All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 2, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:39
January 2, 2012, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
So Barney Frank is retiring from Congress.
He's not going to seek re-election.
He's going to announce it in less than an hour.
Well, he's announced it.
He's going to tell us why in less than an hour.
I've been looking into this, and a basic reason.
Well, it's it's partly with spend more time with the family.
But people, what family?
I don't know, folks, figure it out.
Now it's it's a redistricting thing.
Um really, it his district has been rewritten in such a way that he probably could not win it, is what really has gone down there, and that that's that's uh uh pretty much it.
I don't know what he's gonna say.
He's not gonna say that as the uh as the reason, but as far as I'm concerned, good riddance, if there is a name that is singularly attached to this economic collapse via the subprime mortgage fiasco, it's Barney Frank, along with uh along with Chris Dodd's uh as well, and most elements of the Democrat Party back in the Clinton years uh moving forward.
Great to have you with us, folks.
Here we are kicking off a brand new week of broadcast excellence.
L. Rushbow here behind the golden EIB microphone.
If running a prostitution ring in your house couldn't make you resign, what does?
This is a question.
Wait a minute.
Wait, Barney did not run the prostitution ring.
He said he didn't know that it was going on.
It was uh his partner at the time, Stephen Goby.
Yeah, Barney fixed parking tickets for the clientele at the uh at the house.
So if if running a prostitute if having a prostitution ring being run out of your basement couldn't embarrass you to retire, you have to have to wonder what it is.
And it has to be look at I've looked into this, and I think it is a a uh redistricting thing.
No, he's not gonna go coach football, Sturdley.
What are you talking about?
Have you heard that?
I thought it was basketball.
Were you talking about where is he gonna coach football?
Oh, don't get me started on that.
No, no, don't get me off.
Don't let me start the week with that kind of information.
Don't tell me that's true.
No, no, no, no, no.
I I will find out at uh at one o'clock.
What is the uh what is the reason here behind I mean the media's shaken.
The drive-by's are terribly upset about this.
The kid caught everybody by surprise.
It's gonna it's gonna boil down to a redistricting thing uh where he I'm sure was not confident that he could win.
Pure and simple.
And he had a very tough time last time.
He had a tough time last time, and that was in a district that was written for him.
Uh they've they've gone from ten to nine districts in Boston, and and one of the districts took a major hit and a new shape.
Yeah, it was rewritten.
Uh new form.
Uh looked entirely different, was Barney's.
And I also think uh, as part of this, Barney's doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who wants to be part of an ongoing minority for an interminable number of years, and he's got to know what things are looking like for the Democrat Party in the uh in not just the House but the Senate elections uh nationwide.
So here we are.
It's Cyber Monday.
How time flies.
Cyber Monday, it seems like it was just Black Friday a couple days ago.
Then it was small business Saturday.
And now here it is Cyber Monday.
And tomorrow, do you know tomorrow's Green Tuesday?
Tomorrow is Green Tuesday, whatever the heck that is.
But notice how all this consumerism is being celebrated by the very people who ripped it to shreds uh when it was going on under any Republican president Ernest Holling.
Too much consuming going on now, dear.
Anyway, uh there are some contradictions.
Uh it's a classic mixed message.
The Obama campaign has sent its occupy goons out to attack Walmart stores all across the fruit and plenty of 38,000 Walmart stores, seven of them were attacked, and it's considered major news.
Seven Walmart stores were attacked out of 38,000, and this is somehow major news.
The stores that were attacked by Occupy people were in San Diego, Los Angeles, Honolulu, Nashville, Seattle, Atlanta, and even a place called Dell City, Oklahoma.
Now, the regime, the Obama regime, thinks that it's obviously more important to help their union pals than it is to help the economy.
But why, why do they just go after Walmart?
Target's non-union, too.
Oh, oh, well, what Michelle.
Michelle pretends to shop at Target.
Uh, at least for the AP photographers.
Remember that?
Uh, she shows up at Target and miraculously there was an AP photog there.
That's that's why, that's why Target is uh off the hook.
Now, in San Diego, these goons, the Occupy Goons filled up 75 shopping carts with merchandise, some of it probably perishable food.
Then they read in unison from a script, no doubt provided by the Union about how mean Walmart is to the working man, and then they left.
And they left all 75 carts for the Walmart employees to reshelve all the merchandise.
Now, who knows how many people are going to get sick from re-frozen food and perishables.
Walmart probably has to throw that stuff out.
So forth.
So this is the kind of people that uh that we are up against the Occupy movement.
And in fact, folks, there is a fascinating story in the New York Times by uh who is this?
Uh Edsel, Thomas Edsel.
The future of the Obama coalition.
Let me read this first paragraph to you.
The future of the Obama coalition.
For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters.
But preparations by Democrat operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time, the Democrat Party will explicitly abandon the white working class.
The Democrat Party is just abandoning white working class voters.
The Democrat Party is punting.
The Democrat Party is saying, Cyanaria, we don't care.
They are going after the welfare state full-fledged.
They are going after the entitlement mentality people of this country full-fledged.
They're not making any pretenses.
Here's a pull quote.
A top priority of the less affluent wing of today's left alliance is the strengthening of the safety net.
Top priority, including health care food stamps, infant nutrition, diapers, and unemployment compensation.
These voters generally take the brunt of recessions and are most in need of government assistance to survive.
According to recent data from the agriculture department, 45.8 million people.
Nearly 15% of the population depend on food stamps to meet their needs for food.
And yet these same people's kids are fed three meals a day at school.
All pretense.
This is in the New York Times.
All pretence of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up on the one hand of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment,
professors, artists, designers, editors, human resource managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers, and therapists, and a second substantial constituency of lower income voters who are disproportionately African American and Hispanic.
So the Democrat Party, according to the Obama coalition, Democrat Party, according to the New York Times, is going after the entitlement class, the welfare dependent class, and the elite in academia, art, human resource management, lawyers, library, and social workers, and so forth.
What a coalition, the backbone of America.
And that's who they're going after.
They are seeding it, CED.
ING, they are seeding working classes.
They have already seated Republican voters.
They have seated conservative voters.
The New York Times is admitting that the Democrat Party, the Obama coalition is saying, if you work, we don't want you.
If you work, we know you don't want us.
If you work, you're the targets.
If you work, you are the people we are gunning for.
If you work, we are coming after you to make sure that the other elements of our constituency are able to eat.
That's what the Obama coalition is saying.
Can you imagine if there were a story in the New York Times, Republican Party to white workers, screw you?
Can you imagine the charges of racism?
And what have you that would be flowing from this?
And in the New York Times, this is present.
This is a brilliant, brilliant piece of political strategy.
It's instructive, says the New York Times, to trace the evolution of a political strategy based on securing this coalition in the writings and comments over time of such Democrat analysts as Stanley Greenberg and Rai Toshira.
Both men were initially determined to win back the white working class majority, but both currently advocate a revised Democrat alliance in which whites without college degrees are effectively replaced in the Democrat coalition by well-educated, socially liberal whites in alliance with the growing ranks of less affluent minority voters, especially Hispanics.
It's purposeful.
Here you have the sitting president plotting his reelection.
And in order to win reelection, what do you need more than your opponent?
You need more votes than the other guy gets.
And in order to do that, you jettison people who work.
Now think of that.
You throw people who work who are white overboard.
And instead, your coalition includes the eggheads who have taught all these people the entitlement mentality and the entitlement mentality recipients.
The people who think that they're owed something simply because they are Americans or because they are in America.
And here's Obama, the Democrat Party saying, you are who we're looking for.
You who don't work, you who need welfare, you who need unemployment compensation extension, you who need food stamps.
That's who we want.
You are our people.
Well, how do you get those people?
You promise them more.
or You don't challenge them.
You don't tell them that they're going to have to improve themselves.
You don't tell them they're going to have to go out and find work.
No.
You excuse them.
We understand.
We understand you're where you are because of people like these conservative Republicans who hate you.
Well, we're here to take care of you.
It's an amazing.
And I'm not surprised that this is their coalition.
I'm just stunned that they're so publicly admitting it.
I think it's a big deal.
It's not a big deal in the sense that it's always been the case, well, not always, but I mean in recent years, this has been the Democrat coalition.
But to come out here and have it admitted to in the New York Times is almost a matter of pride and brilliant strategy.
What this means is the white working class is the Tea Party.
The white working class has abandoned the Democrat Party, is what this means.
This is the old Reagan Democrat coalition in part.
White working class people have decided that they're voting Republican.
That's who voted in the 2010 midterms.
I should point out also that these voters, these white working class voters, there are some in the Republican establishment who are very embarrassed by them.
They're not college educated.
They're a group of people wandering around out there aimlessly.
And not everybody wants them.
We here happy.
We're happy to have them as part of the audience.
We're happy to have them as their backbone of America.
Working people for crying out loud.
I don't mean union people.
That's not what they're talking about.
When they talk about working people.
Normally, when the Democrats use that term working people, they mean unions.
They don't mean it in this case.
Obama's alternative path to victory, according to Tashira and Halpin, would be to keep his losses among all white voters at the same level John Kerry did in 2004 when he lost them by 17 points.
This would be a step backwards for Obama, who lost among all whites in 2008 by only 12 points.
Obama can afford to drop to Kerry's white margins base.
Because between 2008-2012, the pro-Democrat minority share of the electorate is expected to grow by two percentage points, and the white share to decline by the same amount, reflecting the changing composition of the national electorate.
And again, a top priority of the less affluent wing of today's left alliance is the strengthening of the safety net, including health care, food stamps, infant nutrition diapers, and unemployment compensation.
These voters generally take the brunt of recessions.
They are most in need of government assistance to survive.
According to recent data from the Department of Agriculture, 45.8 million people, nearly 15% of the population, depend on food stamps to meet their needs for food.
So the Democrat Party in Obama are making it official.
We're going after light's losers.
And we're going to empower them.
We're going to make them the reason we win.
Now, everybody, you should know this.
This should not be a surprise.
This is what the Democrat Party's been doing for years.
They're admitting it now.
They're admitting it.
They are saying they're not interested in voters who work.
And welcome back, Rushlin bought the cutting edge of societal evolution.
So this assistant basketball coach at Syracuse, this guy Fine is his name, Bernie Fine.
He's been accused of sexually molesting boys and students for a whole bunch of years.
It turns out that ESPN had a tape since 2002 with evidence.
ESPN has sat on evidence for nine years because they say they couldn't corroborate it.
On the tape, the guy's wife cops to it, saying she witnessed it.
And a ball boy admits it.
They say they couldn't corroborate.
I wonder if the coach's name had been paterno if ESPN would have sat on this for nine years.
That's they're saying they couldn't corroborate it.
Syracuse fired assistant coach Bernie Fine Sunday after a 2002 phone recording emerged in which his wife told his accusers that she was well aware her husband had molested him.
The tape had been in ESPN's possession since former team ball boy Bobby Davis legally recorded it nearly 10 years ago.
But the network said it didn't air it until Sunday because it didn't have corroboration.
Two other men have since come forward to say that Fine molested them.
The accusations became public after Penn state assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky was fired amid allegations he sexually abused young boys.
Davis, the ball boy, made the tape after a brief talk with the cops in 2002.
His allegations, which he brought to ESPN and the Syracuse Post Standard at the time, created a journalistic conundrum for both.
They didn't know whether to report accusations that could be incredibly damaging to find or to risk Not exposing a child molester.
Both news outlets opted not to report on the allegations, they said, because they couldn't find anyone to support the ball boys account.
Neither Davis nor ESPN passed on the tape to Syracuse University officials for an internal investigation in 2005.
Syracuse Chancellor Nancy Cantor noted in a statement Sunday that university officials did not have the tape at that time.
That's true, they didn't have that tape in 2005, said ESPN's Mark Schwartz.
Bobby Davis did not know what to do with that tape.
All he knew is that Syracuse police had a cursory five-minute phone conversation with him in 2002.
He made the tape, he gave it to us.
We didn't have a corroborating second alleged victim, and apparently no curiosity either.
Apparently no curiosity to find out anything further.
But then the whole thing blew up when the coach's wife told his accuser that she was well aware her husband had molested him.
So the wife knew that this was all going on all this time.
As I say, I wonder if if the coach's name were Paterno, uh, or if McNabb had been involved somehow.
If ESPN would have sat on the tape for nine years.
This is really fascinating stuff.
I mean, a lot of people are how do you sit on evidence like this for nine years and not have even any curiosity to find out if what you've got is a bombshell.
We're hearing all this holy than now wringing of hands.
My God, the abuse of a child is going on, and nobody did anything about it.
How could this coach possibly sit by this McQuery guy?
How could his McQuery guy let it go Penn Stadium?
How can he let it go on?
How could he not stop it?
How could ESPN let it go on?
How could they not take steps to stop it, corroborate it or whatever?
It's amazing.
We'll be back, folks.
Don't go away.
All right, this scandal.
Now it's Syracuse, the Bernie Fine scandal.
For nine years a tape existed of sexual molestation of a young boy.
Evidence.
Nine years.
I said they couldn't corroborate.
Nine years, they sat on it.
Why not?
Folks, there's this giant elephant in the room.
It's the same thing happened at Penn State.
Nobody wants to bring it up.
Nobody wants to talk about it.
Nobody's got the guts or the courage to talk about it, but it's there.
And that's there's no question.
You see how fast ESPN would have put out that tape.
If this Bernie Fine guy had said something questioning the media hype around Donovan McNabb.
See how fast ESPN would have put that out if it was a young girl that was molested.
Now I want to go.
One other thing here about this business in the New York Times today, with Obama regime basically admitting that it has no interest in attracting white working voters.
The headline to that New York Times story could just as well be Obama to white workers drop dead.
Pure and simple.
That would be the headline if it were in the New York Post.
And the only real surprise here is to hear a liberal and the New York Times just flat out admit it and talk about it as though it is a timely and brilliant strategy.
I say we've known for a long time Obama and the Democrats are pinning their hopes on the underclass.
And then the very rich, the elites.
That's that's who the Democrat Party hopes to coalesce.
And the reason for it is these super rich elites feel guilty as hell about all these poor non-working minorities.
And they'll give all kinds of money to Obama, the Democrats to help these people.
And there's this egotistical narcissism that runs rampant throughout this group of elites, such as academia administrators, the professors, the human resource experts, and so forth.
But both of those groups of people, if you'll note, the elites at universities and so forth, they are and the non working, the uh the entitlement class, they're all dependent on government.
So it's now official.
Obama is running on the Occupy Wall Street ticket.
Whatever happened to Obama bringing us all together.
Whatever happened, oh, that wonderful hope and change back in 2007 and 2008.
And now they make no bones about the fact that they are out to divide this country.
They are out to divide the people of this country, and they're doing it along class lines.
It's no longer something left to ascertain.
It's no longer something to conclude.
It's no longer an opinion to be posited.
No, the regime, via its house organ, the New York Times has announced it.
And this is why Obama has expanded government from 20% of GDP now to 25% of GDP.
This is why Obama has increased our national debt from 40% of our GDP to 70% to buy these voters.
And today in the New York Times, they admit it.
And this is also why Obama wants to continue the bad economy.
This is so hideous.
This admission in the New York Times is everything.
Obama is admitting why he grew government, why he's growing government as a percentage of GDP, why he's increasing the national debt, and most of all why he wants a continually poor performing economy because he needs more dependent people.
He needs even more people in pain.
He needs more people on the receiving end of government goodies.
He needs more votes to buy.
All this is being admitted to.
This is a fundamental transformation, the country that we've all been talking about, that we've been warning about that some people do not want to admit is taking place.
Because that's a call to arms.
Can't tell you the number of people I talk to who, and I've mentioned this before, who are at most apolitical.
No, not true.
At most, they're involved in politics because they have to be.
They run businesses that are regulated, so they have to, whoever's in power, they have to pay them respect.
But ideological, they haven't been.
They don't want to go there.
And I can't tell you the number of people that are approaching me, some of them in near tears, worried for the first time in their lives about the future of the country.
But they don't quite know why.
Some of them will say to me, Obama has to be defeated.
And when I say why just Obama, you realize the whole Democrat Party, I don't want to go there.
They don't want to even No, no, no, no.
Come on, you're being extreme now.
No, I'm not.
If you find Barack Obama as a singular problem, then you are missing something crucial.
He has a party.
He's no different than anybody else in that party.
If you think Barack Obama is a problem, if you think this country can't survive Barack Obama, you must, I'm telling you, you must logically then agree that this country can't survive the Democrat Party.
They are one and the same.
There's not a difference.
Obama couldn't do what he's doing without the Democrat Party, and verse vice.
When Barack Obama goes to the New York Times and basically says to hell with white working voters, the Democrat Party is saying to hell with white working voters.
Obama's not running in a vacuum.
But it's amazing a number of people who can't make that leap.
People who are not as steeped in politics as you and I. Those people are the ones I hear from who just they want to compromise.
They think the answer here is compromise is getting along.
If if both sides would just tone, and they're sincere.
If both sides would just tone it down, we could come to a gather and we can agree on some things.
And when I tell them in my view that I don't know what I've got to agree with the Democrat Party, I ask them, what do you agree with Obama about?
No, no, no.
There's nothing in the Democrat Party to agree with either.
But making that leap for people who are apolitical.
For people who are only involved in it in the edges and as little as they have to be, people that don't like it.
But there are a lot of those people.
They have to be told the truth.
The truth somehow has to penetrate.
It's tough.
Because this is a truth a lot of people don't want to face.
That there's an actual political party that is now transformed itself in such a way that its enemy is constitutional government.
When you as a party head to the New York Times and admit that you can't win with working white voters?
That you're willing to abandon them in exchange for people who don't, what are you saying you want the country to be?
You and I in this audience, folks, have known for either how many decades this is where the Democrat Party's headed.
This is who they are because they're liberals and they're socialists.
And now with the evidence right in front of everybody in the for the New York Times, you would think it would facilitate the conversion of a lot more people to this understanding.
And maybe it will.
Let's go to the audio sound bites.
General Powell, who is a titular head of the Republican Party, it's amazing how this guy surfaces on the uh on the Sunday shows.
But he does.
He surfaces on the Sunday shows at the most coincidental times.
When the Republicans are looking to get strong, and when the conservative side of the Republican Party is asserting itself, guess who happens to show up and put it down?
Guess who just happens to answer the phone when the Sunday morning shows call out would be General Powell.
It's amazing how this happens.
I'm going to get these soundbites.
I gotta take a break because I'm gonna get the sound bites of General Powell after the break here, but before we go to the break, I'm reminded, you know, I've I've mentioned to people for many moons now that I don't watch the Sunday shows anymore.
And a lot of people are surprised by that.
People think somebody like me and my position be watching those shows, not just on Sunday, but every night on cable TV that they'd be immersed in it.
And no, no, no, no.
I've not done that in a long, long time.
And I'll tell you why.
Yesterday's Sunday shows are classic illustration of why.
We all agree we got a nation in great trouble.
They have a great nation at risk in a dangerous world.
We have internal threats, we have domestic challenges.
European economy is a perhaps precursor to our own collapse.
People terribly worried about this.
Instead of discussing, I don't care what Sunday show you go to yesterday.
Instead of discussing the nation's needs, what you get on these Sunday shows are all of these pundits talking about the candidates' vulnerability to the latest attack ads, for example.
These shows are going the way of the dinosaurs.
They are becoming obsolete.
It isn't going to be long before we get a story I discovered the bones of David Gregory.
3.
The host of Meet the Press.
Our country, our America, our United States has problems.
Real problems, real problems that require real solutions.
Wouldn't you think that political analysts would discuss which candidate would do best to get this economy going?
Wouldn't you think that an honest Sunday show would focus on who has the best ideas to move this country forward for the benefit of everybody?
Which candidate, if not able to unite us, would at least divide us less than Obama has.
But no, no, no, those topics are of no interest whatsoever.
Improving the country, fixing what's wrong with the country, putting the economy on solid foot.
No.
Those topics aren't discussed.
They're not reported.
They're not even evaluated.
All we hear is which candidate has which flaw that's going to make it easier for Obama to beat him.
That's all the Sunday shows are about.
Is which Republican can we pick apart with negative ads or opposition research to make it easier for Obama to win?
Now why do I want to watch that?
And what the heck am I going to learn from it?
Zilch, zero, nada is the answer.
European banks are teetering on the edge.
The Italians went out and they sold bonds and they can't pay them now as they're maturing.
The Euro might collapse.
It is it is real trouble.
And meanwhile, U.S. banks did not get bailed out.
Not the big banks, not the Wall Street banks.
They did not get bailed out.
We have so many lies and myths being told that people believe.
Most of the big banks were forced to take TARP money so as to avoid there being a stigma.
The banks that needed TARP money were the local mom and pop banks all over the country that were in trouble.
The big banks.
Wells Fargo, these guys were forced to sign a paper agreeing to take X numbers of millions of dollars, billions maybe, I forget the number, but whatever it was.
Just to make it look like everybody was in the same boat.
But the big banks paid it all back.
The banks, these occupied people are protesting something that never happened.
The big banks did not get bailed out.
Taxpayers made a profit on the money they were forced to borrow.
Other banks did get bailed out, the little mom and pops, but the big ones did not.
What do we get on the Sunday shows?
Which candidate can be more easily tripped up by Obama's opposition reason.
I'm sorry, that is why it holds no interest for me.
The media template is the Republican candidates' weaknesses rather than their strengths.
It's frustrating, folks.
We're in big trouble in this country, and half of the political establishment wants that trouble to get even worse, and that's what it really boils down to.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
I thought you probably thought that I had forgotten.
It's time to start the Christmas music in the bumper rotation.
I had not forgotten.
Great to hear Manheim steamroller again.
I'd go to the audio soundbites like I promised.
General Powell, the titular head of the Republican Party, the uh it was this week that found him.
Christian Amanpoor.
She said, What about the tone in the country right now?
Still very divisive.
So very brash.
Some say poisonous.
I mean, you can barely get anything done on Capitol Hill just behind me here.
What needs to be done to actually improve the tone and the ability of people to work together, General Powell?
Let me say this directly.
The media has to help us.
The media loves this game where everybody is on the extreme.
It makes for great television.
It makes for great chatter.
It makes for great talk shows all day long with commentators commenting on commentators about the latest little mini flap up on Capitol Hill.
So what we have to do is sort of take some of the heat out of our political life in terms of the coverage of it so these folks can get to work quietly.
Can I posit a different point of view?
You know, I've read the Constitution, and I've read the Federalist Papers, and I happen to know that one of the key objectives of the founding fathers was grid luck.
They wanted as little as possible to get done on Capitol.
Why can't Christiana Monpoor look over her shoulder at the Capitol Dome and say, General Powell, weren't the founders brilliant?
A whole bunch of destructive stuff that people are trying can't get done because of built-in safeguards by our brilliant founders.
General Powell, there are a lot of people trying to destroy this country.
But the brilliance of our founders in writing the Constitution makes it almost impossible for him because of this great gridlock.
Well, she doesn't look at it that way because she's an idiot.
She has no clue that's the reason the Constitution was rich.
She has no clue that that was the mindset of the founders.
No clue whatsoever.
Here's General Powell again.
What do you do I have?
Yeah, here, just Run the bite.
The founding fathers compromised on slavery.
Oh, oh.
They had to in order to create a country.
Right.
They compromised on the composition of the Senate, of the House, of the Supreme Court, of a president.
One of the French powers.
Okay, that's enough.
You see how this works.
The founding fathers compromised on slavery.
And they compromise.
Well, you know, compromise is all well and good when one thing exists, and that is a common objective.
Now the common objective was the establishment of a union.
An independent nation free from the tyranny of King George.
What do we have in common with today's Democrats?
What in the name of Sam Hill is there worth compromising with them on?
We don't hold the same objectives.
That the framers from the various states had.
They had the same objective, the establishment of a union.
Today's Democrat Party wants to tear this one apart as it was founded.
We want to hold it together and strengthen it.
Where is the compromise there?
It's a false argument.
But it's seductive.
And we all get along like they did at the NBA and put it all together by Christmas time.
Do do do do do.
Barney Frank just said, among other things, the reason he's quitting Congress is that he's he's looked at it and he's convinced that conservative Republicans will not raise taxes on the very wits.
They're not gonna so I'm I'm putting moving on.
There's nothing for me here.
▲
Export Selection