All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 13, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:31
September 13, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I know you people are going to want to shoot me for bringing this up, but I'm depressed.
I'm mildly depressed.
Because I just learned that the new upgraded iPhone and iPad operating system is not going to be released until October 10th.
And I had my heart set on this month.
And while there's all kinds of rumors about a new iPhone, Apple hasn't even confirmed it.
I mean, there's all kinds of rumors that are being built.
They said they lost a prototype, but they didn't say that it's eminently released.
Apple hadn't said anything about a new iPhone.
Now they're expected to have this big giant meeting or what do they do?
These assemblies, these uh metal block on the word, but invite the media in to announce normally in September they tell you what's new in iPods, but the iPhone normally hits the new one in June or July, and they didn't make it this year, so now supposedly making the new iPhones, but they're waiting for the new operating system to be put in before they put them in boxes.
I know they're testing the new beta set the new operating.
I know that's coming.
The beta's a net are out there.
But I I'm I've had my heart set on September, because this new operating system is going to be a killer.
It's going to be.
I know you people, you think I'm doing free Apple commercials.
I'm not.
I'm just, I'm just sharing a passion with you I have for this stuff.
And um, it's just October 10th.
Jeez.
What am I going to do between now?
How am I going to make it to October 10th?
I have my heart set on September.
I'm just going to have to find a way here.
And that's if everything goes right.
And then that could be wrong because Apple hadn't even announced anything.
Anyway, greetings, uh, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, the excellence in broadcasting network uh Limbaugh Institute Advanced Conservative Studies.
There's an interesting story here about Social Security.
Cybercast News Service.
It's by our old buddy Terry Jeffrey.
We've been talking this week about the ratio of workers to beneficiaries and the taxes it takes from X number of workers to pay benefits per single beneficiary.
And that is uh three to one right now.
And when the program started, it was like 143 to 1.
So they they spread the burden of paying benefits to people over 143 people.
So that if 143 people had to come up with 10,000, that's a lot different than three people having to come up with 10,000, for example.
Well, Terry Jeffrey says that the actual rate, according to labor department information, is 1.75 full-time private sector workers per Social Security recipient.
There were only 1.75 full-time private sector workers in America last year for each person receiving benefits from Social Security, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Social Security Board of Trustees.
That means that for each husband and wife who worked full-time in the private sector last year, there was a Social Security recipient somewhere in the country taking benefits from the federal government.
Now, it's actually worse than that.
Unless wives or husbands are considered to be only three-fourths of a worker.
Now, here's how Terry Jeffrey gets to this point.
Unlike private sector workers who pay Social Security taxes with private sector dollars, government workers pay their payroll taxes with tax dollars.
So in reality, public sector employees can't be truly counted as paying money into Social Security.
Only private sector employees are actually putting real money, non-tax money, into Social Security.
And what he means by this is you and I are in the private sector, and we pay our taxes, it's deducted there, it's called FICA.
And right now, about three of us are needed, the taxes from three of us are needed to pay the benefits for one Social Security recipient.
However, when you consider, when you put the public sector employees in the total workforce, where are they getting the money to pay their Social Security taxes?
From us.
They are paid.
Their salaries are tax dollars.
Their salaries are not dollars generated by genuine production or service taking place in the private sector.
So what Terry Jeffrey has cleverly done here is eliminate them from the equation because their social security contributions are being paid for by us, not by them.
their entire salaries are being paid for by us So every Social Security recipient out there, 1.75 citizens is paying that benefit.
This is unsustainable.
Especially when it started out at a rate of 143 to 1.
Now, interesting thing about this business with the poor, and I know that some of you are waiting out there.
You're probably dialing the phone, trying to call in and catch me in something you think that I haven't caught on to, you think I've missed.
I know that some of you're waiting out there, you're thinking I'm purposely forgetting something or purposely not mentioning it to you in order to mislead people to make my point.
With most other hosts, you would be correct.
It is this.
We got the poor.
We got all these numbers on the new poor.
All these people living in poverty.
you Numbers are way up.
And yet, I just told you all the stuff the poor have.
So if we say that more poor people have been created under Obama, and then we say, but the poor really aren't poor, then we have an interesting conflict there.
very, very, very careful is how we must, carefully is how we must navigate this.
I mean, you can't complain about all the poor Obama's creating with his policies and then downplay what it is to be poor.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So the way to hit this is to simply say that Obama is creating more and more people who are defined as poor in this country.
The point is that Obama is creating more and more food stamp recipients, more and more unemployed, more and more homeless, and let's be honest.
Why do the poor have all of this stuff?
Well, yeah, government's dash, but where does the government get it?
The point is that they have it because of redistribution.
Many of them do not work.
Many of them do not work.
So I, you know, you you could define, I mean, we could have some fun with this because you could define poor today as simply saying somebody who is dependent on the government.
And if you are dependent on the government, look at all you get, and look at why you're likely to vote Democrat.
It is a it is a problem.
If somebody loses their job and their home, but their kids have two meals a day.
The point is that Obama's policies have severely harmed that family.
What Obama is doing is converting middle class families into poor families.
Now I know some of you have been waiting out there.
I know, I just know you've been waiting to call me on this and say, wait a limbo, you can't do this.
You can't sit there and start claiming all these poor people and all this poverty and Obama created it and then follow it up about how it isn't so bad.
Hmm.
Thank you.
And you have a point.
The point is that as our government defines poverty, Obama and his policies are putting more and more people into it.
So the question then becomes did Obama save or create more poor people.
Just as we debate, did Obama save or create X numbers of jobs, how many poor people did Obama save versus how many poor people did he create?
Because what's happening in America is that Obama is turning middle class families into poor families by destroying the economy.
There aren't enough jobs.
It's just a shame, folks.
It just it just is a depressing to see what's happening to the country.
And again, I stress this is nothing compared to what our country is going to look like once Obamacare begins full implementation in 2014.
Being poor today simply means being dependent on the government, which is exactly what Obama and the Democrat Party wants.
The more dependent people are on the government, the more dependent they are on the Democrat Party.
That's the theory.
The way it shapes up here, only the very rich and the very poor can afford the Democrats.
Can afford to be Democrats.
I've got to take a brief time out.
We'll take that.
I do want to get to some debate sound bites and also want to get to your phone calls, too.
People have been patiently waiting out there.
All of that coming right up.
And to the phones.
Daytona Beach, Florida, 17-year-old Jordan.
Jordan, thank you for calling.
It's nice to have you with us on the program.
Hi.
Hello, Ross.
It's an honor to speak with you today, sir.
Thank you very much.
My question or my comment for you is why is it that the American people are so gullible as to believe the lies proclamated by the Democrat Party concerning social security security when it's them who wants to not only raise the age to 70, but reduce the payout by 40%?
I love this.
You're 17.
And I'm, you know, the answer to you is welcome to the conservative club.
I'm 60, and I have been asking that question since I was 17.
Honestly, I I've been w why did the gullible American people fall for any of the Democrat agenda?
I ask myself that every day.
You you're 17, so the 80s they're history to you.
But in the 1980s, this country had a recession much like this one, and we came out of it with specific policies that were just the exact opposite of what we're doing today, and it brought prosperity for 20 years.
15, 20 years.
And so I asked myself, the people lived through that.
What is it that made them forget it and what makes them susceptible to lies?
Well, what happened, Jordan, from the very beginning in the 80s when Ronald Reagan introduced the policies that caused the uh economic growth that resulted, the Democrats and their friends in the media started lying about it all.
They continued to lie throughout Reagan's presidency and after he left office, revising history, making things up about how Reagan's policies created homelessness and AIDS and uh poverty, that Reagan was uh basically stealing food from the poor, taking it back to the White House and eating it himself for them, they were trying to create this picture of Reagan for people.
And back then there was no media like there is today.
I mean, whatever was said about Reagan stuck.
There was there was no countervailing media.
Uh Reagan's only opportunity, and the reason Reagan was able to win in two landslides was that he had The ability to speak directly to the American people.
Every time he was on television, he didn't need, he overcame the filter that was the uh the media.
Now, in in a specific answer to your question about social security, I think in the last ten years, in fact, it isn't working.
I live in Florida.
For my whole life, the Democrats have been threatening voters that Republicans are going to take away their social security.
It's like the the threats that uh they're making today on Medicare.
It's Obama that's cut $500 billion in Medicare in his in his health care plan.
And yet the image persists that Republicans uh want to take your health care away from you.
The charges are not as automatic today.
There are more and more elderly here in Florida, it's God's waiting room, and they're electing Republicans.
That the charge simply after all of these years of empty threats, people are starting to say, Oh, wait a minute.
Uh all these years I've heard Republicans want to take my Social Security away, and it isn't happening.
They saw Bill Clinton raise taxes on Social Security recipients in 1993.
They've seen all this.
Another thing, too, uh uh, and this is very important for you as 17 years old to understand.
The senior citizens that you are referring to who buy into this are people whose presidents were people like Franklin Delater, Roosevelt and Harry Truman and JFK and LBJ.
People like you, when you uh begin to hit your 30s and 40s, or whatever age you start thinking about your retirement, your memory is not gonna be of these architects and stuff.
Your memory is gonna be of people like Obama.
And I think your generation is gonna be, and maybe one generation ahead of you, is going to be the generation that finally brings a halt to all of this left-wing demagoguery working because you are growing up realizing already at age 17 the lie.
Rush, can I ask you one more thing?
Well, of course.
Oh, they go on to say, they insidiously ask the American people if we would rather have the fat cats on Wall Street manage our retirement money.
But the funny thing is, Rush, if anybody in the private sector, these fat cats that they refer to, if anybody tried reducing the payout by 40%, or um saying that no, you're not going to get your return until 10 years later.
If anybody in the private sector tried that, they would be put in jail immediately.
And the perfect example of that, you mentioned them yesterday, is Bernie Madoff.
Right.
Exactly right.
Here's another question for you.
Are any of these fat cats on Wall Street taking their investment portfolios to Social Security and saying, here, invest this for me?
No, they're investing it where?
Exactly what the Democrats are telling people they will lose their money.
So you you have learned early.
I you obviously uh uh have great parents, you've obviously had a chance to listen to the show sometime.
Um because I you you you have you have learned a basic truth.
You you understand it.
Liberalism is so easy to understand.
All you have to admit to yourself, it's a tough thing to do.
All you have to admit is the whole thing's a lie.
And all you have to admit that all the liberals who talk about they're all the pri they're lying.
That's hard for people to accept that.
But once you do, it's the easiest thing in the world to understand.
And you're there.
You are there.
That's this is why people ask me all the time, how come I stay optimistic?
I get phone call from somebody like you who's 17.
Where did you figure all this out?
How did you do it at your age?
Uh I listen to you every day, and I actually um I just recently bought um a subscription, a year's subscription to Rush 24-7.
So I'm doing homework at night, and I have your entire three hours playing in the background.
Wow.
Oh, that's just awesome.
It really is.
That is uh that's cool.
You have an iPad?
What was that?
Do you have an iPad?
Uh no, sir.
Don't tell me you use Windows.
I do use Windows.
Okay, well that's all right.
That just means there's room for growth.
Um I'll tell you what I'm gonna do.
You I I'm I'm gonna send you I'm gonna I'm gonna send you a uh you hold on here for the snurter we find out where to do it.
I'm gonna send you a uh uh not very many of them left now.
There were twenty-five.
We still have some back there, right, Brian.
You know, we got uh signature rush EIB signature iPads engraved.
And uh we got them both black and white.
Ask him what color we want, so I think we got them both black and white.
And uh and make sure you get make sure you get an overnight address, not a P.O. box.
What?
Some tea.
Yeah, yeah, that's a yeah, okay.
Yeah, that's an excellent idea.
Get get his tea flavor preference.
That's a superb idea.
See, this this is how, folks, this is why.
I'm able to remain optimistic.
And I'm sure it's not just this program he's been listening to, but seventeen years old.
Well, why?
Yeah, he's pretty smart, but in in addition to pretty smart, he's pretty learned.
Being smart by itself doesn't mean anything.
How many, how many, how many people we consider brilliantly smart do the stupidest things, like raise money for Democrats and so forth.
At any rate, that's Jordan, and he is uh uh from Daytona Beach, Florida.
And did you get what what what tea flavor does he want?
Tell him we'll send him some of both.
We'll send him some, just make sure he just whether he wants regular or diet.
And we'll send him some regular and raspberry.
Okay, he likes regular.
Okay, cool.
That's the best tea on ETH anyway.
Two if by tea.
All right, folks, I got a brief time out here.
More of your phone calls are coming up.
Uh and I will got this sound bite roster.
There's some juicy stuff here.
I'll try to squeeze a lot of it in when we get back.
Really?
So the uh Snerdley was just telling me here that our last caller, Jordan, age 17, is already halfway through college.
And is uh yeah.
His life goals are to own his own hedge fund and to meet me.
And he's uh seventeen, halfway through college.
Living in um in Daytona Beach.
Ed, uh broadcast engineer, uh get let's see, just it's uh security uh job.
Stand by their audio sound by uh fifteen.
We we may need them from there.
Let's look at Central Texas here.
Janice, you're next.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the uh Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hello, oh my God, Rush Limbo.
Uh it's unbelievable I'm speaking to you.
Have a great day.
My I have two points on Perry and Bachman on the immunizations.
Simply by mandating the immunizations, he put it on the schedule.
Things have been put on the immunization schedule that's required for kids even to come to school for years.
For instance, recently chickenpox, recently meningitis, recently hepatitis B. So Gardasil ought to be there.
Now, if you've got a problem with getting your kids immunizations, there's always a flat risk.
Flat, but the benefits far outweigh that.
Number next, with Gardasil and Hepatitis B, they are both sexually connotated.
So, and if you are a parent of a girl or a boy now, because both both sexes can get this uh ammunization now, you should definitely get it for your kids, because General Warts is so prevalent that the CDC doesn't count the numbers anymore statistically speaking.
Okay, so let me see if I understand where you are on this.
You think that the Gardasil was a good thing, and you think that the mandatory vaccine of little girls in Texas at Perry required was a good thing.
Should be little boys as well now, because now boys and girls can get it.
Back then when he first did it, just girls.
But you also you also think it's a good thing because there was an opt-out.
Absolutely.
And if you didn't want it, then you take responsibility for what happens.
Don't ask me to pay for your opt-out if something goes wrong.
Yeah, I've been there.
And my other point is the Ponzi thing.
If only people that were that it added in to Social Security were taken out, It wouldn't be much of a problem.
Unfortunately, we have a lot of hands in that bucket that never put a dime in.
Oh, yeah.
I've been there too.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, this affords an opportunity.
Here's here's a woman in Texas who has no problem with what Perry did on the Gardasil and the HVC vaccine.
No problem whatsoever.
Thinks everybody ought to get it.
How many of you uh now I must admit I bring no shortcomings to this program?
However, there are things that I have to work extra special hard on to uh uh get up to speed with you on, and one of them is things involving kids, because I don't have any.
So my natural inclination when this about vaccine hits, I in terms of it has no personal impact on me, so I have to work hard to quote unquote care about it.
I don't have little girls, therefore I don't have the fear that mine are gonna get cervical cancer.
Therefore, when this thing all hit, the natural inclination was that's somebody else's problem.
Of course, I can't afford to look at it that way.
So I'm just wondering as I sit here, how many of you mothers out there raced out and got this vaccine?
When you heard, when you heard what was uh being touted about the vaccine, that it would go a long way toward vaccinating your kid, your daughter against cervical cancer.
Did you wait or were you and how many of you were naturally said, you know, a lot of people government mandates a vaccine, you know, when the Clintons came along and tried to do it?
It depends on who's doing the mandating.
As to what people's reaction.
Now, here we have Janice in Central Texas who thought it was just fine.
She has no problem with it whatsoever.
Ever.
Ever.
What is that?
What is uh well, in this it this vaccine, it only works before they've had sex.
Right.
Well you have to get the vaccine when you yeah, preferably if if well, if it only works before the kids have sex, then you got a vaccine before they're seven or eight.
I would think, isn't that about right?
I don't have kids, but isn't that about right?
So if you don't do it before they're seven or eight, then of course the vaccine is it automatic it doesn't work, or its chances of working are much reduced.
Wouldn't it?
Oh.
Oh, really?
Oh, oh, your daughter, they wouldn't, she had to sign something that said she hadn't had sex.
So if you've had sex and you admit you've had sex as a kid, they will not give you the vaccine.
Okay.
Okay, so it must it must be that it's no impact whatsoever if you've had sexual activity.
Zip zero not effect.
Well, let's go to the debate.
Here's here's how this happened.
It was in Tampa last night, and Wolf Blitzer said, Governor Perry, as you well know you signed an executive order requiring little girls 11 and 12 to get a vaccine to deal with a sexually transmitted disease that could lead to cervical cancer.
Was that a mistake?
It was, indeed.
If I had it to do over again, I would have done it uh differently.
I would have gone to the legislature, worked with them.
But what was driving me was obviously making a difference about young people's lives.
I will tell you that I made a mistake by not going to the legislature first.
Well, he um uh has also said he hates cancer.
That I mean, I'm quoting him there.
He hates cancer.
Um, here is Bachman after Blitzer said, uh, Congresswoman Bachman, do you have anything to say about what Governor Perry just said?
I'm a mom and I'm a mom of three children, and to have innocent little 12-year-old girls be forced to have a government injection through an executive order is just flat out wrong.
That should never be done.
That's a Violation of a liberty interest.
That's little girls who have a negative reaction to this potentially dangerous drug, don't get a mulligan.
They don't get a do-over.
The parents don't get a do-over.
She uh wasn't finished.
We cannot forget that in the midst of this executive order, there is a big drug company that made millions of dollars because of this mandate.
It's wrong for a drug company because the governor's former chief of staff was the chief lobbyist for this drug company.
The drug company gave thousands of dollars in political donations to the governor.
And this is just flat out wrong.
The question is is it about life or was it about millions of dollars and potentially billions for a drug company?
All right.
So there was the charge.
Crony capitalism.
That Perry had no real interest here in saving lives.
He wasn't interested in net.
It was simply the fact that his former chief of staff was the chief lobbyist for Merck, and that there was a payoff in it.
That's why he insisted on the vaccine be given because it had to be bought, and that meant profits.
So Perry said that he ended up being offended by this.
Yes, sir.
The company was Merck, and it was a $5,000 contribution that I had received from them.
I raise about $30 million.
And if you're saying that I can be bought for five thousand, I'm offended.
I'm offended for all the little girls and the parents that didn't have a choice.
That's what I'm offended for.
Now, what I didn't understand throughout this whole thing was there was an opt-out.
I mean, there was a choice.
There was an opt-out.
Now I don't know how widely advertised the opt-out was, but there clearly was an opt-out there.
Now I'm I'm also being told that we might not be correct here in saying that this vaccine is uh uh no good if given to you after you have sex.
Uh there's a there's a there's a school of thought that says that the Gardasil only works if you get the vaccine before you get the HVP infection.
If if you it that it's not so much that you've had sex, it's that if you it only works before you've had the infection.
If you get the infection first, the vaccine doesn't work.
So I I again we're I am not a doctor.
I don't play one on television, and I I don't want to be uh uh stamping official here.
Medical news that we're putting out here is simply uh uh the the the may not be a hundred percent accurate here.
Um you have to be vaccinated before you get the infection.
All vaccines work that way.
That's what a vaccine is.
You can't you a smallpox vaccine will not prevent you from getting the smallpox.
You got it or chickenpox, or whatever mumps, whatever they shoot you up for.
Uh in my day, polio vaccine was a sugar cube that they gave you to have something in it.
Kids love the sugar cubes, but if you had polio, it wouldn't do any good.
So all vaccines actually work that way.
Now, on this crony capitalism business, and I mentioned this at the top of the program.
Sarah Palin jumped on this with Greta last night.
Um the the the Perry and the Merck thing.
She jumped all over in defense of Bachmann.
And there's no evidence of that, there's no evidence that that what Bachman charged Perry with doing happened.
And Perry said he can't be bought for five grand.
I know.
It's funny the way a cynic could listen to what Perry said.
Well, what is the price?
I'm not saying that.
Some could.
Crony capitalism is when the government is using tax dollars to subsidize a particular industry or company.
What Bachman is accusing Perry of is a quid pro quo.
That's making a decision based On a donation.
That's not crony capitalism.
Crony capitalism is what's Obama doing with GE and Cylindra and that kind of stuff.
We'll be right back.
Well, now I'm told that uh it's still gonna be October the 10th or 5th or whatever the IOS.
Well, I'm gonna have to find something to occupy my time.
It's like telling me that Christmas has been moved to January 30th.
Sorry, this is me.
Donna in Smokehan, Washington, welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, great to have you here.
Thank you, Rush.
Great to talk to you.
I have two co questions.
One's a comment on the Heritage Foundation Constitution.
I recommend that to anybody.
You mean the Hillsdale College thing?
I beg your pardon.
Hillsdale College.
Their constitution's here.
Yes.
Yes.
Good.
And the second one is I wanted to get your opinion on what's happening with gits and guitars and having them being raided.
The guy's being targeted because he's uh not an Obama or Democrat donor.
That's what I thought.
Well, there's no question because his competitors use the same wood.
I know.
And also he's non-union.
Yeah, exactly right.
This is Obama.
This is typical Democrat union foggery.
This is uh Gunyanism.
Yes.
Nonunion shop.
I mean, it's he's a perfect, perfect target.
Oh, yeah, he's a perfect Patsy.
Good example of crony capitalism, in fact, is Obama partnering up with his buddies and uh harming his buddies competitor at uh at Gibson.
So yeah I I palin getting involved in this is a little unsettling only because there's no evidence that Perry did any of this.
And it really isn't crony capitalism anyway.
Uh now, if you're making official policy in exchange for a donation, we're talking about something criminal.
And that you'd better be able to back up if you're going to charge that.
And that's why, frankly, people cringed when she said it.
Because that takes it to a different level.
That's not simply a policy disagreement.
That's an accusation of criminal activity that she made.
Bachman against against Perry.
And that's why this little nervousness that you can see since uh settled in a hall there, changed the whole dynamic.
More on this tomorrow, but um, fewer people received insurance coverage through their employer in 2010 than 2000.
One and a half million people lost health insurance to their employer and are signed up through a government agency somehow.
It's already started.
▲
Export Selection