All Episodes
Previous Next
April 5, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
April 5, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, let's see, John Boehner has left the uh morning meeting with Obama over the budget negotiations.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, said there's no deal.
So apparently the internal polls are just not there yet for Obama.
No deal.
Now the we have a we have a tweet here from Boehner.
Latest tweet, it's become sadly evident to me.
The White House and Senate Democrats are just not serious yet about enacting real spending cuts.
Don't don't tell me that don't tell me that they really have it can't be.
This has got to be that has to be a tweet just that said things up for the future.
That can't possibly be true.
That they've actually thought maybe Obama the Democrats are interested in spending cuts.
Greetings, folks.
How are you?
El Rush Ball back, ready to go, raring in action.
And I didn't get a whole lot more sleep last night.
I intended to, but it just didn't happen.
The old body clock kicked in, and when I was supposed to get tired, I didn't.
So here we are.
Phone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, and the uh email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
I got to thinking about something.
You know, Paul Ryan announced his budget today, and the Democrat opposition is exactly what you would expect.
It's cliched, it's 30 years of the playbook, uh debt on arrival, extreme, all this.
I started to think what standing do these guys have to object to the budget.
They didn't even offer one last year.
They much less, not not even past one, they didn't even offer a budget.
They didn't even do one.
And the reason they didn't do a budget is that last year, of course, an election year, and they didn't want anybody to see what their plans were because it would have harmed their re-election chances, been much worse than it already was.
So guys that punted, guys that voted present on the budget, people that said we're not even gonna do one, we just do these continuing resolutions, now come along and say that, well, there's Ryan budget, it's uh it's too extreme.
And by the way, another question.
Where's the no labels crowd here?
You know, these uh these wonderful sensitive understanding people that don't like labels in politics.
They don't like conservative, they don't like liberal, they don't like any well, they're all actually displaced liberals who have been losing and know that liberalism is one of the reasons they've been losing, so they again try to camouflage the fact that they're liberals or slight liberals by saying that they're really nothing, no labels.
Okay, here comes the all-out assault predictable on Paul Ryan and the Republicans as they renounce their budget today.
Six trillion dollars over ten years in budget cuts, and it's predictable.
It's it's uh the reaction to it's totally understandable.
We're you could not have a greater, more visible line of demarcation of where we are or what the future of this country is going to be all about.
And yet here come the cat calls, Ryan is extreme, budget cuts are extreme.
Where's the no labels crowd on this?
The no labels crowds urging us to get away from these kinds of characterizations that are poisoning our politics.
Fox News reporting the White House rejects Republican spending bill.
No surprise there.
What's the surprise?
Like I say this, this tweet from the speaker to House Boehner uh saying that uh there's no deal yet, uh the um has figured out that the Democrats really aren't serious about serious about budget cuts.
I hope uh Snerdley You don't think they really go into these meetings thinking that Obama, the Democrats are serious about budget cuts, do you?
You really you really sadly you think that they go into these meetings thinking that the Democrats and Obama are, particularly in an election year, are serious about cutting spending?
Why there's no Democrat on earth right now that is interested in cutting spending.
I can't I uh is it is the theory maybe that well they they see the election results too?
They understand what the American people want for crying out loud, the Democrats have been governing against the will of the American people for as long as they've been Democrats, particularly the last 30 or 40 years.
Let me find something here in the stack.
I got all kinds of stuff on the shutdown here today, but there's an interesting uh story about let's see, put it down at the end of the stack.
It's it's a it's a way this is all characterized by a reporter.
Uh and it is here we go.
It is in the Washington Post by Philip Rucker and David Farrenthold.
A House Republican plan to propose Tuesday historic changes to Medicare, Medicaid, and other popular programs that pour federal money into Americans' lives.
If that doesn't spell out the way the Democrats look at this and the media too, and to expect them to be serious about reducing some of this.
House Republicans plan to propose today.
They already did it.
Uh historic changes to Medicare, Medicaid, and other popular programs that pour federal money into America's lives, Americans' lives.
And then they have a professor quoted here.
Uh who says, I don't think the public responds simply to facts.
This is John Sides, a professor at George Washington University said that Paul Ryan's approach is not likely to change the nation's mind.
I don't think that the public responds just to facts.
He may have a point because we've had the facts on our side for I don't know how long, but the Democrats own the narrative.
The Democrats and the media own the narrative.
We've got the facts on our side.
So we'll see where this all heads out.
We can let's list some audio sound.
Oh, before we do that, I promised I would fix something.
That uh came up yesterday in the program.
It was about the coach, UConn coach ended up winning, by the way.
Uh the NCAA Final Four championship game last night.
But Grab Audio Sunday 24.
This was um uh now wait a second.
Wait, just a second.
Uh no, this is okay.
I'm uh my fault.
I've sound by here says it's from 2009.
And I guess this is the first time it happened.
But somebody was somebody heard, I guess the coach was asked the same question.
We had the caller yesterday, same question a couple days ago.
And this is the caller who said, I hope you can hear the video, hope you can hear the audio.
Let's let's listen to this anyway.
This is February 21st, 2009 in Hartford, after uh Yukon game against South Florida.
The coach of Jim Calhoun, Hello Presser, and a freelance writer and activist, had this exchange with the coach.
Coach, considering that you're the highest paid state employee and there's a two billion dollar budget deficit.
Do you think that is?
Not a dime back.
I'd like to be retired someday.
1.6 million is enough?
I'm sorry?
1.5 million?
I think a lot of that.
Quite frankly, we bring in 12 million to the university.
Nothing to do with state funds.
We make 12 million dollars a year for this university.
Get some facts and come back and see me.
Get some facts and come back and see me.
Don't throw out salaries or other things.
Get some facts and come back and see me.
We turn over over 12 million dollars to the University of Connecticut, which is state run.
Next question.
That's the coach Jim Calhoun.
Now, this is two years ago.
The caller said she heard this exchange two days ago.
Um it sounds like it happened again, but that's the coach's response to it, and uh she was all happy about it.
The caller was extremely happy that somebody finally stood up for what they earn.
They were not cowed by a bunch of people in the press.
And I can understand that.
So many people do get cowed, so many people do get defensive and so forth.
Uh and And it's it's frankly.
A lot of people right now with this looming government shutdown on Friday, people have the same attitude toward Republican leaders.
Why are you so afraid of the shutdown?
Why are you so afraid of it?
Even if you do get blamed, what are we talking about here?
We're talking about an out-of-control federal government.
We're talking about you guys ran for re-election in November, you won big on it.
If you believe in the idea to hell with the with the with the ancillaries here.
If the government's going to be shut down, if that's the result here, then own it and go out and explain it.
You know, defensiveness, scaredy cat tactics, it's off-putting to people.
So that's why when you got, especially in our culture today, where everybody is just so worried about offending somebody, his coach actually had the guts to stand up for what he earns and then said, probably I uh should be earning a lot more.
I'm worth a lot more given how much we're generating for the whole program here.
Anyway, the shutdown is looming, it's uh slated to be Friday.
Democrats seem eager for it because they think that the circumstances are exactly what they were in 1995, meaning the Republicans take it on a chin and the Democrats win the big PR battle over this.
Republicans, a lot of them in the leadership have the same fear and have vowed not to shut down the government or not to take part in any action that would result in uh in the government being shut down.
But if you have these beliefs, if you believe that this government is spending the nation into bankruptcy, if it is as serious a problem as you have stated, then what in the world is wrong with backing it up?
And then going out and trying to convince people if you have to, if you have the facts on your side, then try to gain control of the narrative.
But it seems to be in a lot of people's minds in the leadership anyway, an insurmountable obstacle, a task.
They just uh don't want to take it on.
But we have two stories here.
One's from Reuters, Boehner tells Republicans to gird for shutdown.
Um John Boehner on Monday told fellow Republicans to prepare for government shutdown, undercutting optimism that progress is being made on a deal that would keep the government running.
See, I personally, and I've shared this with you before.
I don't care if the government shuts down.
My life is not affected.
I don't sit here, and I don't know how many other people do, frankly, either, live in mortal fear of their precious government shutting down for a day or two.
There might be some, but the way this is all cast in the media, it's almost the same as if a meteorite would hit the earth and oh my gosh, what do we do after this?
The government shut down.
We can't handle that.
Well, a lot of us, our lives don't revolve around government.
Many of us, our lives are spent trying to avoid as much contact with government as possible.
Just leave us alone.
And so when it shuts down, that's great news.
Shuts down, they they stop hassling us.
But we have this picture presented that's the opposite, that people, it's almost like they're being deprived of air and water and food if the government shuts down.
Um, in some people's cases it may be.
Over at the Hill.com, ahead of White House Talks, Boehner rejects $33 billion in cuts.
Boehner said Monday, Vice President Bite Me's offer of $33 billion in spending cuts isn't enough, suggesting the chances of a government shutdown are increasing.
Despite attempts by Democrats to uh lock in a number amongst themselves, as Boehner in a statement, I have made clear that their $33 billion is not enough.
And many of the cuts that the White House and Senate Democrats are talking about are full of smoke and mirrors.
That's unacceptable.
So we'll see where it all shakes out.
You get competing stories.
Boehner, last thing I'm gonna do is preside over shutdown, there will not be a shutdown.
now he's telling people to get ready for it.
It could well be that he's saying this because the Democrats are engineering it.
The Democrats want it to happen.
They are looking forward to it.
But again, folks, when it comes to budgeting, back to the Ryan budget.
The Democrats, as far as I'm concerned, have no standing to oppose it because when it was their time or their turn, it was their responsibility to present a budget last year, they punted.
They didn't present one.
They took the coward's way out.
They might think that it was smart politics.
They might think that it was deft in that they were uh hiding from the public elements of their campaign that would uh harm them if people found out what their budget plans were.
Okay, so they punted.
So they're spectators.
They're sitting on the sideline.
We have a nation in big trouble.
We are a great nation at risk in a dangerous world.
There's some people coming along rolling up their sleeves who are ready to do the heavy lifting, and these spectators, these cowards, the sideline sitters, now respond in their typical 30-year-old way.
It's extreme, it's dead on a rival.
You're cutting old people, you're cutting young people, you're cutting minorities and so forth.
Where the bottom line remains, it has to happen.
We don't want to think about the alternative.
We don't want to think about what happens in this country if this doesn't happen.
There simply isn't the money to support the current spending plans of the Democrats.
There isn't, but we're not even close to having the money.
Let me take a brief time out here before I uh go a little too long, meaning two commercial breaks back to back, never good.
Local program directors would have a cow.
And we're back, El Rush Ball, serving humanity simply by showing up.
Great to have you here at the Limbaugh Institute.
For advanced conservative studies, Boehner now reportedly saying that there is no vote scheduled for a continuing resolution stopgap bill.
No vote scheduled.
If there's no vote scheduled, it's hello shutdown.
That's from the National Journal, Boehner.
No budget deal, no CR schedule for vote via statement, said the House will not be put in a box and forced to choose between two options that are bad for the country.
Those options, Boehner said, are a government shutdown and inadequate spending cuts.
He also said that uh no new continuing resolution had been scheduled for floor action to keep the government funded past Friday.
So everything's being made to look like we're headed to Friday in a steamroller sense with the shutdown as uh unavoidable.
No more continuing resolution votes, no more votes, what have you.
And they're not happy out on the left.
There's a reporter slash columnist blogger Washington Post guy named Ezra Klein.
He's a young phenom as far as the left is concerned, 24, 25 years old, and they think that uh the world begins and ends with this guy.
He's got a piece in the Washington Post today.
What happened to the fierce urgency of now?
Mr. Klein starts off expressing disappointment with Obama's re-election announcement, saying it had introduced us to Ed from North Carolina, Gladys from Nevada, Catherine from Colorado, and Mike from New York and Allison, Michigan, but no Obama.
Not even a picture.
The battle over funding the government for the rest of 2011's gone on for months, but the most involvement we've seen from Obama was a few phone calls placed to negotiators over the weekend.
It's the can you hear me now strategy.
Wouldn't matter so much if they were being heard.
Unfortunately, the White House let House Speaker John Boehner and the Tea Party good cop bad cop them into agreeing to the $30 billion plus in cuts that the Republican leadership wanted from day one.
With the negotiations breaking down, Obama's invited congressional leaders to the White House to hammer out a deal, but at this point the question is simply how bad the final agreement will be.
So Mr. Klein here, who is a wonderkind, if you will, on the left, thinks that Boehner and the Republicans Are going to roll Obama.
And they're talking, in fact, about $33 billion in cuts.
That's we'll take it, but that's not rolling anybody.
Not considering what spending is.
But then Klein says perhaps the more disappointing are the times the president has shown up.
Last week Obama laid out his first major energy plan since the campaign for anybody who remembers President elect Obama warning that few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change.
This plan, which focused on the vastly less urgent but far higher polling question of energy independence, was a terrible disappointment.
So they're not happy with Obama on a lot of levels.
And it says something has gone wrong in the Obama regime.
And the candidate we need to step forward and point it out isn't whichever Republican manages to limp shamefacedly out of the primaries after agreeing to call Obama a Kenyan.
We'll continue.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
Ha!
Welcome back, El Rushmore and the EIB Network.
You remember...
A couple of a couple of months ago, Obama, the Democrats were trying to do away.
This is, I guess, during the um lame duck session.
So more than a couple months ago, the uh the Obama, the Democrats are trying to do away with the Bush tax cut extension.
And remember Obama and Hillary, even Gates.
Even Gates told us the deficit was a matter of national security.
Where's all that talk now?
How do we not hearing about that anymore?
Why are we not hearing that the deficit, the national debt, what have you, is a matter of national security.
You got Paul Ryan's program out there.
You've got his proposals, and it does contain significant cuts across the board, a spending freeze.
Well, actually a return to spending levels of 2008.
And by the way, might I just observe that in 2008, elderly people were not dying.
People were not being kicked out of their houses because of budget cuts.
It might have happened because of an economic disaster brought about by the Democrats, but all the usual forecasts, all the usual scare tactics, predictions the Democrats gave us and to the if we go back to spending levels of 2008, which is essentially what Ryan wants to do, none of the catastrophes that the Democrats talk about were happening then.
In fact, if you go back to 2008, a lot of people were saying that level of spending was absurd and way too high.
Ezra Klein cut to the chase here in this uh piece of the Washington Post.
Conventional wisdom is that Obama is being given a great gift this week by Paul Ryan, whose budget proposes to privatize Medicare and slash Medicaid.
But the conventional wisdom might be wrong.
Ryan is beginning the debate far to the right.
He's not going to get everything he wants.
But if Paul Ryan gets 50% of what he wants, or even 35%, it'll be the most dramatic victory that conservatives have scored against the social safety net in a generation, larger at least in dollar terms, than anything done to welfare in 1996.
Now it is true, skilled negotiators always go in asking for much more than they expect to get.
Throw in items that are called throwaways.
Things that you will give up, grudgingly, but you will give them up.
You leave yourself some room.
Klein here is suggesting that Ryan knows this.
He's starting way, way out there on the right.
By the time he ends up here, if he gets 50-35%, it is still a huge and major victory.
So at least in the Obama media here, they are frightened.
They're thinking Obama might get rolled.
Because they think Obama's checked out.
He's out playing golf, he's doing all that.
Where is he?
He doesn't even show up at his own reelection announcement.
He puts other people in the video.
And he doesn't even do it live.
He does it with social media and so forth.
Audio soundbites.
Here's Pelosi.
And this is uh yesterday talking about Medicaid and Ryan's budget proposal.
Putting Medicaid into block grants is one way to tie it with a put it in a box, tie it in a ribbon, and throw it in the deep blue sea.
This is the beginning of the end for Medicaid once you block grant it.
Yeah, all right.
And here's Bernie Sanders.
He was last night on uh MSNBC Live with uh SyncUgar.
And the question, Senator Sanders, uh, they've been trying this for decades, Republicans, of course, but as I just said, I think they're on the doorstep.
I think they're real close to knocking out Medicare and Medicaid.
My top question, the most important question today, how are you going to stop them?
Jenk, this year, some 45,000 Americans are going to die because they don't get to a doctor on time.
If you block grant Medicaid, if you voucherize Medicare, that number is going to soar.
So what you are talking about is a life and death issue for millions of the American people.
Last week we announced that there were 10 corporations, 10 of the largest corporations in this country who not only paid nothing in taxes, they got substantial rebates.
The idea of cutting programs for the weakest, the most vulnerable to give tax breaks to the richest and largest corporations is totally grotesque.
Here we go.
The same old cliches for 30 years are cutting the poor, we're cutting the sick, and the rich and corporations are getting tax cuts.
It's the same old, same old.
For 30 years.
Problem is the sick and the elderly are not being kicked out of their houses, and they're not dying for lack of attention from the government.
But don't forget this.
Pointed out yesterday.
Crony capitalism.
Here's Bernie Sanders doing the same thing that Chris Van Holland did.
You come out, you've got your Democrat Party playbook, you've got your cliches, tax breaks for the rich, while the poor and the sick die and go hungry.
Fine.
Well, who was it, Mr. Sanders who arranged for the United Auto Workers to get 202 million dollars of taxpayer money for their early retiree pension plan and health care?
Who was it that saw to it that ATT, another one of your hated vile corporations?
Who was it, Mr. Sanders, that saw to it that ATT gets 140 million dollars of taxpayer money to pay health care benefits for early retirees?
Who was it, Mr. Sanders who saw to it that I believe it was Verizon gets 97 million?
It was your president, Barack Hussein Obama, mm-mm, in order to save his precious Obamacare bill.
Now, who is it that's giving tax breaks to rich corporations?
Who is it that is in bed with corporations that could afford their own health care benefits?
It's not John Boehner, it isn't Paul Ryan, it isn't Lindsey Graham, it isn't any of the people that you want to point fingers at.
It's your party.
It's your party in bed with the unions, your party in bed with all these corporations, and it's not just the uh telecom, not just ATT and Verizon, is a number of others throughout the whole health care industry, in fact, the insurance industry.
You tried to co-opt that.
I mean, the crony capitalism going on here at the uh at the White House on down it that whatever it's in this budget deal pales in comparison if you're talking about shortchanging the sick or the poor, what have you?
If block grants are so bad, Ms. Pelosi, block grants here to Medicaid.
Why issue any block grants to the states?
The states are living off of block grants.
What's so wrong about Medicare living off of them?
Because we don't want to privatize any.
Of course, you don't want to privatize any of it because you don't want it to become efficient.
You don't want the private sector to be the source of the solution to any of these problems.
You want government to constantly be involved.
I've been through all this.
You know, this this 30-year cliche of attack the poor, attack the elderly, attack the sick, tax cuts for the rich.
Who was it that gave 90% of their campaign money to the Democrats?
It was Wall Street banks.
I mean, you can't get more rich than that from Goldman Sachs to AIG to hell, go down the list.
American Express, it doesn't matter.
The vast majority of their campaign contributions went to Obama and other Democrats.
Some of them give to both sides just to protect themselves in the payoff racket, but for crying out loud here.
The same old, same old.
Here's more Bernie.
Well, I don't want to play more Bernie Sanders.
It was asked about the rich haven't contributed enough here.
It's just Congress, Congress was completely controlled by Democrats in 2008.
They wrote the 2008 budget.
Ryan wants to return to 2008 spending levels.
And here's 45,000 Americans are going to die because they don't get to a doctor on time.
That's what Bernie Sanders said.
Who's running the show?
Who's in the White House?
You got your health care bill.
How come that problem's not fixed?
I don't believe the problem exists anyway.
45,000 Americans die because they don't get to the hospital on time or the doctor on that's B.S. They throw these numbers out there.
They never back them up.
State control media never says, wait a minute, could you cite your source for me on this?
Give me a list of names.
I want to go talk to the families of these 45,000 that died because they get to the doctor on time.
Or maybe some of them are illegals and you don't know how to reach them.
What are you talking about, Mr. Sanders?
Constantly portray and paint this country as something that it's not.
Most compassionate, especially where health care and programs for the needy.
There's nobody that does it better than we do.
Every time the Republicans present a budget, all of a sudden those people are going to die.
Well, Mr. Sanders, we're going back to 2008 spending levels.
You wrote the budget, you signed off on it.
None of these problems that you are predicting were happening then.
Why are they going to start happening now?
And lest we forget it was Obama who has increased spending, federal spending by $4 trillion in just two years.
That's a record.
How is it so?
How is it so dramatic, so extreme that somebody is suggesting cutting $6 trillion in 10 years?
You raise spending $4 trillion in two years, money that we don't have.
And now we've got to cut $6 trillion in 10 years, and that somehow is extreme.
Somebody at National Review on the website says, well, there is an alternative to Ryan's plan.
And he's got a good point.
Simply here as a rhetorical exercise, there is an alternative to all these budget cuts.
Tax increases.
And by the way, folks, this number that I'm going to give you, a tax rate increase has been in every budget since I have been hosting this program.
Every budget contains forecasts of what will be necessary to generate revenue to cover escalating costs.
Uh in the early years of this program, my education continued to skyrocket.
Continue to learn about how all the budget process takes place and what this contain, what the CBO does.
And they don't just do one-year budgets, they do 10-year budgets of projections.
Each budget that's signed is only the law for one year, but they still do projections.
And Snerdley, you'll remember this.
We found in the early 90s that in order to support the coming spending, and it's 20 years ago now.
We're looking at an overall tax rate of 78%.
You'll remember us talking about this if you've been here for all this time because While talking about that, we concluded nobody's gonna work.
Nobody will bother going to work if 78% of their income is taken.
Well, the 78% has now become 88.
88% tax rate or Paul Ryan's budget cuts.
Those are the alternatives.
Remember the discussion of imputed income on the value of your house for the purposes of income tax.
It's all still in these budgets.
It's all still there.
And so everybody agrees we don't have the money that we're spending.
Everybody agrees, sensible people, that we've got to do something about this.
If there is to be a future for your children and grandkids and those not yet born, if there's to be a future, if there is to be a United States as we've known it, we've got to get this under control.
And the two alternatives are you cut the level of spending, or you raise taxes to 88%.
Those are the two alternatives.
Take your pick.
And we're back.
Rush Lindbaugh and the excellence in broadcasting network, Paul Ryan.
This was uh on CNBC this morning.
Prior to his announcement, talking about budget proposal, the co-host, Becky Quick, said there's something to be said for trying to get this argument out there, but the president's own deficit commission weighed in on these issues, and the conversation very quickly turned away from it.
The tax cuts.
What makes you think that this is actually going to be something that now gets everybody's attention?
We took dozens of recommendations from the deficit commission from the General Accountability Office and put it in this budget.
So we're basically trying to take what they did and build on it and go forward.
And look, shame on the Democrats, shame on the president if he, knowing that we're going toward a debt crisis, demagogues this issue, plays politics with this issue, and does nothing about it.
We don't need politicians around here these days.
We need leaders to tackle these challenges before they get out of control, Becky.
I mean, you just can't keep kicking this can down the road.
And what we now know is we can preempt a debt crisis.
This budget shows you it's not too late to get this under control.
No changes to anybody in and near retirement, and we can get this economy growing again.
Paul Ryan is serious.
And in the standard operating procedure of life in America, that would count.
That would matter.
I hope it still does.
But he's serious.
He's not playing this as a politician.
He's playing this as a leader to fix it.
He's right.
Can't keep kicking the can down the road.
I talked to him yesterday.
There is no, there will be no cuts to current seasoned citizens.
Retired or not, there will not be any cuts.
Nothing else will happen.
If there are cuts, they're going to oppose it, nothing else will happen.
There are some hard-cold realities that even Ryan understands that have to be dealt with here.
100% purity is not going to get anything done on any issue, particularly this.
So this is a tacit acknowledgement here that current retirees, seasoned citizens, operating under the belief that they have a deal.
They made the deal long ago.
They paid into it, they expect their payout.
No.
You don't want to touch it.
Doesn't even want to go there.
The Democrats are going to demagogue it.
Ryan wants them to.
Ryan wants them taking shots.
Ryan wants them to try to blow holes through all of this.
He's such a strong believer in the merits of what he has presented.
That an honest answer to every objection will win the day.
Facts matter.
This is what he believes.
So you have that premise, facts matter up against the Democrats and the media owning the narrative.
And we'll see where that falls out this time.
Don't go away, my friends.
We have barely scratched the surface here today.
Yeah, I'm going to get to that today.
I have it in the stack from uh yesterday.
It's about Hillary's supporters.
Miserably unhappy with Obama and strongly hoping that she will once again seek the presidency in 2012 running against Obama.
Probably gonna happen, but it's a it's a fascinating, uh fascinating piece, nevertheless, that just goes to illustrate contrary to state control media, there's not universal contentment or happiness on the left with the regime.
There's no reason to be afraid of them, the point here.
▲
Export Selection