All Episodes
Previous Next
June 12, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:51
June 12, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 Podcast.
And greetings, my friends.
I am Rush Limboard, just like the brand new MacBook Pro, thinner and more powerful.
And easy to see.
Well, what a what a machine that is.
But have some things on Apple later.
I'm going to relate Apple to Obama and teachers and cops, firefighters.
And I am still struggling, folks, trying to explain in an understandable way what I was trying to explain yesterday.
Greetings, by the way, great to have you.
Telephone number is 800 282882.
If you want to appear on the program if we go to the phones.
Yesterday we had the sound bites from the Sunday shows.
Axel Rod and Obama himself talking about the private sector's fine.
What we need are more teachers and firefighters and cops.
And if you remember the discussion yesterday, I was struggling mightily at trying to explain to you why I know that that is old-fashioned, 50-year-old thinking linked to Marxism.
But I don't think I I don't think that I made it understandable.
I've been I've been struggling with this ever since the program ended yet.
Well, I took four hours off to immerse myself in the Apple stuff.
But then after I'd done that, I I uh got right back into this, and I've been really thinking about it in a way to try to explain it because it's so illustrative.
If I've can illustrative, if I can pull this off, it's it's going to explain so much about who Obama is and the Democrats and all of his inside circle and the way they actually think about the country and how old fashioned and tied to a discredited past they are as they attempt to disguise themselves as forward moving futurists and so forth.
Now, before I give this another whirl, a related story from the Investors Business Daily, and it came out last Friday.
I missed it last Friday, and it didn't get a lot of attention.
But in a nutshell, I mean here's the headline private jobs down 4.6 million from January 2008.
Federal jobs up 11.4%.
And yet, here's Obama saying, the private sector's fine.
We need more cops and firefighters and teachers.
That equals jobs.
Nothing about productivity, nothing about innovation and so forth.
But that still doesn't quite get me there.
Well, in a nutshell, the federal government's own statistics show just how out of touch Obama's comments about the private sector really are.
If you look at if you look at payroll changes since January of 2008, the private sector has gone down by 4.6 million jobs.
That's a 4% decline.
Meanwhile, all of government, federal and local, state, whole uh whole shooting match, has only declined by 407,000 jobs, 4 million versus 400,000.
That's a 1.8% drop.
And since January of 2008, the number of federal government jobs has grown by 225,000, which um equals an 11.4% increase.
And these numbers come from the federal government, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and so forth.
So clearly, Obama was as wrong as anybody could be about this, but in his mind he wasn't.
The private sector always does fine.
It's always there.
Private sector's cool.
He's got an ignorance combined with an arrogant condescension about it.
He thinks he knows everything about it.
He doesn't know anything about it.
And those two things combined to equal an arrogant condescension and a dangerous Lack of understanding that should never occupy such a position of power in this country.
I was frustrated by this whole topic yesterday.
And I was concerned that I started talking about the productive aspects of work that I would be insulting cops, or they be taken as an insult to police officers and firefighters and teachers.
We like them.
I don't want to offend anybody here.
I never ever want to offend anybody.
And I said numerous times yesterday, I've got to be very careful with this.
Well, I was talking about growth, and that's where I'm going to intertwine a short little passage about some Apple innovation with all this that will help to illustrate it.
But before I get there, I need to touch this subject in a more generalized way.
And we all assume that teachers and firefighters and cops are exclusive members of the public sector.
And I think that the problem that I was having yesterday is in that fundamental concession that may not be necessary to make, namely, cops, firefighters, and teachers belong to the public sector.
Because you could make an argument that they don't.
Now, Obama says they do.
But the thing you have to understand about Obama, he's not really talking about the jobs of police officer, firefighter, and school teacher.
And this is what I didn't make clear yesterday about my level of understanding here.
When Obama and Axlerod talk about putting more cops and firemen and teachers in the classrooms on the street putting out fires, he's not talking about the jobs that they do.
He's talking about their unions.
And he's talking about the way these functions are co-opted by the public sector in the big cities in the blue states, which has created a presumption among a lot of people that they are public sector jobs.
Now, millions of Americans, most of whom are not wealthy, pay additional money to send their children to private schools in order to keep them out of dysfunctional public sector school systems that we all rightly decry and criticize.
American men and women all over the country serve as volunteer firefighters on behalf of their communities, and then their taxes are confiscated to pay for public schools and big city fire companies, but they choose to pay more for the value having these jobs done right creates.
I mean, there is value in what these people do.
And that this touches on the whole argument about productivity in the sense that there's no entrepreneurism and being a police officer and that there's no productivity, maybe so, but there's value.
And the value has to be calculated.
And it's a mistake to try to calculate that value, the way we calculate the value of entrepreneurism or commerce or what have you.
There are measurable ways to determine productivity.
And there are with teachers.
How well do the students do, for example, is one way.
But there's no direct financial relationship until you find out how well the student does in the world.
And who can keep track of all that?
The bottom line is there is value.
having these jobs done right creates.
Now if the states if the states went bankrupt tomorrow what would happen is that communities would come up with their own police forces.
This appears People would do this if the state or the municipality went bankrupt and was not able to, the community would come together and do that.
And the history of the United States, education and security from crime and catastrophe has always been part of the private sector.
This is what I was struggling with yesterday, why I knew that I had to be careful here.
Education and security have always been part of the private sector.
I did not mean to say that there is no value created yesterday when I was talking about the job of teaching, policing, and firefighting.
They are fundamental to the assurance that we have a civil society in which economic activity can flourish.
They have a value that can be measured like anything else.
Now, let's bring Obama back into this.
Obama is flaking for the unions and big government, and he's always urging there has to be more and more and more.
It doesn't matter how many we have.
It doesn't matter how well they're doing their jobs or how poorly they're doing their jobs, or whatever value we assign, there has to be more.
There's no end to how many more cops, firefighters, teachers, and public sector employees, union employees that we must have.
There's no end to it.
Now, as I say, they have a value that can be measured.
But a community of, say, 25,000 people doesn't need 1,000 more teachers.
Maybe it's got plenty if it has a few hundred good ones.
If it has 80 good cops, that might be enough.
It may go a whole year with no fires, but if it has an effective volunteer emergency force and it's on duty and reacts whenever there is a fire or somebody needs an ambulance, it doesn't need to hire 200 firefighters at union wages and benefits.
Most communities have what they need in this regard.
And the assumption that we don't is another thing that offends me here.
What do you mean we don't have enough teachers?
We had plenty.
In fact, people are escaping the public sector school system because it's not good in their in their view, where they live in some cases.
We don't have a shortage of teachers, but you listen to Obama, we wouldn't have a shortage of police officers.
We don't have a shortage of firefighters.
But listen to these guys.
This equals a solution to our economic problems.
And of course it doesn't.
And again, not to offend about that work, but...
I said yesterday, when was the last time you went to a police officer, a teacher or a firefighter to apply for a job.
They have a value, but it's not measured in the in the in the same way that traditional economic output is.
Now, the trick here is not to fall for Obama's insistence that these are public sector tasks.
I mean, they may be hired by municipalities and so forth, but they have a different relationship.
Teachers, firefighters, and cops with members of the community than other government employees, even in big cities.
Big cities, you might have a better argument that municipalities should provide police and fire service since you have a lot of people living in close quarters who can be destroyed if violence and fires are not contained quickly.
But see, in Obama's ever-expanding public sector, when he says we always have to have more teachers and firefighters and police, regardless of whether we have enough to suit our needs.
He's not talking about in-classroom educators or guys climbing the ladders to put out a fire and other guys chasing down the bad guys.
Thank you.
When he talks about teachers, firefighters, and cops, those are broadly defined terms.
He's talking about diversity administrators, for example.
We need more bilingual education coordinators, community liaisons, government-related.
I guarantee you, if there were a piece of legislation, we're going to hire more cops and firefighters and so forth and so on, these are the kind of jobs he would fill.
The stimulus was used practically exclusively to either hire teachers or to ensure that they weren't fired.
The stimulus was not used as it was promised.
Productivity jobs, j uh digging ditches or building roads, bridges, and rebuilding schools or what have you.
It all went to what Obama really means when he talks about teachers and firefighters and cops, and that's people behind the scenes that you never see who are busy corrupting our civil society as it exists and perverting it.
Community organizers, community liaisons, government relation directors, sensitivity trainers, regulatory compliance officers, and things of that nature.
Paper shuffling, union wage benefit, sinecures that create zero value and drag down productive economic activity.
That's what he's talking about when he wants to hire cops, teachers, and police officers.
He's just using the terms because I said yesterday, who doesn't want protection?
Who doesn't want an adequate fire fighting force?
Who doesn't want good teachers in the neighborhood?
That's why I was struggling yesterday.
You've got to be careful because you can't.
I didn't want to sound as though I was coming out against the whole notion of having teachers and firemen and police officers.
The point is we're not in a shortage of those jobs, and yet Obama wants more of them.
But he's not talking about specifically beat cops and firemen that climb the ladder and teachers in the classroom.
He's talking about more administrators, union types behind the scenes who will act in a stealthy way to further implement his agenda.
I was I was really bothered by this yesterday.
And I didn't, I wanted to make sure that I did not offend these people who are doing real work.
You have a lot of conservative firefighters, a lot of conservative cops, as we know, probably a decent amount of conservative teachers.
They just can't say so.
Out of fear of being harassed.
But the thing I don't I think the real point here is I don't, they are part of the community.
We live and work side by side with them.
And I don't want to, or didn't want to create this line of demarcation where they are public sector equals the bad guys.
That's that's not what I was saying, and I didn't, I didn't want anybody even infer that.
They are with us, those of us in the private sector.
They interact with us in the private sector, and they are they are different.
They're not bureaucrats.
They're not behind the scenes regulators that you never interact with or very rarely.
But these people, the cops, the firemen, the teachers, they they create the essentials of civil society.
And uh and Obama wants that to be seen as a public sector gig because he wants the public sector seen in a great, great positive way.
Let me gotta take a break.
Sit tight.
We'll come back and continue right after this.
Okay, here's the thing.
The police are great.
They don't create wealth.
They protect it.
That's crucial.
They protect wealth.
Firemen, they're also wonderful and great.
They don't create wealth, but they too protect it.
Teachers.
They're wonderful profession.
They help educate people, become good citizens, which is their job, so that citizens can then go create wealth, but they don't create the wealth themselves.
One of the things that's happened, you know, we need these people.
They are us.
They're as much in the community as we are.
They are not bureaucrats.
But look what's happened here.
We don't want to make promises that we can't keep these pensions and health programs and retirement in perpetuity for 30 years.
What does that end up doing?
It ends up dividing.
And the union members, the Cops and the firefighters and teachers, they all get caught in the middle.
A Democrat Party money laundering scheme has created financial burdens impossible to pay for now.
But we have the cops and the firefighters who work to protect the wealth created and the security, including their own, and the teachers who theoretically educate people to be good citizens so that they can go forth and create wealth, become productive themselves.
But what got in the middle here?
Why are the why why are we divided?
And I would submit to you, it's because of the unions.
These jobs became unionized.
Then all of a sudden there became opposition between us and people that do this work.
And that division was intentional and the war between the citizens was intentional.
And if not for the unions and so forth, there wouldn't be all of this friction.
Ladies and gentlemen, um look at if you will.
Does Detroit need more cops right now?
Does Detroit need more teachers and firemen?
No.
Detroit needs more private sector growth.
And this is an illustration of the point.
Detroit's a big problem.
Here's Obama and Axarado.
Well, we need more jobs, firemen, teachers.
That's not gonna help Detroit right now.
So why do Obama and Axelon want it?
Because they're they're talking about actually more bureaucrats.
It's more control.
And it's it's uh it's a total as I said yesterday.
I don't know if these people are really this dense, or if they've just been so ill-educated in the schools of Marxism and Leninism that it's one of it's one of two things.
They either really don't know what they're doing, or they know exactly what they're doing and are just trying to make it as palatable as possible with language they think everybody would understand and end up unwittingly supporting.
But I have to tell you, I you go back to 2008 campaign, and everybody thought, wow, how brilliant Axelrod and Pluffin' these guys are that ran Obama's came, how brilliant Obama was now.
You look at them now.
And they're clueless.
They don't know what to do.
They are out of ideas, and they know they can't run on anything Obama has done.
And yet they are.
They're running on an additional stimulus.
More cops, more teachers, more firefighters, they're just more jobs.
Who cares what kind they are?
Here, listen to this.
The the Obama's reelection campaign will release its first radio ad targeted specifically at the African American community today.
And the um Daily Caller says this is an unusually aggressive early effort to uh rally blacks behind the president.
We have the ad.
It's audio soundbite number 14.
It's entitled, We Got Your Back.
Four years ago, we made history.
Now it's time to move forward and finish what we started together.
We have to show the president.
We have his back.
We've got to be.
We can't afford to spend the next four years going back.
We've got that.
I refuse to pay for another millionaire's tax cut by kicking children off of Head Start programs, or asking students to pay more for college, or eliminating health insurance for millions of poor and elderly and disabled Americans on Medicaid.
Have the president's back and register to vote.
Go to gotta vote.org to register now.
That's gotta vote.org.
You know, we've got your back.
Pay for by Obama for America.
Now they getting desperate here, folks.
They are getting them.
I mean, this this is a sign of big Trouble to have to go out and run an ad targeted at black voters.
And I could ask, you know, the predictable question, can you imagine if a white candidate ran an ad like this aimed at white voters?
There would be hell to pay.
Racism charges would be going back and forth.
But I want, has anybody ever been kicked out of a head start program?
We can't afford to spend the next four years going backwards.
That's exactly what we're doing.
We're going backwards at full throttle.
That's the whole point here.
I refuse to pay for another millionaire's tax cut by kicking children out of head start programs.
Where is that happening?
Head start's funding is increased year after year, no matter who's in the White House, no matter which party controls Congress.
Head start never gets smaller.
It never pays for a millionaire's tax cut.
This is absurd, but I know that they they think that their audience is susceptible to being persuaded by this.
I refuse to pay for students, asking students to pay more for college.
They are, Mr. President.
You are you your buddies in higher education are financially raping these students, and your student loan program is putting them in debt to you for the rest of their lives while you sit there and refuse to allow it.
You run an ad into the black community say you refuse to allow tuition to go up, the rich guys are uh getting a tax cut, so tuition goes this is nonsensical.
I know that the target audience here, they they some of them fall for it because it's emotion-based.
Health insurance for millions of poor and elderly, where's nobody's health insurance?
This is absurd.
Everybody gets health treatment in this country called the emergency room.
Anyway, when they're running ads in June to a group that traditionally votes 93% for the Democrat.
Then folks, you have to say that they in heap big trouble.
Little Elizabeth Warren lingo out there.
Now, Roland Martin this morning on CNN starting point.
And he's he is he still at CNN or did he get suspended?
He's there.
Okay.
Because it says here he was the guest of uh Washington Watch.
Oh, maybe.
Maybe if you host a show at CNN, you can guess on another CNN show rather than appear.
How does that work?
You have your show at CNN, and some other show wants you so you do a guest shot on a network where you already have your own show.
Anyway, Roland Martin had this to say.
They were talking about the the new report that median net worth fell 40% during the recession.
That story was in the uh the New York Times yesterday.
This is net worth fell 40% in the recession.
Roland Martin.
We talk about African Americans.
53% of black wealth has been wiped out.
And that's going to affect the next two generations.
Because typically you start your business with a home loan.
You can't do it because you don't have a home now.
53% of black wealth has been wiped out.
Now he doesn't say it's the Obama economy, but it is.
This is why the regime has to worry about shoring up even black voters.
That and gay marriage.
Gay marriage and black unemployment overall, black wealth destruction in this country when the black president first in history.
They're in trouble.
Can you imagine what their polling data must look like?
They have to put together a spot like this.
So all these all these people, they've lost their wealth, they don't have any jobs, and they're running ads.
We got your back, Mr. President.
You know, the ad ought to be from Obama, I got your back.
Or at least I'm gonna have your back if you re-elect me.
I know I haven't had your back up till now.
I've only made you think so.
But we got an ad from all the people who've been destroyed economically.
Don't worry, Mr. President, we got your back.
It's all about Obama.
It's all about Obama.
Um, this was C-SPAN QA Brian Lamb is on June 10th, a couple days ago.
Interviewed the uh congressional black caucus legislative political director, Angela Rye.
And Brian Lebs said, from your own standpoint, do you see the president of the United States as an African American?
What impact does that have?
This is probably the toughest presidential term in my lifetime.
A lot of what the president has experienced is because he's black.
You know, whether it's questioning his intellect or whether or not he's too Ivy League, there's an ad talking about the president is too cool.
Is he too cool?
And if this music there reminds me of, you know, some of the black exploitation films from the 70s playing in the background, him with his sunglasses.
And to me, it was just very racially charged.
They weren't asking if Bush was too cool, but yet people say that that's the number one person they love to have a beer with.
So if that's not cool, I don't know what is.
I don't know what she's talking about.
But she's offended.
And she's terribly upset.
Calling Obama cool is racist.
Calling Obama cool is racist.
By the way, that story on the uh decline in personal wealth.
Let me tell you something buried in that story.
Declines in average income were greatest in the wealthiest 10% families, and for higher education or wealth groups, according to the survey.
Now that story is out there.
Forty percent wealth of net worth was destroyed during the recession, but declines in average income were greatest in the wealthiest 10%.
Now it's in there, it's in the story, but it's buried.
They want you to conclude something else.
They want you to conclude that the gap between the rich and poor is getting wider, the richer getting richer, the poor are getting poorer because the rich are stealing from the poor, and yet they had to include it because the polling data is what it is.
10%, the wealthiest 10% of families, saw the largest decline in average income during the recession.
One more Angelo uh Rye Sound by Brian Lamb from June the 10th.
She is again the Congressional Black Caucus legislative political director.
Brian Lamb said, What happens if the jury would find George Zimmerman guilty or not guilty?
I think a not guilty verdict is extremely problematic in 2012.
I know folks have talked about race riots and all these others.
I don't know that.
I think that we live in a day and age where people are educated enough not to do that.
I know that his mother and his father have asked for peace, peaceful solutions, not repaying evil with evil.
So I'm just not sure.
She's still floating the idea, though.
She's floating the idea of possible race riots.
She says she hopes there aren't any, but she's still floating the idea.
Obama's bad week continues is deterioration into this week.
That and much more straight ahead when we get back.
Don't go away.
James Carville and Stan Greenberg have a polling company.
It's called Democracy Now or some democracy corps, or as Obama would say, democracy corpse.
And they've just issued a new report.
James Carble and Stan Greenberg, and actually uh Erica Seaford, a third member of a group now.
They've gone out, done a bunch of focus groups.
Focus groups are a little bit different than a poll.
You actually assemble the people and you chat with them for hours sometimes, and you videotape it, and you run all kinds of ideas by them.
This is the stuff Frank Lunch does occasionally on Fox that you see.
That's a those are miniature focus groups.
And Carval and his gang have been out there doing a bunch of them, and they say that the data from the focus groups show that Barack Kardashian is taking the wrong approach to the campaign by focusing on economic issues.
They say that, in fact, Carville says that Obama, quote, will fail, unquote, if he talks about economic growth.
They claim that the Obama campaign has got to move to a new narrative in order to be successful in November.
Current campaigns focused on success in the economic recovery, but Carville's group says the strategy is wrong and will fail.
The only reason Obama is keeping up in the campaigns because voters perceive Romney as out of touch with ordinary people.
That's the only thing they say that's keeping Obama alive.
If Romney's able to bridge that gap and become more like a regular guy to people, and it's over for Obama.
And I don't care what Dana Milbank has a column in the Washington Post today pile up at the White House.
And it's devastating.
It just more of the same people in the media and on the Democrat side of the aisle are coming right up against the reality here that this guy can lose.
They have been under the impression that his re-election was a slam dunk.
It didn't matter what any economic details were.
It didn't matter what polling data said.
It was automatic.
Obama was going to be re-elected for all the various reasons and obvious ones.
First black president, history continues.
Smartest guy in the room, history continues.
Just a fate accompli.
And you and I, living in Realville, have known since the stimulus and then health care.
That if this country is the same country we grew up in, he's toast.
We've known this, everything being equal, no cheating, no fraud, no implosions on our side, this kind of thing.
We've known this.
There was still some concern about the Republican primary race.
We need the best candidate we can get, but there was still this realization.
Well, maybe I shouldn't speak for you.
I'll just speak for me.
I have always been confident that Obama could lose his reelection because of facts, because of reality.
The economy is horrible.
People are losing everything they ever had.
They're in debt like they've never been before.
The country's in debt like it's never been.
This is not the way this country is always operated, and this is not the way things have gotten done.
This is not what people this country thought that they were electing.
Nobody wants that.
The numbers opposing it continue to rise, the economic destruction taking, but the Democrats and the media, they're just now realizing that last week was the first time it really hit them that Obama could lose.
And you can see it in the way they're talking on television, the way they're writing, Millbank job growth is stalled.
Democrats have been humiliated in Wisconsin.
Attorney General facing a contempt of Congress citation.
Talks with Pakistan have broken down.
Bill Clinton is contradicting Obama.
Mitt Romney is outraising Obama.
Democrats and Republicans alike are complaining about a cascade of national security leaks from the regime.
And he's now on record saying the private sector's doing fine.
Could it get any worse?
Well, it depends on your point of view.
If the Supreme Court strikes down Obamacare, I'd say things are much better.
But for Obama, they would be much worse.
For Obama, it could get a lot worse.
For Obama, you could argue that last week was not really that bad, as I attempted to illustrate yesterday.
Back to Milbank, early Monday morning, Obama learned that it could get worse.
His aides delivered the news to him that his commerce secretary had been cited for a felony hit and run after allegedly crashing his car three times over the weekend in one incident.
The cabinet officer apparently rear-ended a Buick, spoke to the car's occupants and then hit the car again as he drove away.
Now, interesting, Milbank would include the uh commerce secretary's misadventures in his car as somehow a blow to the president.
How's that?
The most noteworthy thing about this story is we got a commerce secretary.
Who knew?
I never heard of this guy.
We've got a commerce secretary.
Guy gets drunk and he drives his car around and bashes into people.
Epilepsy.
May have been epilepsy.
Okay, so he wasn't drunk.
We don't know yet.
They'll come up with something.
Anyway, um, the Millbank column goes on.
It's not pretty.
I gotta take a timeout, however.
We'll do that and be back here in the fastest three hours in media.
Here we are, folks, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
And we've got uh brief break here at the uh top of the hour.
John Zogby with polling data.
Disillusioned young voters are dropping out with a companion story that voters under 25 flocked to Scott Walker in Wisconsin.
▲
Export Selection