed by wind turbines or whatever.
And the government set up this.
This is all what all green jobs things are.
The government set this thing up.
This guy with the green car wash applied for the funding.
The funding ended, so he could no longer afford to have the wind-powered car wash or whatever the hell it was.
So he went over to the old-style planet-destroying car wash, but he still kept the name the green eco-friendly car wash.
So all you guys in the Prius still drive there because they think they're still getting the wind turbine car wash.
Every single green jobs initiative, doesn't matter whether you're talking about Canada, Germany, Spain, they all boil down to the same thing, getting government money.
And when the government money goes, there's no real job there.
They're all like that, all the same.
Mia, you mentioned windmills.
That reminded me of something else.
I'm old enough to remember Lady Bird Johnson and her initiative to beautify America's highways by getting all the signs taken off, all the billboards taken down.
And it has dawned on me, I wonder what Lady Bird Johnson would think about all these ghastly 100-foot-tall windmills all over the place.
No, I think she'd have the same attitude that Ted Kennedy had when they wanted to put them off his fantastic place in Nantucket.
Apart from anything else, if you're ever near a wind turbine, it's like Hurricane Earl all year round because you've got basically sliced up birds coming through your window every time there's a slight breeze.
It's like the final scene out of that Hitchcock movie, except it's not the, instead of the birds attacking the people, you're just getting this bird bloodbath splattered, splattered, what they call it, the Condor Cuisinauts.
That's what they call them out near Palm Springs in the desert.
They've got these things.
It's like the statue of the old tree trunk legs of Aussie Mandius' statue in the desert.
You're driving through the desert, they do rusting up wind turbines, rusted up wind turbines.
The private sector, the private sector always takes care of the problem.
In the late 19th century, they were worrying that with all the increase in manufacturing, increase in industry, increase in population, we were running out of horses because people went everywhere with horse and buggy.
And then someone invented the motor car and they realized they didn't have to worry about running out of horses.
But you can imagine what would have happened if Obama had been in office and he'd have gone in there, he'd have gone in there to bail out the horse breeding industry.
So you'd go all over the country now and every stud would be owned by Obama and they'd be breeding government horses and we'd never have advanced to the motor car.
That's what government does when it takes these industries over.
So the green jobs thing is just some phony baloney way of transferring, again, transferring money from one sector of the population to another.
And that's what's so awful about this, the way we're governed now, is that you're not a citizen equal before the law.
You're a member of privileged subgroups in society or unprivileged subgroups in society.
So someone like Obama comes along and takes the money that you work hard to make in a real job and he transfers it to some pal of his who's well connected, who wastes it in some phony baloney nothing job.
More straight ahead on the EIB network.
Great to be great to be with you.
Rush is off on his annual golfing vacation and he will return live on Tuesday.
Mark Davis in on Friday.
November's election is shaping up well for the Republicans and that's good news in the sense that the Democrats are going to be punished for what they've done over the last couple of years.
People just don't want it.
People have looked into where the Democrats are taking this country and they realize at a certain level that it is a fraud.
I thought once we'd introduced the word trillion to the vocabulary, which happened, I think, in Obama's first week, I thought this is cunning of the Democrats if they make trillion sound like a normal word instead of an insane word, which is what it is.
I mean, really, whenever any government spokesman is using the word trillion, you want to be driving a stake through his heart because that is not a number that any responsible government leader should be using.
But I think, in fact, it backfired on the Democrats, and they realized that the whole thing, the message it sent to the public was that the whole thing is a fraud.
The whole thing is phony.
whole thing is unaffordable.
And I think that is what is really driving the voter anger that is so-called out there.
I don't mean anger, really.
People always call it anger.
Whenever there's a swing to conservatism, it is placed as angry white men, angry, overwhelmingly white men getting angry.
It's not.
It's an entirely rational response to what is happening.
There's nothing so-called compassionate or progressive or moderate or nice or fluffy about spending money you don't have.
We're basically saying, okay, we don't have the money to spend for this, so we're going to pre-approve credit, we're going to issue credit cards and pre-approve our unborn grandchildren.
That's the Obama model.
And it's a recipe of death for this nation if we go down that path, if we do not seriously reel in the spending.
So the question is, the question is, are the people that we elect this November just going to be the oldest credited Republican caucus of 2006 restored to power?
Or are they going to get it this time and understand that the problem here is quite simply that government spends too much.
Government spends too much to the point that there's too much government and not enough market.
There's no longer enough of the emaciated market nag to pull the big government cart.
And do the people that we're going to be electing this November to replace the Pelosi-Reed Congress, do they get that?
Or do they think, oh, it's just 2004 all over again and we're going to get all our committee chairmanships back.
Trent Lott, Trent Lott.
Do you remember him?
He was the guy who his career self-detonated when he was Strom Thurmond's singing Telegram on his 100th birthday, basically.
I think that's what happened.
He was toasting Strom on his 100th birthday and he got a little carried away and he said something and he was the, at that point, the Republicans had just taken control of the Senate again and he was the incoming Senate majority leader.
And then he went to Strom's 100th birthday party and he became the first outgoing incoming Senate majority leader in American history.
Trent Lott never had any use for him.
He had fabulous hair, lacquered hair.
His fabulous, fabulous hair.
That's how I knew Hurricane Katrina was serious because I saw a hair move on Trent Lott's head.
But Trent Lott is back.
He's back.
He's back.
And he's saying we do not want to be a lobbyist.
He's like all these lifetime legislators.
He's cashed in his Rolodex and he's now a big lobbyist.
And he says we don't want 60 Jim DeMintz in the Senate.
I would rather have 60 Jim DeMintz in the Senate than 60 Trent Lotts.
I don't want to go back to Trent Lott-era Republican governance because it's not good enough now.
We're in a serious crisis here.
And if we do not roll back some of these programs, this is why this is a consequential election, not just because it's a chance to stick it to the Democratic Party, but because it's one of the last chances we have to roll back the sustained assault by government on America's future, which is what is at issue this November.
So the Trent lotification of Washington, restoring the Trent Lotts of this world to power in Washington is not going to be enough.
The candidates who are elected in November have to understand that they're being sent to Washington to restore the balance between the private sector and the government sector.
Now, you don't blame, I don't blame Obama for this, by the way.
He's a creature of government.
Everybody around him is a creature of government.
Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, none of these people have ever created a dime of wealth in their life.
None of them have ever made payroll.
There was this whiny article, Mark Belling brought it up yesterday, this whiny article in the New York Times about how Wall Street, which had supported Obama and the Democrats 70-30 just two years ago, now had turned against Obama.
And what the New York Times reported was that essentially all these big Wall Street guys, the smart guys, the smart guys who brought us subprime and credit default swaps and all the other stuff, these Wall Street guys had voted for Obama because he was one of them.
He'd been to the same schools as them.
He hadn't been to these no-name schools like Sarah Palin.
They could imagine themselves being at the same dinner party sitting across the table from a guy like Barack Obama.
Well, more fool them.
He's more typical, he's more typical of what's wrong with this country than you might think.
Look at this guy.
Look at this guy.
He goes to a fancy, expensive prep school in Hawaii.
He goes to Occidental College.
He goes to the University of Columbia.
He goes to Harvard Law School.
You add that up.
Fancy prep school, Hawaii, Occidental, Columbia, Harvard.
And then what does he do?
Oh, he becomes a community organizer.
Look at the cost of his education.
And then look at what he goes into.
That's a deformed economic model.
And everybody who, all the clever guys, and by the way, if you're a liberal and you were one of those people who thought that Sarah Palin had a joke resume and Barack Obama was qualified, qualified to govern the world superpower, give me a call.
1-800-282-2882.
I'd love to hear.
I was stuck behind somebody in Vermont, a woman in a rusted up Subaru still had her Obama Biden sticker on yesterday.
If you've still got your Obama-Biden sticker on, if you're one of those people who still sneers at Sarah Palin because she had a joke resume, and this guy, this guy has the perfect resume for running a superpower, this guy, he goes to Occidental, he goes to Columbia, he goes to Harvard, and then he becomes a community organizer.
Call me up.
I'd love to hear you defend that thesis.
1-800-282-2882, because that is actually the deformed economic model on which too much of America is invested in.
You think of that famous speech Michelle Obama gave, I think she was in Ohio, where she said, what we're asking young people to do is to turn their backs on corporate America.
That's what Barack and I did.
We turned our backs on corporate America.
Who do you think pays for non-corporate America?
Who do you think pays for government America?
Corporate America, the wealth-generating community, pays for the government community.
But Michelle Obama says, we're asking young people to turn their backs on corporate America and become community organizers.
That's terrific.
It's corporate America that pays for the 68-person secret service detail that has to accompany Michelle and her couple of pals over to the fancy resort and take up all the big rooms at the resort in Marbea in Spain.
Corporate America pays for that.
The problem is that you have too many people with the kind of six-figure education that Barack Obama did who do turn their backs on corporate America.
We need to get back to serious wealth generation in this country and serious government shrinkage in this country.
And if the people we elect in November don't get that, then the whole exercise will be a waste of time.
We'll take your calls and lots more still to come.
Mark Stein, in for rush on the EIB network.
Mark Stein, in for rush.
Let's go to Michelle in Tampa, Florida.
Michelle, great to have you on the show.
You're not in the path of Hurricane Earl there, are you?
In the way?
Are you in the path of Hurricane Earl?
Oh, no, no, no.
That's going up to the Northeast.
Oh, right.
So you're way south.
I can't say I can't take any hurricanes seriously called Earl.
it doesn't seem like quite the name for a hurricane I like to when Maxine do you remember when Maxine Waters was complaining why hurricanes were given white names This was one of her complaints.
She said all the names, she said, all these hurricanes just have these pasty, honky names.
She was complaining there wasn't a Hurricane Leroy or whatever.
So that it was racist when these white-bred hurricanes swept in total the total the neighborhood.
It was just another example of white hegemony.
And why didn't they give them African-American names?
Anyway, whatever, Hurricane Earl, I can't take that.
It's like being Hurricane Bud, isn't it?
It's like, what kind of...
Maybe if they gave them African names, they would have swept in the white areas.
Okay, let's not get into the racist hurricane things.
Okay, we'll be doing homophobic hurricane cracks in the next segment.
Don't worry about it.
Michelle, what point did you want to make?
Well, for years I heard from the liberals about how much money George Bush's war is costing.
But when we go into wars, it creates a lot of private sector jobs.
These government goal handouts, they don't create any jobs.
They take away jobs.
Because when you start hand, government starts handing more and more money out, they have to collect more and more taxes, which in essence, people get fired.
Yeah, I mean, that's the way to think about it.
Every time the Obama stimulus creates a job for, say, a community organizer in charge of writing grant applications for stimulus funds in Idaho,
what real job was lost as a result of taking that money from real people, hiring real people, other real people to do real jobs, and giving it to the government to create the community organizer in rural Idaho in charge of supervising grant writing application outreach for stimulus funds.
My business really, really shows what the economy is doing.
And I'm going to tell you right now, it wasn't until two years ago where things started really going down because I'm in the limo business in Tampa.
Right.
And I do majority of what I do is back and forth to the airport.
I do a lot of business travelers, a lot of vacation travelers.
And the last two years, what's going on in this business is just unbelievable.
No.
I've seen a lot of my customers lose their jobs, and we're talking big, nice paying jobs.
No, and you know what?
That's a good example of a business being in that business, Michelle, that is dependent on the kind of mood of the economy.
In other words, whether a guy, when you fly in and land at Tampa, whether they send a limo to the airport for you or whether they say, just take a cab downtown, or whether they say, no, pay six bucks and take the bus downtown, a lot of that is to do with issues like broad consumer confidence, broad business confidence.
And there absolutely is no business confidence at the moment because nobody knows what he's going to do next.
He doesn't talk like a man who understands the economy.
He talks like a man who's disincentivizing with his every utterance the impulses that drive economic growth.
And it's tough for you in that line of work, because I'm not sure things are going to be getting better anytime soon.
Thanks for your...
No, for a fact, they're not going to get better, because when George Bush was in, even though the economy was getting bad, people still had confidence in the private sector taking care of it.
Yeah.
Yeah, and again, it comes back to what government does.
You can't operate.
You don't hire people, for example, if you don't know what the rules are going to be.
When you take someone on and you offer to pay them, a guy was writing about this in the Wall Street Journal the other day.
He was pointing out that to give an employee $44,000, he has to spend about $75,000, the rest of it going to government in one form or another.
Now, you don't know.
You don't know right now when you take on that employee how much extra money you're going to be having to give to the government because Barack Obama and the Democrats have introduced uncertainty.
We know they can't afford what they're doing, so eventually at some point, they're going to have to come to the only source of money that they have other than foreign governments, and that is the American people.
And they're going to have to take some more money from small business or more money from federal taxpayers or more money in a sales tax.
They don't know what they're doing on things like cap and trade, where again, if some version of that passes, people said, oh, healthcare, healthcare, it keeps getting stopped, stymied, we keep holding the line.
Eventually it passes.
What healthcare is about is not government healthcare is not about healthcare, it's about government.
It's about new government rules, new government obligations, new costs that government imposes on you.
And what determines whether an economy grows is certainty.
When people talk about outsourcing jobs, nobody outsources jobs to Haiti.
Nobody outsources jobs to Rwanda.
People outsource jobs to Singapore and Ireland, to India.
Countries where you know what the rules are.
The rules are set, and you don't have to worry that you go in under one set of rules, and then when you've been there for 20 minutes, all the rules are up in the air, and you don't know yet where they're going to come down.
We have uncertainty because Obama has made it clear he wants to fundamentally transform and rewrite the rules, and potential employers don't know where that's going to end up.
Let's go quickly to Ken.
Ken, you are live on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Hey, Mark, welcome to the EIB Network.
You're a great stand-in host, and we love your articles.
The reason for my call is I think the Republicans are failing to highlight the fact that it hasn't been a decade that they've been in charge of spending.
Actually, the Democrats took over the Congress in 2006, and they've been in the budget control seat ever since.
And I don't see the Republicans shining that spotlight on the Obama crowd and the rest of this spendthrift government that is going to destroy the dollar and cause us to go bankrupt.
No, I think that's fair enough, that essentially since 2006, spending has been driven by the Pelosi-Reed Congress.
But this is the important bit, Ken.
We shouldn't expect the Republican Party, which is not the most efficient political machine, to do our job for us in this respect.
We have to get that story out.
We have to get that story out.
Nobody's excited particularly about restoring the Republican Party to power.
But Conservatives recognize it's easy for Democrats because if you're a statist, the Democratic Party is the party of statism.
It is committed to statism.
If you're a statist, you have no problem about giving your vote to the Democratic Party that will increase statism and give you more statism.
It's more complicated.
There's a more complicated relationship between conservatives and Republicans.
But right now, there are more conservatives in this country than there are Republicans.
And so Conservatives have to get that story out.
They have to say, with all their problems, what happened to this country was not done by the Republican Party.
This was the Pelosi-Reed Congress at 2006, actually in the Obama analogy saying, oh, we can't give the Republican Party the keys to the cars because they're spending too much.
If you thought, essentially, to take the Obama analogy, they took the keys to the car and they cranked us up to what Mel Brooks in Spaceballs called ludicrous speed.
So if you thought we were going too fast on the old speed, they took us to the next level.
Lots more still to come.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein, in for rush on the EIB network.
Congressman Bobby Bright of Alabama was asked whether Nancy Pelosi would be back as Speaker and said, who knows, she might even get sick and die.
The interesting thing about that, if a Republican said that, his career would be over.
That'd be, it'd be out of there.
Representative Bobby Bright of Alabama is a Democrat dodging the question of whether he planned to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.
▲
Export Selection