All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 18, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:51
December 18, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Have I got this right?
I think I do.
Because I usually have most things right.
Sorry, I know that makes people nervous.
Well, being confident in what you believe makes people nervous, particularly women, that's what I've been told.
So I'm trying to dial that back, trying to sound more unsure of myself as a way of expanding the audience.
A little bit um less confident.
Um so as to be less threatening.
Squishy.
Well, yeah, funnier, squishier, less threatening, uh less confident, more indecisive.
Uh seems to be the uh uh the stuff that gets rewarded today.
Anyway, I I think I do understand this right.
I think John Boehner has proposed in what's been called Plan B raising taxes without anything in return.
Basically what Boehner has done here is adopt, according to the people at Buzzfeed, and they're pretty accurate here, the um oh not the but a plan put forth by Pelosi not too long ago.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
Let's let's see if in my new indecisive squishiness I've got this right.
This is Boehner this morning at a press conference.
It was breathlessly awaited by the drive-by media as he came out and explained plan B because the president won't talk to him.
The president won't move on anything.
See, the president wants to go over the fiscal cliff.
And the Republicans don't want to go over the fiscal cliff.
Now the reason the president wants to go over the fiscal cliff is because it's it's made to order.
And here's what I think, of course, I can't be sure, no one can.
But uh what what what I thought I think is going on here, uh, ladies and gentlemen, I think the the the see the fiscal cliff is a deal that was reached the last time we all agreed to raise the debt limit.
And it was it was fought very hard.
Um there was there was real political combat on both sides.
And the deal that was agreed to contained elements that are supposedly unacceptable to both sides when the deal expires, which is December 31st.
And because the deal has elements that are just repellent to both sides, the theory was that they'll go in and have meaningful bipartisan negotiations and come up with a new deal to replace this horrible deal by December 31st because it has such horrible stuff in it.
Well, what are the horrible things in it?
Well, if we go over the fiscal cliff, the Bush tax rates expire for everybody, and everybody's tax rates go up to what they were during the Clinton years.
That is bad.
They go up not just for the rich, but for everybody.
And then on and that that's of course not good for any politician, theoretically.
And then there are also massive defense budget cuts, and that's supposedly not good for any politician either.
So though and that there are other elements, but those two are the primary movers.
Those are the motivating characteristics that are supposed to inspire both parties to come up with a replacement deal for the one that goes into effect on January first.
And that's what the fiscal cliff is.
Now I can't be sure.
No one can, but I think the president, from a purely strategic standpoint, as a Democrat and as a socialist.
I think he's a socialist wants this deal to go into play into effect on January first.
I think he wants the tax rates To increase on everyone temporarily.
And I think he salivating over these major cuts to defense.
I think he would love that.
As a as a Democrat, his country's always wrong.
I think that's what they believe.
And this country's to blame for many of the problems in the world, and the defense budget has led to the largest problems.
We have so many nuclear weapons that, you know, they kill people.
Uh, and we have big bombs, and we have lots of guns in the military.
Uh, not just Bushmaster rifles.
We have lots of guns.
We have pistols, we have guns, we have missiles, we have rockets, we have jet airplanes, we get we can kill more people with our military than any kid could ever dream of.
And the Democrats don't like that.
So they would be happy for the defense budget to have money taken away from it.
So if we go over the cliff, meaning if January 1st comes, and this deal that contains elements that are horrible, reprehensible to both parties, actually goes into effect, what will happen is that everybody's income tax rates will go up significantly, and the defense budget will be cut by something like a trillion dollars over a certain number of years.
Now I believe the president wants this to happen.
Can't be sure.
But I think the president wants this to happen because as a tactic, after everybody's taxes go up in January, he will wait for everybody to get a couple of paychecks so that they see that their take-home pay is a lot less.
Because you have to realize the country has a lot of what we call low information people.
Um in the old days you call them morons.
Today they're the people running the country.
And they are going to discover that their take-home pay is significantly less.
Uh in the first two pay periods, may take two.
The first pay period they might not quite understand it, might be a clerical error, it could be something that uh they chalk up, but you give them two paychecks where their take-home pay is less, and they're gonna figure out something's up.
At that point, they will be informed that their their taxes went up.
Uh, and they're gonna be confused because all they've heard is tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts, uh, during the little amount of time they pay any attention to this.
Well, they're not gonna want less take-home pay.
The low information voters, the uh and and by the way, this is a declining number of people uh that we're talking about who still have jobs anyways, and we're really not talking about that many people, these are people that work.
But for the people who work, their paychecks are gonna get much smaller.
And after a couple pay periods in January, they're gonna be mad and they're gonna be demanding something done about it.
And President Obama, seeing an opportunity, will then propose tax cuts for the middle class after having been the one to allow the taxes to go up.
He's the only one that wants tax rates to go up.
For some reason, the Republicans have a problem in telling people this.
But there's not a Republican around who wants anybody's taxes to go up.
The Democrats do.
The Democrats and Obama, they're the only people that want your taxes to go up.
Now, not just the taxes on the rich.
They want everybody's taxes to go up, and everybody's taxes are gonna go up.
But Obama, if we go over the cliff, will then be able to propose tax cuts.
And these low information voters who used to be called idiots and morons, will then believe that the only guy who cares anything about them is Obama.
He'll be saying that the Republicans let this happen because they were holding out for the rich.
They didn't want the richest tax to go up taxes to go up.
And Obama said they screw it in everybody's taxes, but he's gonna be there to say today.
And then little cherry on the top, you know what else Obama, he'll then propose putting back some of the defense spending that will be cut.
And in the process, the president, Who will have engineered all of this will then be able to steal from the Republicans that which they are known for a strong defense and low taxes.
And in the process, uh the president and his party uh will effectively decimate the Republican Party, which will make a lot of people very happy.
Hollywood, Warren Buffett, uh Oprah, uh David Letterman, you know, all your favorite people will be very happy at this.
And the Republicans will be scratching their heads trying to figure out what just happened.
Meanwhile, by the time we get to February or March, as more and more of Obamacare health care kicks in, everybody's taxes will continue to go up and health care will decline as premiums also increase.
And for this, the Republicans will also get blamed.
Well, they just will.
There doesn't have to be a reason for it.
They're just going to say that this is the Republicans' fault, because they held out uh in December for no tax increases for the rich.
And the media will join that chorus.
So what are the Republican options here?
This is what the the the Republicans could say what I just said to you, but for some reason they don't want to.
The Republicans are hellbent on not going over the cliff.
The Republicans do not want to go over this cliff.
The Republicans don't want any of the elements of the New Deal to go into effect on January 1.
And so John Boehner, the leader of the Republicans, is proposing various plans to President Obama to avert this, and President Obama rejects every one of them.
John Boehner, in fact, today just proposed a plan authored by Nancy Pelosi this past spring, a Democrat leader in the House, and the White House has rejected it.
Well, there's always one thing that Republicans could then rely on.
They could always fall back on.
And it's always worked for me.
Thank you.
And that is just hanging tough on principle.
What do the Republicans believe?
What do well, what do we believe?
We believe that you don't raise taxes in a depressed economy.
And we believe in lower taxes, broadening the base, and economic growth.
We believe in a growing economy which presents opportunity for even more and more people to gain employment and decide on careers and start on their success track.
Now that's become a route that many Americans, low information voters, think is not for them.
But that's where we are.
The Republicans uh I think could very easily just say the only person in this who wants your taxes to go up is the president.
And that would be the truth.
Why are you sneering, Snerdly, when I suggest that the Republicans fall back on principle and the truth.
Why are you sneering at them?
Do you oh, oh, oh, I thought you were telling me it's a lousy strategy.
You think relying and staying rooted to your principles and truth is a bad strategy?
Oh, good.
Okay.
All right.
I miss.
I know they are Republicans.
But um, so the the the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, is desperate to not go over to Cliff.
He is desperate for there to be an agreement between himself and Depreese.
And so he he came out, he had a press conference.
So, well, not a press conference, but he had a press availability, and this is among the things that he said.
Every income tax filer in America is gonna pay higher rates come January the first unless Congress acts.
So I believe it's important uh that we protect as many American taxpayers as we can.
And uh our plan B uh would protect American taxpayers who make a million dollars or less and have all of their current rates extended.
I continue to have hope uh that we can reach a broader agreement with the White House uh that would reduce uh spending as well as have revenues on the table.
See, this is the Republicans.
The Republicans are holding out for the president agreeing to spending cuts.
This would be akin to asking the president to resign.
He is no more going to resign than he is going to agree to spending cuts.
The Democrat Party is all about spending.
That's why I said last week in a previous monologue where I wasn't quite sure, but I thought I was pretty close that there is no common ground here.
But there is no middle ground.
There really isn't any way that a compromise can be reached here, because the things that both sides want have nothing in common.
They really don't, folks.
I mean, it's no more complicated than that.
They really don't have anything in common.
Republicans want entitlement cuts, spending reform, government's getting too big, the big government, bigger entitlements, that's how Democrats stay in power.
It's not complicated, it's just the way it is.
Now, I said, and Boehner sounds like he's proposing a Pelosi plan.
What do you just say here?
Plan B would protect American taxpayers and make a million dollars or less.
See, he had offered 400 grand to the White House.
The White House made it sound like they're moving a little bit on that.
So they upped it.
White House rejected it.
But let's go back.
This is April the second on Charlie Rose on PBS.
He interviewed Nancy Pelosi and he said, You're not prepared to say that the Bush tax cuts shouldn't be continued.
The former Speaker of the House, what do you say about this?
In our caucus, there is a school of thought that says, you know, just let's get rid of all of the tax cuts.
I said, let's begin by getting rid of tax cuts for people making over a million dollars a year.
I'm not even saying 250.
The president's saying 250.
I'm saying a million and above.
That's who can argue with that.
That's what Boehner has adopted.
I mean, the Pelosi plan of last April.
That's what Boehner's adopted.
That's what he sent in the White House, and they've already rejected it.
The Pelosi plan.
Boehner didn't call it that.
We are, but I mean, her idea, no tax increases for anybody up to a million dollars a year, not 250,000, like the president's saying.
Let's take a brief timeout and we'll come back and continue.
Right after this.
Don't go away.
Rush Limbaugh, the new L Squish Other thoughtful and less sure of himself.
Maha Rushi here with the EIB network.
Great to have you.
Now, uh, ladies and gentlemen, I think one of the things that Boehner is trying to do here, and I I should point out, by the way, that Chuck U Schumer proposed the very same deal that Pelosi proposed.
Chuck Yu Schumer was all for this plan all the way back in November 2010.
This plan again would exempt everybody making up to a million dollars from any new tax increase.
And the Obama plan is calling for everybody at 250,000 and up.
Then it became 400,000.
The White House theoretically warmed up to that, but then they backed off.
And now Boehner has proposed what Pelosi proposed.
I I I don't think this is an accident.
I can't be sure.
But I think what Boehner's attempting to do is throw an essentially Democrat leadership idea at the White House.
And then what Boehner wants to do, they get the Senate over there that is is not really involved in this, and so they get a little bit of protection.
I think what Boehner is trying to do is put some burden, some pressure on Dingy Harry.
The Senate majority leader wants him to act, wants him to get involved, And take the revenue issue off the table.
But what Boehner's trying to do, and I I don't know that it's going to work, but I think offering this million dollar umbrella is essentially taking the revenue issue off the table by agreeing to it.
And then the efforts to focus the Democrats on spending.
Now, Dingy Harry, the wily old coyote here has refused to be trapped.
Dingy Harry has already rejected the Boehner Pelosi plan.
And in his statement, he said the House bill will not protect middle class families because it can't pass both houses of Congress, meaning he will not let this be voted on in the Senate.
That's what he's saying.
So the Democrats are holding middle class tax cuts hostage, is what is happening.
Nobody's going to report it, but I'm pretty sure for I'm not dead, sir.
I think I. Hi, welcome back, folks.
Great to have you here.
It's Rush Limbaugh, and this is a one and only Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
And it's Merry Christmas time to all of you from all of us here at the distinguished and prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
So let me in summary explain what I think has happened today.
John Boehner, the Republican leader, is eager to make a deal with the White House so as to avoid going over the fiscal cliff, which again is the implementation of a budget arrangement that contains elements supposedly unacceptable to both parties.
Massive tax increases and massive defense cuts.
Remember, uh I am fairly sure that President Obama wants that to happen for reasons previously explained.
But John Boehner doesn't.
John Boehner thus has made a new proposal as of today called Plan B. The president wants tax increases on all income over $250,000 a year.
Back in April, Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats in the House, said, no, let's make it a million dollars.
No tax increase on income up to one million dollars, therefore only income above a million dollars would get a tax increase.
Chuck Schumer in 2010 proposed the same.
So John Boehner said, you know what?
Let's throw a Democrat idea at President Obama, which he did today, and it has promptly been rejected.
The White House has rejected it.
Uh and Jay Carney said it doesn't ask enough of the very wealthiest in taxes, and instead shifts the burden to the middle class and seniors.
And of course he said it can't pass the Senate.
Now the White House is saying that all income under a million dollars will have no tax increase.
The White House is saying that's not asking enough of the very wealthiest.
Obama therefore is insistent that every American family, small business and otherwise, earning $250,000 a year more, face a massive tax increase.
This is what the White House wants.
They're the only people that do, the Democrat Party in the White House want tax increases on certain Americans.
Nobody else does.
None of the Republicans do.
Another attempt, and I'm sure what Boehner was trying to do here, and I'm I don't know whether it's a good strategy or not.
Leave it for you to decide.
What Boehner was attempting to do is get the spending or the revenue, the tax increase stuff off the table by agreeing to raise rates, by agreeing, this is the the Republicans held out on this for a long, long time, by agreeing with the president to raise rates on the wealthiest Americans.
What the Speaker is attempting to do is, okay, we've taken care of that.
I agree with you.
Now let's focus on the spending side, and the Democrats are rejecting That.
There will be no spending cuts that anybody on a Democrat side agrees to.
There just will not be.
No way, no how.
That's why I said there's no common ground here.
There is no way for there to be a compromise.
The only thing that can happen here is for one side to lose dramatically.
That's all.
There's not going to be a compromise.
And Harry Reed, I'm sure part and parcel of what Boehner's trying to do with his plan B is put pressure on Harry Reed because, okay, look, we're agreeing to raise rates.
This is what you guys have said you wanted.
We're agreeing to it.
That's done.
Now let's talk about the spending.
Sorry, this can't pass the Senate.
And of course, they're throwing in this middle class mumbo jumbo as a as a distraction.
There's there's nothing about the middle class in this.
In fact, this deal expands the middle class and exempts them from a tax increase.
This Boehner proposal, the Pelosi proposal, essentially expands the middle class to include people up to a million bucks.
No tax increase.
And yet the Democrats reject it.
The White House rejects it.
So the one thing for you to take away in all of this is that it's the Democrat Party, the president, the White House, that are adamant that your taxes go up.
The Republicans have agreed in principle.
But they also are demanding some spending cuts, and that's where the deal is falling apart.
There will not be any spending cuts, pure and simple.
There are some people, however, even in the media, who believe that if the Republicans agree, raise rates on the rich, that that will then force the Democrats to be nice and play ball and make a compromise.
That is on the spending cut side.
Let's go to Bob Beckle.
He was on Fox this morning with Bill Hemmer.
Bob Beckel, co-host of the five at five on Fox.
Hemmer said, okay, they're talking about a deal now that will save two trillion dollars over ten years.
We're already at a $16 trillion national debt.
We're going to be at $20 trillion national debt in four years.
And we're going to save two trillion over the next ten?
Come on, Bob, that's nothing.
I mean, we're going to be left with a huge bag on our hands at the end of this deal, aren't we, Bob?
What you don't include in that are the entitlement cuts, which they will be.
And here's the answer for the Democratic caucus.
If the Republicans go along with tax rate increases on the rich, then the Democrats, if they don't do something on entitlements, will take the political heat for it.
From who, Bob.
Somebody tell me who is going to give the Democrats heat for not doing something on entitlements.
This is nothing more than an enticement.
This is a...
Well, I'm pretty sure what's happening here is a trick.
Does I...
I...
It sounds to me like what the Democrats are doing is tempting the Republicans into believing that there will be pressure brought to bear on the Democrats to cut spending if they agree with the tax rate increases.
Because the media will then say, okay, Democrats, the Republicans have compromised.
Now it's your turn.
And here Beckle is basically joining in that chorus line say, well, if the Republicans go along with tax increase on the rich, the Democrats, if they don't do something on entitlements, will take the political heat for it.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Democrats will not take any political heat from people they worry about if they don't cut entitlements.
Who is going to give them heat?
Is it going to be the media?
State run media is going to criticize Obama and the Democrats for not compromising with the Republicans.
I don't think that's going to happen, folks.
I just don't see it.
I have yet to see the media put any pressure on the Democrats.
I've yet to see the Democrats be criticized at all by the media for anything.
I mean, four Americans are dead in Benghazi.
And the media doesn't care To find out what happened there.
And that's because they can't blame that on Republicans.
So I think this is a giant trap that's being set.
People are telling the Republicans, if you just agree to raise tax on the rich, then the Democrats don't play ball on entitlement cuts, they're going to take the heat for it.
But they won't take any heat.
The Democrats don't take any heat for anything now.
And not from people they care about.
I mean, they take heat from me.
They get heat from people on Fox, but they don't get heat from people they care about.
Oprah's not going to give them heat.
Letterman isn't going to give them heat.
John Stewart's not going to criticize them.
Stephen Colbert isn't going to criticize them.
They don't care.
The people that matter to the Democrats and the President are not going to criticize them.
So I don't think that follows.
So then the question becomes, well, what should the Republicans do?
And that's why I say fall back on principle.
Always fall back on what you really believe in, which is a small, efficient, performing government that gets out of people's way.
And lets people keep more of what they earn, the fruits of their labors.
Lets them decide to do with it what they want.
This is how people start businesses and hire other people for jobs, where people go to work.
No job, J-O-B.
It's where you you get up and you leave home and you go someplace and you perform and somebody pays you for you.
Yeah, yeah.
It used to happen a lot.
And we want more people doing that.
Because more people doing that means there we have more people paying taxes, and that means there's more money to run precious government operations.
So Republicans could say, you know, we don't believe in tax increases on anybody, and we're not gonna except that cat's out of the bag now, or the genie's out of the bottle.
Could Boehner put that back, could Boehner withdraw his offer to raise taxes on the rich?
Could he withdraw it?
I think he could.
Not sure.
But I think Boehner could say, okay, I've tried everything.
And it is clear the White House isn't interested in striking a deal.
It is clear that the White House wants taxes on Americans to go up.
Just say it.
Call another press availability and say, I have gone more than the extra mile.
I've given the White House everything they've asked for.
And they're not interested.
So I'm withdrawing my offer to raise rates on the rich, and we stand for no tax increases.
We stand for spending reform and then go over the cliff.
And let the president own what happens.
He will own it.
Now he will blame the Republicans for it, and the media will join in the chorus, but the Republicans will have done the right thing.
Now I don't know that any of this is going to happen.
I'm just a small-minded small talk show guy.
So these are just my ideas.
I don't know whether they're going to happen or not.
Yes.
Well, until uh till I'm told that I'm not threatening.
Speaking of that, you know, I may do something else along these lines.
I remember last week we told you the story about the French actor Girard Depardi.
Gerard Depardi left France.
He announced very publicly he's leaving France, moving across the state line or the country line to Belgium.
Because he's fed up with a top tax rate of 75% on the rich.
Now Gerard DePardier is not the first Frenchman to announce that he's leaving France because of this.
The first French citizen to announce that he was leaving was a huge, well-known big time corporate executive, who nobody nobody cared whether He left.
Because big time corporate executives are hated and despised everywhere.
So when one of those announces they're leaving, the population of France applauded and saying, not only are you leaving, stay away.
Screw you.
But it didn't work out that way with Gerard Depardi.
He was criticized.
He faced a mountain of criticism.
But Gerard DePardi responded to it.
I'll tell you how and what happened and what it may mean for me when we get back.
Hi and welcome back.
Great to have you here, Il Rochbone a cutting edge.
Societal evolution.
So it's it's it's it's one thing when a wealthy CEO corporate exec tycoon leaves France, nobody cares, in fact, good riddance, but a very popular actor, Gerard Depardi leaves France.
And he was criticized at first.
And he was called greedy at first by government officials and members of the public.
But then Gerard DePhardi published an open letter on Sunday in French newspapers.
And he wrote, I was born in 1948.
I started working aged 14 as a printer as a warehouseman, then as an actor, and I have always paid my taxes.
I am neither worthy of pity nor admirable, but I shall not be called pathetic.
Saying that he was indeed sending back his French passport.
He said that over 45 years he had paid 145 million euros in tax, and to this day employs eighty people.
Last year he said he paid taxes amounting to 85% of his income, and he's had it.
And today, after this open letter, Gerard Depardi now has 70% support of the French people.
An online poll conducted by the Popular Le Parisian tabloid showed almost 70% supporting Depardi.
And his quest to lower taxes in France.
What did he do?
He left.
He left the country, which I say, how does it apply to me?
Well, maybe if I move out to avoid taxes and explain how much I pay and how many people I employ and all this, maybe people will love me more.
And maybe women will feel less threatened.
If it worked for DePardie, who knows?
But I I find it I find it interesting.
He turned it around with one letter explaining.
Hey, don't confuse me with some wealthy fat cat tycoon.
Eighty-five percent last year I paid in taxes.
I've had enough.
Here is Reginald in Tampa, Florida.
Great to have you, sir.
You're up first today.
Good morning, Rush.
Uh I think the dialogue's all way off.
We're way over the cliff.
We were roaring down the highway with a gas stuck, spinning like crazy, and now we're over the cliff.
We're just arguing about how hard we're gonna hit the ground because we can't stop spending.
And it's not about taxes, it's about spending.
They just don't want to talk about that word.
No, that's exactly right.
We are over the cliff.
I think we've been over the cliff, like you say for a long time, and I uh and and the only and it by the way, do you think we ever repay sixteen trillion dollars in debt?
No, of course not.
We get manipulated around, raise the currency levels, add more money because we can print it and hope for the best.
Well, but you have to make some effort to.
And and clearly this is a spending side problem.
And now which party is it not interested in spending reductions at all?
Neither one of them are interested.
Have you two have you heard anybody talk about spending reductions other than making oh we're gonna cut the amount we're gonna increase?
I mean, that's basically what the Republicans are talking about.
Let's don't increase quite so much.
Let's keep spending.
Well, you know you're on to something.
The practical result is exactly what you say.
The Republicans are talking spending cuts, but there never really are Any, are there?
Nope.
Every year the budget gets bigger, doesn't it?
No matter what everybody says about spending cuts, all these draconian cuts that happen all the time, budget still gets bigger every year, doesn't it?
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Over the cliff already.
Hmm.
I like it.
Okay, folks.
We um yeah, we of course there there's more to say about the incident in Newtown, Connecticut.
Everybody well, not everybody, but there is a massive cave-in going on uh uh against guns.
Right now, financiers, uh hedge funds are dropping their investments in gun manufacturers, senators are changing their minds.
It's uh breathtaking sight to behold.
Uh literally, spines are turning into linguini before our very eyes.
▲
Export Selection