All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 28, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:59
September 28, 2011, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, we're up to um uh audio sound by number five and in order.
There we get there.
Greetings and welcome back.
Uh ladies and gentlemen, Rush Limbaugh, I have talent on the loan from a god.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Which we strive to do here each and every day.
All right, this this question about independence.
I'll tell you, I don't think anybody cared about independence till Ronaldus Magnus came around.
Everybody says that that outright conservatism scares away independence.
But I don't recall, this is just me.
Now I could be proven wrong on this, obviously, because this is something I'm just calling up from memory.
I don't remember the media ever talking about independence until the Reagan elections.
Because in every election, the independents numbered about 20 to 22 percent.
Reagan got 34% after one year of Reagan, the independents supported him by 34%.
And that's when they started getting noticed, because they went for Reagan in a big way.
And you might also want to call him the Reagan Democrats.
It might have been referred to the independents as Reagan Democrats back then.
But that's when they first started getting noticed.
And it's like everything else.
It's like somehow the Republicans stood in the way of the Civil Rights Act.
No, no, no, no, no.
It was the Democrats that stood in the way of the Civil Rights Act.
Now, it was a Democrat president, LBJ that proposed it.
But it was Bill Clinton's buddies in the Senate, J. William Fulbright and Human Talmadge and a bunch of other of these guys down there that stood in the way of it.
A greater percentage of Republicans in the Senate voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats.
But today, conventional wisdom has it that the Republicans are the racist sexist bigot homophobes.
Just like conventional wisdom has it that the independents always vote Democrat.
And when they majority of them goes for Republicans, uh-oh, there's an aberration, something wrong there.
No, no, no, no.
That's that's actually not true.
So much of political conventional wisdom is the exact opposite of the truth.
Now the health care situation.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the individual mandate, but they left the rest of Obamacare intact.
Now that I thought I'm pretty sure that is different from previous rulings at other courts, talking here about the 11th Circuit.
So it was thought, it was speculated that the uh the regime would uh would ask for the entire 11 judge court to hear the case rather than just the three-judge panel that decided.
And then the regime shocked everybody, or I think shocked everybody.
No, no, no, you know what?
We're not even gonna mess around with the 11th anymore.
We're just gonna go straight to SCOTUS.
Straight to the Supreme Court.
And I said now, wait just a second here.
That tells me that they think that they're gonna win this at the Supreme Court.
I frankly think, folks, and I have no problem telling you this.
I think they're gonna lose it at the Supreme Court, but that's just me.
I think Obama is gonna get paid back big time for his dissing of the Supreme Court at that State of the Union show.
I think his moment is coming.
This health care bill would it finally, but I'm way ahead of things here, so let's I don't even want to go there any further than I have, as just an opinion based on no knowledge.
So I asked uh a legal friend of mine to help me understand, because there was a story today that uh uh from the from the foundry, which is a Heritage Foundation blog, that we have outmaneuvered The regime, and we have filed an appeal at the Supreme Court based on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal ruling before the regime has.
And this is considered a victory because we have outmaneuvered them and outsmarted them.
So I said, okay, somebody you need to explain this to me because I all along have thought that what the regime wanted to do was slow this down.
Take as much time in the lower courts as possible while this was implemented, because the more of it's implemented.
This is what the regime's counting on.
This is a giant entitlement.
We're going to be giving people things.
And once you start giving them things, it get really problematic and difficult, taking it away from them, i.e., repealing it.
So the regime's strategy has been to slow walk it.
This is not slow walking it.
This is speeding it up.
So what we're we're having, what we have here is the regime figuring that the longer Obamacare has to be incrementally implemented before the Supremes ultimately decide the constitutional issues, the more it will be a feta complete.
And such that the court will find it difficult, if not impossible, to roll it back or to declare it unconstitutional.
And the strategy gives the media all that much more time to work on Justice Kennedy.
Justice Kennedy is thought to be the swing vote here.
And the media thinks that Justice Kennedy can be swayed by promises of puff coverage and a Washington Post style section piece or what have you.
That he, among all the justices, is more susceptible to a ruling based on what he wants to be thought of in the aftermath.
I'm just telling you what they think.
So they have more time here to work on Justice Kennedy.
Moreover, while the legal challenges are important.
What needs to happen for Obamacare with it, really, is a political resolution.
And by a political resolution, what I mean is we need a Republican party committed to repealing it, not waiting for the Supreme Court to do it for them.
Just like we waited on campaign finance reform.
We figured, eh, court will take care of that.
We don't have to do any heavy lifting.
Look what happened.
The court found it constitutional.
And there's a there's a great concern here that the Republican Party doesn't, you know, for all the bluster and for all the talk, they don't want to do the heavy lifting.
As long as it's going to go to the Supreme Court, the theory is, well, we'll just back out of this.
We'll avoid any controversy and any negative media coverage.
Remember, the Republican leadership focused on mainstream media.
That's what they care about.
They care about what those people say about them.
And they also believe that those are the people that have they will have to go through to get their message out.
So we need a committed Republican effort to repeal it.
But as long as the as long as the Republicans think the courts will take care of it, there isn't a whole lot of energy in the Republican congressional efforts.
And by the way, in let me even add to that the presidential debates.
Who have you heard talking about repealing Obamacare?
Michelle Bachman.
That's it, and that's my point.
We haven't, we don't hear it from Romney.
We don't hear it.
We have heard it from Cain.
Romney does say he'll say he'll repeal it, but that's in the context of trying to defend the Massachusetts.
But I mean, in terms of energetically making it a lead issue, making it a defining issue, Michelle Bachman is it.
And Obama knows that time is what helps him.
You know, Bachman, if you talk about Bachmann got almost no support in her effort to defund that 105 billion dollars that Pelosi snuck into Obamacare to fund its implementation between now and 2013.
This is this is shortly After the 2012 midterm elections or 2010 midterm elections, and Bachman discovers this 105 billion dollars that Pelosi snuck in there to implement it, and she wants it taken out, and she went and she got nowhere in the party, nowhere with the Republican leadership.
They didn't want to touch it.
The reason they don't want to touch it is because Supreme Court talked there.
It's eventually going to go to the court anyway.
We'll let the court take the arrows on this.
Now, Obama, Obama doesn't know much about this.
I don't think Obama really knows what's in this.
I don't think Obama really cares.
All he knows is that at the end of the day, the government's going to run health care.
And that's enough for him.
What he is is a tactician.
When it comes to using to his advantage the enormity of the government's procedures and delays, that's what he's good at.
So my question was, okay, if they want to slow walk it, then why not ask for the whole 11th court to hear it?
Instead, they say that they're going to go straight to the Supreme Court.
We supposedly beat them to the punch at the Supreme Court, but we're still at the Supreme Court, which is not slowing it down.
So I was confused.
So what I got back was from the legal eagle that I queried here, well, you have to balance a couple of competing interests.
Yeah, they want to slow walk it, but they also, meaning the regime, they also want to win it.
Now the 11th circuit ruling was not a complete loss.
They did lose there, but it was not a complete loss because the 11th Circuit held that the individual mandate was severable, meaning the rest of Obamacare stands, but the mandate's unconstitutional, so we'll just pull that out.
That was a big win for them.
It seems to fly in the face of pretty settled law that a multi-part piece of legislation is not severable unless Congress indicates that it intends for the rest of the law to survive if one part is held invalid.
Now, normally the mandate here is the foundation of Obamacare.
If the mandate is stripped out of it, the rest of the bill should fall apart on its own weight.
Because the mandate is what funds it in large part.
But the 11th Circuit said, no, the whole law can stay, we're just going to pull out the mandate.
So the regime says, look, if we go back to the full 11 judge panel for what's called an N Bonc review, there's no guarantee that the whole 11th Circuit would agree with the three judges on severability.
They didn't want to take the chance because the 11th circuit is usually a pretty good court for us.
So they didn't want to take the chance that they could lose what they won by asking for the full panel of judges in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the case.
Because this is a big win.
I mean, it was declared the mandate unconstitutional, but the rest of the law stands.
That's fine with them.
So they weighed everything, and the regime's Department of Justice decided not to appeal because they could have lost what for them is the good part, but they also tried to use all their time to string it out as long as they could because they know that the court's docket for the next term's already pretty full, and if they played out the string, maybe the Supreme Court wouldn't hear the case until 2012 or 2013 term.
And it is believed in our camp that that's what they were trying to do was get this to court but late so that it didn't get on the next year's docket.
Now the states know the delay doesn't help them, and that because of the severability ruling, they had their own grounds for an appeal that is a practical matter would force the court to look at Obamacare as a whole, which is what has happened.
Our side has forced an appeal at the Supreme Court before the regime has filed theirs.
So the bottom line is a long way, and probably too much wind here, but there's a long way of explaining That the action today, our side, actually yesterday, in filing our own appeal in advance of the regimes, could save a year of delay by getting it on the docket at the Supreme Court a year earlier than the regime wanted it.
The regime is sitting out there figuring they win at the 11th, well, they lose at the 11th, but they they they have a victory in that.
Yeah, they lost the mandate, but the rest of the law stands.
Okay, fine.
That's cool.
We're not going to risk losing that by asking the entire 11-judge panel to rule.
So we'll just sit on this and we'll go to the Supreme Court in a couple months and ask them to hear it.
Well, we didn't give enough time.
We have already asked the Supreme Court, so the upshot of this is that we're trying to speed this up as fast as it much as it can be.
And by a having our own appeal to the court, maybe a year has been shaved off of this.
And that's crucial when talking about the implementation of this.
It's crucial also in terms of the court's ruling.
I don't care what anybody says the Supreme Court reads election results.
And the Supreme Court knows public opinion polls.
And don't let anybody tell you that that stuff doesn't matter.
It does.
And I also think there's a wild card, as I mentioned mere moments ago, and that is Obama's public disrespect and calling out of the Supreme Court at a State of the Union address a couple years ago.
You don't see, they don't go up there anymore.
You haven't seen.
I don't think Chief Justice Roberts has been back.
Sam Alito hadn't been back.
I don't think Clarence Thomas has been back.
I don't think Scalia's been back.
I don't think they've gone up to any more of these State of the Union shows of these joint session things.
Yeah, you got Ruth Buzy Ginsburg in there, and you've got uh there's also the question of of uh Elena Kagan and whether or not she can even survive this in terms of recusal.
That point is still a lot to happen here, but it's got to happen fast because as this gets implemented, it's tough to rip things out by the roots.
You know, you don't prune weeds.
And this health care bills nothing but a bunch of weeds, and you have to get rid of weeds at the root level.
And that's what's going to have to happen with this.
I got to take a break.
We'll come back and continue much more of your phone calls too when we get back.
Who's next?
Jim in Boston.
Glad you called, sir.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Megadito's rush to the all-knowing, all seeing, all feeling, all senties Maha Rushi.
Thank you, sir, very much.
Okay.
I want to cite the Buckley rule as the preface to my question.
And I'm a little embarrassed to ask because you probably already answered it.
Will Christie jump in or out?
I don't have any idea.
I I can only guess, and I I don't think so.
I don't think he I don't think he's going to run.
You're supposed to know.
That's why I'm calling your you.
You're the only one who knows.
Well, my gut tells me that he's not going to run.
Same thing with Sarah Palin, by the way.
Don't think either of them are going to run.
I think he would sharpen Mitt Romney.
Um.
If he ran, it would be to take out Perry and Bachman and Kane and uh some that that would be the purpose.
Thanks for the call.
Yesterday on CNN's newsroom, um, the host Drew Griffin interviewed Larry King.
Larry King just got a lifetime Emmy award.
And he was seen at a uh at a at a New York restaurant running around the restaurant, introducing himself to everybody carrying his Emmy and showing it to people.
Larry King.
He uh the guy that wears the suspenders, snerdly, he uh had a talk show on CNN for used to be on TV, yeah.
Yeah.
And he got a lifetime Emmy.
A lifetime Emmy.
And so he was he was on CNN Drew Griffin.
Who who was Drew Griffin?
Obviously he's a CNN anchor.
What time is CNN's newsroom on?
Well, it's a show called Newsroom.
Yeah, I don't know if they've actually got a newsroom in the building, but they have a show called Newsroom.
Anyway, uh King was on this, and Griffin said, you know, Larry, so many people watching this may be 26, and they don't remember how long ago you started.
If there are any 26-year-olds watching CNN, it's because they don't have the remote.
Ha!
Jesus!
This is it.
Ha, ha, ha.
*clap* Thank you.
They can't find the remote, or else they're at the airport.
Larry, uh, you know, uh a lot of people uh watching this are maybe 26, and they don't remember how long ago you started.
I don't mean that negatively, Larry.
I'm not saying you're Jurassic Park, but you know, you built a lot of this cable TV news industry.
You did it yourself.
Is there any one moment that sticks out in your mind to be the pinnacle of your career?
I think the Perole Gore debate.
It was a program that had for the first time ever, a sitting vice president debating an ordinary citizen.
Al Gore and Ross Perot going at it, and the House of Representatives passed it.
It was gonna lose.
And Bill Clinton wrote that I owe you big time because you changed that vote.
Well, I didn't change it.
The show changed it.
That would be the moment.
That's NAFTA.
This was the uh the NAFTA debate.
Uh if you're 26 center, you may not even know what that is.
But I remember this.
I I in fact I remember the uh three or four days after the NAFTA debate on CNN, I remember I was uh an invited and esteemed guest, 60 minutes at the Temple of Dendar at the uh uh museum on Fifth Avenue.
And it was it is uh it was a anniversary show.
It was the anniversary dinner that thirty years, sixty years, hundred years, whatever it was of sixty minutes, and they had a number of people they had profiled, and and and they thought at at 60 minutes they're gonna have fireworks, because they seated me at the table with Camille Paglia, who a fire brand uh art professor, University Arts Philadelphia, she's lesbian, and they thought they thought that there would be fireworks.
I'm sitting there and Camille Poggy and I got along famously that night.
It was it was a fun night, but Steve Croft and Ed Bradley, and these guys kept circling our table during dinner, just kept waiting for the fireworks, like they stroking their chins with knowing smiles on their faces like fireworks were about to erupt.
That was the only reason I was there in a circus act.
And I remember the cocktail party in the Temple of Dendar Before we actually went to sit down.
Well, that was the that was the display, the temple at Dendar, the museum display.
Tom Brokaw came up and he was beside himself over the ratings that the NAFTA debate got on C. They got an 11 or 12 cable number.
This is 94, 95 cable numbers had never news numbers, never seen anything that high.
And Brokaw was around.
He could he couldn't believe it.
I I was stunned.
But that's not the only thing.
During this debate, the Gore Perot debate on NAFTA.
Al Gore said something for the ages.
Let me just finish this one point.
And distinguished Americans from Colin Powell to Tip O'Neill to Rush Limbaugh.
That's 1993, November 9, 1993.
I was a distinguished American that night.
Yeah, yeah.
Colin Powell, Tip O'Neill, uh Rush Limbaugh.
Yeah, I was a distinguished American.
That night.
Anyway, that's uh so that big Larry's uh Larry's big night.
Now let's see.
Well, let me grab a phone call or two here.
We got uh Naugatuck, Connecticut and Patty.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Good afternoon, and thank you so much for taking my call.
You bet.
I uh wanted to make a little comment, and um, it was actually to In regards to the beginning of the show too.
And um I I too agree.
This isn't the time for compromise.
This is definitely a time we need a leader who is going to save the nation.
I I think we already may have him on the stage, but I don't know that we've um actually allowed him to show how brilliant the man actually is and has a vast knowledge of Congress, the world, the foreign affairs, and it's Newt Gingrich.
I I think he um this might be the his time.
And I think uh if we had a very difficult complex questions during the debate that were pointed to each one, rather than focusing on one or two and allowing so much time elapsed between those two, he might shine, and I think the more time goes on, the enormity of the complexity of the problems that we'll be facing this nation, he may be the president we need.
Well, how would you analyze the problems that he faces?
Uh well, uh some of them would be the financials, the banks, the wars, foreign affairs, uh, I think um managing and be able to No, no, no.
I mean the problems Newt faces.
I mean, why is he s why is he not doing better than he is?
Because a lot of people have your impression of him that he's the adult on that stage, that he's brilliant, that he's uh got the experience, all of these things.
Why do you think he's not doing better?
I think because of some personal issues in the past, and I I I think um I I w I have personally been trying to do this with the people because it's such a critical time in our nation.
There may be something that is cast to each person that would be something that we say, well, they're not perfect because of this, we're not perfect because of this.
I think we need to go with the the gentleman or the woman who you think can rise to the occasion of the multiple complex problems this nation's going to fix.
I think our focus should be that, and our secondary concerns should be secondary, because I think it's going to take a great person with a very, very lot of courage and a lot of stamina and strength to navigate and have a vision for this country that could make us sound.
Well, you know, one of the problems that Newt has, you said at the beginning of your call that you say this isn't the time for compromise.
Yes, sir.
Well, Newt's done too much of that.
Uh just at least in photos.
I mean, he by by sitting on the couch with Pelosi and talking about global warming or joint press conference with Hillary on health care.
This has caused some people to question uh whether Newt will stay the course.
Mm-hmm.
Or whether he is uh uh easily distracted by things, uh things that might make it appear like he wants to get along or you know, it uh a lot of people think that Newt is is is like a lot of Republicans, he's been badly burned by the DC media and establishment and wants desperately to be liked by him and goes out of his way, like Nixon did.
And it never works.
Nixon gave him OSHA, Nixon gave him everything they want, and they hated him even more after everything he tried to do for them.
I think there's just a little concern that that that you know we we don't want to nominate somebody that that finds it okay to sit on a country with Pelosi and agree with her on global warming, which is a hoax.
Yes.
So it those are then I know those things happened a long time ago, but they were pictures.
They were TV spots commercials, people remembered them therefore.
Yes, the history is the pr affecting the present.
Yeah, I know.
Well, I don't disagree with you at all about Newt's brain and his mind, his experience, uh no one more formidable intellectually.
Not even close.
Not even close.
Speaking of all this, thanks, thanks for the call, Patty.
Audio sound bites.
Twenty-three.
Followed by twenty-four.
Uh Tuesday night in Des Moines, this is last night in Des Moines while meeting with the Polk County GOP Central Committee, Anita Perry, the wife of Texas Governor Rick Perry said this about her husband.
He has never had a debate class, nor debate coach in his life.
He realizes the last debate.
He realized that I can look on his face, and he knew that.
So he's gonna be better prepared this time.
He's going to um in fact our son is 28, and he said, Mom, when they do the debate prep for the next debate, I want to be there.
He is not he's fast and he's down as a fighter, and this is his opportunity to show up.
Okay, so the wife says he's gonna be there, and I'm gonna make sure of it.
The wife said he's better off when he's the unit next debate prep.
I'm gonna be there.
So keep a sharp eye out for Romney Perry in the in the next debate.
By the way, little news here.
The Obama regime has just approved two more solar energy loans for a total of one billion dollars.
Two more solar energy loans.
Cylindra type thing.
Cylinder.
We ought to just say that we are a solar company.
I'm gonna, I'm gonna, you know, I'm gonna turn two if by tea into a solar company.
I'm gonna say we need, we we we're gonna go solar to produce the tea.
We're gonna do sun tea, and we need to be solar.
$523 billion, a million dollar loan, don't forget.
That's what all these other people are uh are getting.
GOP establishment not happy today, folks.
Drudge has it, poll data.
Obama 39%.
Herman Cain 34%.
Herman Cain trails Obama by five.
As much as these polls today mean.
Now, to the establishment, polls are everything.
I don't care when they are.
They mean nothing to me this time of year.
Really, what is a presidential poll on September 28th of 2011 mean?
It means absolutely nothing in terms of forecasting the end result.
It matters fundraising and that sort of thing.
It doesn't matter the end result.
Also, in Iowa, the latest polling data on the Republican side, Romney 21, Bachman 15, Parry 14, Paul 12.
Michelle Bachman being within striking distance.
Not going to please the Republican establishment, ladies and gentlemen.
Get this.
This is just out on the wires from Bloomberg News.
Cylindra had a 733 million dollar plant to make their solar panels.
They made them for $6 and sold them for three.
Cylindra got $533 million from the federal US, basically.
The Cylindra factory covered 300,000 square feet.
That's five football fields.
That's how big their factory was.
The Cylindra Factory had five, I'm sorry, had robots that whistled Disney tunes.
Showers that you would find in Spa, liquid crystal displays of the water temperature.
Glass-walled conference rooms.
John Pierce, 54 San Jose resident who worked as a facilities manager at Cylindra said the new building is like the Taj Mahal.
733 million dollar plant, five football fields large, robots that whistled Disney tunes, spa-like showers with liquid crystal displays of the water temperature.
And they were making solar panels for six bucks that they were selling for three, claiming the Chicom's undercutting them.
And the regime has just authorized a billion dollars in new money for two additional solar firms.
All right, that's it.
Everything comes to an end, and we're through.
I mean, that's it for today, other than my polite goodbyes and this and that and the other thing.
Just a couple things I wanted to get to today that I didn't.
Obama is basically out there telling Congress he wants his jobs bill back.
Now that's a headline, ABC News.
Obama wants his jobs bill back.
It doesn't mean he doesn't like it and he wants to change it.
He means he wants them to pass it and send it back to him so he can sign it.
That's all BS and bogus.
That bill is never coming back to him to sign.
It hasn't even got a sponsor in the House.
Dingy Harry has got it sponsored alone By himself in the Senate, but he's burying it.
It's not going anywhere by design.
It's there as an election tool only.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence in the can.
By the way, Politico has a story today.
Healthcare premiums now cost more than a new car.
Not going down, folks.
Healthcare premiums not going down, and coverage is not getting better.
▲
Export Selection