All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 13, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:53
February 13, 2012, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
There, you see that Romney won the Maine, what was it, caucuses.
Yeah, but you know, and also the CPAC straw poll and Santorum is charging fraud.
Now, a lot of people are saying that San, that Romney bought the straw poll at CPAC, but the turnout in Maine was infinitesimal, they're saying.
So the point is, the Republican presidential nomination remains very fluid and things are smoking.
It's on fire there.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
We're back at the EIB Southern Command, and the audio is all perfect here.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
The email address, LRushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
Obama put out his budget this morning, a week late, and a trillion dollars short.
You'll be shocked to hear, ladies and gentlemen, Obama's budget actually increases spending.
I know I was shocked when I saw that.
Well, based on what he said in the past, you take him at his word, what he said in the past is outrageous.
Are you guys just now getting your lunch delivery?
Boy, am I glad I don't depend on that.
Jeez.
Anyway, his budget increases spending, and there are only two areas where there are spending cuts in Obama's budget, which is DOA.
It's not going anywhere.
It's a total fantasy.
It isn't going anywhere.
You wonder why even put this thing out, because it's just going to get slapped down.
Even Democrats are slapping it down today.
But the two areas where the Obama budget has real spending cuts are in defense and just found another cut.
That's the Postal Service.
Obama's budget proposes cutting back mail delivery to five days a week.
Now, you may think, big deal, Rush.
That's not a big thing.
Nobody gets real mail anywhere.
Wait a minute.
That's not going to be a very popular budget cut.
How many Americans rely on government checks?
How many of Obama's constituents rely on government checks?
It's a big number.
Now, I don't know.
I really don't know this.
I'm embarrassed, I have to ask.
Does the government mail out checks anymore?
They direct deposit.
They're both.
Okay, so the people who do receive checks, this is a cutback.
It could have an impact, minor, but at least it's possible.
According to the new Obama budget, the national debt will be $1 trillion higher in a decade than previously forecast.
Now, he usually gives his budget some kind of name.
His first budget was called the New Era of Fiscal Responsibility.
I kid you not.
I don't know what he's calling this one.
Maybe Occupy America.
Maybe this budget is Greece too.
Have you seen what's happening in Greece?
They're rioting.
They're burning restaurants, shops, storefronts, but the wrong people are burning Greece down.
Once again, the legitimate investors, bondholders and so forth, who have been told that they're only going to get 30% of what they put back in, they're the ones that ought to be burning the place down.
The students and the freeloaders are the ones actually committing the arson over, which is understandable.
They've been raised to believe all of this stuff that the government's there to provide for them.
All they have to do is grow up.
They don't even have to grow up.
The reason for government is to provide them things, to give them everything that they want.
But you have to wonder why they even bother to print this thing, this budget.
It's a fantasy.
Everybody knows it's deader than dead on arrival.
Harry Reid won't even allow it to be voted on.
He doesn't want this budget to see the light of day.
He doesn't want anybody to even see this.
You may have forgotten last year Obama's budget was voted down in the Senate 97 to zip, and that way it wasn't even an election year.
So I don't know why they bothered to put this on paper.
You would think they'd want to hide the evidence.
Now, three years ago, three years ago, Obama promised that he would cut the deficit in half in three years.
Let's go back to the audio soundbites.
This is February 23rd, 2009 in Washington.
This was during the open of the presidential fiscal responsibility summit.
We cannot and will not sustain deficits like these without end.
Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation.
That's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.
Now, I know what some of you are saying.
Rush!
Every politician lies about stuff like this.
Why in the world are you wasting time with this soundbite?
The reason I'm not wasting time, the reason I'm re-airing this is because it's an illustration.
And remember what the avowed purpose of this program is, is to, aside from the business aspects that have to be met.
Once you get past those, if those don't happen, the rest of this is academic.
Once you get past those, if I had to say, if I had to express this program in the form of a mission statement or what have you, it would be to create a large, participating, voting, informed public.
Real change happens at the ballot box, and the change in the ballot box that happens as a result of an informed, sizable voting public is real.
It's substantive.
There is mandate attached to it.
Now, I don't think that's idealistic at all.
That's, in fact, how this was all intended when the country was founded.
It was also understood by the founders that not everybody would be participating, that not all voters would be informed.
That's why voters didn't elect the Senate in the founding of the country.
It was well understood by the founders that a bunch of ne'er-do-wells or people didn't care.
People would rather watch the Grammys than learn about what's going on in the country.
You watched the Grammys last night.
Catherine watched the Grammys last night.
I didn't watch them, but I saw a list.
I've never seen so many awards.
Anyway, there are people who'd rather do stuff like that and read, what, Just Us magazine or Insight magazine or in whatever, keep up with celebrities.
But the bottom line is, for those that pay attention, we actually want to increase that number, and we want to increase the number of them who are informed.
And going back to 2008, the presidential campaign, remember how Obama portrayed himself?
Remember how he was portrayed to the media?
Messianic.
We had never before seen a politician like this.
Someone who told the truth, someone who was capable of uniting all the people, all the various divisions in the country, somebody who was going to restore respect for America around the world, somebody who was going to get rid of all of the traditional harangues that take place in our political culture.
Of course, what's happened is we have the most divisive president in our lifetimes, the most partisan president in our lifetimes, and we have a president who couldn't tell the truth about the budget and spending to save his life.
And so it's important to go back and listen to him promise all of these things about budgets and spending because he's running a campaign this year that is the equivalent of him saying, I've not been in the White House yet.
Nothing that's happened, taken place, have I had anything to do with.
He's running a campaign in a sense that's going to replicate what his 2008 campaign was.
The last three years happened, but he had nothing to do with it.
That's going to be his approach.
That's why it's important to go back and listen to this stuff.
As more and more people start to get interested in this, the election year, as more and more people start to pay attention, as more and more people want to start measuring past promises, past projections against reality.
The one thing that has to happen here is this election must be about Obama.
I don't care who our nominee is.
This election must be about Obama and what he has wrought and what the future portends if he's re-elected.
In that sense, as the program unfolds today, we're going to go back and revisit this whole contraception abortion Catholic church business.
There was a piece, called to my attention over the weekend at Ricochet.
It's a website started by a good friend of mine, Peter Robinson.
Peter Robinson took over the equivalent of firing line, hosted by William Buckley when Buckley gave that show up.
And Peter's out at Stanford at Palo Alto.
And he started the website Ricochet, and it's a highbrow place.
Highbrow conservatives.
Paul Rahe, R-A-H-E, a professor at Hillsdale College, wrote a brilliant piece that was posted over the weekend.
Actually, February 10th, so it's about three days.
I guess it was last Friday.
American Catholicism's Pact with the Devil.
And what made me interested in this, we had a couple of calls last Friday.
One was from a woman, you'll recall, who was very, very animated and very upset, criticized the Catholic Church, the bishops, the clergy, for being in bed with the Democrat Party for decades.
That they basically sold their souls and became leftists.
Rahe explains it and expands upon it.
One of the key points that he makes is the Catholic Church got sucked in.
And by the way, I don't want you Catholics to get upset here.
This is not a rip on the Church per se.
It's not a rip on Catholicism.
It's a rip on the people who've been running it, starting with Cardinal Bernadine.
But the point is, they fell for a seductive notion that the redistribution of wealth equaled charity.
That robbing Peter to pay Paul equaled charity.
And that allowed them, under the tenets of capitalism, to support liberalism and socialism.
And that's what they became.
It's a real brilliant piece.
It prints out six pages, and I haven't the time to go through it all.
But I did excerpt it.
I'm going to share it with you as the program unfolds.
But it is so good.
It's the reason I'm going to revisit the subject.
And it is interesting in another sense, too.
People are wondering if what's happened here with Obama, Catholic Church, abortion, contraception, is it a tipping point?
Is the outrage from the church real?
Is it enough to cause the church at the top to reverse its whole association with the Democrat Party?
We'll see.
One of the things that Rahe does is point out that the same thing happened with the priests who were abusing kids.
They looked the other way, just as they looked the other way with abortion.
Why don't you hear this?
It's a pretty profound indictment of Cardinal Bernadine, who basically said abortion, contraception, that's no different than any other popular social issue of the day.
He lumped it in with everything else, and they hemmed themselves into where they really couldn't criticize the Roe versus Wade decision.
Rahe points out that when he goes to Mass, he doesn't hear Catholicism anymore.
He doesn't hear any moral underpinning from the church.
All he hears is a bunch of socialist left-wing dogma.
Anyway, it's a brilliant piece, and I'll excerpt it as the program unfolds today.
But it all ties in with the question here of, are people waking up?
Are they realizing who Obama is, or are they not?
But is the outrage temporary?
Is it temporary and personal, and therefore forgettable once it's been dealt with?
Or is it systemic?
The same thing with the budget question here.
The reason why we go back and dredge up a soundbite from February 23rd of 2009 at the White House.
Listen to it again.
Here is Obama promises.
We can't keep spending this way.
We've got to balance the budget.
We can't kick the can down.
From everything he's done, he said in February 23rd, 2009, barely a month into his term, that none of what has happened was going to happen.
We cannot and will not sustain deficits like these without end.
Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation.
And that's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.
Well, that's not possible.
And there again, the budget deficit I inherited.
This man has spent already the budgets of 2013 and 2014.
They're already spent.
The entire federal budget, that's what his deficits have equaled.
That's how they've added up.
And I want to also tell you what I said in response to this.
The day Obama made this pledge, February 23rd, 2009, I, your host, L. Rushboe, said this.
Everything I heard him say is a lie, or sounds like a lie.
Everything I heard him say is the exact opposite of what he has done or is going to do.
He then, after giving this lecture on pay-as-you-go, don't spend what you don't have, and we're making great progress towards responsibly living within our means.
He then, and this is how community organizers work, he then released the group in the East Room into their breakout work-study groups.
He said, I want you to not only identify the problems, I want you to come up with solutions.
I want you to talk to yourselves about the problems and about the solutions.
I want you to talk to people in other breakout groups.
I want you to talk to me and my team.
And then, the best part of this, report back later this afternoon with your results.
So, to set the stage here for you, Obama convenes this summit, this fiscal responsibility summit.
Everybody in the room knows that everything he says to them is jaw-dropping, incredulous, unbelievable.
Then he dispatches them to their work groups.
And at the end of the day, they're supposed to go back and report the solutions.
So, do you realize, folks, in three hours, Barack Obama will have solved the nagging problem of fiscal irresponsibility.
It's going to be fixed by, well, three hours and 20 minutes at five o'clock.
By five o'clock Eastern time, the problem is solved.
That was the game being played.
Breakout study groups, that happened a lot in the first six months of this regime's first term.
And it was all for show.
It was all on television.
Remember, this was the Messiah who had just been elected.
I mean, the media was still having on-air orgasms.
And Obama was being covered practically 24-7, at least during the business day, non-stop, on the cable nets.
All this was seen.
Sends people out to their breakout groups, come back, solve the problem.
And people in the hinterlands, okay, problem's going to be fixed.
I can forget it.
It's all, finally we got a guy that's going to fix the problems.
Okay, well, it's three years later now.
And it's time to remind everybody, problems are worse and getting worse and there's no end in sight as long as he remains in the White House.
You want to laugh or Obama's budget predicts federal revenues will rise by 17.5% fiscal 2013.
Federal revenues will rise by 17.
federal revenue is not going to rise with all of the tax increases planned and all of the money that will be taken out of the private sector with Obamacare implemented.
There's not any way that federal revenues will rise by 17.5%.
Also, unemployment will not be above 8%.
So, the 2013 budget is an absolute laugher.
It is an entire joke.
The new budget projects gross federal debt rising to 17.5 trillion.
That is 107% of GDP.
Now, everybody's out there talking about, at least they were before the CPAC weekend.
Everybody's talking about the Tea Party's dead, the Tea Party's faded away, the Tea Party's just gone away, the Tea Party lost all of its momentum.
The Tea Party's lost its energy.
That hasn't happened and it's going to pick up whatever energy it left off with and it's going to grow.
It was spending and debt which was responsible for the Tea Party forming in the first place.
And this budget that Obama's put out is just outrageous because it is a blueprint of what he would like.
It's not going to happen but it's a blueprint of what he wants.
Be right back.
Don't go away.
Now, folks, this statistic that is in the budget.
New budget projects gross federal debt rising to $17.5 trillion in FY13.
Not only is that 107% of GDP and the budget is going to grow at more than $2 trillion next year is what that means.
currently the federal debt is $15.3 trillion and some might say we've reached debt limits and expanded we're up to $16.
Regardless, the debt is going to go up more than $2.2 trillion.
That's almost twice as fast as Obama has been increasing the debt per year so far.
He's going to double the rate of increase of the debt with this budget.
Now, remember, we just picked one soundbite but you go back to the first three months of 2009 you can find all kinds of examples of Obama even after the first three months talking about how we've got to get our fiscal house in order.
We can't keep spending like this.
We've got to get it in control.
And we knew what was happening.
We were all being set up for tax increases.
Now, politically it just didn't work out for Obama to raise taxes the past three years.
And even a year and a half ago, a little less than a year and a half ago, the dead skunk or the dead whatever it was that December meeting of Congress when Obama decided to not let the Bush tax cuts sunset.
He knew that raising tax rates at that point would do horrible things, wreak all kinds of havoc on his re-election.
He knows what tax increases do.
He knows that they are a break.
Yeah, the dead duck session.
the lame duck dead duck whatever it was Obama knew that raising taxes back then two Decembers ago would be damaging to his re-election because he knows what tax increases do.
They retard economic growth.
So, knowing full well, they retard economic growth.
The fact that he intends to raise taxes and double the debt is as great an indicator as you need of what his intentions are for this country and our budget and our overall structure.
He knows exactly what he's doing.
This is not somebody in over his head.
This is not some well-intentioned little plebe who has no clue what he's doing.
He knows exactly what he's doing.
He was in Annandale Virginia, this morning Northern Virginia Community College where he went out and talked to a bunch of college kids who have been raised and educated on far-left socialism since they were in a third grade, if not sooner, to explain his budget to them.
We have three soundbites.
The budget that we're releasing today is a reflection of shared responsibility.
Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary.
That's not fair.
It doesn't make sense at a time when we've got to pull together to get the country moving.
I don't need a tax break.
We don't need to be providing additional tax cuts for folks who are doing really really, really well.
Do we want to keep these tax cuts for wealthiest Americans or do we want to keep investing in everything else education, clean energy, a strong military care for our veterans.
We can't do both.
We can't afford it.
Some people go around they say well presidents, engaging in class warfare, that's not class warfare, that's common sense.
That's common sense now.
It's total class warfare.
It's all lies, it's all misdirection, it's all misrepresenting what is happening.
Everything from Warren Buffett and his secretary on down on that list deep tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that we want to keep investing in everything else education, clean energy is nothing more than crony capitalism.
It's a total scandal.
Obama's clean energy endeavor is nothing more than scandal.
Central, strong military.
He's cutting the defense budget.
He is weakening the military.
Nothing the federal government is doing regarding education is improving it.
Kids aren't learning, they're being indoctrinated with a left wing agenda and it's.
More intense than ever.
Care for our veterans.
This from a man who disdains them.
Here's the next bite.
Warren Buffett's doing fine, I'm doing fine.
We don't need the tax breaks.
You need them.
You're the ones who see your wages stall.
You're the one whose cost of everything from college to groceries has gone up.
You're the ones who deserve a break.
And we don't begrudge success in America.
We aspire to it.
We don't envy the wealthy, but we do expect everybody to do their fair shit.
All right, I can't stop the.
This is such a crock.
The percentage of Americans who are paying taxes in this country the top 1% paying close to 30.
The top 5% are paying close to 60, the top 10% paying almost all the taxes.
It's just absurd to say that they're not paying their fair share.
This is about envy.
He's telling one group of Americans, a bunch of college kids who have no future because of him, that they're suffering because of millionaires and billionaires.
It's disgusting.
This is what he hopes to win re-election on.
He's banking on the fact that there are more people who'd rather sit around and do nothing, become wards of the state, become totally dependent on him, than there are people who would like to seek their dreams, be the best they can be, go out and pursue happiness.
Happiness that's.
That's what he's banking on folks.
He is explicitly banking on the fact that he can be re-elected by a dependent class that outnumbers a working class, and I mean by working class anybody that earns a dime or 10 million dimes.
That's what he's banking on.
Here's the next bite.
Americans understand, if I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford, then one of two things are going to happen either.
That means we have to add to our deficit.
Wait, stop it.
She's at three sound bites in a row where Obama's focus on him.
Like himself, like Clinton, I don't need tax break.
I'm rich now.
I don't.
This is nothing more than a ploy, as expressed earlier by me brilliantly.
So, if I might add on this program, the reason filthy rich leftists run around and talk about how they don't need a tax cut and they're willing to pay more taxes is how they keep college kids like the people in this audience off their backs.
The Kennedy family perfected this rolling in dough and yet everybody thought they were kind compassionate, that they hated their wealth and they felt guilty over it, and so they were going to go out and make sure nobody else got wealthy like they did, because it wasn't fair and it was Un-American to have that kind of money.
That's what these people are trying to do.
Well, I'm telling you, Americans do not run around and say, if I get a tax break, I don't need in the country.
That's not how Americans producing, working Americans don't think that way.
They don't talk that way.
I have never.
Well, can't say never.
but the number of wealthy people I've known in my life I can count on less than one hand the number of them who say to me I don't need a tax cut Practically everybody who works in this country that I know and I know a lot of people is focused on how they can keep more of what they earn, not how they can find a way to give it away.
Most people I know who work are looking for ways to hide it.
They're looking for ways to shelter it from people like Obama.
If people do not run around and say, if I get a tax break, I don't need and the country can't afford nobody that that's responsible talks about.
The country can't afford.
The country can't afford Obama.
The country cannot afford Pelosi.
The country can't afford Read.
The country can't afford any more Democrats.
The via hard work, damn right.
He's trying to stigmatize that and he's trying to guilt people.
So when Warren Buffett comes along, I don't need this tax cut.
I don't need them all for getting rid of the estate tax.
That's just so that you don't someday march on Warren Buffett's house and try to take his money.
The filthy rich in this country I've had so many people ask a game.
It's to keep the peasants with the pitchforks away from them.
It's all phony.
There's not a one of these guys who got where they are by agreeing with what they're saying now and by behaving the way they talk now.
Warren Buffett didn't get where he is with policies, philosophies and business practice that are reflected by his current language.
Just the opposite.
So all these filthy and who try to make people think they live liberalism?
They're scared.
They want an insurance policy.
They want a moat.
They want a moat around their homes and their businesses that you can't cross in anger.
So that's how they do it.
They speak of disdaining wealth.
They talk about how they don't need any more cash cuts they've got everything while they go out and try to earn even more.
And Warren Buffett fights current tax bills that he has.
Warren Buffett is not beating a path to the IRS saying how much do I owe you?
Warren Buffett is in a battle with him right now.
They're telling him he owes more than he wants to pay, but publicly, Warren Buffett wants you to think that he goes to the IRS every day and writes a check because he feels so bad about earning so much and being taxed so little.
It's all absurd.
It's all a lie.
It's all class envy.
Obama's speech today to these students at Northern Virginia Community College proves that Occupy WALL Street is already running our country.
They already occupy the White House.
That kind of thinking is already running this country.
Here's Obama talking to a bunch of college kids talking about their wages stalling.
They don't have any wages.
They're not earning anything yet and if they do it's part time.
They're not.
They've not entered the full time workforce yet having grads.
It's a community college.
he expects everybody to do their fair share except the half of us who pay nothing they're not going to do their fair share they're going to continue to sit there and do nothing and receive the rewards for it
because in Obama's world they're victims they don't have anything because the rich have stolen it from except Warren Buffett who hasn't stolen it from him because Warren Buffett doesn't think he needs a tax cut so he's cool I don't know how many but I'll guarantee you these kids in his audience today very few of them are paying income tax some of them earn enough probably to have to pay some income tax but it's insignificant
He's promising the takers that he's going to take even more from the producers.
That's what the speech is.
That's what his campaign is.
Obama is seeking re-election with the votes of election on.
That's where he thinks the country is by design.
That's where he wants the country now.
One of Obama's guys is the budget director, Jack Liu.
Jack Chief is chief of staff and he went out there said, you know, this is crazy.
He said, we need to be honest.
You can't pass a budget in the Senate of the United States without 60 votes and you can't get 60 votes without bipartisan support.
So unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed, and I think he was reflecting the reality of that could be a challenge.
That's Jack Liu, chief of staff.
State OF The Union, CNN yesterday.
Has he never heard of budget reconciliation?
The one thing in the Senate that does not require 60 votes is the passage of a budget, because it's constitutionally mandated.
You cannot filibuster the budget.
This is why the regime tried to get health care passed via budget reconciliation, where they didn't need 60 votes.
They couldn't get that done and they thought about deeming it to be passed in the House, which would facilitate it in the Senate.
And Henry Nostralinus waxed, we're not going to deem it.
Even he knew that that wouldn't fly.
So here's Obama's chief of staff.
You, in fact folks, you don't even need 50 votes, you just need a simple majority.
A budget resolution is one of the few things not subject to a filibuster.
A bill based on reconciliation instructions cannot be filibustered, and that's what a budget is now.
Is this guy stupid, idiotic or lying when he's on CNN yesterday?
Frankly, I don't care, because his whole point was to blame the Republicans for the fact that this debt on arrival budget isn't going to get passed.
That was the whole point.
Make sure the Republicans get blamed for this by refusing to work with Harry Reid.
The Democrats don't have 60 votes in the Senate, but they don't need them.
The blatant, brazen lie on CNN picked up so bad, it was so bad.
Welcome.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
As we head to the phones hello yeah hi Rush, how are you good?
Thank you.
First of all, I just want to tell you that you affect my life in so many ways I can't tell you.
Well, I listen to everything you say and I believe you.
Well, that's sometimes I'm kidding not very many I when you're kidding, but I awesome.
At the CPAC I've never heard a better speech.
We got the sound bites coming up.
Okay, I also know that I consider Romney to be the Republican version of Obama.
He will say he will do absolutely anything to get elected.
To me he looks like he's totally desperate.
I think he's mean, he's nasty and he's not a conservative by my definition or by yours.
I will never vote for him.
I got a piece here.
I mentioned Peter Robinson of Ricochet.
He has a post at Ricochet.
A sentence I wish I hadn't read.
Front page of the NEW YORK Times yesterday, long story on Romney's positions on abortion.
In both his 94 Senate race, 2002 gubernatorial race, the Times notes Romney campaigned unambiguously pro-choice.
Then by 2005, with Romney eyeing a possible presidential bid.
Abortion rights platform.
In an article that June 2005 National Review, Romney said, my political philosophy is pro-life.
Same article quoted his top strategist at the time, Mike Murphy, as saying Romney had been a pro-life Mormon, faking it as a pro-choice friendly, that he's always been pro-life.
He just faked being pro-choice once he was in Massachusetts, faking it, Mike Murphy, suggesting Romney intentionally misled the people of Massachusetts.
His own guy.
His own guy made the point that you're making, Laurie.
You know, Warren Buffett secretary pays a lot more for food than Obama does and she pays a lot more for rent or housing than Obama does, and she probably pays.
Warren Buffett secretary probably pays more to travel than Obama does, he he?
▲
Export Selection