All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 28, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
October 28, 2011, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The day everybody waits for TGIOF IOLF Thank God it's Open Line Friday live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday The views expressed by the host on this program make more sense than anything anybody else out there happens to be saying Because the views expressed by the host on this program are rooted in a daily relentless, unstoppable pursuit of the truth Great to have you with us folks open line Friday.
Whatever you want to talk about, fine and dandy telephone number is 800-282-2882.
The email address, LRushbow at EIBnet.com.
Just this afternoon on the FOX Business Channel, FOX Business Network, They talked to Herman Cain.
They were on Kane's bus down in Talladega, Alabama and one of the FOX correspondents, a guy named Barnes, said the last presidential candidate to come to Talladega was former Alabama Governor George Wallace, a segregationist.
I remember being on the bus in Atlanta riding as a young teenager, where I would see the sign at the front of the bus that said white seat from front, colored seat from rear, and I had to sit in the back of the bus because of the greatness of America and the fact that we have this ability to change.
That's one of the things that has made us great, and today I don't have to sit in the back of the bus.
I own the bus and my picture's on the outside.
That's the greatness of America and I'm running for president of the United States Of America.
Does it get any better than that?
Herman Kane, who admits that he was around when everybody was down for the struggle, he remembers having to go to the back of the bus.
Now he owns the bus and this kind of optimism is why Herman Kane's not fading away.
You know he's the latest Non-Romney.
There have been many Non-Romneys and they have popped up, they have shot up in the polls and then they've lost ground.
Herman Kane hasn't yet.
He's still up there and a lot of people, I've got some friends who want to do fundraisers for the guy.
This support for Herman Kane is real.
And a lot of these people that I know who want to do business, fundraisers for Herman Kane, are business people, as well as being oriented toward politics.
So there's something happening here.
It's many, many facets to this campaign.
You've got Rick Perry now saying that, I'm not sure that I'm going to be in these debates anymore.
I mean, this next debate may be my last one.
And who can blame him?
He doesn't do well in these debates.
And these debates really aren't debates.
Who is it?
Newt and Kane are going to do a private Lincoln-Douglas kind of debate.
You know what?
Ticket prices for that thing have reached up $1,000.
$200, $1,000 pay-per-view, $200 if you want to be in the hall for a Lincoln-Douglas style debate between Newt and Herman Cain.
So the dynamic is changing.
And you've got nine candidates on the stage with 30 seconds here or a minute there.
You really don't have debates.
You have glorified press conferences with the moderators choosing who gets what questions and how much time to respond and all of that.
Some people do well in formats like that and others don't.
So Perry, and some people might say, but Rush, it's a mistake for Perry to drop out.
Folks, it really isn't.
I remember when I was a DJ, struggling young DJ, long ago in my career, one of the radio stations I worked at was in Pittsburgh, and the program director decided that the number one song in the market, we weren't going to play it.
He didn't like it.
He thought it was culturally degenerative.
This is in the 70s.
So he says, we're not going to play it.
And all of us jock said, what do you mean you're not going to play it?
The competition is playing.
They're going to kill us.
He said, nobody will know.
You can't be hurt by a song you don't play.
Meaning, people won't tune out of a song they don't play.
There's a show business adage that if you don't do it, it can't flop.
So if Perry doesn't do a debate, he can't flop in one.
And that's the theory.
You take a measure of, okay, what's the upside?
What's the downside?
And if a particular format's not good for somebody by not doing it, you can't flop.
You do run the risk of the news being, I don't have the guts to do it, or whatever the criticism might be, but you are limiting the damage.
You don't flop.
It's something you don't do.
Well, but this is all oriented toward getting the debate, getting the nomination.
Well, I think what Perry's talking about is particular debates like this.
We had nine people up there.
One-on-one debates that go for an hour and a half, even if they are the staged TV kind with the League of Women Voters format, that is a different ball of wax.
It is a different animal.
So that's Perry's decision.
Kane and Newt have said to hell with it in their own way.
They're going to have their own little private two-man debate and charging big bucks for it.
And I like this because in both cases, it is a rejection of the conventional wisdom.
It's a rejection of the conventional wisdom saying, this is how we do things.
This is how we elect a president.
We have nine candidates on a stage and we call it a debate.
It's really just an elongated press conference with the moderators playing gotcha, which is fine.
I'm not being critical of that.
That's what it is.
These guys have decided their own way they don't want to be part of it.
They don't play that way.
But if they don't play to their strengths or if these formats don't play to their strengths, don't do it.
And Perry's obvious operating philosophy is, if he doesn't do it, he can't flop.
And if you stop and think about it, it makes perfect sense.
I mean, everybody's talking about after each debate how it just didn't quite get there.
It just looks like he's struggling for words.
Whatever the criticism is.
And there's also part and parcel of the theory is that debates are by no means the only thing that contribute to somebody's winning an election or a primary.
And they aren't.
In fact, they may rank pretty low.
They can do more damage than they can do good is the bottom line.
You can ace debate after debate after debate.
It is said that Romney does.
But look, 70% of Republicans still say after Romney's acing all these debates that they prefer somebody else.
And the non-Romney flavor of the moment happens to be Herman Cain, who, by the way, interestingly, Obama wants to move back to the back of the bus.
I mean, that's an obvious conclusion one could draw.
You know, the phrase is what's cut won't flop.
And it's true, you're editing a television show or a movie and you're putting the final product together and you cut something out.
Well, we're going to cut that because that can't flop.
It's actually what this stems from.
If you read any of the philosophy of the great artists, almost all of them will tell you that what makes great art is what they take out of it, not what is added to it.
Whether they're trying to be complex or simplistic, it's still what they take out.
And it has also the root, brevity is the soul of wit.
All of this stuff, all of these different philosophies are tied together.
And they basically say, play to your strengths and avoid as best you can your weaknesses.
And that's what people here are deciding to do rather than to continue to butt their heads against a wall that is immovable.
The question being asked by the official program observer is, isn't being articulate a primary qualification for the job?
Yes.
Yeah, undeniable.
So if you're not articulate in a particular format, get out of it.
So how can you be hurt if you're not articulate, if you don't go anywhere where you are unarticulate or inarticulate?
That's the theory.
Now, the other side of it is the news is out that Perry is leaving the debates.
And of course, what will be the public relations aspect of that?
And what will his opponents say?
Oh, Rick Perry can't handle it.
He's quitting.
He can't handle the pressure, admitting he doesn't do whatever they say about it.
Hey, it's the big leagues.
I don't know how articulate Eisenhower was.
You talk about, you know, Eisenhower is thought of as a great president.
He really is.
But Eisenhower fits the mold of what I'm talking about.
Eisenhower didn't do anything.
Eisenhower comes out of World War II.
What did he learn in World War II?
Your enemies?
You shoot them.
Okay, so he's elected president.
He figures out, somebody tells him, you can't shoot Congress.
He's okay, fine.
And he goes and plays golf.
He becomes a member at Augusta National, and he joins a couple clubs out in Palm Springs, and he's on a golf course all the time.
And a few other places.
But he's basically, he didn't do all that much.
And he was considered a great, yeah, it was, well, he was somewhat pre-TV, yeah, but at the same time, well, we were also in a post-war boom.
And he didn't do anything.
He didn't mess it up.
Just let things go.
Let things happen.
Unlike the meddling that we've got every day from this bunch who can't leave well enough alone.
Open line Friday.
Your calls are coming up when we come back from this obscene profit timeout.
Quick reminder here before we go to the phone, support for Obamacare has hit its lowest point since the law passed in March of 2010, according to a new monthly poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
After months of split support for the law, 51% of respondents had an unfavorable view.
Only 34% approve of Obamacare.
Now, just yesterday, the Washington Times had a very dispiriting column about the opposition to Obamacare dimming.
Now, that, to be fair, was opposition in Washington among elected Republicans that they had done everything they could.
They can't force it because they don't have the votes.
They don't have enough votes to override an Obama veto.
And they sent their repeal bill up and been there done that.
I'm glad they actually wrote the piece because I think it's helpful for all of you to know that the effort or the support for repealing Obamacare is dimming somewhat.
And remember now, two of the reasons.
Well, you know, Rush, there's a couple things in Obamacare that we think our voters really like, keeping the kids on the policy till they're 26 and preconditions, pre-existing conditions.
We think people, so there's a, shall we say, a lessening of intensity, but not among the voters.
Do not believe that there is a falling off of intensity, either to get rid of Obama next election or to get rid of Obamacare.
In fact, it's just the opposite.
It's ratcheting up.
People have had it.
You don't see it covered in the media.
Right now, you're looking at all this wonderful orgasmic news about the economy coming back, but don't doubt me.
The numbers of people fed up with what's happening to this country and the intensity that they feel about it increasing.
All the polling data on passion to vote, Republicans cream the Democrats in that category.
Now to the phones, as promised, Open Line Friday, Highland, Indiana.
Hello, Lee.
Great to have you with us.
Hi, Rush.
I love, love, love you.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
Okay, when you said today that you didn't feel like you were quite on your game this last month, I suddenly realized that I don't think you have been either, but my theory is that something has to give.
And when you are happy in your personal life and your wife needs you, I think you can either be the most fabulous husband, the most fabulous radio host, but sometimes you can't be both.
Really?
That's your take on this.
It is.
And I've been with you for 18 years.
See, I told you, Sturdy, she says, you said it, Lee.
You said it.
I have not been at the top of my game.
You said it.
I haven't.
And I thought it was.
Okay, now, wait a minute.
What do you mean?
I'm not arguing with you.
When you say I haven't been at the top of my game, what do you mean?
I'll tell you exactly.
Okay, here's the example.
I have Rush 24-7.
So when I listen to you, I run my errands.
And if I miss the first 30 minutes of our two, I come home and I listen to it while I'm cooking dinner.
And I have noticed that sometimes I don't do it.
And I thought, well, I'm just busy.
I want to see something else on TV or whatever.
I used to never miss anything.
I thought I was just kind of losing interest.
And when you said that today, I thought, you know what?
Maybe it is him.
See, you were blaming yourself.
Yeah.
You were blaming yourself for not listening to the program.
And now you are eager to be able to blame me for it.
But I'm not.
Because you know what?
I love you so much.
I am so happy you're happy.
I don't like it.
I mean, I love Mark Stein, you know, or the host, but I don't always listen to the whole show when it's another host, but I want you to be a fabulous husband first.
Oh, okay.
Got it.
Well, interesting thoughts.
Do you consider, let me ask you this, Lee, before we wrap it up here.
Do you consider yourself to have been at the top of your game on this call?
No, because I'm so nervous.
And you know what?
I've listened for 18 years, and here I am, calling about your personal life.
How funny is that?
Well, I wasn't talking about my personal life.
You are assuming I was talking about my personal life.
Exactly.
No, that's my theory.
I don't know if you think that.
That's what I think because I have listened to you for so many years, and I'm also married to a workaholic.
And when I need something, when I demand my husband's time and attention, that's what he has to do.
And that's what you have to do.
Because I love you enough that I want your wife to be the most important thing in your life because she's going to be there past the radio show.
Right.
All right.
Well, look, Lee, I appreciate this.
This stuff fascinates me.
Find out how people think, how they react to this, how they react to things that I say.
Who's next?
Andy on the highways of Ohio.
Welcome to Open Line Friday.
Great to have you here.
Thank you, Rush.
Good afternoon.
I've got a couple of quick comments about this economy and the unemployment.
Of course, the economy is going to get better.
Of course, the employment rate is going to go up because it's a fourth quarter.
I mean, look at the fourth quarter.
You've got Halloween.
You have Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's.
It always goes up.
It's kind of a cyclic thing every year.
Wait until January, February, and let it roll around to where they dump all these jobs from the seasonals.
Well, that's interesting.
You're talking about temporary, seasonal jobs and hires.
Yeah, but here's the thing.
I like to have people prepared.
Like to have your spine stealed.
And that distinction is not going to be made by the state-controlled media.
That's not even going to be referenced.
It's going to be the economy's back.
It took longer than we thought, but Obama's policies are working.
That's what's coming.
It's not going to be true, but that's what's coming.
Open Line Friday, El Rushbo, have my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
A man, a legend, a way of life.
This is Gordon in Great Falls, Montana.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
How you doing?
Very well, sir.
Thank you.
Hey, look, I was reading an article.
You mentioned an article at the Heritage Foundation about the flat tax over in Russia.
Why haven't we looked at this?
We've looked at it in the past.
I know.
But talking about the GOP candidates, you know, Herman Kane and also Rick Perry coming out with his flat tax.
Why haven't we looked at his plan, you know, what he's done over there, what Roche has done over in their country?
And why haven't we looked at it a little bit closer?
Why haven't we looked at Russia's flat tax plan?
Yeah.
I don't know.
I don't even know what it is.
Well, they started the plan that they implemented was by Russian guest in the Russian president Putin, but they put in a, I think it was a 13% flat tax.
Well, why should we look at theirs when we've got a couple candidates proposing their own?
We've got the fair tax.
We've got the flat tax.
Perry's got his version of it.
What do you like about the Russian tax?
Not necessarily what I like about it, but why don't we just take a look at what they're doing and then see how it works and then see what we're doing.
Well, because we're too busy looking at what the ChiComs are doing.
That's who Obama wants to emulate.
Well, I would certainly hope that one of the candidates will maybe mention, and no one's ever mentioned it, you know, what they're doing, but at least there's one country there that's got a flat tax that we can look at.
And I think other countries, after Russia started their flat tax, I think other countries have followed pursuit in that as well.
Well, I do remember the heritage story on the Russian.
I remember it's a long time ago.
I remember the story, something about their tax and their economy was the revenue generated by it was at an all-time high.
I think, you know, I can't tell you why the Republicans don't do or do things.
I'm not one of them.
I can tell you why Obama's not interested in it, and I can tell you why the Democrats aren't interested in it, and that is they're not interested in things that generate revenue.
The Democrats, they don't care about deficits.
They don't care about raise.
I mean, as a talking point, they will say, well, if we're going to cut that tax over there, we have to pay for it somewhere else.
They do not want to lose any revenue, but they're not concerned about raising it.
That's not their purpose for the tax code.
Their purpose, the tax code, is growing government and usurping individual liberty and freedom.
Now, as to why the Republicans don't incorporate the Russian plan, I don't know.
I haven't the slightest idea.
Jordan in Daytona Beach, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
It's great to speak with you today.
Thank you very much.
My comment for you is we shouldn't be letting the left define greed as the people who use superior talents and abilities to achieve wealth.
Instead, we should turn it around and define greed as being the people who vote for politicians based on the sole principle of who is going to give them the most money out of someone else's paycheck.
Yeah, this is a good point.
The greed, I hear politicians talking about the greed in this country resides in two places.
Washington, D.C.
And of course, you're right, maybe three places.
The greed of the people who expect to be given things from other people.
But then greedy academics, look at these people.
Look at how they benefit from rising tuition and all of the other added finances that the institutions of higher learning get.
The greed is everywhere.
And they are attempting to say that people who want to keep more of what they earn is greed.
And that couldn't be further from the truth.
But again, the reality of definitions is not their point.
This is character assassination and basically other attempts here to denigrate conservatives and Republicans.
Because it's worked in the past.
The media picks it up and runs with it.
And so the greedy are now considered to be the people who work and who are achieving and who want to keep what they earn.
The greedy are not those who want to take it from them.
And you're right.
It's just the exact opposite.
Mary in Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin.
Open Line Friday.
You're next.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Thanks for taking my call.
You bet.
My husband and I are a small business.
And in 2008, the year Obama got elected, first quarter unemployment, I paid $2,800.
In 2011, first quarter, based upon the same amount of payroll, I'm paying over $14,000.
Plus, in August, I got hit with a $938 assessment based on interest owing to the federal government that Wisconsin had to pay.
Let me make sure I understand this.
Before Obama was elected, your unemployment insurance payment was $2,800, and now it's over $14,000.
Is this a year or a month?
A quarter.
A quarter.
Yes.
So the amount you pay for unemployment compensation for your employees, if they need it, is $14,000 a quarter.
Correct.
Wow.
Yes.
And then I have had three people in the past year turn down jobs saying that I was not offering them enough money to get off of unemployment.
People forget that employers hate unemployment.
We pay based on payroll taxes to the state level.
Yeah, they don't think that.
They think Obama's paying for it.
They think the federal government's paying unemployment and for 99 weeks.
And you're exactly right.
Unemployment is so high now that there are people to whom it's a much better deal to stay on unemployment than to go get a job.
Also, Rush, I wanted to point out a lot of schools encourage kids to take out student loans, quote, it helps their credit rating.
Yeah.
And they encourage them to do it.
They don't sit back and say, why don't you get a job going to school?
They now require unpaid internships, community service before you can get your graduation, and they encourage them not to work.
That's right.
Go ahead and get a loan.
Establish your credit rating.
Go to school.
That guarantees that the money you borrow, we will get.
It's a racket.
And Rush, thank you so much for taking my call.
You are welcome.
You have a good day.
You do the same.
Here's another Mary from Bethany, West Virginia.
Hi, and welcome to the program.
Hi.
You there?
I'm here.
Okay, okay.
Hey, just called to say, you know what, you make my day.
Well, thank you.
Thank you very much.
I have to say my husband listened to you for years.
And to tell you the truth, I couldn't stand you.
Okay?
Why?
Why not?
Because you sounded so arrogant.
What do you mean, arrogant?
You mean I sounded sure of myself.
I have one hand tied behind my back.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
Yeah, well, your statements, and then eventually, as we're listening, I'm like, oh, okay.
And then I would chuckle.
And no matter how bad my day might be, you always make a statement that I have to smile or laugh about.
Well, thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
I really do.
You're welcome.
You have a good day.
Okay, you do the same.
Thanks.
That's Mary from Bethany, West Virginia.
We've got a brief timeout.
We'll be back and continue after this.
Well, the first linebacker is, first lady is on the campaign trail.
Where was she?
It's from a website, White House Dossier.
In a chilling appraisal of President Obama's Republican opposition, the first linebacker, Michelle.
I did it again.
A first lady, Michelle Obama, Thursday suggested a Republican victory in the 2012 presidential race would result in limits on freedom of speech and religion.
She was speaking at a fundraiser at a private residence in Tampa, and she noted the power of the president to appoint members of the Supreme Court.
And she indicated that a Republican would select justices who would lack basic First Amendment rights, saying that's what's at stake in this election.
And as a White House transcript, here's what she said.
Let's not forget about what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices.
And for the first time in history, our daughters and our sons watched three women take their seats on the nation's highest court.
But more importantly, let's not forget the impact those decisions will have on our lives for decades to come on our privacy and security, on whether we can speak freely, worship openly, and love whomever we choose.
That's what's at stake here.
This is what you get when you can't run on your husband's economic record.
This is what happens when you can't run on your husband's achievements because there aren't any.
This is what you get.
Republicans want dirty air.
Republicans want dirty water.
Republicans want fewer people alive.
And now Republicans don't want you to be able to speak, and the Republicans don't want you to be able to practice your religion.
This is what they have.
This is what they're worth.
This is all they've got.
They are morally bankrupt.
This is how they have to go out and raise funds.
There is nothing, not one syllable from either Michelle Obama or Barack Obama or anybody in this campaign that's inspiring or uplifting.
They are happily presiding over and managing a country in decline.
And the only ammunition in their arsenal is these never-ending lies about the Republicans want poisoned air and water, dirty air and water, nobody able to speak.
It's just, it's breathtaking to listen to this, to listen to absolutely how morally vacant they are, how unable they are to talk about anything positive or uplifting, including any of their own achievements, because there aren't any.
Nancy in Chatham, Illinois, you're next on Open Line Friday.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
This is such a great honor to talk to you.
I'm so pleased.
My husband just carries a recording of your program each day and he carries it around with him.
That would be the podcast.
Thank you very much.
Well, no, we're not quite that up to speed.
It's kind of like you still know what it is.
Yeah, yeah, I do.
Anyway, we're retired, and I just wanted to say that that Herman Cain ad, a lot of people put it down because of the guy smoking.
I thought it was brilliant.
I have never been a smoker.
I hate secondhand smoke, but people have a right to smoke.
And I think that that where he says at the end that support Herman Cain and we will take back America, he smoked.
There is no group of people that have lost more personal rights than smokers.
And I thought it was absolutely brilliant.
Well, it it was on a number of levels.
People are still talking about it, number one.
Right.
But why what is it your grievance with with secondhand smoke?
Well, I have asthma, but if I go to a restaurant, I always ask for the I did ask for the non-smoking area, and then my clothes come away as kind of smoky smelling.
But people have a right.
It's yucky.
Yeah, well, people have a right.
You know, and nowadays they're trying to ban it in your houses, your private homes, in your cars, in the parks.
And I think that's just gone too far.
And I think this was a statement that all smokers can relate to.
Well, it was something.
I don't know what the guy was trying to do with it.
But whatever he did with it, it had an effect.
It had some impact.
They had to know that there was going to be shock and dismay by ending that commercial with the guy taking a puff off his cigarette.
They had to know that.
What they were trying to do is open to interpretation.
He says he's a smoker.
He likes smoking.
Boehner likes to smoke.
Obama likes to smoke.
Every smoker likes it.
Let's face it, folks.
It's cool.
It looks cool.
Everything about it is cool, except the health impact of it.
But here's what I think about this.
I'm amazed, because you're right, they're trying to ban it everywhere, including in the privacy of your own home.
And yet, you know how many health care programs are funded with the sales tax revenue from cigarettes, cigars, and other tobacco products?
I have long maintained that smokers deserve our gratitude.
In fact, I think smokers, there should be somebody chosen, and a smoker should be given the highest medal that this country gives out, whatever it is, the medal of honor.
If not that, a congressional medal of honor.
Smokers are being told horrible things about themselves.
They're being told they're rotten to the core people.
They are despicable.
And yet, they alone practically are funding children's health care programs.
And we are raising taxes on the sale of tobacco products.
And that money is targeted ostensibly for health care programs, primarily for children.
So we want them to keep smoking, contrary to the so-called do-gooderness of the liberals who wants everybody.
They say they want everybody to quit.
They want everybody to be healthy.
Let's put less strain on the healthcare system.
And yet, how does that jibe with setting up health care programs that depend on the sale of tobacco products to be funded?
So smokers continue to pay these exorbitantly high prices.
They continue to suffer the abuse, the verbal abuse, the onslaught, the attack on their freedoms, and yet they continue to buy.
They continue to pay these higher taxes, all to support and fund health care programs for our children.
And they're still despised.
And you have to wonder about assembling programs this way.
You raise taxes, you make the cost prohibitive, claiming that you're a do-gooder, that you have compassion.
You actually want these people to quit smoking.
It's good for them.
It's good for us.
Getting them off cigarettes will bring down health care costs, it is claimed, because there will be fewer people showing up requiring health care at a relatively early age because they have contracted a terminal disease.
We want to eliminate all that, right?
Yet, we take the sales tax revenue from those products to fund important programs like children's health.
So does the government actually want these people to quit smoking?
It doesn't look like it to me.
It's just this simple.
Ladies and gentlemen, whenever a person quits smoking, a young child suffers.
Whenever a person quits smoking, a child has to do without treatment.
That child coughs a little longer and a little harder every time somebody quits smoking.
It's a terrible thing.
▲
Export Selection