All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 15, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:28
December 15, 2011, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 Podcast.
Well, here it is, Thursday, ladies and gentlemen, and another Republican debate tonight.
Establishment Republicans are dumping all over Newt Gingrich all over the place.
National Review.
Posted an editorial, Mr. Buckley's Magazine.
It used to be conservative.
And they had an editorial last night that said they didn't really recommend anybody.
They just said not Newt.
No way, Newt.
No way, Newt.
They didn't say.
They didn't say they've implied Romney, of course.
And then they kind of ruled out Perry had another chance.
Santorman Bachman maybe get a second look.
But it was uh it was this anti-Newt.
Now you've got this debate tonight.
You've got in Iowa, Ron Paul in second place and moving up, and Newt is losing ground in Iowa.
Which is somewhat understandable because Newt's rise was precipitously fast when and that sometimes can indicate is it it is not uh deep or substantive and is subject to fluctuation.
And then in uh in in in New Hampshire where Newt had gotten within the margin of error.
Mitt Romney continues to lead, however, he's uh with 35% there, and that is the only, even with Newt Plummet, Romney still can't get 25%.
Still can't get anywhere near 30 outside of New Hampshire.
New Hampshire's the only place where Romney Romney is 30% or higher.
Uh no matter where you look, 70% of Republican primary voters want somebody else.
And I, of course, am the zany Rush limboy here on the Zany EIB network.
So in New Hampshire now, you have uh Romney at 35%.
Ron Paul has moved into second place in New Hampshire at 21%, and Gingrich is now third uh third place with 16%.
John Huntsman in fourth place at 13%.
I told you that you have to take the long view of this.
Last summer I said, last fall, you gotta take the long view.
Too much can happen.
Not a single vote has been cast yet.
Not a single vote.
Meanwhile, you have Newt and Romney going at each other embarrassingly.
You've got Romney who could buy Tiffany if he wanted to, running around ripping Gingrich for having a $500,000 line of credit there.
I mean, this really, these guys uh they may be doing at the end of all this a bit of a service uh by opening the door to potential other candidates.
Because they're this is looking childish.
This is this is you know, it's it's it's the libs that use class warfare against us.
Now we got we've got two Republicans going after each other, the way liberals talk about us with this class warfare business.
Romney out there, hey, you know, Gingrich's got a lot of money.
He's not exactly a man of the people.
He's out there 10,000, 500,000 line of credit at Tiffany.
Uh but the the bad thing about that is we we got two guys attacking rich people.
So Romney's attacking Newt for being rich, and Newt's not that rich, and Newt's attacking Romney for being rich, and Romney is that rich, but it's usually the Democrats that do that kind of stuff.
Well, whatever, folks, we will wade through this.
The the jobless numbers are out.
And for the second consecutive week.
The job numbers, the new applications for unemployment compensation are an improvement.
But outside of a couple of segments on CNBC, nobody's talking about it.
When the unemployment rate dipped below 400,000, when there were 2,000 meagly, measly 2,000 fewer applications, there were orgasms in the media.
When the number stayed over 400,000 every week, there were orgasms in the media about, well, we're working hard.
There are signs.
There are signs.
The job market is coming out.
There are signs that it's beginning to come together.
The Obama policy is.
Now we've had what is this decline that uh it's uh down to 19,000 to a seasonally adjusted 366,000 last week.
We've been in around the 400,000 per week mark for a year.
Now, 19,000 fewer applications for unemployment were filed, down 366,000 total.
That's still a lot, but you would think, you would think that this would be a huge story all over the media, because it would fit right in with Obama's re-election camp.
It would fit right in with the unemployment number falling.
It would fit right in with Obama's policy starting to work.
It would fit right in with Obama yesterday saying, well, it will, you know, it was much worse than we knew.
They didn't tell us how bad it was.
It taking our policies a little longer to work.
There isn't any of that, folks.
There are no drum beats.
I've scoured.
I've looked everywhere.
The usual suspects in the state control media, the White House stenographer pool.
Not one trumpet about this.
They are down even more than they were last week.
To decrease 366,000 applications is uh a decrease of 19,000 from last week's, and yet no trumpets.
It's one of the most peculiar things I have seen in years.
And at first I thought, well, maybe the media doesn't believe in the numbers.
And I said, no, that can't be because they wouldn't care.
They wouldn't, unless they're so faked, unless the media knows they're so faked and they're so seasonally adjusted because of Christmas that once we get into January and February, it's going to go right back up.
And so they're trying to spare Obama eventual bad news.
That could be the only reason that they would care if the numbers were being fudged here.
Maybe they are afraid to call attention.
There's got to be a reason.
Folks, there are no coincidences in politics or in the news.
This is proof.
We got news.
They're not reporting it.
Why?
Want to know why?
What do you think, Cerly?
What's the reason?
Why aren't they trumpeting this in the state control media?
No, that's not what it is.
They may think the numbers are cooked and they may be embarrassed and they may not want to uh attach their credibility to the numbers.
But if you look at the ongoing debates in Washington, Washington, for those of you in Rio Linda, you'll find that the regime and the Democrats are pushing for something.
Really, really pushing for something.
And that would be unemployment compensation benefit extensions beyond the 99 weeks.
The regime wants it.
The media wants it.
The Democrats want it.
If you start trumpeting how new applications for jobless claims are way down, then you give the opposition, hey, what do you mean?
Why do we need to extend unemployment benefits?
Look at the numbers.
It's getting better.
So you don't report the good numbers because you want an extension of unemployment benefits.
That is what I L. Rushbow believe, as I have studied and analyzed this.
Now, last week's number, you'll be surprised to hear last week's number was revised upward by 4,000, just as it always is.
But still, that's that's what I think is uh is is happening here.
If you're reading, I've got a I've got an AP story here by their assigned unemployment writer whose uh name is Christopher Ruegaber, if you read the story, you will see it in Mr. Rugaber here does have concern about whether or not they could pass an extension of unemployment benefits if they made a big deal out of this uh out of this new number.
And the story does say if you read far enough, which most people would not, if you read far enough, you will find out that last month's decline in the unemployment rate was mostly due to people giving up looking for work.
Not new jobs being created, but simply the numbers of people looking not being counted anymore.
Even Mr. Rugaber admits this.
So that's why I think they're hiding the number.
That's why I think they're soft-selling it.
Now CNBC, you know, they had their usual, hey, baby, look at this kind of moment, but it didn't go on for very long.
And outside of that, you don't see this being mentioned anywhere.
Unemployment benefits extensions is precisely what I think this is happening.
I gotta take quick time out here, folks.
You sit tight.
Ill Rushball back before you know it.
Don't go away.
You know, I didn't talk, I can only mention it one time yesterday, which was an oversight.
It was unintentional.
But I did an interview after the program yesterday with Greta Van Susterin for the Fox News Channel, her show on the record.
It runs at 10 o'clock Eastern every night.
And I, ladies and gentlemen, was the entire hour.
It's now posted.
We got the video and the transcript.
Oh, wait a minute, no way.
Just a second.
Yep, video and transcript are posted at rushlimbaugh.com if you missed it.
And as you watch it, I know I don't have to say this, but as you watch it, you will notice two things.
No, you will notice one thing, and I will tell you the second.
The one thing you'll notice is that Greta let me answer her questions.
I answered perhaps 10 minutes straight without an interruption.
Her first question.
And the next question, another 10 minutes.
And the reason that she did that is because I actually answer 10 or 15 questions with each question that she asks.
And I do that in the 10 or 15 minutes.
What you will not see, what you don't know, well, you'll I think you instinctively know it, there is no teleprompter.
Now, very rarely do guests on TV shows have teleprompters.
But I just want to tell you as you watch this, no teleprompter.
So it's up at Rush Limbaugh.com.
Here's the latest polling data out of Iowa from Rasmussen.
And what's interesting about this is for the fifth straight survey, the Republican field has a new leader in Iowa.
There's been a new leader in each of the five previous surveys.
Well, this being the fifth, so each of the previous four.
Right now, according to Rasmussen, Hawkeye Cawkey, Romney's at 23%.
Gingrich is at 20, and Ron Paul is at 18.
In some other polls, Ron Paul's in second place in Iowa.
And there are people who are beginning to whisper.
Pst.
Ron Paul might win Iowa.
People saying this.
Ron Paul might win Iowa.
Chris Wallace of the Fox News Channel.
He was on Cavuto.
Your world with Neil Cavuto.
Cavuto asked Chris Wallace what he thought the takeaway would be from a Ron Paul victory in the Hawkeye Calcai.
Chris Wallace said, well, Ron Paul people aren't going to like me saying this, but to a certain degree, it'll discredit the Iowa caucuses, because rightly or wrongly, I think most of the Republican establishment thinks that Ron Paul is not going to end up as the nominee.
So therefore Iowa won't count, and everything else will go on.
So Chris Wallace, if Ron Paul wins it, Iowa is discredited because Paul doesn't have a prayer anyway.
So Paul wins in Iowa, it means Iowans are not a factor.
Mitt Romney did not call Ron Paul Zany.
Nitt Romney called Newt Gingrich Zaney.
George Will has not called Barack Obama a Marxist.
George Will has Called Newt Gingrich, a Marxist.
And I'll tell you, am I right?
Did I tell you yesterday and the day before?
The long knives throughout the Republican Party have come out for Newt.
One guy went on TV today to defend Newt, and it was Giuliani, and that made all kinds of news because there's somebody, somebody ranking in the Republican Party who's defending Gingrich, and it shocked everybody.
That Rudy's out there doing it.
Cheney did as well in mild tones earlier in the week, had this story yesterday that didn't have a chance to get to it.
Squeezed by rising living costs, a record number of Americans, nearly one in two have fallen into poverty.
Or they are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income.
One in five American children live in poverty.
Now stop and think of this.
One in two Americans are now poor or low income.
Now, this is the kind of story that usually comes out when a Republican is in the White House.
Seriously, you don't get these kinds of stories when a Democrat's in the White House.
We had a story yesterday about homeless children.
And I said to myself, we don't get these kinds of stories when a Democrat's in the White House.
What's going on?
And then and then I remembered.
The New York Times in an op-ed two weeks ago on a Monday, Thomas B. Edsel, now at the Huffing and Puffington Post, wrote a piece in which he said that the Obama campaign was writing off white working class families.
They were going to focus on the poor.
The focus on the votes of the poor and the votes of minorities that they are forgetting white working class voters.
Meaning they know they can't get those votes.
The white working class is hurt.
The white working class wants to work.
Obama has policies that are destroying the creation of jobs.
They know it.
So Obama's not even going to make a pretense in the campaign.
Therefore, what's Obama need?
More poor people.
More people who are told they're poor.
More people who are told they're poor because Wall Street stole from them.
More people who are told they're poor because the 1% have taken everything from them.
So when you see a story, it's a U.S. News World Reports, MSNBC, it's everywhere.
One in two Americans are now poor or low income.
Well, Obama's not failed.
It's like I said on Greta last, I've reminded everybody, January 16, 2009, Wall Street Journal calls say, can you give us 400 words on what you hope for the new president?
I said, it won't take 400.
I can do it in four.
I hope he fails.
And an excrement storm erupted.
And I, for six months, was the only guy carrying that message in that water.
So I said last night to Greta, he has not failed from his perspective.
He has had resounding success.
Bankrupting the country, joblessness, increased debt, a transfer of money from the private sector to the public sector to government that's never been done before on this level.
The cutting down to size of the private sector, the class warfare, he's succeeded.
And when you see one in two Americans are now poor or low income, and you understand Obama's gonna spend a billion dollars in his re-election, targeting those people, the more poor the better.
That's a very cynical view to have, Mr. Limbo.
That's not cynical, Mr. New Castradi, it's political.
I defy anybody to tell me that this is something Obama doesn't want.
Remember, one of his own lackeys writes in the Washington and the New York Times that white working class votes, not interested.
We don't think we can get them.
We're gonna go after the disadvantaged the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, and the minorities.
Well, the more of them the better.
And to the extent that you might not be able to really expand substantively the number of poor, you can still convince a lot of people that they're poor.
You can doesn't take much for Obama to make a speech and depress everybody.
Blame it on Wall Street, blame it on the 1%, blame it on the rich.
As though he was just inaugurated yesterday in the last two to three years happened with somebody else in the Oval Office.
So I look at this dismal prospects.
One in two Americans are not poor or low income.
Success.
Bam o bullseye.
Home run.
This is where Obama is heading.
The latest census data depict a middle class that's shrinking.
Remember now, Obama was going to focus like a laser on him.
And who was the middle class liaison?
Joe Bight Me.
Obama appointed Joe Bightney to supervise the stimulus.
All other kinds of things to make sure the little middle class had a spokesman, had somebody standing up for him.
And now census data depict a middle class that's shrinking as unemployment stays high.
And the government safety net phrase, new numbers, follow years of stagnating wages for the middle class that have hurt millions of workers and families.
Yep, that's what Obama said in Osawatomi, Kansas.
It's all the rich people's fault.
It's all a Republican's fault.
It's worse than he knew when he was inaugurated.
He inherited all this from George W. Bush.
But it's exactly what he wants.
It's how he intends to win reelection.
We'll be back.
No way, no way am I going to ask for that meeting.
It's just been suggested that I call for a meeting between Romney and Gingrich.
And basically say, look, guys, you're embarrassing yourselves and everybody.
It's time to shape up and stop all this childish little he's got a $500,000 line of credit at Tiffany and he's destroying jobs and so forth and ruining companies.
You've got to stop the what if I if I held a meeting, what would come out of it?
Is they'd both say, why don't you run?
Jeffrey Lord, uh, an American spectator on a blog today.
Said he was watching the Ungreto last night, said it was the single best presentation of what conservatism is in this day and age, and what needs to be done that he's heard.
And last line is Rush Limbaugh for president.
So it's out there.
And if if I you know start doing a Trump, move in there and try to police these guys, that's they're on their own.
They're on their I look at, I think there are benefits to this.
Now, I I talked to some people here during the break.
In both New Hampshire and Iowa, Ron Paul's in second place.
Where is his support coming from?
That's what I would like to know.
I have my ideas.
But for example, are we to believe that Ron Paul is attracting the precious independents and precious Democrat crossover voters?
Is that where he's getting his support?
Or is he getting his support from uninformed, down the line Tea Party conservatives who really are not hearing the wacko nut job things he's saying about foreign policy?
All they're hearing him say is first thing he's gonna do is just cut a trillion dollars out of the book, and they're going right on.
Right on.
That's what people want.
That's what the Tea Party, a Tea Party wants that government cut down to size, and they want it happen in a big step.
And Ron Paul's giving on that meat, but they're not hearing much about his foreign policy.
So is is support actually could be widespread throughout Republican primary voters.
But no, no, no.
Um but Ron Paul has said things.
For example, to make you think that he believes 9 11 was an inside job.
He has said things.
The only conclusion he hasn't said it word for word, but the only conclusion you can draw when you listen to him talk about his theories on it.
He said, I don't blame the Iranians for doing what they're doing.
We're just banging the war drums like we did before Iraq.
We're just setting the table to go into Iran, start another war.
What do you expect the Iranians to do?
I don't blame them for shutting off their oil.
I don't blame them for blocking the Strait of Hormuz.
He doesn't think they're building nukes.
And if they are, they've got a right to.
We did it.
Well, who are we to say they can't do nukes?
Who are we?
But he's moving up.
And I you know, I just I just know that the reaction, Chris Wallace, if if Ron Paul wins that thing, that Iowa is discredited and doesn't count.
Okay, there's some steam in Iowa, I am sure.
After Chris Wallace said that, no question about it.
White Ron, Ron Paul said, I don't know if it was the last debate or in a town hall somewhere, but it was recently.
Ron Hall, Ron Paul said that the White House celebrated when 9-11 happened because that was their ticket to go into Iraq.
He's um he's saying these things openly, repeating them frequently.
But it's not apparently hurting him.
Iowa and New Hampshire.
Newt has fallen to third place in both states.
Newt was leading Iowa last week.
Newt was getting close to Romney, New Hampshire last week.
Romney's never trailed in New Hampshire, I don't think.
And New Hampshire's the only state where Romney gets plus 30.
In fact, it's the only state where he gets anywhere near 30.
According to a new study, uh, ladies and gentlemen, according to a new study from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, public school teachers are now the highest paid state workers.
Public screw teachers.
In fact, public school teachers receive more than twice as much in average hourly wages and benefits as workers in private industry.
On average.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, public school teachers are paid an average of $56.59 per hour in combined wages and benefits, which is twice the $28.24 cents an hour in wages and benefits paid to workers in the private sector.
No, I some of you are probably saying, well, I don't understand, Rush.
Why are you upset about that?
I mean, I've heard you say that you're all for everybody doing well.
I've heard you say you're all for everybody maybe as wealthy as they can get.
Have you changed your mind?
No, I haven't.
The problem with this, and I will say it again, is that the people who earn $28 an hour on average are the ones paying the people making twice that.
And we're not talking about evil CEOs.
We're talking about these teachers' neighbors.
In public school teachers, we're also talking about a protected class of people.
Whether you want to believe me or not, a sizable portion of Obama's stimulus was earmarked for states to keep public employees On the job.
A sizable portion of the stimulus was to make sure that teachers and other public sector employees did not lose their jobs.
And it wasn't out of compassion.
It was pure politics.
Every one of those teachers and every one of those public sector employees a union member.
And as such, they have dues deducted from what they're paid.
And those dues, as we know, all end up back in the coffers of the Democrat Party.
And that is why the stimulus was structured so that public sector employees, state to state, would not be laid off.
So the people who are earning, on average, $28 an hour, are paying public sector workers $56 an hour on average, with the largest pay being for teachers.
That can't go on.
That doesn't, you can't in any formal structure, that is not sustainable.
That's I give you Wisconsin, and there will be other states.
I gave you the city of Detroit.
This kind of thing just can't go on.
Thank you.
And that $56.59, don't forget, this includes pensions, lifetime health care.
That the people whose taxes pay the salaries are not getting or given.
They don't have lifetime pensions.
They don't have lifetime health care benefits.
They have to find that on their own.
Now, while they have to pay for their own, they're also paying for the public sector union employees.
So that's why.
Let me throw that word in.
I like using that word.
It's unfair.
Well, the left likes to always tell us how unfair things are.
This is the epitome of unfairness.
Now, let me add one more thing to this.
In addition to public school teachers now being the highest paid state workers at an average of 56 bucks an hour.
According to the study by the Center on Education Policy, which is a nonpartisan think tank, this year, a record number of public schools failed to meet the adequate yearly progress benchmarks established by the No Child Left Behind Act.
$88%.
For those of you in real land, it's almost half.
48% of all public schools in the country failed to meet the no child left behind standards for reading and math proficiency.
So while teachers are making more than they have ever made with lifetime pensions and health care paid for by people who earn half what they earn.
Their job performance across the board on average on balance does not warrant this.
in a merit sense.
Amazingly, amazingly, Washington DC's public scruels are ranked near the bottom.
87% 87% failed to meet the No Child Left Behind standards.
87% in reading and writing and math, 87% of the students failed.
And we're not talking about standards that require you to be mensa here.
Basically, all you have to do is know how to make a peanut butter jelly sandwich by being able to read peanut butter and jelly on the various labels.
Only Missouri, my home state, did worse than Washington.
That's right.
88% of Missouri schools are failing.
You got me.
I 88% of public schools in in Missouri are failing the no child left behind standards.
Even though, according to the Census Bureau figures in 2009, Washington is second only to New York in the amount they spend per student.
New York spends 18,000 per pupil.
Washington spends 16,000.
I don't know what Missouri spends, but New York, 18,000 per student, New York Washington, 16,000.
And they're near the bottom in student performance.
So we know it's not a problem of money.
But yet, remember now, item number one, teachers earn twice on average what the people paying them via their taxes in the private sector are earning.
By the way, by the way, that story I just had on the screws, and how these uh the students there are faring uh according to the no child left behind standards, that doesn't even uh account for all the cheating that went on.
For example, in Atlanta for 10 years, remember all of the phony grades that were awarded by the teachers or the waivers from the no child left behind standards.
It's pathetic.
The state of public education is pathetic.
And I don't I don't mean this as an attack on the individuals in it in the from the standpoint of teachers.
I'm just it has the whole education system has been corrupted by liberalism.
It's not even an education system anymore.
It is an indoctrination, a series of indoctrination camps.
It's not education.
It's been totally taken over and corrupted.
And I know some of the teachers are activists, maybe more than I'd like to believe.
They are legitimate liberal activists, disguised as teachers.
But it is why.
It's why so much insanity exists.
It's why there's so little knowledge of the point of and the beauty of free markets.
It's a concept not even taught.
Okay, Pittsfield, Maine.
We're going to take a phone call here in the first hour.
And it's from Tim.
Tim, thank you, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Rush, it's a pleasure to talk to you.
Um, Rosh, I'm getting a little bit tired of Barack Obama and the liberals in this country hijacking the language of what poverty is.
Okay.
I grew up in the 1970s.
I had when I was a little, when I was 21 years old, I got left with two kids under the age of three.
Okay.
I had 1125 a week is what I was taking.
What did your wife run out on you or something?
We got divorced, yes.
And I got left with two small children.
I hitchhike back.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Your your wife did not want the children?
No.
I I hitchhiked back and forth to work for nine years before I had enough money to put a vehicle on the road all the time.
And my father always told me, and I work my way out of it, and what they're doing is they're poisoning these kids' minds, and they're doing that, how they're doing that is they're teaching them that hijacking the language about middle class and poverty.
Right.
In other words, I work all day long.
I work 60, 65 hours a week.
I still work a lot of hours, and I'm 53 years old today, okay?
I own my own home.
I work my way out of this because I knew how to work my way out of it.
And the thing of it is, if you've got a roof over your head and clothes on your back, and you're paying your bills, and you got a little bit of money left over, man, you're middle class.
You're not poor, you're not poverty stricken.
You're middle class.
And part of the reason that the education system is failing is because they're doing these kids a bad disservice by teaching them that they're poverty stricken, that they're somehow or another they're never going to be able to do it.
You're right.
Let me tell you why.
You you are nailing this.
You are exactly right.
And the story that I just had, where now the Bureau of Labor Statistics says one out of two Americans live in poverty.
That is flat out BS.
It's flat out BS, but you're nailing it.
The language is being totally corrupted.
The reason why this is being done is it it's it's sickening and it's pathetic, but the reason it's being done.
They want people to think they're poor.
They want people to think that they are victims of Wall Street, of the rich, or whatever.
They want people to think that if it weren't for others who have more than they do, that they'd be happy.
It's pure 100% class envy.
This is why I maintain to you that Obama relishes Obama and the Democrats, and they're one and the same.
Relish a story with the headline, one out of two Americans in poverty.
Made the order.
See what the Republicans did to you.
See what Wall Street did to you.
I'm here to help you.
I'm here to help you.
I'm here to give you health care.
I'm here to put your kid into college.
I'm here.
This is exactly you have nailed it.
That's precisely the whole point of this.
Gotta take a break.
Be back.
You know, the truth is, uh, ladies and gentlemen, and this is something the left, the Democrats have to rewrite out of history books, they have to take it out of the economics books.
Wealth does trickle down.
What is called poor today would have been considered upper middle class in just a generation or two generations ago.
What is today called poor.
I'm not exaggerating.
▲
Export Selection