All Episodes
Previous Next
June 26, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:55
June 26, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, sir, we Matt Kennel Rushbaugh.
The home of the real counterculture, the EIB network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It's a delight to have you with us, folks.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
And the email address, L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Okay.
Ladies and gentlemen, yesterday, Mitt Romney blew it.
The response to all the immigration rulings of Supreme Court, the Obama administration reaction to it, basically telling Arizona, we don't care.
We're going to have spies tattling on you if you start stopping people and so forth.
Yesterday was a warning, I think.
Yesterday was a red flag for the Romney team.
Yesterday, and it's the first time in a long time.
First time I've thought this in a long time.
The Romney team was not ready for prime time on this illegal immigration, the Arizona decision.
This is not the time to get too cocky.
I know that the Romney campaign is basically saving it all up for after the Olympics.
And I understand that.
But this is too consequential a week.
What's happening this week is going to have legs, and there will be memories associated with it.
And it's you can't live off of uh all of Obama's gaffes like the economy's doing fine, private sector's doing fine.
You can't live off that forever.
I really had this had that decision happened in the fall on a debate night with Obama pandering away the way he was up against if if if Romney's response yesterday had happened in a debate, it would have been a big win for Obama for the community organizer.
Now healthcare is coming up Thursday, and it's time to get the ducks back in a row.
I'm just saying, folks, I that I was I was a little surprised.
The Romney camp has been superb.
They've had their rapid response stuff ready to go.
I know that there's fear, the Hispanic vote, angering it and so forth.
But I uh unless we're gonna pander to them the way Obama does.
And if we do that, we're gonna lose.
We can't outpander Obama.
We can't promise a bigger government than Obama will promise.
We can't promise.
Not with credibility.
That's not who we are.
We can't promise this kind of stuff.
And if if that's the attempt as a defensive measure so as not to offend them, well, then fine.
I don't think you offended anybody, but you didn't gain anything.
And we are about gaining things.
The future of the country's riding on this stuff.
You there's got to be more than a tepid response.
What, snurtly?
What?
No, I don't, I don't I don't think the Republican is that the Republican establishment is for amnesty.
What's changed about that?
We know the Republican establishment's for amnesty.
Ever heard of Senator McCain.
That's right.
That's right, Limboy.
Amnesty, except we don't call it that.
We call it meaningful comprehensive immigration reform.
Well, fine.
But in the past, they've they've been for amnesty.
I want to illustrate that.
Grab, I said 19, but Grab Soundbite 16.
I, if this is what I think it is, it's fascinating.
It's uh it's the CBS News political director, guy by the name of John Dickerson, and he was on CBS this morning, this morning, and he had a question, Charlie Rose had him on there, and they said, How does Romney plan to handle this?
This um appeal to Hispanics and immigration.
How does he plan on handling this?
I mean.
He was very strong in his appeal to conservatives in the primary, and now he's in a general election in which the Hispanic vote is very important.
Here's what Dickerson said.
He's basically going to make the same pitch to Hispanics that he's making to the rest of the country is that the economy's bad, that Hispanics have been hit by the bad economy, and that he has a plan to turn the economy around.
He'll just try and get the focus back on the economy because that's what they hope the election's about.
See, and I should add, it's unfathomable.
This Dickerson and Charlie can't believe that that's how they would appeal to Hispanics.
They can't relate to that.
You mean treating them like everybody else?
You mean they're Americans and a bad economy is affecting them.
That's how you're going to do it.
You really gonna try to get the Hispanic vote that they're stunned that people don't see Hispanics the way they do.
A bunch of incompetent, helpless, migrant workers stomped on by the cruelties of life, saved only by the benevolence of Pope Obama.
And they can't believe that nobody would see, or that anybody would see it any other way than this.
But I just you know the response yesterday was it was just it was just a bit tepid.
Um you gotta be a proud, eloquent defender of the Constitution when your opponent is stomping all over it and ignoring it.
By the way, here's Obama getting booed in uh Boston that joke.
He had a fundraiser here last night in Boston, and he's talking about the trade, third baseman Kevin Eukolis and the Red Sox and the White Sox.
just want to say, thank you for Euclid.
Thank you.
I'm just saying he's going to have to change the color of his socks.
Ha, ha, ha, ha.
I didn't think I'd get any booze out of here, but I guess I shouldn't have I should not have brought up baseball.
I'd have said my mistake.
Even in Massachusetts, they choose the Red Sox over Obama over Kardashian.
No, no, I am saying that Romney's exactly that that is exactly what Romney should do.
Treat Hispanics like every other American.
That's that's no, I wouldn't be critical of that.
I think I'm just saying that these guys at CBS can't believe that Romney would treat Hispanics like every other American because everybody knows they're not.
You know that Obama had better not go off teleprompter.
Uh that those were real booze out there.
And he's not, you don't boo narcissists.
You don't he doesn't get booed.
He doesn't understand it.
Doesn't compute the associated press.
When it comes to the economy, half of Americans in a new poll say it won't matter much whether Obama or Romney wins, even though the presidential candidates have staked their chances on which one would be better at fixing the.
Do you believe this?
Do you believe this is the latest propaganda point from the White House and from the AP that a president really has no effect on the economy?
That's what the story.
Can you imagine?
Let's let's say it's 2007.
No, it's 2004.
And that and Carl Roth calls up some of the AP.
You know what?
Really?
The president doesn't say over the economy.
You imagine AP running that stenographers.
When's the last time you heard anybody in the media say that The economy is irrelevant to a presidential election because that's what the AP is trying to tell people.
And what does that tell you?
It tells you that they know the economy is not going to be seriously rebounding, and it tells you that they know that there's nothing they can do about it with their policies, and that they don't intend to do anything with different policies, so they don't intend the economy to get any better.
So the obvious conclusion from AP is, well, presidents really can't do anything.
And by the same token, whatever's wrong with the economy, Obama had nothing to do with it.
Presidents don't have anything to do with the economy.
It's I I go back to the review of the newsroom, create this delusional fantasy land, and have your news executives and your journalists do it for you.
Yeah, what's this?
Doesn't that kind of throw the Bush ruined the economy inheritance out the window?
If you're going to say that presidents have no control over the economy, if you're going to say that presidents have nothing to do with it, then it doesn't matter what Bush left Obama with, doesn't it?
You think the AP would think of that?
Somebody from the AP gets a call from the White House.
By the way, here's what we want you to cover today, the economy, presidents have nothing to say about it.
You think somebody at the AP would say, wait a second, for the last three and a half years you've had us blaming Bush for the rotten economy you inherited.
Now you're telling us that Bush had nothing to do with it?
No, we're just telling you that from this day forward, presidents have nothing to do with the economy.
The guy at the AP says, oh, okay, yeah, well, we can make that work.
And then they do the story.
Well, if they want to stick with this, then it's bye-bye Bush being blamed for all this rotten economy stuff that poor Barack Kardashian inherited.
I marvel.
I marvel at this stuff.
Back on May 10th, a month, a little over a month ago, month and a half.
Same poll, APGF, GFK, whatever organization that is, I guess some German bunch.
AP, GFK poll found that, quote, Americans are growing more pessimistic about the economy, and handling it remains President Obama's weak spot and biggest challenge in his bid for a second term.
So back on May 10th, they had a poll showed the American people are growing more pessimistic about the economy, and Obama's handling of it is his biggest challenge.
On June 14th, Gallup had a poll that found Americans still blame Bush more than Obama for a bad economy.
Now today on June 26th, AP GFK poll, guess what?
Presidents have nothing to do with the economy.
I guess blaming Bush isn't working.
And I guess Obama getting credit from non-improvement because there isn't going to be any isn't going to work.
Kind of like in the mid-90s, we got stories that said white lies are actually good for us.
These lies that protect people's feelings from being hurt and keep everything on a smooth, even keel.
Whatever we have to do to shield our young president from being blamed for all the stuff that he's done.
Whatever we have to do, we at the AP will be right in there.
You can count on us.
Gallup.
Gallup tracks daily percentage of U.S. adults in the workforce, age 18 and older who are underemployed, unemployed, and employed full-time for an employer without seasonal adjustment.
And here's the number.
The number of American adults who are in the workforce but are either out of a job completely or working only part-time because they can't find a full-time job is 17.8%.
Essentially, the U6 number in the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics number, 17.8%.
That's the number that Romney needs to be using.
That's the number that Romney needs to be talking about.
Not this 8.1 or 2% stuff.
17.8%.
The number of American adults in the workforce, either out of a job completely or working only part-time, because they can't find full-time jobs.
17.8%.
Be right back, folks.
Sit tight.
By the way, that same AP story says the deficit is not the president's fault either.
That 55% of the American people say the deficit, that's not a big deal.
President dunno control over the deficit.
So the AP.
A majority of Americans, the president has nothing to do with the economy.
And a majority of Americans, 55% say that.
Nothing to do with a deficit.
Time magazine, a guy named Michael Crowley.
One note Mitt Romney, too focused on the economy.
It's a concerted effort out there.
The media's gotten together.
Romney's scoring too big on the economy.
Obama getting hurt too much by a bad economy.
Media gotten together, and now the economy doesn't matter.
Presidents have nothing to say about it, and Mitt, you're overdoing it on the economy, buddy.
You're too focused on the economy.
It ain't gonna help you, Mitt.
You better shut up about the economy.
You're you're just a one note samba out there.
Johnny one note, not you gotta, you gotta move on to the social issues or something.
What a bunch of pathetic incompetent, blatant, pure partisans.
All right, Tony Marie in Tucson, Arizona, as we head back to the phones.
Great to have you on the program, and I appreciate your patience waiting online.
Hello.
Thank you.
Mega Ditto's Rush.
I've been listening to you for probably 22, 23 years, and I just love you.
Thank you very much.
I want to preface my comments by telling you that I come from a very large Mexican family.
I have a brother-in-law from Mexico, a sister-in-law from Mexico, whose family did migrate here legally, and we are all very, very frustrated with this whole situation.
We're down here on the border in Tucson, and it's very, very frustrating.
But what I was calling you for is I know you're not huge into college sports.
Um, the University of Arizona Wildcats won the College World Series last night.
Well, congratulations.
So it might be a very interesting obligatory White House visit with all those A's with the Cardinal Red and the blue and the white behind him with all our little A's.
Well, I'm I'm glad you found something to feel happy about.
Well, we gotta find happiness where we can.
And getting on with you is really making me happy.
Well, I appreciate.
Did you know that uh Romney comes from a Mexican family?
His father and grandfather were born in Mexico.
Yes, I actually I did know that.
Yeah.
But he's probably not like Mexican like I'm Mexican, but we won't go there.
What does that mean?
Well, I I don't think his skin is probably the same color as mine.
Are you saying that Romney is illegal?
Uh no, I'm not saying that Romney is illegal.
But I'm not either.
I was born in Houston, Texas.
All right.
Well, you're great.
Look, you're great.
I love your vivaciousness, your bullioncy.
Well, and I love you, and I love your tea, and thanks so much for for getting me on.
Thank you.
I appreciate it very much.
By the way, folks, I I found uh a story, 1995.
It's actually a YouTube video.
We found it.
I d all I have to do is give you the headline.
You ready for this?
Eric Holder, 1995, quote, we must brainwash people against guns.
Anybody say anybody say fast and furious.
We want to have as part of this gun initiative.
This was dug this up back in March.
It's a C C-SPAN 2 video of a speech that Holder, who was then U.S. Attorney for D.C. He gave to the women's National Democrat Club in Washington, January 30th, 1995.
So we did the transcription.
Our own selves.
And Holder in 1995, in this speech as the U.S. attorney for for the District of Columbia.
We must brainwash people to be against guns.
We want To have as part of the gun initiative bill an informational campaign to really change the hearts and minds of people in Washington and in particular our young people.
They're saturated in the media and in entertainment or by the entertainment industry with violence.
And I think too many of our young people, in particular our young men are fascinated with violence, and in particular fascinated with guns.
And what we need to do is change the way which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that's not cool.
That's not acceptable.
It's not hip to carry a gun anymore in the way in which we've changed our attitudes about cigarettes.
Well, you see, cigarettes aren't protected by the Constitution, but guns are.
So Eric Holder, 1995, we must brainwash people against guns.
You fast forward to 2009, Eric Holder and Barack Obama Institute, Fast and Furious.
The ultimate objective was to get people to change their minds about guns.
1995, he told a bunch of Democrat women, we must brainwash people against guns.
It's right here.
It's right here.
Assigning this motive is absurd.
That the White House.
Well, then thank them for conferring it for us.
If the White House is saying that this motive that we've come up with is absurd, then they've confirmed for us that's what it is.
Thank you, President Kardashian, or whoever you sent out in the White House to berate us for coming up with a obvious conclusion.
What else is being why else would you run guns that could not be tracked without the Mexican government knowing why would you purposely see to it that's a sold AK-47s end up with drug cartels?
What possible reason could you have for that?
Somebody explain that to me.
Folks, uh one thing I think is clear, particularly with young people, but actually with adults as well.
We just have to be repetitive about many things.
Fast and Furious, particularly.
It's not enough to have a catchy ad about it on Monday, maybe mention it again on Wednesday, and think people...
Heard it, understood it, and that you have them.
This needs to happen every day of the week.
And they do, they brainwash people every day about guns or whatever it is that they're trying to brainwash people about with propaganda or what have you.
Now, the White House thirdly just told me the White House said this theory, which by the way has now been voiced by Daryl Issa of the committee.
ISA has said, and it looks like they're trying to impact gun control law in this country with this program, Fast and Furious.
The White House said the theory's absurd.
From Fox News, the Congressman's analysis has as much merit as his absurd contention that Operation Fast and Furious was created in order to promote gun control.
Our position is consistent with executive branch legal precedent for the past three decades, said the White House spokesman, one of them.
Guy by the name of Eric Schultz.
Okay, then what's the other explanation?
Why would we purposely walk AK 47s to Mexican drug cartels?
Without tracking devices, without helicopters, without the Mexican government understanding and being involved and knowing anything about it, why would you do this?
Tell us.
While you're at it, tell us who is it that actually thinks it's a good idea put a website up to tell newlyweds to forego presents and have their guests send money to Obama instead.
They did that?
Yes, they did that.
What do you mean walked guns to drug cartels?
They did that?
Yes, they did for two years.
They did that?
Yeah, they did.
Thousands of guns.
AK-47s from American gun stores In Arizona and elsewhere, across the border, with straw purchasers, set up by the federal government, the Obama administration, the guns were in the hands of drug cartels and their soldiers.
They did that?
Yeah.
Why?
You tell me.
What is to be gained?
No tracking devices in the guns.
No attempt to jail the people who have How could you?
You gave them the guns.
Give us another explanation.
We'll happily wait.
Lest we forget, folks, there were internal ATF emails that say that these guns were being used to pad statistics to help advance the assault weapons ban.
Really?
Sounds like gun control brainwashing to me.
That quote is from Holder about brainwashing.
Holder talking about rainwashing on guns.
Cheryl Atkinson, CBS from back in December, documents ATF used Fast and Furious to make the case for gun regulations.
She's the one reporter in the whole drive-by media complex that's dared to get anywhere near the truth of this story, Cheryl Atkison.
Documents obtained by CBS News showed at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms disgust using their covert operation, Fast and Furious, to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.
Sounds like gun control brainwashing to me.
What other reason could there be?
Hey, another question.
You're walking down the street, you're in the mall, you see an obese person.
Do you think, does it cross your mind that there ought to be counseling centers for those people?
Does it?
When you see a bunch of obese people, do you think, is it one of the first thoughts that you have?
Maybe the second or third thought.
You know, we need counseling centers for these people.
We need the federal government to have counseling centers so these people can be talked to about.
Do you think that?
Or do you just thank God you're not and move on?
Or do you feel a little sorry, or do you wonder how it's possible?
Whatever you think, but do you think we need counseling centers?
Well, from the LA Times, in a move that could significantly expand insurance coverage of weight loss treatments, a federal health advisory panel yesterday recommended that all obese adults receive intensive counseling in an effort to rein in a growing health crisis in America.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force urged doctors to identify patients with a body mass index of 30 or more.
That's currently one-third of us, and either provide counseling themselves or refer the obese patient to a program designed to promote weight loss and improve health prospects.
Under the current health care law, Medicare and most private insurers would be required to cover the entire cost of weight loss services that meet or exceed the task force's standards.
Now I don't know about you, but the last thing I think of when I see obese people walking down the street is we need federal counseling centers.
But these people are everywhere in the regime.
They are people who think this way about pretty much every form of behavior that they find disagreeable, or that they find repugnant.
From Cybercast News Service, federal government not making much headway reducing poverty despite spending hundreds of billions of dollars, according to a study by the Cato Institute, despite an unprecedented increase in federal anti-poverty spending and national poverty rate has not declined.
Well, we could have told you that.
It's not hundreds of billions, it's trillions of dollars that have been spent since the war on poverty.
Started by Lyndon Johnson, the mid-60s, and expressed as a percentage, same number of people in poverty today as then.
So allowing liberals, shower people with never-ending money, not an effective method for fixing a problem.
But then I have to ask, because we were discussing this yesterday, do you think liberals actually want to fix poverty?
Do they want an end to racism?
Thank you.
Do they want to fix any of this?
No.
They want credit for trying.
They want credit for great big heartfelt intentions.
But if the problem were ever solved, solved, there'd be nothing to blame Republicans for.
They want the money to spend.
They want the money to spend, and they want the money to spend.
But they don't want to fix the problem.
If any of these problems ever got fixed, it'd be the end of them.
Nothing to complain about and nothing to blame the Republicans for.
Jan in Kaysville, Utah, as we head back to the phones.
Thank you for waiting and welcome to the show.
Rush I have a question about after the from the aftermath of the um decision on Arizona by the Supreme Court.
Do you think that Obama is going to try to do something similar to that when the health care decision comes down that is not what he wants it to be?
Wouldn't be surprised.
But what can he do?
Implement it anyway.
So just by just by a declaration, he can just say that it's to go into effect.
Yeah, he can say the Supreme Court found an element of the law unconstitutional, so he's just going to issue an executive order.
And then would have to wait until the election to get him out of there to do anything about that.
Yeah.
Oh my gosh.
Now wait, folks, before you start thinking, come on, Rush, well, what it's what he did with the uh uh immigration.
He's entirely capable of this.
I think the what would be most likely, um he could write an uh presidential executive order that requires the IRS to collect his mandate to issue the fines.
If you don't buy health insurance, he's gonna hire the agents.
You know, whatever it is, four thousand, sixteen thousand, I forget what the number is, he's gonna hire the new agents, you have to have them something for it to do.
I think you can expect something like that, wouldn't be surprised.
I don't know if we can expect it.
But what I do know is gonna happen.
If the mandate's ruled unconstitutional, or if any part of this is, I can tell you right now what's gonna happen.
Four white guys and an Uncle Tom just took away your health care, they still have theirs.
Four rich white guys and an Uncle Tom just took away your health care, they still have theirs.
They're gonna I folks, I have to tell you so this this week bothers me in a whole host of ways.
But we got to Monday, we all got here, and everybody's breathlessly waiting for the decision of nine people on really important things.
It's the evolution of the court, I understand this, but the political class has punted everything over to the judicial.
And I don't know about you, but I find it hanging by thread.
Every time one of these decisions comes up that the country stops and waits breathlessly for the decision of at least five people.
Uh 300 and some odd million.
And I get caught up in it too.
What are they gonna do?
What are they gonna do?
What's the future health care?
What's Kennedy gonna do?
Oh no, what's Robert's gonna do?
And then I find, gosh, that offends me.
I'm sitting right wait for these two guys.
I don't know them.
I mean, I I mean I've I've met Justice Kennedy.
Fine people, don't misunderstand.
I'm in the whole notion.
That everybody sitting there breathlessly waving decisions of a bunch of people in black robes.
Just seems rather precariously tied together.
Here you have two-thirds of the American people don't want this piece of garbage.
And five people can tell us to go to hell.
Oh, that was makes me nervous.
No, folks, I let me express this a little bit better.
I know that some of you might be shouting at me, wait a minute, wait a minute, Rush.
Uh the people's representatives passed health care.
Doesn't matter, two-thirds of us doesn't matter.
And the Supreme Court may save us.
I understand that.
That's it express this well.
I'm like everybody else.
I hope the Supreme Court overturns it.
What I'm talking about is the masses gathering for the Roman Emperor to give thumbs up or thumbs down.
It's just that whole notion here.
And that so many people just like sheep flock to it.
I don't know.
Still not expressing it as I as I mean it.
So it's something for you to work on and develop a little bit further.
The solution to this isn't complicated.
But it's hard, apparently.
What we want is for all branches to uphold the Constitution.
It's that simple.
We wouldn't be here if the Democrats cared about the Constitution.
We would not be on immigration or health care.
We would not be here.
If there was respect for the Constitution, it's that simple.
If you want to find out about this precarious nature of these guys in black robes and how the court got so much power in the problem, you know, Mark Levin's book, Men in Black, excellent in explaining the evolution, the court, and how we got here.
I gotta go.
We'll see you back here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection