All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 1, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:26
February 1, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ha!
Hurry you!
Great to have you back.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB Network at 800-282-2882 at the email address El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
Now, apparently, Hosni Mubarak is going to step down in September.
Is he not going to run for re-election in September?
We shall see.
That's just flashing across wires even now.
And I'll worry about details of this when I get them and then fully up to speed.
Mitch McConnell just announced that he will offer the House passed health spending repeal as an amendment to the FAA bill when the Senate reconvenes this afternoon.
This is an act of aggression, as you would say.
So McConnell is that they're still going to get a repeal vote in the Senate.
Remember, on healthcare, Dingy Harry does not want that vote for two reasons.
Dingy Harry doesn't want the vote because 2012 is coming up.
He doesn't want some senators who would be hurt by voting against repeal to have to cast a vote.
And he also does not want his side casting votes for repeal because of how it would look for the regime.
So Dingy Harry doing everything he can to make sure that vote does not happen in the Senate.
Mitch McConnell is going to attach the spending repeal from the House as an amendment to the FAA bill when the Senate reconvenes this afternoon.
One more thing here on severability.
We spent a lot of time in the previous hour explaining severability, lack of a severability clause.
I'm certain, as I said, that the regime did not want to play around with any severability, particularly because of the mandate and the fundraising aspect that was crucial to having the mandate that 32 million people, well, everybody, buy insurance or at least pay a fine if they don't.
Now, the judge said that he's not going to sever the individual mandate from the rest of the law because it was not possible to do so given the structure of the law and how it all evolves around the mandate, which it does, which was my point.
It all revolves around the mandate.
But there's plenty of arrogance to go along on the part of the regime, too, in this.
Now, the judge said something, he didn't write this, but essentially he said, I'm not a legislator.
I'm not going to rewrite the law.
So I just voided all of it.
Now, the left is out there saying he's an activist judge.
If he were an activist judge, he would have rewritten it.
That's what activist judges do.
Activist judges take a law they don't like and rewrite it so that it will pass their version of constitutional muster.
He said, look, put a tax increase or whatever in it.
This guy said, look, this thing is flawed.
It's unconstitutional.
And I'm voiding it.
The whole thing.
Which takes us back to this soundbite.
Again, Gene Cummings at Politico.
She was asked this afternoon on television, what will the regime do as a result of this ruling?
I think the administration is just going to move forward and hope for the best and hope that they get the ruling that they argue they deserve.
Clearly, this judge in Florida went further than anyone else did and basically put the entire issue of the law now before the Supreme Court once the case gets there.
But the Supreme Court would have had the ability to review the whole law anyway.
So whether these negative rulings are narrow or broad doesn't really change the process that this issue is on, and that is resolution in the Supreme Court.
So I, look, these people, Ms. Cummings, as an example, really, honestly, folks, they make this job very hard because what she just said is senseless.
What she just said is ignorant.
I mean, I do not like talking this way about people.
She's clueless.
It is clear she hasn't the slightest idea what she's talking about.
I know people told her that, but that's the, you know, the people that she wants to hear certain things told her what she wanted to hear, and she went out and reported it.
I think the administration are just going to move forward.
They're going to hope for the best and hope they get the rules that they argue they deserve.
They deserve.
They deserve to be able to act extra-constitutionally.
This judge in Florida went further than anyone else did, she said, and basically put the entire issue of the law now before the Supreme Court once the case gets there.
But the Supreme Court would have had the ability to review the whole law anyway.
So whether these negative rulings are narrow or broad doesn't really change the process that this issue is on, and that is resolution of the Supreme Court.
Negative ruling?
This was a positive ruling.
It reaffirmed the constitutional premise of individual liberty and limited federal power.
It's a very positive ruling.
You know what she's saying?
Essentially, the judge never ruled.
Well, it doesn't matter what he said, because everybody knows it's going to go to the Supreme Court.
How does everybody know that?
It's going to go to Supreme Court because of what this guy did.
And tell me, if this case doesn't matter, why did the regime defend in this case?
They sent a lawyer to defend.
They presented their case to Judge Vincent, just as the opponents of Obamacare presented their case to Judge Vinson.
So if the case doesn't matter, why did they even bother to show up and defend themselves in court on this case?
Clearly it matters.
So it's very sad.
It's very sad that this is the state of competence that we have in big-time media.
Well, you know, they're just going to move forward.
They're going to hope for the best and hope they get the rules that they argue they deserve.
Ms. Cummings, the whole thing's just been thrown out.
It's just been ruled unconstitutional.
That means it stops.
It has been voided.
Apparently what she's been told, just the real news here, what she's been told is the regime's just going to ignore this on the premise that it's going to end up Supreme Court anyway, so we're just going to keep implementing this until it gets there.
And there are, I must stress again to the point of having to apologize of being redundant, there are people who think that the judge's ruling gave them permission to keep implementing under appeal.
He didn't.
So as I said in the first hour, next thing to happen is one of the attorney generals from these 26 states can go back to Judge Vinson and say, the regime is ignoring your ruling.
We need an injunction.
We need something.
And then the regime would have to go argue that.
And that would, of course, then make the point of what we are all up against.
John Lewis.
John Lewis has weighed in, ladies and gentlemen, on all this.
This afternoon on television, he was asked the following question.
The Supreme Court will probably decide it by a 5-4 ruling, and the odds are that it could go against the regime.
Doesn't this throw all of this planning into jeopardy?
There's been two jurges ruling against a section of the law, and two jurisdictions ruling in favor of the law.
I'm sure the administration will appeal, and we will wait for the decision of the United States Supreme Court.
But I believe health care is a right and not a privilege.
I think the president and the administration and the Democrats in the Congress did what was right to set us on a path to providing comprehensive health care for all of our citizens.
And we cannot go back.
We've come too far.
Come too far in violating the Constitution.
We've taken too many steps beyond where the Constitution says we can go to come back.
We've been there and we've got so far over the line where the Constitution says we shouldn't go that we shouldn't have to go back.
I crossed that bridge once before.
I don't want to have to walk back across that bridge.
John Lewis on the Obamacare ruling.
We've come too far to go back now.
Here's Jerry in Elkhart, Indiana.
Hi, Jerry.
Great to have you on the program.
The vomitos out there in the West Ike.
It's too bad.
Eric in Metairie, Louisiana.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Oh, tell me.
Testing, one day, there's this guy gone.
Nobody knows.
Can you tell if the line's still active or not?
He's gone.
Lamont, Illinois.
James, you're next on the EI.
You better be there because if you're not, heads are going to roll here.
Are you there?
Yes.
All right.
Once and for all, we have to put the rest the idea that health insurance is anything like automobile insurance.
Driving is a privilege.
You must pass an eye test, a written test, a road test, and you must provide proof of financial responsibility.
In the Illinois law, when it first went into effect, you could post a bond.
Now, nobody does that.
They simply buy liability insurance.
Right.
And liability insurance pays others should you be judged liable in operating an automobile on a public road.
My mom is 94.
She doesn't drive.
She doesn't have to buy automobile insurance.
Right.
And you can buy lots of things from insurance companies, annuities, stuff like that.
Now, in a matter of the court decision, if the president goes ahead and starts enforcing the health insurance law, I believe he would be in contempt of court.
No question about it.
If that was a Supreme Court, a federal court decision, I think that it would be incumbent upon the U.S. Marshals, which are the enforcement arm of the U.S. courts, to arrest the president.
Hold him in for contempt of court.
I don't know about that.
You know, there's those kind of things involving presidents.
I don't know.
But it's clear.
It is clear that this judge has voided the law, and it appears the regime is just going to say, screw it.
We're going to keep implementing.
If they're not stopped, keep doing it.
Some AG is going to have to go back to Vinson, Judge Vinson.
Yeah.
Or some other ruling.
I don't know if it would be called contempt of court.
I will have to.
You know, Obama's already in contempt of the American people by just this whole health care bill in itself.
He's already in contempt of the people.
Yes.
He's already doing things the American people don't want.
Now he is defying, it appears, a federal judge.
The rest of us can't do this.
Well, if it's a federal judge, then the U.S. Marshals may be after him.
Well, you really expect that.
You really expect the federal marshals to be knocking on the Oval Office door.
Maybe the American people should be expecting that.
Well, that's a different thing.
But I hear you.
Don't misunderstand.
I'm just these kind of things are different with presidents.
And for certain reasons.
I know that the media would have loved to frog march Karl Rove out of the Oval Office.
They would have loved to frog march Bush out of there.
So over what he said were lies about Iraq and all that.
So anyway, I'm glad James called because that is an illustration of the seriousness of this.
But we have a certain percentage of people in the country who believe the federal government's all power, powerful, whatever they want to do, they can do.
And judge says this, well, it doesn't matter.
People do think that presidents are above the law.
And we've had some presidents who think they are above the law, particularly if they're confused and think that they are on some moral crusade that supersedes the law.
Anyway, James, I appreciate it.
Scott, Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Hello, sir.
You're on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
Good to talk to you.
Thank you.
I was just wondering how if it just takes a group of people to get this guy out of Egypt, why aren't we doing the same thing if Obama's supporting it there?
I'm not supportive here.
It is an interesting question.
Here we have some 200,000 people in Egypt demanding that Mubarak go.
Oh, and by the way, here's a series of events.
The Wall Street Journal and a bunch of others, Al-Arabiyah Al Jazeera, announce that Mubarak says he's going to leave in September and not seek reelection.
And then some American news agency comes along.
I forget which one it is.
And it says, Obama convinces Mubarak to step down.
Yeah, it's New York Times.
Obama urges Mubarak not to run again.
So after we learn Mubarak isn't going to run, the New York Times says, Obama did it.
Obama did it.
The Manchow boy president did it.
He did it.
He did.
The regime would this incessant effort to credit this guy with everything.
But you're right.
That's why I said, how come the Tea Party is not as respected in their opposition to what Obama wants to do as this mob in Egypt is?
It is a great question.
Okay, here's what would happen or what needs to happen if in fact Obama ignores Judge Vinson.
The plaintiffs, one of the AGs, would need to go back to court, ask the court to enforce his ruling.
But Rush, but Rush, why?
Well, because the regime is not obeying it.
Judges assume their rulings are going to be obeyed.
If the regime doesn't obey it, then you've got to go back and ask the judge to enforce his ruling.
Now, if we want to talk about contempt, the judge would order the feds to comply with his order or he would hold the government in contempt.
But nobody's going to send marshals to get a president.
It is not going to happen.
We don't do things in this country that way.
What is likely to happen is that the government will seek a stay at the circuit court level before most of this plays out.
Now, what's clear, that having been said, what's clear is that the administration, in the meantime, is not complying with the judge, and the reporters don't give a damn.
Or, as John Lewis said, the judge.
He said, well, grab, he said, the jury, grab soundbite 24.
I didn't know what he was talking about at first.
Here, play soundbite 24 again.
There have been two jurges ruling against.
See, he said jurges.
Stop it.
He said two jurges ruling.
And I didn't know what he meant at first.
But we're talking judges here, not jurges.
And I just, well, I'm in a communication business.
I don't want anybody to misunderstand what's being discussed here.
So here's what's clear.
The judge ruled.
The regime is ignoring.
They're not complying with the judge.
And reporters in the state-controlled media don't care.
They are in full support of Obama ignoring the law because they deserve this health care bill.
They deserve this.
So, yeah, they'll ask for a stay.
They probably already have, for all I know.
Back after this, my friends, don't go away.
It is the fastest three hours in media.
And I am your host, Rush Limboy and the EIB at work.
Nearly 11% of U.S. houses are empty.
Nearly 11% of U.S. houses are empty.
This is this booming recovery everybody is talking about.
America's homeownership rate, after holding steady for a while, took a pretty big plunge in the fourth quarter.
Homeownership is falling at an alarming pace despite the fact that home prices have fallen.
Affordability is much improved, and inventories of new and existing homes are still running quite high.
More concerning than the home ownership rate is the vacancy rate.
Census tables don't tell the entire story, but they tell a lot of it.
Of the nearly 131 million housing units in the country, 112.5 million are occupied, 74.8 million are owned, and that's only dropped by about 30,000 in the past year.
All of this means that more new houses are choosing to, households are choosing to rent, and that 11% of all housing units are vacant.
In the United States of America, the number of vacant homes fell by nearly 500,000.
Think about this now.
11% of the houses in America are empty.
And this is as homebuilders start to get more bullish, renting apartments becomes ever more popular.
Vacancies in the apartment sector have been falling steadily and dramatically.
And that's because we're still recovering emotionally from the toll of the housing crash.
And I was right.
Mubarak announces he's stepping down, and within literally five minutes, the news in this country is Obama convinces Mubarak to step down.
The first reports from over there said nothing about Obama convincing anybody to step down.
Only after it is known he's stepping down does the U.S. media say, our guy did it.
Our guy did it.
Obama did it.
He convinced Mubarak to step down.
Yay!
How long has Mubarak been in power in Washington?
Quick question, snerkeling.
How many years has Hosni Mubarak been?
It's exactly right.
30 years.
How many years has Obama been running the show here?
Seems like 30.
Is the correct answer?
Obama's been running the show here for two years.
Seems like 30.
How long have Democrats been in charge of Egypt?
Well, you'd have to say that Mubarak is closer to being a Democrat than one of us.
60 years the Democrat Party has run Egypt.
60 years.
It's a little precursor of what we're headed to.
A Detroit area district says that it is allowing Sikh students, S-I-K-H.
This is from this FoxNews.com.
Detroit area district says it's allowing Sikh students to wear a small religious dagger to school.
The decision by the Plymouth Canton Community Schools reverses a ban put in place in December after a fourth grader was found with a dull three to five inch Kirpan.
The Kirpan represents a commitment to fight evil in the Sikh religion or tradition.
The dagger is a religious symbol that baptized Sikh males are expected to carry.
The principal initially let the boy keep it.
Second school board instituted a ban because of parental concerns and conflicts with the district's rules against bringing weapons.
The Detroit Free Press reports that Kirpans meeting certain criteria will now be allowed for Sikh students.
Now, we've had stories for years about kids being kicked out of school over a table knife in a car in a parking lot.
Nail clippers.
But we allow this.
So I guess, I mean, if it's part of your religion, you know, most Sikh handles or daggers have rhinoceros handles.
I mean, if they're legitimate, if they're authentic, most of them do.
I don't know if these do.
But think about that.
She got rhinoceros dyes to make the dagger, then the dagger can be brought to school in Detroit.
So you got the environmentalist wackos ticked off, but they're not ticked off.
But you've got animal rights people ought to be outraged, but they're not.
You've got the weapons group ought to be ticked off, but they're not, because everybody's afraid.
So here's little Johnny goes home from school.
Mommy, mommy, they took away the plastic butter knife that you gave me for my piano butter and jelly.
But there's this kid that's got a dagger on his belt and I didn't keep the dagger.
What is it up, mommy?
What's up?
Mommy goes to the schools, told us, shut up and go home.
Don't cause any trouble.
From the Jerusalem Post, Muslim Brotherhood, leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, told the Arabic language Iranian news network Al-Alam yesterday he would like to see the Egyptian people prepare for war against Israel.
Mohammed Ghanem reportedly told Al-Alam that the Suez Canal should be closed immediately.
Oh, this is a peaceful bunch of people, right?
The Democratic Uprising over there.
This is Stockton, California.
Tom, great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Megadudo's Rush.
Thank you.
I'm calling because I think we need to go back and remember George Bush, when he first started going into Iraq, said, give democracy and freedom a chance.
And we started here in Iraq and it'll spread to the rest of the world.
We are seeing it.
I think we may be seeing it now because that stuff does not happen overnight.
Yeah, with the, I mentioned this yesterday.
One of the things we're not clear on is whether this is a democratic uprising in Egypt.
We're not, I don't think anybody knows yet.
The suspicions are that it's not.
Muslim Brotherhood's not exactly, you don't associate white doves and Slip Wintman with this bunch.
And so, but I made the point yesterday that if this is a democratic uprising, don't the Democrats have to praise George W. Bush for this?
I mean, because you are exactly right.
Bush said the natural yearning of the human spirit is to be free.
Show the Middle East a democratic regime with self-determination, people voting in elections, it'll spread.
Well, I mean, you could say that people in Egypt, after 30 years of Democrat rule, Hazni Mubarak, have seen what's going on in Iraq and they want a little taste of it.
I mean, how do you leave Bush out of this?
And everybody ridiculed Bush.
Everybody ridiculed this as an element of U.S. foreign policy.
Thought it was crazy.
So you have a good point there, Tom.
Thanks very much.
Folks, one more reminder, episode, what is this, four tonight of the Haney Project on the Golf Channel?
It's at 9 o'clock.
Now, if you watch, you need to check this.
This happened to me last week, and it turned out it happened to everybody that watches or sets up TiVo or DirecTV DVR recording on DirecTV.
For some reason, last night at 9, or last Tuesday at 9 o'clock was a repeat of the previous week.
It was not an original version.
They didn't run the original version until midnight.
And I thought that it was just somehow I'd screwed up the settings.
But I went, all my receivers, and it was the same thing.
And then I found out that there was some sort of a programming screw-up between the golf channel and direct TV.
So make sure that what you're recording at 9 o'clock tonight is not a rerun.
And if it is, like it was last week, the original will air at midnight.
I'm hoping they get it fixed.
But this is episode four tonight, and this is the first episode showing improvement.
But Haney is not, well, he's in China in this episode, opening a new golf training center for the Chi-Coms and their rich kids.
Catherine Zetta Jones somehow wormed her way into the show over there, kicking a couple lessons.
Meanwhile, I'm on the course here in Palm Beach, a good friend of mine from Palm Beach, David Rosso, the president of town council here in Palm Beach.
And this episode is where I find, because everybody's asking, are you getting any better?
We're not seeing any of that.
That's because I haven't improved any while being taped with Haney.
Haney's been tearing down the stroke and the swing and building it back up.
And my improvement, trying to learn from what he's been teaching me, has happened as I've left after I've left Haney and started working here on my own.
Tonight's the first episode where improvement starts to show.
And then next week, next week, episode five in the Bahamas, is when the Grand Slam home runs start racking up.
So don't miss it tonight.
The next, we got, let's see, five to go.
We got three episodes, five, six, seven, eight.
Yep.
So, and I can tell we've got seven of them taped.
We've got one more to do the weekend of February 11th.
And it's building and building and the crescendos.
It might even be a couple tonight.
Yeah, there will be.
But next week, episode 5 in the Bahamas, that's where mouths are wide open in stunned disbelief.
From the UK Daily Mail, a teacher who advises colleagues on how to avoid affairs with students was caught having a sex with a teenager in the back of her car.
Courtney Bowles was found by a cop naked, lying atop the boy who was also naked.
This happened in her school in Colorado.
Why the hell are we hearing about this in the UK?
It happened in Colorado.
Her student lover initially said he was 20, but later admitted he was 16.
Courtney Bowles was employed as a teacher's instructional coach.
The NEA has no comment on the story, and we had to go to the UK to find it.
We had to go to the UK Daily Mail to find it.
P. Diddy.
Is that what he goes by now?
Let me find it here.
Did I put a...
Yeah, no, just Diddy.
Got rid of the P. Gracing the cover of the February, March edition of the source.
The hip-hop star Diddy, that would be Sean Combs, gave Obama a tough assessment in an interview.
I just want the president to do better, said Diddy.
Diddy said specifically that he hoped Obama would do more for the underprivileged in America and emphasized that many of those people are African American.
A hip-hop mogul also criticized political gameplay.
I'd rather have a black president that was man enough to say he was doing something for black people have one term than a president who played the politics game have two terms.
And of course, everybody stopped and waited with bated breath to find out what Diddy thought about anything.
Identity theft, the most scammed states in America.
Every year, the FTC releases a report on the state of fraud and identity theft in America, and they track instances of identity theft and fraud complaints through the Consumer Sentinel Network.
Here to go.
Washington, D.C., most scammed place.
Nevada, number two, Colorado, three, Maryland, four, Florida, where we live, five.
Arizona, six, Oregon, seven, Washington State, eight, Delaware, nine, and California, ten.
Let's see.
Democrat, Republican, Democrat, Democrat, Republican, Democrat, Democrat, Democrat.
Eight of them are Democrats.
Get LifeLock, folks, and spare yourself any concern whatsoever that you're going to have your identity stolen.
It's not worth trying to put yourself back together.
It's not to mention the financial risk loss that you incur.
Just call Life Lock 800-4404-833.
Mention my name and save 10%.
It's that simple.
You don't have to worry about it.
And believe me, they've got a great identity alert system.
What happens?
Somebody gets your information and tries to use it.
They get caught in the process.
You get called and it stopped dead in its tracks.
And that's far better than having your identity stolen and taking months to put it all back together.
LifeLock 800-440-4833 Bill in Matthews, South Carolina.
I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, Rush, thanks for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
Hey, listen, I think people are missing the biggest thing.
It's not health care that this guy ruled on.
Obama has basically backed himself into a game of Supreme Court roulette.
When this goes before the Supreme Court, it's not about health care.
This is about Obama.
And listen, he can't afford to lose this.
And because he can't afford to lose this, he will find a way not to go to the Supreme Court.
Listen, Rush, if he loses on the Supreme Court, his presidency is over.
So he has to circumvent this.
I predict he'll get with the Republicans and come out and say they're going to fix health care.
And he will not.
He cannot let this go.
Well, wait a second.
Two things.
If the Republicans fall for that, I can't see it.
That's Republicans bailing him out on that.
Number two, I'm not ready yet to accept the premise that his presidency is dead.
There might be a devious part of Obama that would love the Supreme Court to rule against him, gives him every opportunity to point out how the right wing and the enemies of the little people have taken over this country and how finally he is needed more than ever to make sure he gets his shot to appoint correct judges.
They're going to recognize the needs of the downtrodden in this country that he's tried so far, but this is what he's up against.
He is already on record as calling them out at the Supreme, or the State of the Union speech two years ago on the Citizens United ruling.
I think he would love nothing more than an occasion and an opportunity to rip these people a new one and blow that place up and use himself almost as a martyr.
I will have to ask if Elena Kagan will have to recuse herself on any health care cases.
She argued a bunch of them.
She was solicitor general for the regime for a time.
I have to ask my legal beagles about that.
But it's still, I understand what you're saying.
It is about Obama.
If the Supreme Court says he is unconstitutional, I can see you thinking he can't tolerate that.
That's a repudiation he doesn't want.
This guy so dislikes the Constitution.
That would just fit right in with his whole argument that it's outdated, needs drastic change, and so forth and so on.
But still, an interesting point.
Maybe we could get Mubarak to tell Obama that he shouldn't run again.
I wouldn't mind that.
I'd like to see that.
Okay, episode four, Haney Project, tonight, 9 o'clock Eastern, Channel 218, DirecTV, The Golf Channel.
▲
Export Selection