All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 2, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:36
December 2, 2010, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You bet greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
You got it, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
We come to you from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number, 800-282-2882, and the email address, lrushbaugh at eibnet.com.
Let me ask you a question.
How can the regime, how can the Obama regime and their lackeys in the media even be talking about an economic recovery if at the same time Austin Goolsby, a White House chief economist, says that not extending unemployment again will throw us into a depression and cost us at least 600,000 jobs.
I mean, it just doesn't compute.
That doesn't sound like the lingo of an economic recovery.
Forget the insanity here of the notion that if we don't extend unemployment again, in other words, if we do not continue to pay people not to work, it'll somehow cost us 600,000 jobs.
Won't it guarantee us 600,000 jobs lost if we keep paying people not to work?
I'm sorry, folks.
I can't come here and suspend my logic.
And I know the logic on this program deflates some people.
They live in this little cocoon.
Liberalism, easily inflated or penetrated.
And when it is, and we do that daily here on this program, it just destroys them.
Because they actually believe this.
That's right, Mr. Lambo.
In order to save 600,000 jobs, we must continue to pay people not to work.
So Mr. Castrati, what you're telling me is we need to continue to keep people unemployed.
And if we don't, it's going to cost us at least 600,000 lost jobs.
That's right, Mr. Lambo, makes perfect fit for me.
Why?
Well, because they make thith for me because people I believe in are saying it.
Well, it's asinine.
It's so ridiculous.
I don't know that I can even explain it.
I don't know I have the ability to be that dumb.
I don't know that I have the ability to be, to act this dumb.
I still don't think I've made this point as powerfully as it needs to be made.
We've got people saying, so over here, we've got 9.6% unemployed.
Let's just say that that's 10 million people just for the sake of it.
Arbitrarily chosen number.
We've got 10 million unemployed.
Of the 10 million, let's say 500,000 of them about to lose their benefits after 99 weeks.
So the White House is saying that we had better extend their unemployment, i.e. pay them to continue not working, because if we don't, we will lose 600,000 jobs.
Sorry, I'm not, I do not have the ability to get any stupider than necessary to explain this if you don't already get it.
I just don't.
Some have a problem with upward movement.
I have a problem with downward movement.
I can only be so stupid and ignorant and then I find a level I cannot get beneath.
And this is one.
From the Politico, hopes for cooperation quickly dashed.
The headline is the story.
Hopes for cooperation quickly dashed.
Style over substance or symbolism over substance, still the name of the game as the country still has no idea of next year's tax rates.
As we've just learned, Almost $5 trillion worth of bailouts.
That's not even the news is that the Republicans are mean.
The Republicans have dashed all hope at common ground and bipartisanship.
You want to hear the theme?
It's found its way into the media.
The Democrats State Control Media have a new mantra.
The Republicans are holding the nation hostage.
Republicans are holding these middle-class tax cuts hostage in favor of tax breaks for the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
Holding hostage the unemployment benefits.
Hold that hostage in order to keep tax breaks going.
They're willing to hold tax cuts for middle-class families and small businesses hostage.
Holding the Senate hostage.
Will they hold the middle class hostage?
Will they hold unemployment benefits hostage?
Will they hold the START treaty hostage?
The GOP is holding key legislation like the START Treaty or jobless benefits hostage.
We're really held hostage over here.
Hold it hostage.
Hold it hostage.
Extension of these taxes have been held hostage.
We are being held hostage.
Every one of us, we are hostages being held hostage by 42 Republican senators.
The last there was client number nine, Elliot Spiltzer.
The girl's mad at me on that show.
What girl?
Kathleen Parker's mad at me?
Oh, she's mad at Splitzer.
Wait a minute.
Where did I see that?
You know what?
Snerdley, do I have?
I think I had that yesterday's stack and didn't get to it.
That's a New York Post story.
Ah, ah, yes.
Here it is.
Is Parker threatening a Splitzer split?
New York Post says so.
Citing anonymous insiders, the news corporal New York Post suggests today that Parker Spitzer co-host Kathleen Parker is so fed up with playing second fiddle to the hooker-loving ex-governor, she's threatening to walk.
Hey, Kathleen, even his wife didn't do that.
Come on, Kathleen, you've got to have more to you than, I mean, even Celia Wall stayed in there.
As the posties tell the story, Elliot Spitzer is a bit of a control freak.
And they quote some people talking about him being a control freak.
And they talk about how Kathleen Parker doesn't like him being a control freak.
And Parker herself is even making fun of him being a control freak.
Okay, so she's threatening to leave.
Is anybody worried about that?
Have you bothered Mr. Snerdley?
Nah, no, no, no, no.
I think it's all part of trying to promote the show.
Somebody might leave.
Oh, good.
Then we might watch.
And that's the way.
That's the way it's working.
So anyway, back to Obamaville being held hostage day one.
The poor Republicans, the poor Democrats, rather, the poor Obama, the Republicans are holding the Senate hostage.
This is over the extension of middle-class tax rates.
Now, remember, for the last seven years, the Democrats have been telling us there weren't any middle-class tax cuts, that the Bush tax cuts were for the millionaires and the billionaires only, the rich only.
Now, all of a sudden, somehow they've found middle-class tax cuts they want to extend.
At any rate, the political story, hopes for cooperation, quickly dashed.
A day that started off with the...
This is Carrie Budhoff-Brown, by the way, writing...
A day that started off with the rare sight of top Obama officials sitting down with Democrats and Republicans in Congress to hash out a tax cut deal deteriorated almost immediately Wednesday as both parties reverted to partisan form.
Senate Republicans threatened to grind the Senate to a halt.
House Democrats announced plans to force a vote on middle-class only tax cuts with Republicans crying foul.
And the idea of a bipartisan tax cut bargain that seemed possible at Tuesday's White House meeting had practically evaporated before lunchtime.
So they're totally distressed over there at the Politico.
And all this is about how dare the Republicans do this.
Don't they realize this is all still about what the Democrats want to do and want to get done?
So now this headline, hopes for cooperation quickly dashed.
That might have made sense two years ago when it was Obama failing to do the cooperating.
But, you know, as far as the state-controlled media is concerned, process and horse race, horse races, those are the things that give the media a sense of excitement.
Process stories, horse race stories.
And those days are long gone.
We are in a new era of life or death, recession or depression, and fiscally sound or bankrupt.
Headline doesn't surprise me.
But I simply want the good folks at Politico to know that they look like a bunch of idiots stuck in the past when they run a headline like the Republicans won the election.
No one with the tiniest bit of brains gives a damn whether or not the Democrats and Republicans held hands at some meeting.
That's not the focus of the American people on whether or not things are getting better.
It's whether or not the Republicans and Democrats are holding hands.
What we're all doing is holding our noses at the stench from the dead businesses brutally mutilated by Democrats since taking over Congress.
You think we're sitting here worried about whether the Republicans and Democrats are holding hands?
The story is that will Obama's tax increases go into a factor?
Will tax rates remain the same?
No one knows what the hell's going on with their taxes, the taxes paid by their employers.
There's uncertainty out there.
And we get a story about, damn, the Republicans and Democrats just can't work together.
They refuse to work together.
And we were hoping so much that we would have people to get along with one another, but it just isn't happening.
And of course, that's not really what they want.
They just want to write a story about how mean the Republicans are.
When have the Democrats cooperated since January of 2007?
Name one occasion, Ms. Budolph Brown, where the Democrats compromised.
Just one.
Democrats have had total control of Congress since January 2007.
2007.
They've locked out the Republicans out of every important decision for four years, and now the Republicans are holding a Democrats hostage.
Okay, we're back.
It's Russia Limbaugh Cutting Edge Societal Evolution.
Robert Gibbs says Obama's main objective is to make sure that there is no middle-class tax increase.
There was not a middle-class tax cut, I thought, President Obama.
Somebody's going to have to ram it down these guys' throats at some point.
What do you mean you're worried about extending these middle-class tax cuts?
I didn't think there were any.
In fact, go to Audio Summit 24, Ed.
This afternoon at Blair House, a meeting of newly elected governors, Obama spoke on taxes, said this.
I'm actually optimistic that before the end of the year, we are going to have come to some agreements on some critical issues.
Obviously, issue number one is making sure that on January 1st, middle-class families aren't seeing their taxes go up as a consequence of the expiration of some of the Bush tax cuts that are currently in place and some of the tax cuts that we put in place over the last two years.
And so that's going to be an important discussion over the next several days.
In the end, the people are going to recognize that it's important for families who are still struggling to have some relief, and it's important for our economy to make sure that money's still out there circulating at a time when we are recovering, but we're not recovering as fast as we need to.
Well, that's a whole bunch of nothing.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Three bags full.
Larry in Los Angeles.
Nice to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hi, Rosh.
I wanted to talk about the money that was given to GE.
Yeah.
These were really just bridge loans to get them through so that they could pay their suppliers, which I don't really have a problem with because, according to the Wall Street Journal, they've been paid back.
What bothers me is that we are giving money to foreign banks and bailing them out when that should really be the responsibility of the government of that country, not really our government.
Well, tell me, why is it the responsibility of the government to give GE bridge loans, even if they do pay them back?
Well, like President Bush said, the credit market was frozen up at that time.
It was hard to get.
Why couldn't GE just borrow money from itself?
It has a lending arm.
Yeah, they do.
But, I mean, if they need short-term loans to pay off their suppliers and they can't get that borrowing, then they have to go elsewhere to do it.
Yeah, like to the Federal Reserve.
That's unique.
How many of you would ever think to go to the Federal Reserve if you needed some money?
You know what?
We here at the EIB, we so far, we're going to knock on granite here, but we haven't any problem making payroll.
But if we did, the last thing I would ever think of is going to the Federal Reserve.
Get me Ben Bernanke on a line.
I need a bridge loan to pay you, Mr. Snordley.
And he'd make the call, I guarantee you, but I don't know that Bernanke would take it.
I don't know.
And how do we know the loans are paid back?
Bear Stearns can't be the only company on that list that didn't pay their loans back.
They didn't pay their loans back, and they're gone.
Larry, what does the journal say about that?
Are you convinced?
Does the journal say that GE paid the loans back?
Yes.
Okay.
Well, I don't know.
I guess that's good enough for me.
If Herbert Burdock says it, I guess we got to, I don't know.
By the way, folks, could somebody tell me, you know, that soundbite we just played from Obama?
Play this again, Sam.
And I want, there's a point about this.
I want you all, Larry, thanks for the call.
I'm finished.
I don't mean to be rude.
It's not that I'm interrupting you or myself.
We concluded our business, and you're fine.
We'll see you at the Fed window.
I want you to listen to this.
Larry was growing on me like a rock and roll rash.
You know, he is going to scratch it.
I want you to listen to this Obama soundbite at Blair House and see if there's something about this.
Maybe even a couple of things about this that stick out.
I'm actually optimistic that before the end of the year, we are going to come to some agreements on some critical issues.
Obviously, issue number one is making sure that on January 1st, middle-class families aren't seeing their taxes go up as a consequence of the expiration of some of the Bush tax cuts that are currently in place and some of the tax cuts that we put in place over the last two years.
Gotta smart.
That's going to be an important discussion over the next several days.
Stop the tank.
People are going to recognize that.
Gosh, this guy's smart.
Doesn't that just ooze from this soundbite?
Man, this is a smart guy.
The smartness is just like the blob.
It's just coming out of my speakers here.
He's just such a smart guy.
Well, I don't know what's so smart, but they say he's smart.
So he sounds smart.
Right?
Here's the rest of the bite.
It's important for families who are still struggling to have some relief, and it's important for our economy to make sure that money's still out there circulating at a time when we are recovering, but we're not recovering as fast as we need to.
Brilliant.
Just brilliant.
The aura of that brilliance is so blinding, it's almost tough just to even be in the same room as the soundbite, much less the man.
But what stands out to you about that?
Anything, Snerdley?
I know I interrupted the bite, but there's the one thing, actually, two things.
There's one thing, he sounds like there's something going on outside, but he's not really part of it.
He's looking out the window, and he's hoping the kids out there building the snowman actually finish it before the snow melts.
But if not, that's okay.
We got to keep the snow in circulation.
It sounds like he's got nothing to do with this.
And the second thing that was missing is: did anybody hear him say what his proposal is?
What's Obama's proposal for resolving the tax rate issue?
The guy never suggests anything.
He sits back.
He appoints Geithner and these other quasi-adults to go do it.
And he sits back and he has no role in it.
So those are the two things that stand out.
He's not even part of it, and he has no solution himself.
I'm confident.
I'm very confident we'll work this out by the end of the year.
And Pap goes on and on and on and on.
But gosh, folks, he's smart.
No, it just comes right out of the soundbite at you.
That's just me speaking.
All right.
We must take another brief time out.
Obscene profit center timeout.
Back with much more after this.
Ladies and gentlemen, sorry to push through this, but we're going to play that Obama soundbite one more time because there is a third thing that I just it just hit me as they're going to break that he mentions in here that I want to point out to you.
So here it is.
I promise the last time.
I'm actually optimistic that before the end of the year, we are going to have come to some agreements on some critical issues.
Obviously, issue number one is making sure that on January 1st, middle-class families aren't seeing their taxes go up as a consequence of the expiration of some of the Bush tax cuts that are currently in place and some of the tax cuts that we put in place over the last two years.
Stop the tape.
It's right there.
Go up as a consequence of the expiration of some of the Bush tax cuts that is currently in place and some of the tax cuts we put in place over the last two years.
Who's talking about extending his tax cuts?
Nobody's talking about extending his.
What's on the table is the Bush tax rates.
But what's this?
He says, and some of the tax cuts that we put in place.
Obviously, issue number one is making sure that on January 1st, middle-class families aren't seeing their taxes go up as a consequence of the Bush and some of the tax cuts we put in place.
Well, that's my point.
There weren't any tax cuts.
There were some, you know, you got a check for five cents once or a $50 check or two, whatever it was, you got a tax credit.
But the point is, what is he talking about?
Nobody has said anything about extending his tax cuts.
He just introduces it here.
He's lumping his tax cuts in with the Bush tax cuts, and there weren't any Obama tax cuts.
Now, the BAMSTER has always claimed that one-third of the Porculus bill, $787 billion, went to tax cuts.
He's always said that.
If they did, those tax cuts are also going to die if they're not extended.
But nobody, not even Obama, is talking about extending those tax cuts.
So there's two tax cuts, I guess, the same ones.
Obama, nobody's talking about extending those.
He just brings it up for the first time.
And there are no Obama tax cuts.
That's the whole point.
The Craig in Vero Beach, Florida, former home of the Dodgers at Spring Training.
Hello, sir.
Professor Limbaugh, it's an honor to speak with you, sir.
Thank you very much, Craig.
And I am a student of the Limbaugh Institute and have learned much.
This has been an outstanding program today, Rush.
I've enjoyed it.
You've really brought to light a tremendous amount.
My thought today is what you were talking about earlier, and that is the reason for extending the unemployment, so-called benefits, and what Pelosi has to say about this.
And you describe the Keynesian approach absolutely perfectly.
This is all about consumerism.
And I need to give you thanks and applaud you for it because consumerism is what is holding the Obama government together.
And I think that your explanation was excellent.
I would like you to expand upon it just a little bit more in the area of, as you just related, to these so-called middle-class tax cuts.
What do the Keynesians want that money to go towards?
You named it, Rush, consumerism.
If consumerism falls apart, there goes the recovery.
There goes Obama.
Right.
But what is the flaw in the Keynesian connection to consumerism?
Well, it doesn't work.
There isn't any recovery.
Why doesn't it work?
Why doesn't Keynesian-sponsored consumerism work?
It's based on the false assumption that more money in circulation will lead to more spending.
And of course, it doesn't.
It leads to the word you were talking about earlier, inflation, not deflation, inflation.
Right on.
But if the money that ends up in the hands of consumers is essentially not theirs and not earned by them, and frankly, really never reaches their hands, how much consuming can they do?
Because the money generated by Keynesian spending is, of course, printing or borrowing.
It's not produced by genuine economic activity.
And the flaw here is the Keynesians believe you can print up a bunch of money, spend a bunch of money, throw it out there, put it into various strategic points.
It's going to somehow end up in the hands of consumers.
This is their silly thinking on unemployment checks.
Their unemployment check, they think, is going to lead to all kinds of consumerism, as opposed to tax cuts, which won't lead to any consumerism.
And they've got it asked backwards.
Because the tax cuts are what leads to consumerism, because that's people's own money.
Unemployment checks, by definition, are not enough to freaking consume.
All you can do basically do is sustain yourself.
Exactly.
And that's what the Obama administration and their Marxism is to sustain, not grow.
They don't want people to have real jobs and make real money because then they would no longer be dependent on the government.
And you have described it perfectly.
I think you need to say it every day, over and over and over.
The only thing that this younger generation understands and lives for each day is to consume.
And it is a false security.
One way I like to explain this, and I appreciate the kind words, Craig, I really do.
One way I like to explain this in light of what we were just talking about, consumer, people consuming.
The Keynesian theory is you throw a bunch of money out there and put it strategic points of the economy, whatever they think they are, and it'll end up in the hands of consumers.
They'll start spending an ergo.
You've got economic activity.
They forget that consumerism is based on real things.
People don't just spend for the hell of it.
Well, some women do, but for the most part, I'm sorry, it's this stereotypical humor, which I just happen to love.
I know I deserve to be slapped.
It's nothing but stereotypical humor.
It's not tied to anything other than my ledge.
Like, I love mother-in-law jokes, so don't like good news, bad news.
You knew Cadillac's going over to Cliff.
That's the bad news, the good news.
Your mother-in-law is in it attached to the seatbelt.
It's just, I love these old jokes, these jokes back from the 1960s and so forth.
The Lockhorns, great stereotypical humor comic strip.
Consumerism has to be based on genuine need, not just spending idly, which really doesn't happen a whole lot except by the rich.
Now, in a case of unemployment compensation, 300 and let's say 300 bucks a week, $1,200 a month, for most people, you're not going to be out doing a whole lot of luxury shopping.
You're not going to buy a car.
But what are you going to do?
You're going to make sure the utility bill is paid.
Maybe.
Maybe you may skip them until you figure you have to pay.
But you're going to pay your cell phone bill.
You're going to pay your cable bill.
These are the things that keep life normal for you.
When is the last time you ever heard anybody say that the economy really came around and started growing because utility bills were paid on time?
Doesn't happen.
Because that's the kind of spending that the spending unemployment compensation permits.
It's sustain-type spending.
It's not expansion spending.
It's not growth spending.
And this is the kind of spending they do want.
I was talking to my good friend Mark Levin the other day.
He had a great, great point.
One of these things, I wish I had thought of it myself about this business that people over $250,000 shouldn't get a tax cut because they don't need it.
Levin, he was talking to some liberal on his show, and he asked the liberal, why should anybody even make over $250,000?
If they don't need it, if they don't need a tax cut when they make, why don't you guys say nobody should have more than $250,000?
Period.
Not that people over that shouldn't get a tax cut.
Just nobody can have more than $250,000.
And if you agree with it, the liberals say, that was not a bad idea.
Okay, well, then why not $150,000?
And it makes the point, I mean, it throws it back in their face so well.
This whole tax cut argument: we're going to make sure everybody, tax cut except those at $250,000 or more, because they don't need it.
Fine.
Well, if you don't need it, they don't need any more than $250,000, period.
And what if we just had a blanket limit?
No American could have more than $250,000, not just salary.
You couldn't have your car, everything that you have could not add up to more than $250,000.
Your house, nothing could add up because above that, you don't need it.
You don't need anything more than $250,000.
So every bit of your salary, your assets, your cars, your home, your jewelry, your watches, whatever, your underwear, clothes, nothing, once it totals $250,000, that's it, and you don't get any more because you don't need anymore.
That's the kind of stuff I just love to ask these new Castrati guys.
You know, because it just liberalism cannot be supported intellectually.
And when you hit them with any kind of intellectual argument based on what they think and say, they crumble and they crumple like a cheap suit.
And it is just fascinating.
When I stop and actually think about this, I can't believe that there still are liberals with credibility.
It is such BS.
All of it is such a crock.
And yet it does.
Oh, Foxnews.com, White House pushes to extend all stimulus tax breaks.
I mean, did I not just ask this 15 minutes ago?
White House pushes to extend all stimulus tax breaks.
Why'd they wait until last minute to bring this up?
This is such posture.
It's like, I don't know if you saw this or not.
This is also Fox News.
Amazon.com has severed ties with Wikileaks, the organization that just released blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Computers run by Amazon's Elastic Web Compute Service in Tulsa, Portland, New York, and elsewhere.
It'd been hosting WikiLeaks.
And so Amazon, when that was found out, Amazon canceled them.
Now, who was the first to point this out?
Come on, snerdly.
It was us.
It was us.
We were the first to report that Wikileaks was being hosted on Amazon servers.
And we cited that obscure UK tech site, the Register.
Now, this story gives Fox News, there gives Wall Street Journal a credit for it, but we were the first to point it out.
And I guarantee you that once Amazon started hearing from people, you're hosting a WikiLeaks guy, they got rid of them.
EIB gets results.
15 minutes ago, I started asking what Obama tax cuts.
What about extending his stimulus tax cuts?
Lo and behold, White House pushes to extend all.
Obama wants to get in on this now.
Now that we're going to extend tax cuts, Obama wants everybody thinking that he's got some too that are going to be extended.
Ladies and gentlemen, multinational identity theft ring capable of defrauding hundreds of victims was cracked just this week in Oakbrook, Illinois after several months-long investigation.
The cops said their arrest came when Oakbrook cops, after looking into complaints of ID theft, executed a search warrant on a property, Calumet City inside the home.
The cops said they found machinery capable of producing credit cards, blank credit cards, magnetic strips, holograms, and credit card social security information on hundreds of victims.
Every day, every week, there are stories, continuing stories, on the increasing number of cases involving identity theft.
And each time it happens, I wonder how many in this audience are ensnared.
Because by all that's right, none of you should be.
None of you should be subject to identity theft because you all ought to be using Life Lock.
I do.
Call them.
It doesn't cost hardly anything.
Give them your social security number.
Rest easy.
The one outfit you should feel totally comfortable having your social security number.
They will protect your identity.
They'll discover somebody trying to steal your identity in the process and let you know about it.
It gets shut down.
800-440-4833 is the number to call for LifeLock.
800-440-4833.
Use my name.
Offer code Rush and save even more.
10%.
Back to the phones to Chico, California.
This is Aaron.
Thank you for waiting, sir.
Great to have you here with us.
How are you doing, Rush?
Early, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year's to you.
Thank you.
Same to you.
Thank you.
You were talking about earlier about what people were just trying to figure out with the economic crisis, what happened in 08, and everything.
And something Representative Jan Korski or Kanjorski said in February of 09, talking about how there was an electronic run on the banks.
And you played a small clip of that.
He was on C-SPAN.
But he said something throughout the entire thing about what really happened as far as what supported why didn't it.
But at the very end, he made the statement about how somebody threw us, meaning the United States, into the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft.
And we are trying to determine which is the closest shore and if we can swim that far and we ever get there.
And they don't know who or what did this.
I remember this.
I remember that now.
Kanjorski was on C-SPAN.
This did not get a lot of widespread attention.
We'll dig that out of our archives for tomorrow because that's right.
Kanjorski, Pennsylvania, did say that somebody started an electronic run on things.
That, what was it?
It was, well, no, no, no metal block.
It's a common, ordinary term.
It does not mean in this case what it normally means.
But anyway, there was, we'll have to get the bite because I know exactly what he's talking about.
We'll have to do that tomorrow.
I know Cook can find it in the archives.
Thanks for reminding us of that, Aaron.
And we'll be back after this.
I really can't believe it's already Thursday, but it is.
We got the Houston Texans in Philadelphia to face the VIX tonight, the Philadelphia Eagles and the Heat.
Miami Heat LeBron back in Cleveland.
And the story that the heat are staying in a super secret location with heightened security, probably LeBron's old house in Akron.
▲
Export Selection