All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 27, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:39
February 27, 2013, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back.
Great to have you here, folks.
L Rushball, your guiding light.
Times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, you name it, we're here.
Telephone number 80082-2882.
And the email address Lrushball at EIB net.com.
No, I'm not kidding.
Saddam Hussein released every criminal in his jails before the invasion of Iraq.
Fidel Castro, what do you think the Mario boat lift was?
During the Jimmy Carter years.
South Florida was flooded with a flotilla of the worst hardened criminals Castro had.
And I'm telling you, that's what Barack Obama is doing.
And it's totally.
I mean, it's it's ridiculous to even say it's unnecessary.
It's like everything else.
This is being done on purpose.
This is action being taken not just against the Republicans.
This is action being taken against the country.
There are many areas in a budget as big and expansive as the United States government budget to say with a with with a sequester that is requiring 44 billion dollars of cuts that you've got to let 30,000 illegal aliens out of jail and you've got to furlough 800,000 civilian employees in the Pentagon.
You can't deploy an aircraft carrier to Persian Gulf.
This is madness.
Bob Woodward is exactly right.
This is madness.
And you can define madness however you want.
It is sheer madness to be doing this.
It's petulant, it is childish.
And it is it is this.
And Obama's out trying to claim that he doesn't have any control over the cuts that he can make, but he does.
In reality, Obama is the only one who can change where these cuts hit.
And I I just I just think it's the height of irresponsibility.
It's childish, and it is it is action that is unnecessarily punitive against the people of this country who haven't done anything.
They're just getting up every day and and trying to get by.
And that's why I think the the Senate Republicans have this idea.
Days before the March 1st deadline, Republicans are circulating a draft bill that would cancel the $85 billion in across the board spending cuts, the sequester, and instead turn over the authority to Obama to achieve the same level of savings under a plan to be filed by March the 8th.
Now you're probably saying, well, why are they doing this if the authority already rests with Obama?
Because nobody thinks so.
Nobody understands it.
Nobody believes it.
Congress would retain power to overturn the president's spending plan by March 22nd, but under a resolution of disapproval that would demand two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate to prevail.
Which wouldn't happen.
The proposal would require, like the sequester, that no more than 42 and a half billion of the cuts come at the expense of defense programs.
We're spending well, I don't know what the defense expenditure are, but I'm telling you, tw we twenty twenty-two billion dollars from defense.
I look at I know we've got uniform military personnel.
We have had calls, folks, we we've had calls.
The office has received calls from people I'm not gonna name.
You don't you don't know who they are, but that they are requesting an anonymity.
And they're telling us that the cuts that are planned against them are real, and that they are cuts that will affect negatively our ability to prosecute war to project power.
Now that's not necessary.
Those kind of cuts aren't necessary.
Those, in fact, are the kind of cuts that Obama relishes.
Those are the kind of cuts that Obama re wants to happen.
And I think all that's happening here is that the Republicans in the Senate are trying to show low information voters that Obama really is in control of where these cuts hit.
The high information voters already know it.
And it's probably going to be a failed effort, but but he's um they're still going to uh make the effort to have this understood.
Look at this.
Brian Preston at a website called PJ Media.
Barack Obama pulls a move almost worthy of Saddam Hussein.
Shortly before U.S. troops stormed Iraq to oust the dictator Saddam Hussein, released thousands of prisoners from Iraqi jails.
Some were petty criminals, some were hardcore, some were terrorists.
Saddam Hussein unleashed them to build his own popularity and to sow chaos.
Today, Barack Obama's Department of Homeland Security is doing this.
The Obama administration already making the first cuts, officials confirming that the Homeland Security Department has begun to release what it deems low priority illegal immigrants from detention.
This is before the cuts have even hit.
These cuts that these actions that Obama, these tactics that he's taking, are to punish the people of this country.
Because Obama's not getting his way.
Bob Woodward says it's madness.
It's a kind it's a kind of madness.
The New York Times mass release of immigrants is tied to impending cuts.
Federal immigration officials have released hundreds of detainees from detention centers around the country in recent days in a highly unusual effort to save money.
As automatic budget cuts loom in Washington, officials said on Tuesday.
The government's not dropped the deportation cases against the immigrants.
However, the detainees have been freed on supervised release while their cases continue in court.
And of course, there's no way they can slip away while they're being supervised.
Does anybody think these people are going to be rounded back up, put back in jail?
They're gonna skedaddle supervised release.
So this is what's happening.
Let's go to audio soundbite number four.
This is Obama yesterday afternoon in Newport News, Virginia at the shipbuilding company.
He was speaking about the impact the sequester will have on jobs and so forth, and said this.
People have been saying, well, maybe we'll just give the president some flexibility.
He can make the cuts the way he wants, and that way it won't be as damaging.
The problem is when you're cutting 85 billion dollars in seven months, which represents over a 10% cut in the defense budget in seven months, there's no smart way to do that.
Do I close funding for the disabled kid or the poor kid?
Do I close this Navy shipyard or some other one?
And the broader point is, Virginia, we can't just cut our way to prosperity.
Well, no, but why would it cut our way to prosperity?
Another straw man argument.
Who is saying that?
That's not even what this is about.
We're only at this point because he came up with this idea of the sequester in the first place.
The second place, it's not $85 billion.
It's half of that.
And then half of that again for defense.
We've already been told from Panetta we're laying off furloughing 800,000 civilian employees of the Pentagon.
One day a week.
Instead of working five days, they're going to work four.
But you see how this shapes up.
That's 10% of the defense budget.
Why there aren't any cuts to be made?
That's right, Virginia.
There's no way we can cut anything ever out of this budget.
Fact of the matter is, if I may be so bold, a ten percent real cut in the defense budget is an Obama wet dream.
And the reason he doesn't want to mess with it is because he doesn't want it to be any less.
He can't wait to make these cuts in defense.
He's even promised his base.
Hell, his base is expecting this.
The Department of Defense is going to be cut twenty-two billion dollars from a budget of one trillion.
So we've got a thousand billion that we spend on defense.
The idea that that cannot happen, the idea that that's impossible to do.
The idea that if we cut twenty-two billion from a thousand billion, we can't deploy aircraft carriers, that we have to furlough 800,000 employees of the defense department, that we've got to shut down a shipyard somewhere, that we have to release prisoners, illegal aliens who are in jail.
It's a four percent cut.
You have to deal with this all the time in your own life.
And you get by and you survive.
Barack Obama wants you to think that your government can't survive.
The sad thing is that there are so many people now that are wholly dependent on government that they are is invested in the government not being redosed in size as the Democrats are.
But I don't know, folks.
It's like Woodward said it's it's madness.
You want to hear some more madness?
Audio sound by number 23.
Dingy Harry.
Today was a big day.
They opened up a National Cathedral up there.
Uh take it back.
Statuary Hall, Capitol Hill.
They unveiled a statue of Rosa Parks.
Snurdley, you know who Rosa Parks is.
What is Rhoda's for the low information voter?
What was Rosa Parks known for?
Right, she right.
She was she was in Alabama.
This was in the uh what early 60s, right?
She tried to get on a bus in Alabama, and the driver said you gotta move to the back.
And she's and give you had to give up your seat and move to the back because a white guy's getting on the bus now.
She refused to give up her seat.
And she has become a hero.
She from that moment on, she was a heroine for the rest of her life and remains so.
And today at a statue unveiled that was erected in her honor at statutory uh statue statuary hall in the Capitol.
And of course, Obama went up there, everybody went up there.
Big speech, Obama, Nancy Pelosi.
I didn't see the uh Reverend Dax.
I I didn't see the Justice Brothers.
I didn't see the Civil Rights Coalition up there.
But it's okay, Obama was there, Pelosi was there, uh Bahner was there, and Dingy Harry.
Now I'm gonna play a soundbite here from Dingy Harry, and I want to remind you.
What I have said over the course of the last four years with Obama in the White House.
Obama believes this country was founded illegitimately, unjustly, was immoral.
You've heard me go through that whole riff.
Here is Harry Reed basically proving it with this soundbite today on Capitol Hill.
Two of the best motion pictures this year were nominated for Academy Awards.
Lincoln and Django and Chain offered cinematic treatments of the legacy of our nation's darkest institution, slavery.
One film presents an unvarnished view of the evils of slavery.
The other depicts our difficult journey to end slavery.
It's significant that 150 years after President Abraham Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation, we're still Considering in film and photo and art and activism, how to eradicate slavery's unsavory successors, racism and inequality.
See, we haven't made any progress.
We effectively still have slavery in this country.
And of course, Sheila Jackson Lee on the floor of the House last week said that she was standing there as a freed slave.
A member of this audience called her office and wanted to know who owned her and therefore who had sold her and what he got for her.
And her office had no idea what he was talking about.
But she said, I stand before you today as a freed slave.
So they're operating on the premises still alive and kicking.
It's just now we call it racism and inequality, but there's still slavery.
And it's one of the many bases on which they proceed to shape policy in the country.
Now to brief time out, we'll get to your phone calls when we get back right after this.
Okay, Warren, New Jersey, as we start on the phones.
This is Robert.
Great to have you, sir.
Hello.
Ex-military American Cuban Tuf IT Marco Rubio for President Megadidos Rush.
Well, that's great to hear such an enthusiastic first caller today.
Great to have you here, sir.
Thank you, Rush.
Um, I just wanted to quickly talk to you about how the Democrats constantly intermingle emotional terms when concerning the uh necessary cuts as being draconian when ultimately, if there are no cuts made, the most draconian thing will happen.
Um what you're saying is if we don't do something about this, certainly down the road it's all gonna collapse.
Yeah, I mean uh it has to.
Yes, um, exactly.
I've been I've been making that point for I don't know how many days here that if if if if we don't that what what Obama is saying is going to happen with the sequester is gonna happen for real if we don't do things like the sequester and more.
But let me tell you what let me tell you what's really what's happening here, and it's something that I I've been doing this for 25 years.
Actually, if you count the three years and a half years in Sacramento, or 28 years I've been doing this type of show.
And I've been doing this long enough now that I see the cycles, I see the repeats, I see there isn't anything new, and I've known this as it relates to the Democrat Party agenda for for years.
They have a small playbook and they just keep recycling the plays, and all that changes is the names of the Republicans.
And some of the names of the Democrats.
But the 1995 budget battle, identical to what's being said now.
Starving children, all of nothing changes.
This this is one of the frustrating things, folks, if I might tell you, is that I would think that the Republicans, after 30 years, would have figured out a way to beat this back.
But the Democrats are are they running the equivalent.
We know the playbook.
We know what they're gonna do, we know how they're going to do it.
We know when they're gonna do it.
We know what they're going to say, we know everything about their playbook, and somehow we can't stop it.
And all kinds of excuses are offered for not being able to stop it.
And the biggest excuse offered is, well, we don't have the media rush, and they do, and I know it's a major factor.
No other way around it.
It's true.
But the one thing that the Republicans are reluctant to try is draw the contrast with what liberalism is, what Obamaism is, what his intentions are.
They do not effectively make the case for the alternative.
Look at immigration.
Does anybody you know there's a big move on, and I told you about my golf buddy.
There's a big move on now to just totally eliminate any concern over the social issues whatsoever.
Because we got to save the economy.
The economy is where your kids' future is the grandkids' future, And that's exactly right.
But all this stuff is interlinked.
Social issues and economic issues are linked by something.
And it's called morality.
And it's morality that's missing here.
And while Obama runs around and claims the country was founded immorally and unjustly.
The truth of the matter is that they're doing everything they can to eliminate morality.
There are no guardrails.
There are no limits, and there will be no judgments.
And nobody has the right to say something is wrong.
Nobody has the right anymore to say something is right.
Nobody has the right to say something shouldn't happen because it's destructive and detrimental.
You don't have that right.
Who you love, who you want to live with, how you want to live, where you want to get your money from the government for a job, it's nobody else's business.
And so morality is being eliminated.
And this country was founded on the basis of it.
This country was founded on the premise that if morality is ever eliminated, this country can't exist as it was founded.
Now what is happening here?
This sequester, but I've said for it's twenty-five years.
The Democrats are attempting to establish in the minds of as many Americans as possible that life itself depends on a thriving and growing government in the center of everyone's life.
And that's why there can be no cuts to it.
More of your phone calls when we get back.
Do not go away.
Talent on loan from God.
Rush Limbaugh.
and the excellence in broadcasting network.
Here's Fareed in Hollywood.
Fareed, great to have you on the program.
Hello, sir.
Make that serene, Rush, and you've got a deal.
Serene.
I'm sorry, uh says Farida, but I'm I apologize.
Uh it's all right.
That's all right.
Um one thing I can barely hear you.
I don't know that you're the quality of the phone you're on is not the best.
That may be why we misunderstood your name.
Okay, let's try this.
Yeah, get a little bit closer to the microphone.
Gotcha.
Okay.
Rush did us to start with Mega Mega Did us um all the best to you, my friend.
Uh this this um uh regime that is uh elected by by the clueless and the uninformed has uh come very very close to um and and in fact cross the line uh of breaking the law um by by releasing these uh people uh out of prison illegally like that.
Something like this happened in the seventies in Europe, and this is the reason why I'm so impressed with you that you're so astute that you can understand details that people who have lived here all their lives would have no access to uh being pounded with false information all this time.
The detail being that nobody in their right mind ever try to enter uh cross illegally and run into a communist country, but everybody tried to escape.
Um what Chochescu did in the early seventies is he gave the um common thieves and pickpockets and and basic criminals uh that were in prison gave them a choice.
Um they would take a passport to go to Western Europe or stay in prison.
So of course they chose to they chose to leave.
That was everybody's dream there, thieves thieves or not.
This would be Nicolai Cauchescu in Romania we're talking about, right?
That is that is correct.
That is correct.
The purpose By the way, for those of you low information, Romania's where Nadia Komanic came from.
Just wanted them to know where Romania is, Serene.
Uh thank you.
Yeah, so the real purpose was to to um create um an absolute havoc in the Western world in the Western Europe where those who try to escape, risking life a limb, crossing at night under the hell of bullets, leaving family, possessions, memories, childhood behind, just the escape and be free.
And when they would ask for political asylum in places like West Germany or France or Italy, the impression given by these criminals that were allowed to immigrate freely, and who, of course, once they hit the streets and saw the naivete of the rich world, which is what everybody looked at it as being, they started pillaging there.
And the the setup was such that the governments over there being faced with this kind of crime would refuse the um acceptance of the of the people who risked their lives just to escape the moral crime that communism is.
and so the fact that you mentioned the Marielitos and intent of creating havoc by releasing these people, it is so close to reality well it is
I tell you, it's it's it is finding myself in a in a difficult situation here because I know that certain words and phrases happen to turn people off in this country.
For example, it's been this way a long time.
You call in this country in media today, you you you say to somebody that person's a communist, you lose them.
That that it doesn't work.
So you say, okay, socialist.
Well, okay, that may make a little bit more impact.
Call them a totalitarian or a statist, they still don't want to hear it.
But it's it's it's challenging because that's exactly what's happening.
Barack Obama is employing tactics that have been used by people like Nikolai Ceausescu, Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Fidel Castro released hundreds of thousands of the most just horrible characters from his prisons, and they invest in South Florida.
The Mario boatlifter.
What happens?
And the same thing with with uh Chautescu and releasing his prisoners, not all of them are political.
Some of them are hardened criminals.
I mean, Chausescu was trying to pollute Western Europe.
He wasn't sending a bunch of freedom fighters to Western Europe.
He was polluting it.
Castro was trying to pollute South Florida, he was trying to corrupt it, and the United States in general.
Saddam Hussein was trying to corrupt Iraq and back then by letting his most hardened criminals go.
It was it was uh uh a punishment.
A punishment to the citizens of Iraq for not supporting him.
For being complicit in the forthcoming US invasion.
And so what happens is Chochescu, let's let's well use the merry old boat lift.
What happened in this country?
The Merry old boat lift, and of course the nice compassionate people of America welcome them in at first.
They're escaping the dungeons of Fidel Castro.
These are people seeking freedom.
And we are people of freedom.
Same thing with Chachescu's released, same thing with uh uh uh Castros and and Saddams, and they end up corrupting the places that they go, and that's the purpose of it.
Now when you say that Obama is replicating the behavior of people like that, my my guess is that any low information voters in the audience who hear me say this are gonna poo-poo it and they're gonna start calling me names.
Reactionary, uh controversial statements, uh whatever, uh extremist, racist, sexist, making it homophobe, what have you.
Because the low-information voter looks at Obama as a prisoner himself of the Republican Party.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Obama's doing everything he can to make life better.
He's trying to create jobs.
He's trying to prevent the deficit from growing.
He said that every policy of his wasn't going to grow the deficit by a dime.
And if it did, he wouldn't do it.
Well, the deficit's growing, it must be the Republicans.
And Obama's got his jobs councils.
He's trying.
He's trying to create jobs, but but the unemployment number is static or getting worse.
It must be the Republicans.
It was Bush.
I saw the exit polls in the 2008 election.
Something like 56 or 57% of the people that voted still blame Bush for the economy.
I've told you when I saw that, my heart fell.
I knew it was over.
But I wasn't able to explain to myself why.
I was still bamboozled by it.
I've never in my life known a president who has escaped any accountability for four years of his presidency until this guy came along, and the media is only part of it.
It's a big part of it, but it's not the entire explanation.
We've reached a point in our cultural evolution where the clueless dominate, where low information, uneducated, who think they know everything, by the way, dominate.
I appreciate the call.
I'll take a quick time out.
I want to expand a little bit here on this brief comment I made in the last half hour about the social issues and the eagerness at which people want to sweep them aside now, and the apparent eagerness the Republican Party has to be seen as supporting gay marriage.
Supporting amnesty.
And even relaxing their views on pro-life.
All because they think that's what they're going to have to do to win elections.
And they couldn't be more wrong.
And there are some really good people, smart people, good hearted people, who also believe that any amount of energy spent fighting gay marriage, for example, or amnesty, is energy not spent fighting Obama on the economy.
And there are a lot of people who really think that if we don't get this economy straightened out, if Obama's policies are not reversed, that their grandkids are never going to know prosperity.
And they want every bit of energy expended reversing that.
And they believe that any attention spent on opposing amnesty, gay marriage, any other social issue, is energy not spent on the economy.
I've had, I told you the story about my golf buddy, but I've heard it from others too.
And by the way, they are they're not the equivalent of the Republicans who want to agree with those issues as a means of getting votes.
The distinction with the people I'm talking about is they don't want to waste time on those issues because they think spending time on those issues is a waste of time.
They want it all focused on the economy.
The old delineation of a fiscal conservative and a social liberal That old argument, they want the social stuff gone simply because they think it dilutes the energy spent fighting to straighten out the economy.
And it's a powerful thing.
I can understand.
And everybody who does, particularly with the grandkids are worried they're never going to have a chance to experience prosperity.
There isn't going to be enough money in the pool for anybody to earn.
The government's going to have taken it all.
The private sector's going to get smaller and smaller.
The government's going to get bigger and bigger, and the government really is going to be in charge Of who gets what?
And that scares the hell out of people.
They don't want their kids growing up in a country like that.
So they believe that any amount of energy spent on any social issue is energy not spent trying to reverse the economy.
And the problem with that is, I understand it, but the problem with that is that they're all, I think, linked.
They're all intertwined with one thing called morality.
The country was built on morality.
I forget which founding father it was, John Adams, Madison, I forget which.
I think it was Adams who said this country was founded and the Constitution was written for a God fearing moral people.
And if the people ever ceased being God fearing and moral, then the Constitution would cease to exist.
And the country therefore would.
So there is this common thread that runs through every issue.
And morality really is the key.
Boy, that you you start using the word morality to the American left today, and it's like showing Dracula the cross.
They don't want to hear it.
In fact, one of the primary motivations for being a liberal is that there isn't any morality.
Which means there isn't any judgmentalism, which means you can engage in whatever activity you want, and nobody is going to tell you you can't, nobody's going to tell you you shouldn't.
Nobody's going to criticize or condemn you for it.
Once you start going down that slope, it doesn't matter what you're talking about money or interpersonal relationships.
It's all going to come unraveled.
And that's what's happening.
And that is being taken advantage of by Obama and the Democrats.
And what they're seeking to do here, what they've been doing my entire career is establishing in an increasing number of people's minds that a thriving, constantly growing, active government is the only source of prosperity income, lifestyle that there is.
I got to take a break because it's time.
Back in a minute.
It was John Adams who said this.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
And he's right.
John Adams said it.
And George Washington had similar things to say.
John Adams also said we have no constitution which functions in the absence of a moral people.
They made founders made several assumptions about the survivability of the Constitution.
One of the assumptions was that a primarily moral country would coexist simultaneously with the Constitution.
And Adams said if if if we ever cease being moral and religious, then the Constitution will eventually crumble and fall.
By the way, the politico is saying that the White House is saying that it was Janet Napolitano's decision to release the prisoners.
The White House and the Department of Homeland Security were unaware of immigration customs and enforcement decision to release detainees until the agency announced it.
So not only did Obama have no idea it was gonna not only did Obama not do it, he didn't even know that it was done until he read about it in the paper.
Yeah, and did you know that Janet Reno was solely responsible for the Waco invasion?
Bill Clinton had nothing to do with that.
Janet Reno herself ordered the tanks and the military equipment into Waco at the Branch Dividian complex and torched it.
Clinton said so.
Uh you gotta go, you have to ask the attorney general about that.
I I didn't know anything about that.
I saw that in the paper.
I found out about fact I found out about that same time you did.
And now that's what Obama's doing.
The White House and the Department of Homeland Security were unaware of immigration and customs enforcement's decision to release illegal immigrants before sequestration until the agency announced it.
So not only did Obama not do it, he didn't know about it until he read it in the paper.
See, folks, he's not even in charge of his own Department of Homeland Security.
He's not even in charge of his own Immigration Customs Enforcement Agency.
All of this stuff happens out there, and he doesn't know anything about it.
And so now Obama is gonna be fighting the release of these illegal alien pris prisoners, just like he's fighting the Republicans who are trying to increase the number of people who don't have jobs.
It's amazing how this happens.
What was it?
About an hour after my monologue on the prisoner release, the White House denies it after the story had been around all day.
By the way, you know Obama didn't know about a Benghazi either.
He didn't know about the prisoner release, he didn't know about Benghazi.
▲
Export Selection