All Episodes
Previous Next
July 27, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:50
July 27, 2012, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
Ah, the sound of that voice.
It's comforting.
It lets you know you're at home.
It tells you you are in America.
It tells you everything's okay.
And it is.
It's Friday, so let's go.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's Open Line Friday!
And we couldn't be happier to be with you today.
Open Line Friday, this has the potential to be one of the fun days of the week because there are so few restrictions placed on callers.
Monday through Thursday, I am Ron Emmanuel and you are Chick-fil-A.
But on Friday, on Friday, we throw all that out and you have total freedom.
Whatever you want to talk about, feel free.
It's an opportunity to ask questions, preguntas, make comments.
It can also be a bomb because of that.
You're turning a program over to rank amateurs.
You never know.
Lovable rank amateurs, but still not broadcast specialists.
So it's always a roll of dice.
It's fun.
Here's phone number, 800-282-2882, and the email address, LRushbo at EIBNet.com.
Commerce Department has issued their initial estimate for the third quarter GDP grew at 1.5%.
This is a disaster for this country.
It is literally a disaster.
And John Pedoritz at Commentary Magazine has a good little post here that puts some of this in perspective.
He says that the economic growth rate of 1.5% is quite simply catastrophic for President Kardashian.
The economy is weakening is what this means.
The economy is weakening as the election approaches.
Now, Pedoritz says here, no one's ever won re-election in such circumstance.
Nobody.
No one.
Forget the unemployment statistic, which is no incumbent has ever been re-elected with the unemployment rate higher than 7.9%.
Throw that out.
No one has ever won re-election with the economy contracting, which it's doing.
Now, he points out that things are not as bad for Obama as they were for Jimmy Carter.
In the second quarter of 1980, the economy actually contracted by 0.7%.
However, get this, this surprised me.
In 1930s, oh, I should tell you, Rasmussen's out today with a poll that has Romney up five.
Romney is up over Obama by five points, and that is identical to the lead Obama had at this very same time in 2008.
Five-point lead.
Now, 1936, FDR won a landslide despite the Great Depression.
Now, a lot of people think the Great Depression was the economy contracting and people jumping out windows on Wall Street.
But Amity Schlays, who is an FDR depression expert, she written a couple books about it. posted an interesting stat on Twitter yesterday.
I thought Twitter was down yesterday.
Twitter must have come back up.
Anyway, do you know what the annual GDP, the economic growth rate was 1933 to 1936?
This will shock you, stun me.
It averaged 9%.
Economic growth during the Great Depression, 1933 to 1936, averaged 9%.
Snirdly saying, how come they call it a depression?
That's to put this in context.
That's the interesting thing here that's been discovered by Amity Schlays and John Podhoritz.
Podoritz says that the most interesting analogy is to 1992, a year in which the economy was actually staging a recovery from a recession in 1991.
And you remember 1992, Clinton, Carville, what's it?
Stephanopoulos running around, worst economy in the last 50 years.
We were taking phone calls from people on this year.
It can't get any worse, Bush.
It can't get any worse.
And drove me crazy.
But perceptions in politics are reality, and that's what people believed.
So listen to this.
1992, a year in which the economy actually was staging a recovery from a recession in 1991.
The annual growth rate in 1992, when the economy was so bad and everybody thought it was, and we had to throw Bush out, was 3.4%.
Remember, it came in in December.
It came in after the election.
The fourth quarter was through the roof after the election, and the annualized GDP rate for 1992 was 3.4%.
The incumbent, George H.W. Bush, got 38% of the vote that year.
Ross Perot got his share, and then Clinton won with 43%.
Now, none of this is a guarantee of anything in the future.
But as Pedoritz points out here, it all gets to the central problem for President Kardashian.
What case can he make for a second term with undecided voters?
And then we just got started yesterday, folks, in dumping this suburban strategery on him.
Stanley Kurtz has figured it out.
This is one thing Obama didn't want anybody to do.
I am convinced that, in fact, I think that one of the reasons they've been so open because remember November 2011 when Thomas B. Edzall had that piece where they just admitted that they were going to ignore white working class voters.
So why admit that?
If you're going to do it, do it.
But why write a piece in the New York Times that spells out, yeah, white working class voters, we're not interested in them.
We're not going to campaign for them.
And then they're running ads now trying to suppress the votes from that group of people.
I think one of the reasons why they might have gone public with that because the real target here is suburban voters.
I don't think Obama wants this out.
I don't think that the campaign of the regime is going to be happy with people identifying that what he's really trying to do is get back at suburbanites who have fled the cities, that those people are his real enemies, that those people are his real targets.
Once that case starts being made, he doesn't have a ⁇ he can't run on his record.
Everybody knows it.
All he can do is try to scare people about Romney, that Romney would make it worse.
So all of the historical signs point to no chance if historical trends mean anything.
Now they don't.
That's the thing.
This kind of stuff is recorded so that someday it can be, like a record in sports, be broken.
Pat Buchanan.
I'm not going to get to this right now, but hopefully in this hour, Pat Buchanan has a column at human events.
In the long run, is the Republican Party dead?
Even if they win this election, is the Republican Party dead?
He makes a compelling case, I have to admit.
Snurdly in there frowning.
It's a compelling case.
He's asking the question.
He's not proclaiming it.
He's asking the question.
And he presents the data.
So I'll give you a hint.
Republican Party blew it when they did not do anything for 40 years to stop illegal immigration.
They just gave California to the Democrat Party and California's lost.
And it's a microcosm for what's happening.
It's not just immigration.
It's cultural rot and everything else.
But when you hear it, it's a pretty compelling case.
Folks, do you remember, you remember that the banks wouldn't lend to blacks and Hispanics because they were racist?
And then do you remember how Jimmy Carter and then Clinton and then after that, Clinton came along and they passed something called a Community Reinvestment Act.
And you remember what that did?
The federal government forced banks to lend money to people who had no prayer of ever paying it back.
Janet El Rinho, the attorney general for Clinton, even threatened the big banks all over the country with investigations if they didn't do this.
The Reverend Jackson was running around complaining about redlining that people of color were not being given loans because the racist policies of the banks.
And so the American dream was defined as everybody should have a house.
And the Democrats came along.
It's not fair.
Some people have houses, other people don't.
How can we fix it?
Well, we got to put the people who don't have houses in houses.
Well, how do we do that if they can't afford it?
It's simple.
We make the banks loan them money at low interest rates.
And then the dirty little secret is they can't pay it back.
So it's up to the banks.
The banks are going to eat it.
That was the philosophy.
The banks owed this because the banks have been screwing people for so long.
Remember all this?
You remember then what Wall Street, Wall Street, after doing this under threat of investigation, under threat of the use of force, under the intimidation of federal government, the banks then made these loans.
And then what they did, they pooled them together.
Worthless pieces of paper, worthless mortgage.
After worthless mortgage, the banks pooled these things together in concert with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
And they went out and they gave these new pool mortgages a name, derivatives and so forth.
And then they sold them to unsuspecting people.
And they said, look at this income stream we've got for you.
We have put together here 25,000 mortgages.
Look at the income stream you've got.
Triple-A raving on these loans.
Triple-A raving on these mortgages.
Now, the banks, the banks had no, I mean, they're stuck with worthless paper that the government made them incur, made them make these loans.
So the banks said, okay, how can we get the money back?
We've got to get rid of this.
They packaged all this stuff together.
They sell it to unsuspecting investors who think they're buying a phenomenal income stream.
And all of this is backed up by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
And remember, they kept selling these things as one group of buyers discovered they had been taken.
They quietly repackaged what was worthless and sold it again.
And this kept happening until finally there were no suckers left to buy this stuff.
And what happened was people were unable to pay these mortgages.
The banks all over this country were left holding the bag.
All five of the Wall Street investment houses either went under or had to be bailed out by the federal government.
Lehman Brothers went south.
Get the movie margin call.
It's fabulous.
And then after it was all over, after that happened, guess what we were told?
We were told that the banks, this is the subprime mortgage crisis.
So we were told that the banks had engaged in predatory lending, that they had forced these unsuspecting, unwitting, unqualified poor people of color to take these loans.
I mean, these people were walking on the street.
They're past the front door of the bank, and some evil banker went out there and grabbed them and pulled them in and intimidated them.
You are going to buy that house and you're going to do it with this mortgage.
They were forced to.
This was the story.
You remember how all of this led to the financial crisis?
It's still the foundation of what's plaguing this country to this day because all of this cost the government a trillion dollars.
It destroyed the housing market because it put a bunch of people into it who had no ability to be there.
So equity went south, home prices went south, and they're still going south.
And home values are still plummeting.
And home sales are this subprime mortgage thing, which was a government creation brought to us by liberals under the guise of compassion.
It's unfair that some people should have homes and others shouldn't.
All of this cost at least a trillion dollars, put the government in a gigantic hole that we are still in.
We still have not dug ourselves out of them.
You've heard me tell this story how many times.
Then we had the investors jumping in, interest-only loans, no documentation loans.
We had people calling here telling us that they went to seminars put on by the government how to get people with no credit rating a triple-A credit rating.
How to do all this?
Well, you might be saying, well, yeah, Red Rush, we know all this.
What's the point?
Well, according to William Tucker, the American spectator, the federal government is about to start the whole process again.
Believe it or not, the federal government is now starting another initiative to force banks to loan money to low-credit-rated blacks and Hispanics, not just anybody, but specifically blacks and Hispanics.
The government is threatening and already collecting huge punitive fines if they don't do it.
And moreover, this time they're going even further.
They're going to take over the credit rating agencies and force them to change their standards to accommodate blacks and Hispanics so that nobody will have any idea who is a bad credit risk and who isn't.
In other words, the government is about to impose its will on the entire home lending market again and force another round of bad loans so that the banks are going to be looted once again so that even the federal government may not be able to bail them out this time.
I not make it.
I know it sounds impossible.
I am not kidding.
No, it's not a joke.
It's being done on purpose.
Sterling wants to know if he qualifies for this because he's black.
Well, let's find out.
The principal instrument in the new round of subprime mortgages, I guess that's what we're going to call this, is not the Justice Department or Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac as it was last time.
The brand new Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, designed by Elizabeth Warren, is administering this.
I think that's part of Dodd-Frank, if I'm not mistaken.
Am I right about that?
The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, I think it's Dodd-Frank.
As reported in last Sunday's New York Post by Hoover Institution media fellow Paul Sperry, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau has just announced that it's adopting a 20-page policy statement on discrimination in lending issues by the Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending in 1994 that kicked off Janet Reno's draconic enforcement of the Community Renewal Act.
They're barely readopting that.
They're going way back to the Clinton years and just going to duplicate this.
Applying different lending standards or offering different levels of assistance to applicants who are members of a protected minority class is permissible, it says, in some circumstances, providing different treatment to applicants to address past discrimination would be permissible if done in response.
You know what they're doing now?
You know what this is?
The first time they were sneaky about it.
They did exactly what they did, but they did.
Now they're doing it.
They just open it shut.
We got people been discriminated against.
They ought to be in houses.
They're not in houses because the banks are racist.
And we got this new part of Dodd-Frank that allows us to go ahead and do this.
So they're just redoing it all over again.
Two weeks ago, it says here, Wells Fargo caved to a Justice Department of Defense.
It paid $175 million for alleged past discriminating against minority buyers.
Be right back.
I don't know if you've seen it or not.
Eric Holder has already been shaking down the banks on this.
Folks, they're reinstituting this.
They're doing it all over again, this time under the auspices of Dodd-Frank.
They're replicating it under the guise, this time they're being open and upfront about it.
The first subprime mortgage fiasco, there was never any of this.
We're going to make sure that we got People that can't pay Mike the loan.
There was none of that.
Now there's being upfront and admitting that that's what they're doing.
And here are the last two paragraphs of William Tucker's story of the American Spectator.
With the current administration in power, the perception is growing among minorities that everything in the economy is rigged against them, but that Obama and his regime are going to solve everything for them.
That's exactly right.
That's what Obama out there saying, you didn't build that.
You didn't make that happen.
That's exactly what that's all about.
Exactly.
Obama is essentially trying to tell minorities, and I think everybody who's in economic straits, that they've been screwed since the founding of this country.
This country's been run by the 1% ever since the days of the founding.
The current incarnation of the 1% of the Republicans and Mitt Romney and Wall Street guys.
And they got rich unjustly, unfairly, immorally.
They didn't pay you for what they took from you.
They didn't pay you for the work that you did.
You made it possible for them to get rich, and they did nothing but screw you.
That's exactly what Obama's doing.
That's his whole campaign.
And Tucker says that the perception is growing among minorities that everything's rigged against them, because they've always believed that.
And that Obama and his administration are going to solve everything for them.
For instance, there's a scam going on around the country right now where con artists call up homeowners and tell them that Obama has a new program.
He's going to pay their electrical bills.
We told you about that.
You remember that?
This is a scam.
It happened during the power outage in the great capital of this country, Washington, D.C., in Maryland.
And at the time, people started calling up and saying, Obama wants to pay your electric bill.
This is going to make sure that the power company continues to have power so there won't be any more power outages.
All the homeowner had to do was provide his social security number and other personal information.
It was an identity theft scam, which we told you about.
It started in Michigan among minority populations in depressed cities like Flint and Grand Rapids.
It's now spread as far as Florida and Mississippi.
More than 2,300 people in Michigan were bilk out of a million dollars, and they were told specifically Obama was going to pay their electric bills.
Not the government, Obama, and they believed it.
And you know full well that there are a number of minorities who thought that that's what Obama's election meant.
Now, as Tucker points out, what's amazing is that all these people actually believe Obama's ready to pay their electrical bills.
It's symptomatic of a rising tide of dependency in the growing sense that nobody has to be responsible for anything anymore and can live all off the rich.
And he said, if we don't get these people out of office soon, there isn't going to be much left to pick over in the American economy by design.
It's exactly what's happening.
Now, talking about loans here and how easy they're going to be to get.
This is interesting.
I saw this last night.
Congressman Mike Kelly, Pennsylvania, Republican, got a standing ovation while he spoke in the House.
That doesn't happen.
No applause is allowed members of Congress.
President could go in there, and of course they raised the roof.
But the protocol does not permit applause, standing ovation, this kind of stuff.
He got a standing ovation for what he said.
And there's a visual here that I want you to have while you listen.
He holds up a stack of pages, stack of papers, 1,100 pages, and it's lending requirements.
And he is on the warpath here about how regulation is killing jobs in his district.
And it's an amazing story.
Somebody built a ballpark in his district, Little League Ballpark, and federal regulators came in and wouldn't open it, wouldn't allow it to open on the day they're going to play the first game.
Little kiddies are all there about to have their first baseball game.
And they said, nope, you can't open it because the mirrors in the men's room were a quarter of an inch too low on the wall.
Three sounds.
We've broken this up into three sound bites.
Here is the first.
We renovated a ballpark in my hometown.
A guy named Tom Bernatowski, veteran.
A couple million dollars to renovate our ballpark.
The day we were going to open up, I got a call at the dealership.
He said, Mike, would you come down?
I said, why?
What's going on?
He said, we're having trouble with the occupancy permit.
So I went down to see.
I said, so what's the problem?
He said, well, here, come in the men's room.
Let me show you what the problem is.
I said, we know we have 1,500 people want to come see the opening ballgame.
They say, yeah, we've got a major problem.
You see, the mirrors in the restroom are a quarter of an inch too low.
So you can't possibly open that ballpark.
Can't possibly open it.
Here's the next bite.
So you want to know the price of regulation?
You want to talk about the thousands and thousands of pages that we put on the backs of the job creators?
You want to talk about creating jobs in America?
When you want to see a nation that doesn't want to participate but wants to dominate in the world market, then let them rise.
Take the heavy boot off the throat of America's job creators and let them breathe.
The jobs we are talking about are not red jobs or blue jobs.
They are red, white, and blue jobs.
They are not Democrat jobs or Republican jobs or independent jobs or libertarian jobs.
They are American jobs.
You know what's amazing about this to me is how infrequently stuff like this is said in the House of Representatives.
This is so unique.
Talking like this, apparently so unique, doesn't happen very often in the House of Representatives that it gets applause, that it gets a standing ovation.
One more sound bite.
We are so out of touch with the American people.
And you know what all this does?
It adds layer after layer after layer of cost.
And that cost is ultimately paid for by the American consumer.
You want to have more revenues?
Then let the tide rise for all boats.
Let us be able to not only survive, but to thrive.
I urge all my colleagues on both sides now.
This is not a left or right issue.
This is an American issue.
I urge you to rise today and vote for H.R. 4078.
Let's let America get back to work.
And with that, I yield back.
He started out.
There was a motion to recommit that he started up.
This is ridiculous.
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.
Now, you know what strikes me about that?
This, what you just heard and what you say every day to your friends is what we all talk about amongst ourselves.
A member of Congress finally starts talking about this stuff and why, why, it blows the roof off the place.
Well, you know, we don't hear this kind of talk in here before.
It's only one thing I would disagree.
I know the point he was trying to make, and I understand why he said that there's no red jobs or blue jobs.
But the bottom line here is that We are in this mess because a particular ideology has taken us in this direction and delivered us here with the assistance of Republicans by not stopping it, by not trying to stop it, even in some cases.
That is Congressman Mike Kelly, Republican Pennsylvania.
Romney has an ad called It Worked.
You know what's happening to people up here in Romney ads?
They're being harassed.
This guy, Gilchrist, that appeared in one of Romney's ads within the past 10 days in New Hampshire, is being harassed on the phone and not threatened yet, but he's being harassed.
People that raise money for Romney, people that donate to Romney, are being harassed by the regime, by Obama soldiers.
Just want you to know that, and these people are not backing down.
The donors, the people appearing in the commercials, they're not backing.
Yeah, yeah, get to Romney and the Olympics.
It turns out he was right.
And it wasn't that bad a thing to say anyway.
You know, you can't go someplace and be honest about something.
What's the point?
He wasn't being insulting.
This is political correctness run among.
You can't come over here and tell the truth.
What are you talking about, Mr. Romney?
Who do you think you are?
Come over here, tell the truth.
Romney has an ad in response to Obama saying we tried our plan and it worked.
That's the next one.
The first Obama soundbite that we've been playing.
You didn't do that.
You didn't build that.
You didn't make that happen.
And then running around and saying it worked.
We tried our plan and it worked.
Listen to the ad Romney's team put together off of that.
We've tried our plan and it worked.
That's the difference.
That's the choice in this election.
That's why I'm running for a second term.
You know, I had to file my own personal bankruptcy.
I had to close my business.
I've been looking for a job for two years.
You know, it's difficult to find employment.
A year ago, I was laid off from my job.
I have to work part-time in order to make ends meet.
So sometimes I feel like I'm a failure.
Good evening.
This is the worst economic recovery America has ever had.
And then there's a graphic that says, Do you agree it's working?
Some of the graphics over this ad, for example, after Obama says that's why I'm running for a second term, the graphics is it worked.
First guy says, You know, I had to file my own personal bankruptcy, I had to close my business.
The woman says I've been looking for a job for two years.
The graphic is 45 million Americans now on food stamps.
And a woman says, Year ago, I was laid off from my job.
Graphic 23 million Americans struggling for work.
Guy says, Sometimes I feel like I'm a failure.
The graphic over that is over 46 million Americans now in poverty, highest ever.
It is a good ad, folks.
It's a good ad.
And it's well put together, and it illustrates the problem Obama's got.
Got to take a brief time out.
Sit tight.
We'll be back.
Open Line Friday rolls on right after this.
Open Line Friday.
Let's take a call.
Always try to go to the phones in the first hour on Open Line Friday.
We seldom do.
Monday through Thursday.
And where are we starting?
Let's Janet Shiloh, Illinois.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Hi, last man standing.
How are you?
I'm fine.
Thank you very much.
Hey, we have to be, we have to celebrate today.
And it's the June fund, Obama's June fundraising numbers.
They tell a deeper story of how badly Obama's doing.
And by that I mean in May, Obama had to come out for gay marriage.
And he was rewarded by being on the cover of Newsweek.
And in June, we were told he had a whole lineup of fundraisers in L.A. from the gay crowd.
And he had gay bundlers who had all been holding back until he did this.
And now we have those numbers.
And the gays did not contribute to Obama anywhere near what ordinary or capitalist Americans are donating to Romney.
And that's really a phenomenal story.
And I think that might be why Ron Emmanuel stepped into the chick-fil-a in Broglio, because Ron Emmanuel is the architect of the Mark Foley scandal that gave the House to the Democrats in 2006.
And so, Mark, for Ron Emmanuel to even step into that one shows that they're either trying to gin up the gays to give more, or, and, well, I think that's what they're doing.
They're trying to get the gays to open up their wallets more because what they did in June didn't cut it, and Obama's spending more than he's taking in, and they're not going to make it until November.
So you think it hurt him, though, Morgan helped him?
Hurt who?
Obama.
I mean, if he's not.
Oh, I think, you know, Rush, now we don't know, okay?
Wait a minute, you just...
Wait, no, no, no, no, I'm...
Please, please, I'm contexting this.
I think you had a black man call you, conservative from California, fabulous call.
And we also have to go back to the Mormons in California in 2008 with the black churches getting together to strike down Proposition 8.
There is already a relationship between Mormons and black Christian ministers getting together for the culture to do what's right.
And Obama has ignored this.
And Team Obama up in Chicago, hi guys, you're blowing it.
But I don't think you can do anything different at this point.
Well, that's what I'm saying.
You called saying his fundraising is down.
And so if Ron Emmanuel is doing what he's doing and the mayor of Boston Menino is doing what he's doing with Chick-fil-A and gay marriage isn't working.
We had the report that Romney's super PAC is running rings around Obama's.
I'll tell you, I've seen so many conflicting stories on the fundraising.
I've seen it both ways.
I've seen that Obama's way behind.
I have seen he's spending more than he's taking in.
Then I've had people say, Rush, don't believe that garbage.
Obama's not going to be outraised by Romney.
That's just stuff that they're putting out.
They're trying to, you know, Obama's trying to make himself out to be Mr. Poor Man, Mr. Poor Old Guy, Mr. Average Middle Class Guy.
The rich don't want to support anymore.
And so don't buy into this notion that Romney's outraising Obama.
On the super PAC side, I think it is true that Romney's ahead of Obama.
And Obama, by the way, is raising money off of his birthday now, folks.
We have spies here who have signed up at all the various Obama websites, the Democratic National Committee websites.
And they got a this is a standard Democrat tactic.
It's a poor mouth.
Oh, woe with me.
Oh, poor me.
And Obama's got a fundraising letter saying that it's his birthday next week.
And it may be the last birthday he ever spends in the White House.
But that's up to you.
Because you have to send him money.
Now, one thing we know didn't work was that Obama was asking people getting married to tell their guests, instead of giving the married couple gifts, send that money to Obama.
We know that bombed out.
People didn't take to that.
But it's a, I don't know if you can draw a correlation here between what Ram Emmanuel and Thomas Monino are.
I think that's just who they are.
I think that's just who they are.
And I think their backs may be up against the wall a little bit, but neither of those guys is in trouble in their towns.
Emmanuel owns Chicago.
Monino owns Boston.
Anyway, I got that quick time out, folks.
Sit tight.
We'll be back after this.
Don't go away.
Well, I don't know how you feel.
And whether she knew it or not, our first caller was essentially saying that Obama was blowing it with his gay support because he's out there trying to get all his money and he's lagging behind, she believes.
So, but she didn't want to, she, anyway, it's as far as Chick-fil-A goes and Ram Emmanuel and the Boston May, folks, that's just who they are.
Let me explain what I mean by that when we get back.
First hour is already gone.
▲
Export Selection