All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 12, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:46
December 12, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No, no, I can tell you what's going to happen.
This is so easy to predict this.
I don't know even why there's any suspense about it.
Now, maybe a conversation with some folks, sorry, the program began in the middle of a conversation.
Great to have you back.
El Rushbo, EIB network, 800-282-2882.
Email address, El Rushbo, EIBnet.com.
Look at, I just tell you what I was sharing here with some others.
There really isn't that much suspense on the fiscal cliff.
Let's look at rates for the rich.
They're going to happen.
This is the rates for the rich are going to go up one of two ways.
The Republicans either agree to it, and if they don't, we go over the cliff.
And going over the cliff raises the rates.
The thing about going over the cliff is they raised rates for everybody.
And I still maintain this what Obama wants.
Now, stick with me on this.
I'm not trying to sound like a know-it-all.
I'm just the media is trying to concoct all this suspense and drama, and there really isn't much.
From the wish list of the Democrats and Obama, it's pretty easy to ascertain what's going to happen here.
The rates on the rich are either going to go up because the Republicans agree to it, or we're going to go over to Cliff.
Going over the cliff raises the rates.
Going over the cliff means the current tax rates expire and they return to what they were in the Clinton years for everybody, not just the rich.
Made the order for Obama.
That takes us into the early part, the first quarter of 2013.
And this is pretty easy to forecast, too.
We go over the cliff, rates for everybody have gone up.
And by the time this all happens, guess who's going to be blamed for it?
Republicans.
And their intransigence, their refusal.
This is what's got them scared.
Being blamed for all this.
They don't have a way of shifting the blame back to Obama.
There is.
They just, I don't know, I don't want to employ it.
So we go over the cliff.
Everybody's rates go up.
The media blames it on the Republicans for trying to protect tax rates for the rich.
And because the Republicans would not cave and would not agree to raise taxes only on the rich and thus prevent the cliff, everybody's rates go up.
And here comes Obama in the white hat on the white horse to save the day.
And he's going to propose, guess what?
Tax cuts for the middle class and thereby take the issue away from the Republicans.
Tax cuts for the rich, they will own.
It will be blamed for all the problems.
Obama will come in as the savior, propose tax cuts on the middle class, everybody but the 2%.
The Republicans can't oppose that.
So Obama gets to cut, gets, you know what else he'll do?
He'll put some of the defense spending back that also gets cut because of the cliff, because that's another major part, sequestration.
Defense budget gets cut going over to Cliff.
And so Obama will come back and he'll propose tax cuts rolling back the rates on the rich, go back to the Bush level on the middle class.
Everybody but the 2% roll those rates back to Bush rates.
And by the way, Obama will then go out there.
I think defense has been cut way too much.
You know, I love this country.
I want to defend this.
We need to put that back.
So he'll get credit for defense buildup, tax cutting on the middle class.
And as part of this, Obama is then going to insist that there just essentially be no debt limit anymore.
He is going to say, I want unilateral control over it.
I want to be able to zoom past it, in effect, wiping it out.
This is going to take place within weeks of Obama's two inaugurations.
Do you realize there are going to be two ceremonies, one public and one private?
And they're going to gin this up as though it's a coronation.
It's an immaculation.
It's going to be the greatest thing.
First term times two.
And Obama's going to have all this love and adoration, all this glory.
And he's saving the middle class.
He's saving the defense budget.
And all he's going to ask for the good of the country, for the good of entitlements, is let's get rid of the debt limit.
And there's no limit to spending increases then.
And that's all going to be seen as the solution.
While tax cuts for the rich remain the only reason why we are in economic malaise.
So the Republicans, what are their options in this?
Well, they can prevent going over the cliff by agreeing to raise taxes on the rich and leaving the Bush tax rates in place for the middle class.
And they can then make a deal in the cliff that defense spending doesn't get cut as much.
Somebody needs to explain to me what is the benefit to Obama in letting the Republicans out of the trap of going over the cliff.
I think going over the cliff is the most attractive option Obama has.
And by the way, does Boehner, I don't know, you tell me, Snerdley, you follow this kind of minutiae.
Does he have the votes yet to stop any of this?
I don't know that he does.
So all they've got at their disposal here is insisting on entitlement cuts.
Why should Obama cave on that?
There's no reason for him to cave.
He's not under any pressure to cut.
Look at the polling data from Bloomberg.
The majority of Americans are worried sick entitlements are going to be cut.
There's no upside to cutting entitlement, not politically.
And by the way, don't think anybody on the Democrat side is worried about the country.
They're not worried about the deficit, the debt, or any of that.
You have to recognize that.
You have to realize they couldn't care less about any of that right now.
This is all pure, 100% undiluted politics.
And what they see right in front of them is a chance to wipe out the Republican Party.
I mean, obliterate it.
That's what they see.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
We're going to go back to the union business.
I mentioned to you, ladies and gentlemen, that I read the Tagli Abu piece, the 22 pages, which he vacated the punishment against the players in this bounty program that the New Orleans Saints had.
But there's a portion of this, of Tagli Abu's ruling, which really creams Roger Goodell, the current commissioner.
What Tagley Abu does is essentially lecture Goodell On not having the slightest idea how to do what he's doing culturally.
And he goes back and he uses Pete Rosell as an example of how it should have been done.
And he goes back to the 1980s and he cites the way Roselle dealt with steroids.
And he makes the point that what Roselle did, he told the players back in the 80s, look, we're going to eliminate steroids from this league.
We're wiping them out.
You are not going to be allowed to use them.
But there's going to be a one-year grace period on discipline.
We are eliminating steroids this year.
If you're caught, you have a grace period.
But next year, if you're caught, we are coming at you with both barrels if we find you violating the new policy.
And Tagli Abu makes it clear to Goodell in his 22-page ruling that that's what Goodell should have done with the bounty.
You should have given them a warning period and a grace year before discipline.
Here's the problem, though.
Goodell did.
That's why this fascinates me.
This bounty thing goes back to 2009.
Goodell warned the Saints and the whole league that bounty programs were intolerable in the NFL.
There was a, so this Tagli Abu basically telling Goodell, you really botched this.
You don't know the guys you're dealing with here.
You don't know the kind of guys the players are.
You're dealing with a culture you don't understand, and you just can't do what you, but he did.
He did give them ample warning.
So everybody assumes that Tagley Abu and Goodell got together before the release of Tagley Abu's statement and that Goodell knew what was in it, not approved it because he's supposed to be autonomous, but at least knew.
But if he didn't, if that didn't happen, and Goodell's reading that, I bet you he was smoking to be raked over the coals like this by the former commission.
It's because it was, at least the way I read it, it was pretty brutal.
So now let's move forward.
We got DeMaris Smith, who runs the Players Association.
He's the union leader for the players.
He was on CBS this morning, and they were discussing the bounty program and Tagley Abu's decision to vacate all of the punishment against the players.
But they left it in place for the coaches.
Coaches don't have a union.
So Sean Payton and all the coaches that were suspended, that stuff stays.
One player, there were four players here.
One player, Scott Fujita, who's now with the Browns, totally exonerated.
Jonathan Vilma, who was said to be the ringleader on the Saints of all this, is suing Goodell for defamation and is going to go forward with it after this ruling.
So they're asking Demarris Smith here, or De Maurice, I think he prefers.
What does the league do other than apologize?
Charlie Rose asking.
What does the league do other than apologize?
Former Commissioner Tagley Abu said, let's lift the suspension on the players, but he didn't say to do that with respect to coach.
There's a difference between where the players were and where the coaches are.
The difference is the players have a union.
At a time when unions are under attack, this is what unions do.
So we fight, and we believe that there are times when our players are wrongly treated that we will fight for their fairness and we will fight for fundamental fairness.
Right.
And so now, De Maurice is an Obama guy.
I just want you to know this.
He's an Obama guy.
He's been there for a long time.
In fact, I suspected when Di Maurice was made the players' union head honcho that he was there as an Obama emissary to solve this thing that Obama would get the credit for it.
That didn't turn out to be the case, and I was wrong about, well, somewhat, not entirely wrong, but I was not 100% right about that.
So you would think that a guy who represents football players want to do whatever he could to assure the financial future of the league, right?
But he's making it clear here that he's joining all of these union fights elsewhere.
States, teachers, right to work.
And he's making it clear here that he wants to exact some revenge for years of NFL mistreatment and unfairness toward the players.
Here's the rest of what he said.
Today we're going to be filing another lawsuit against the National Football League and against some member teams because those teams are making our players sign waivers of liability before they get medical treatment and before they get some shots.
And I believe that a medical professional making a player sign a waiver before you provide that player with medical treatment is not only something that is wrong ethically, but at a time when the league professes to care about player health and safety, do you think that's consistent with player health and safety?
Well, now there's a reason for this too, folks.
One of the treatments in the National Football League is Torridol.
It is a pain reliever, non-narcotic.
By the way, you ever notice in all the drug testing in the NFL, there is an exemption for narcotic pain relievers because the players need it.
They test for cocaine, they test for marijuana, they test for, but they don't test for, say, Vicodin or Percocet because it's, you know, those are, those are over the, well, they're prescription, but they're still, they're needed.
But Torridol, Toridol is a pain reliever.
It's injected, but it's not narcotic.
The problem with Toradol, I only know this because I have had it prescribed, and my doctors have told me, do not use this for longer than a week.
In fact, if I write you a prescription for this, longer than five days, most responsible pharmacists won't fill it because it literally wrecks the liver.
It's such it, you know, pain relief is a, is a, it's a brain thing.
And this, this Toridol is something revolutionary.
It works, but it's not mind-altering in any way.
But as a result, it's not a long-term thing.
And this is what the league wants these players to sign waivers for for that particular and a couple of others.
Because this stuff, if it's used excessively, it can cause liver kidney damage and this kind of thing.
It's powerful stuff.
I've got to take a break.
Brief timeout.
Don't go away.
Coming right back with much more.
Central California, as we head back to the phones, this is Kurt, and I thank you for calling.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush.
Hey, I'm a 29-year Teamster, and I'm a Republican.
And, you know, we had a proposition out here, Proposition 32.
And all the Teamster guys came out here and passed out lots and lots of shirts to all the kids that work in our facility.
And I went up to a couple of them and I asked them, I said, so, you know, what do you think about this?
And they're like, think about what?
And I said, well, they want to stay in control of the money.
So, you know, is Obama your guy?
And some of them were like, oh, I don't know.
I don't know if I'm going to vote.
I don't know.
And I'm like, well, wait, I want to, you're asking them why they are supporting Prop 30?
Prop 32 was the initiative that allows the Teamsters to control the money so they can designate what candidate to give the money to.
I see.
Prop 32.
Gotcha.
Okay.
Yeah, Prop 32 was to say, let the Teamsters say where your union dues went to.
And I would ask these kids about, well, and I'd say, so what do you think about this Prop 32?
And they go, well, that's to save jobs.
And that's to save our, you know, and I'm like, no, it's not.
It's to control our dues and give the money to whatever candidate, you know, that smooshes them the best.
Exactly.
It was to separate you from the use of your money.
Right.
And I mean, you know, I don't listen to your program regularly.
So, I mean, I don't want, for your friends and foes, I just happen to tune in and I'm going, this is one subject that, you know, just I thought it would for sure pass.
But again, it got shut down out here in California.
I'm going to leave this state.
I heard Texas wants to succeed.
I'm thinking that would be a nice place to go to.
But it's ridiculous.
And it's sure enough.
Prop 32.
And I apologize for confusing it with Prop 30.
Prop 32 is payroll protection.
And it lost 53 to 46.
And because it lost, you're ticked off, you're leaving the state?
That's one of many reasons.
Governor Brown is another one.
You know, what are we, I forget how many millions of dollars we're in debt out here, and they're going to just start raising taxes out here until they can get their money back.
And it's businesses are leaving left and right here.
Well, let me ask you a question.
You said you're Republican, but you're a Teamster.
You've been a Teamster 29 years.
Now, Prop 32 was intended, as you said, it was intended to curb the political influence of public and private employee unions while depriving Democrat political candidates of a major source of campaign cash.
And so it lost.
But I guess what I'm having questions about, you're a Teamster Republican for 20 years.
I mean, how have you survived for 29 years?
I'm not loud and proud.
I just kind of keep to myself.
But I just don't like what our candidate who they sent out.
Let me tell you, folks, this is interesting.
I think old Kurt here actually represents a sizable percentage of unions that you never hear about.
Not every union work.
This is what makes this whole dues and money laundering operation really even more insidious.
Not every union worker paying dues supports the Democrat Party.
They have no choice in the matter.
Prop 32 was designed to prevent this automatically going to one particular party, and it lost, like everything else that makes sense in California, goes down the tubes at this day.
There are a lot of union workers who are not Democrats, not liberals, but they have no control over how their dues are spent.
And we'll be back.
Thanks for the call, Kurt.
And we are back.
El Rushbow, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
I'm going to try to use this Torradol example as an illustration of why I think the NFL is in trouble.
And as the NFL, as you and I know it, is finished.
Not immediately, maybe not in my lifetime, but it's happening much faster than I thought.
We played this clip from Bob Costas yesterday.
Bob Costas, the conscience of liberalism, the conscience of no risk, the conscience of what I mean.
Here's a game that alters the mind that affects people.
I guarantee you what's coming is how can we permit this?
And there will be a move to guilt-trip spectators into enjoying this game that's so brutal and could result in paralysis, severe spinal injury, maimed for life-type injuries, bloodthirsty fans.
This is not who we are as a culture, they will say.
This is not who we are.
No matter the players want to take the risks and play, it won't matter.
They don't know what they're doing just like you and I don't.
We don't know what's good for us.
They don't either.
Liberal command and controllers know what's good for everybody.
Like the mayor of New York.
You can't eat trans fat.
You can't drink sodas bigger than 16 ounces.
Well, pretty soon it's going to be easy to say.
It's stupid to play this game.
You're putting your life at risk, and we're not going to allow it anymore.
We're heading in that direction.
And more and more people are picking this up.
And you wait, there's a racial component to this, too, that hasn't been used, and it will.
75% of the players are African American.
Thus, 75%, these catastrophic injuries, the risk, all that being borne by minorities.
And who's enjoying it?
Bloodthirsty spectators.
Why, it's going to be portrayed as a quasi-return to slavery.
It won't matter how much the players are making.
It's going to be, well, it's the only way they can earn a living.
These poor guys, they're having to risk life and limb to play this game to entertain bloodthirsty Americans.
We haven't made any ground at all, racially.
I can hear it all coming now.
I know it's going to happen.
You may think I'm not so crazy listening to me here, but I know the left and I know how they guilt-trip people into accepting what they want.
They guilt-trip you into thinking you're destroying the planet to get you to wear some ribbon or buy some stupid little car or to agree to have your taxes raised or to agree to let the government run more and more because you on your own are destroying the planet.
I know how they work.
Now, let's look at this Torradol drug.
DeMorris Smith just said on CBS this morning that they're going to go to, they're going to go to the end of the earth here because he said, I believe that a medical professional making a player sign a waiver before you provide that player with medical treatment is not only wrong ethically, but it's not consistent with players.
Well, the drug in question, again, is Torridol.
It's a pain reliever, non-narcotic.
Go Google it.
See for yourself what the side effects of the drug are.
The drug wreaks havoc on the liver, the kidneys, and the gastrointestinal system.
Most doctors will not prescribe it for longer than five days at a time.
And my doctors have told me that a responsible pharmacist will not refill one without calling the doctor because it's that risky.
Well, the players want to use it for much longer than five days because it works.
It allows them to keep working.
It allows them to not lose their jobs due to pain, due to injury.
Narcotic pain relievers, slow down reaction time, zone you out.
They don't like that.
But this stuff doesn't have any side effect like that.
So the league, already being sued by how many thousands of ex-players for brain injuries, doesn't want a repeat of that.
So they are asking the players' union to get the players to sign a waiver on this drug because of the side effects.
And the players are refusing.
What the players want is to be able to use the drug and then be able to sue the league if the drug causes them problems later in life.
Now, what are we talking about?
We're talking about the most popular sport in the country.
And the reason I think that this sport, as we know it, is numbered, its days are numbered.
So just look at this discussion here.
Over this one, in order to be able, the players think, in order to be able to play this so-called game, they need a drug that could rip their kidneys and liver apart.
Do you think the left is going to sit idly by and allow that circumstance to exist?
That circumstance is so easily exploitable on the guilt trip side.
How dare we as a society enjoy such a barbaric game where the players need a drug that will potentially disable them in later life in order to play it?
I can just hear it now.
In fact, we are hearing it, and we're going to be hearing it in even greater numbers.
You sports fans, keep a sharp eye for this.
This one's made to order.
How dare we as a culture call it even a game?
Why, this is nothing but the Roman Coliseum and the gladiators and the Christians and the Lions for crying out loud, man, look at what these players need, a drug that could kill them later in life.
In order to play it, you wait.
Well, if you talk about, if you overuse this drug, Google it, folks.
Don't take my word for it.
Google it.
T-O-R-A-D-O-L Toradol.
Go ask your doctor if you want.
He'll tell you five days is all you can be on this stuff because it does work with no side effects at all.
No mind-altering, no nothing.
It's miraculous in that, but there's a price to pay for that.
It metabolizes in the liver and it causes like alcohol.
Alcohol basically cooks the liver.
That's what cirrhosis is.
You drink too much, it cooks the liver.
It's what's happening.
This stuff, same stuff, same effect, a little bit.
Non-medical explanation here, but it's the same kind of effect on the liver and potentially kidneys.
The players want to use it.
It's their jobs.
If they get hurt and can't play, the second team guy goes in, they lose the job, may never get it back.
Where else are they going to get paid this kind of money?
They don't want to come out of the lineup.
They want to take this drug.
It's like you hear them.
I don't care.
I'll risk a concussion.
I'll risk not being able to talk in 30 years.
I'll risk not being able to walk in 30 years.
I want to play the.
Hear them, they say this.
And the liberal do-gooders among us, we can't permit this.
They don't know what they're doing.
Why?
They don't know what's in their best interest, but we do.
And furthermore, we are watching this and we are profiting from it.
There are people profiting from human beings in America putting their lives on the line like this.
I can see where this is going.
Hit well, DeMarc, DeMorris Smith.
I'm not sure that when I read about this, I am not sure that the players have had it explained to them exactly the potency of this drug.
This is not something you take a whole season.
You don't take this stuff every day, every week to get through the.
This is not something you can take for a whole career and then stop.
I mean, some people, it's not going to happen.
Not everybody gets cirrhosis of the liver.
Not everybody gets cancer.
Not everybody, but the risk factor with this drug, and I'm only aware of this because my doctors have told me this.
That's the only reason I know about it.
But DeMorris Smith, what the league wants, what the players want, is to be able to take it.
They don't want to sign the waiver.
The league wants them to sign a waiver because of the risk.
What DeMorris Smith is: no, no, no, no.
We're not signing any waiver.
And not only that, we want to be able to sue you for whatever damage the drug does to us after we've retired.
That's what the argument is.
And my point here is: this kind of an argument is going to be used to say this game is way too barbaric and inhumane.
And we, I mean, this, we can't, if it's gotten to this point, this is what it takes for people to be able to stay in the game and play it.
Why are we playing the game?
We need to retool it.
We need to go back to square one and take the violence out of it so that there's no pain, so that there's no risk.
You wait.
I just.
I know these people like I know every square inch of my glorious naked body, my friends.
No, I only know what I think I know about Toradol because of two things.
What it's been explained to me about it by doctors and what I have thus read on medical websites.
But who knows what's true anymore?
I mean, really, I used to have fun in the fifth grade, actually, all through school.
I would look, I raise my hand, and I asked the teacher, how do we know that what we know is right?
And it befuddled every teacher.
Well, we've had proof.
Yeah, but how do we know?
How do we know all this stuff?
I mean, what if we were to find, for example, that Toradol is available over-the-counter in other countries?
Wikipedia says Toradol is available over-the-counter in Mexico.
Well, I know a lot of things are available in Mexico, Snurdy, but not just Meko, Latin America.
Toradol available over-the-counter.
If that's true, then there's going to be a source for it anyway.
But it's injected and it's oral, and injection is the, that's, that's the biggie.
And I don't know that you can get it injectable over the counter.
But regardless, I'm only telling you, I can't vouch for this.
I've never seen anybody with the after effects that are being described by it.
I only, you know, I don't want to be quoted.
I'm not a medical authority, and I'm not trying to.
I'm just telling him what's happening here with this particular drug in the league and what the latest fight with the union is about and how that's going to lead to the do-gooders among us say, How can we allow this kind of risk to take place in 2013 America?
It's just inhuman.
I could just I would wager money on it.
Here is Chris Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, honored to talk to you, man.
I really appreciate everything that you do for our country.
And I just think you're a great American.
Thank you, sir, very much.
Got a question for you.
I know you're talking about football, but this is a tax-related question.
I really don't understand.
Maybe you could help clear this up for me.
I don't understand how we think or how anybody even comes to the conclusion that thinking that taxing the wealthy, the people that have earned their money, hard-earned money, and these wealthy people that pay me who are down on the lower rung.
I'm not a corporate business owner or anything like that.
I don't understand how anybody comes to the conclusion that taxing them more to where they won't be able to afford to pay me would further our economy.
It's not about that to them.
Because your question is dynamite.
It's right on the money.
But the whole debate is about fairness.
Even I think it was Charlie Gibson, interviewing Obama in the 2008 campaign.
Charlie Gibson read Obama some statistics on the capital gains rate.
He said, are you aware that when Bush 43 lowered the capital gains rate, an unexpected amount of new revenue flowed into the Treasury?
And Obama said, yeah, but that's not what it's about.
It's about fairness.
Charlie, he said, I don't think a 15% tax rate's fair on people who make investments and have enough money to buy stocks.
I don't think 15% is fair.
But lowering the capital gains rate from 25 to 15% caused more money to come to Washington.
It reduced the deficit.
It gave Washington more money to do things.
It wasn't about that.
He said, it's about fairness to me.
So is taxing the rich.
He's playing a class envy game.
Obama wants Americans at war with each other.
What Obama wants, and I'm not exaggerating at all here, Chris.
What Obama and the Democrats want is for middle-income Americans to think that the only reason they are not rich is that the rich have taken from them.
They are being made to believe that higher taxes on the rich will mean more money comes to them.
That's the lie that's being peddled.
The lie that's being peddled is the rich only got rich by taking it from other people.
There's no talk about them earning it.
There is any talk about hard work.
There is only the talk of how unfair it is that the rich have what they have.
And it's immoral.
And so Obama is going to go level the playing field.
He is going to, he's going to take it away from these people who have it unfairly.
And implicit in that is the inference people draw.
He wants them to draw that the only reason they're not rich is that other people are.
So in order to peddle this lie, we're just willing to penalize people that have worked their butts off to get what they have.
Damn straight.
Exactly.
It is a punishment.
It is a penalty.
Exactly the way Obama looks at it, exactly the way the Democrat Party looks at you nailed it.
That's exactly it is a punishment.
They have more than they need.
You've heard him say this.
You even heard Clinton say it.
Hey, you know, Hillary and I, we're rich.
We don't need this tax cut.
We got more than we need.
The other rich people, Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, well, we got more than we need.
You don't see them giving it away other than to each other's charities.
But that's the argument.
They got more than they need.
They got more than their fair share.
That's unfair, all that stuff.
And so it's time to punish them.
Damn straight.
You nailed it.
You understand perfectly.
That makes me feel a little better.
Thanks.
Well, I'm glad it makes sense.
You've been puzzled by it because it hasn't made sense to you in a strict economic sense.
These people ought to be role models.
You're thinking.
They ought to be.
Here's how you do it.
And this is the country where it can be done.
That's the way it used to be, by the way.
But now success is under attack.
Success is said to be illegitimate in America because the deck has been stacked.
The successful have been unfairly allowed to be.
It's as though Obama wants you to believe that some powerful person somewhere decides who gets to be rich and who doesn't.
And that person's been unfair in who he's been allowing to.
And so Obama's going to make it right.
He's going to take that money away from people.
And even if the money doesn't come back to people in the middle class or people who are poor, it doesn't matter because they're still happy the rich are getting screwed.
Because that's what Obama's selling.
And we'll be back.
Don't go away.
Only 7% of Detroit public school 8th graders are proficient in reading.
7% eighth graders can read.
And only 4% of Detroit eighth graders are proficient in math.
And many of the teachers belong to what?
Unions.
Right.
Obama's America.
You can see it.
▲
Export Selection