All Episodes
Previous Next
June 7, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:36
June 7, 2013, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
El Rushbo behind the golden EIB microphone on Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
And the telephone number if you want to join us on Open Line Friday and talk about whatever you want to talk about is 800-282-28.
Wait a minute.
I'm reading something while I'm doing, I'm trying to figure something out.
800-282-2882.
I just got soundbite rusted.
I'm trying to figure something out.
Ah, there it is.
Okay.
Got it.
I want to go back.
We had a call from Brian.
And by the way, is Brian still there, H.R.?
Hilda.
Brian, welcome back to the program.
I wanted to keep you here because I told you I wouldn't take away from your time, and I did.
So I wanted to give you a chance to say, but while you're here, you know, I mentioned one of my monologues after the original 9-11 back in 2001.
This, I want to read to you, and everybody else, my opening monologue in 2012, September 12th of 2011.
And it went like this.
I've heard a number of media people throughout the course of the past day, the past 24 hours, refer to the possibility that we may have to tighten down some of our freedoms, that the age of innocence, that is, America is over.
And that we all now may have to join in some sort of sacrifice of our liberties and freedoms in order to protect ourselves in the future.
And I'm here to tell you right now that if anybody thinks that, I don't care if you're in the news media, I don't care if you're a member of the general population, you are missing the whole point of what being an American is.
You do not understand it.
You're missing the whole point of the Constitution.
You're missing the whole point of the reason for the founding of this country, the reason for this nation's existence.
If you think that the proper response to 9-11 is to ratchet down freedom because of this, if you think that it's worth trading a little freedom in order for security, you must work hard to banish that thought.
The exact opposite is what needs to take place here.
The exact opposite is what needs to be our motivating attitude.
The exact opposite is what's necessary.
This nation must reaffirm its freedoms.
This nation must rebuild itself, expand upon its freedoms.
We cannot allow an event like this to cause us to shrink smaller within ourselves, to become fearful.
And I even said that if it were up to me, the next time and every anniversary of 9-11, we would go to work.
We would not take the day off.
The terrorists were able to shut this country down on 9-11.
They stopped an election in New York City.
They shut this country down.
Rudy Giuliani disagreed with me.
He thought it would be appropriate to take a day off, have a memorial, but I thought everybody get up and go to work on that day and make sure that the world knows that this is not going to shut down the country.
I just want to thank you, Brian, for reminding me that I had said that.
Now, it's your turn.
Well, I just want to applaud your consistency.
I don't remember that you had said that, but I think that's very apropos now with what's going on.
We have to balance daily, you know, the ability to protect ourselves with our rights.
And I think there's going to be stumbles along the way.
I don't think, like you do, I don't think it's a power play on Obama's part.
I think he's continuing and maybe even toughening what Bush started.
But I think we need to be watchful.
And I think the place I disagree with the president the most is that they've got to be open, not with exactly what they're doing so that our foes know what we're doing, but they need to be open with the American people in that we have to know what our government is doing to protect ourselves, and we have to know when they've gone too far.
Well, no question about that.
Here's my problem with what is happening.
I have an institutional fear of big government.
I have an institutional opposition to bureaucracy.
By definition, they get bigger.
By definition, they want more power, no matter who's running them.
By definition, they become less efficient and they get less done.
And by definition, they exist for the sole purpose of existing.
The last thing a bureaucracy needs is a problem solved.
There's no need for the bureaucracy at that point.
And so you have that.
I have that as a general belief about government and bureaucracy.
Now, add to that the kind of people that might be running it any given day.
In this case, we have people running the government who want it to be as big as they can make it.
They want it as powerful as they can make it.
And they have made it clear that they will use that power against citizens.
The people that run this government now have openly expressed their dissatisfaction with the Constitution.
I'm sorry, those are huge red flags to me.
So in the context of all that, since the Boston bombing, look at what we have learned is going on in this country.
Now, I don't want to come across as a conspiratorialist.
I'm not.
And I don't think you have to have a giant secret conspiracy for any of this to happen.
All you need is a bunch of liberals.
This is how they think.
This is how they're oriented.
This is what their lives are devoted to, is getting control of government and running it and using it.
Because the thing that motivates a leftist more than anything else is eliminating opposition, getting rid of it, however is necessary.
And I believe that with every fiber in my body.
And I know that that's exactly the modus operandi of Barack Obama.
It has been in every campaign he's ever run.
And it's how this government is being run.
Just look at the IRS scandals or Obamacare.
Look at the things that are happening against the will of a majority of people in this country.
It is overwhelming the things that are happening here.
One of the problems we have is that the inside-the-beltway intelligentsia, both parties, is as disconnected from the ebb and flow of daily life in this country as they've ever been.
And to them, this is just standard operating procedure.
The Democrats run the show one year, the Republicans will run it the next year, and they get along happily ever after, and it's no big deal.
And really, the only objective is that everybody wants to be in charge of the money for four years.
That's why they want to win the elections, committee chairmanships in the Senate and this kind of thing.
But all of this affects us.
Everything they do at the government level affects us.
And we elect people that we think agree with us that it needs to be stopped and made smaller and rolled back, that individual freedom has been encroached upon enough that some of it needs to be replaced.
We think we elect people, and we think we have people in the media, ostensibly on our side, who also agree with that.
Then certain things happen, and we end up being surprised that they're not as committed to it as we are, which is what gives rise to the Tea Party, by the way.
The Tea Party came into existence precisely because a sizable number of citizens in this country did not feel represented at all in their government in Washington, and in some cases at the state level.
That's why the Tea Party came into existence.
I mean, the specifics were spending, debt, taxation, out-of-control growth.
But the real reason the Tea Party ended up coming into existence is because there's nobody representing that view that they trusted in Washington, in either party.
That's where we are now.
So I don't want to come across.
I don't think Bilderbergers are doing this or the Trail Advocate Committee.
None of that, folks.
This is the natural state of bureaucracies.
You don't need to have a conspiracy.
You just need a bunch of liberals.
They do believe in certain things.
You can typecast them.
You can profile them.
Speaking of which, sorry for my hodgepodge scattershot approach today, but as things come to mind, I'm going to share them.
This massive sweep, yesterday we learned of the Verizon sweep and all this metadata.
And believe me, there's more to metadata than what these people are telling you.
Well, it's just the phone numbers of the calls and the length of the calls.
Let me tell you, no, it's not like a wiretap in terms of content, but why do they want it if it's so insignificant?
It's just metadata, Mr. Limbaugh.
You don't really need to be.
Well, then why do they want it?
Well, Mr. Limbaugh, because they'll be able to detect trends in frequent conversations.
Perhaps with foreigners outside the country, they'll apply algorithms.
Oh, okay, so we've got to trust the algorithms.
Cool.
Fine.
Count me in.
Why don't we just profile?
Why do we have to sweep every phone call up in this operation?
I mean, people calling dominoes.
You realize the people that commit terrorist acts in this country, by and large, can be profiled.
Just like liberals can be profiled.
Conservatives can be profiled.
Tell somebody you're a conservative, they pretty much, if they're educated, know what you believe in.
If you tell somebody somebody's a liberal, and if they're mature enough, educated enough, informed enough, and brave enough, then they will also tell you they know what that means.
If you don't know what a liberal is, take a look at this administration, and everything happening in it is happening because of their ideology.
They're liberals.
It's that simple.
So you don't need a conspiracy.
You just need a bunch of like-minded people.
You don't need Obama issuing orders.
You don't need an owner's manual.
You don't need instructions.
There isn't a smoking gun.
They're all trained to think this way.
They all believe it in their fiber.
They are trained in the Ivy League schools to come out and populate government and start doing things, be it at the fish and game, be it at the IRS, be it at the EPA, be it at the FDA, doesn't matter where they are.
They are there because they want to use government to further their political agenda.
Don't you conservatives want to do this?
No, no, no, no, no.
We don't want to use the government to further.
Our political agenda is the people.
Our political agenda is freedom.
Our political agenda is liberty.
Our political agenda is people being free to be the best they can be with as few government regulations in their way.
We don't want to use government against people.
We don't want to use government to reward people.
We don't want to use government, period.
We want it to administer the things that are necessary and then leave us alone and get out of the way.
We want it to focus on what it's supposed to do and be good at what it's supposed to be good at and then stop.
But liberals don't look at it that way.
Grab soundbite, what is it?
My glasses on.
Number 32.
This afternoon, CNN's newsroom.
This is after Obama's remarks.
In fact, Mike, before that, grab 25.
I told you this happened, but I want you to actually hear it.
This is the opening of Obama's presser or whatever it was.
I guess this is San Jose, it says.
Walk to the podium.
Well, just here, you'll listen.
There's only one problem, and that is that my remarks are not sitting here.
People?
You know, things by Friday afternoon, things get a little challenged.
I'm going to answer a question at the end of the remarks, but I want to make sure that we get the remarks out.
People?
Oh, goodness.
Oh, somebody's crippling.
I mean, folks are sweating back there right now.
He didn't know what to do.
He didn't know what to do.
He didn't have a prompter and he didn't have his speech in front of him.
He didn't know what to do.
You realize how many people make speeches with no notes whatsoever?
All you have to do is know what you're talking about.
All you have to do is know your subject.
All you have to do is know what it is you're going to say.
Why can't you just go out and speak extemporaneously?
Because you might make a mistake.
The reason everything is scripted is to make sure Obama doesn't become Obama.
It's to make sure Obama stays inside of himself.
It's to make sure that Obama doesn't default to Saul Alinsky upon that pedestal.
That's why if it isn't written down, he's not going to say it.
They're not going to take that chance.
So that's what happens when it's not there.
He's totally lost.
Here's Candy Crowley.
After the president's remarks about the government gathering phone and internet data on Americans, John King spoke with Candy Crowley, said the aggressive government role in trying to find out who's doing these things, does it add to the suspicions that people will have about are they really not listening to my phone call?
Are they really not going into my emails in a way that oversteps hunting for terrorists?
This is such an inane question.
What he's asking Candy Crowley is, are people really going to believe, Candy, that the government's not reading their emails?
Are people really going to believe that they're not looking at their pictures?
Are they really going to believe that all the government wants to do is catch terrorists?
I do think it still goes to the trust issue.
Essentially, you heard what the president said.
You elected us.
You need to trust us.
We're doing this within the confines of the law.
I'm very protective of both civil rights as well as civil liberties, et cetera, et cetera.
But I do think that it's a complicated subject and it's a nuanced subject.
That doesn't always play well on talk radio.
Certainly our conversation, the conversation of most people I've seen reporting this, has not been about they're listening to your phone calls.
It's been very clear that they simply have numbers.
Nobody said they're listening.
See, it doesn't play well on talk radio, they're not.
We don't do nuance here.
I'm sorry.
We do more nuance in five minutes on this show than CNN does in a week, because all CNN does is write down what somebody in the regime wants them to report and they do it.
The entire first hour of this program has been nothing but nuance about all of this.
I'm sorry.
It's a complicated subject.
It's nuance.
It doesn't play well on talk.
See, folks, we're not smart enough.
We're not sophisticated enough to understand what's really going on.
We're not mature thinkers.
We're not level-headed, is what she means by this.
This is a woman who knowingly admittedly cheated in a presidential debate helping Obama against Mitt Romney.
Who are you going to believe, me or her?
I got to take a break.
We'll come back to more of your phone calls after this.
Don't go away.
It's the fastest three hours in media.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network, and to Orlando.
This is John, and I am glad that you called, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi, Rush.
I love you, buddy.
Hey, I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Thanks very much.
This thing with Obama, everything is ruled for radicals.
I read it when he was running.
Everything he's doing is trying to crush conservatives, no matter how small we are.
That's all he wants to do is crush us and take our money away so we can't compete in elections.
It matters how you say that to people because.
The whole government is against us.
No, no, no.
I know.
I know.
I'm not disagreeing with you.
I'm just saying some people are going to hear it the way you're saying it, and they're going to believe it because they don't want to believe they elected somebody like that.
I don't want to believe that.
It's like if you were to say, Rush, look at, I've read it.
I know everything about it.
This guy, nothing but a communist, wouldn't persuade anybody.
It just doesn't work.
I'm not disagreeing with you on the Alinsky and the rules for radicals.
There's no question that Obama's purpose is the elimination of opposition.
Obama doesn't want to debate anybody.
He doesn't care to debate anybody.
He's not interested in anybody else's ideas.
He's not interested in bipartisanship.
All that's just mumbo jumbo that's focus group tested.
He knows that low information voters practically have orgasms when they hear bipartisan cooperation, working together to get things done, blah, blah, blah, blah.
So he utters that stuff, but that's not what he's about.
It's his way of the highway.
Now, I'd be the same way.
I don't want to be misunderstood.
I'd be the same way.
I make no.
I think liberals are to be defeated.
Now, I think liberals are to be defeated for different reasons than liberals want me defeated.
I'm not afraid of them.
I don't think they need to be silenced.
I don't want to inflict government on them.
I don't want to have the First Amendment shut them down or anything like that, the tactics they would use.
I'm not interested in any kind of boycotts against them.
I want to beat them in the arena of ideas because I want a victory that lasts and I want a victory that's substance and I want a victory that has a mandate.
So I want to beat them in the arena of ideas.
They don't care about that because they can't win that debate.
Their ideas are on display now.
We've had four and a half years of their ideas and what's happening.
The country's in a big mess.
The country is in crisis.
The country is in chaos.
The country doesn't have any.
I mean, the employment numbers are out today, and the media is doing everything they can to massage this into looking good, but it doesn't.
We're nowhere near.
We've lost 9, 10 million jobs since man became president.
Just danished from the job market.
Labor force participation rate's almost as small as it's ever been as a percentage of people alive and capable of working in this country.
Liberalism has made that happen.
Or call it socialism, whatever ism you want to call it, leftism, but that's why I defeat it.
It is destructive.
That's why it deserves to lose.
Back in just a second.
Hi.
How are you?
Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network.
It is Open Line Friday.
I mean, some bites here, but economy, sequester.
Yeah, this is crazy.
We got some, who is this?
Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, Alan Krueger.
You know, the economy would be much better if it weren't for the sequester.
See, this is the kind of absolute nonsense.
The economy doesn't stand a chance as long as this administration is in charge of policies that govern it.
It doesn't stand a chance.
Now, the dirty little secret is that what's happening in this economy is what was intended to happen.
We got a lot of people out of work.
A lot of people not even looking for work, but they're all eating.
They're all driving.
They're all talking on the telephone.
And they're all watching big screen TVs.
And it's all made possible by Santa Claus, in their mind, Obama.
Who are they going to vote for?
It's not complicated to figure out.
So this guy, here, let's listen to this guy.
Grab Soundbite 2.
This is on CNBC Squawk on the street.
And David Faber said, is there any expectation the labor force participation rate will move up appreciably?
Meaning, is there any chance that any of the 10 million people who have lost jobs, will those jobs ever come back?
Do you foresee anything in your administration's policy portfolio which would might make those jobs reappear?
Now, listen to the BS answer that question gets.
We see in today's report and what we've been seeing recently, the economy is poised to do a lot better.
What we need is some more help from Congress, investment in things like infrastructure, early education, which will help promote the tech.
For five years, we have been hearing we need money for infrastructure.
For five years, we've been hearing we need to rebuild our roads and the bridges.
For five years, we've been hearing we need to spend more money on education.
And guess what?
For five years, we have been spending money like it has never been spent before.
We have never had annual deficits of a trillion dollars or more in consecutive years like we've had here.
And yet we're not spending any money on the infrastructure.
And we're not spending any money on education.
What is it being spent on?
The money is being given primarily to people who are going to end up sending some of it back to the Democrat Party and Obama in the form of campaign contributions.
For five and a half years, this administration is in charge of everything.
We need to spend more money on infrastructure.
Why, if you listen to this guy, and if you listen to Obama, they haven't even begun to serve yet.
Why, it's still Bush or somebody running this show, and they're not spending enough on education, and they're not spending enough on infrastructure, and we're not building enough roads and bridges.
Well, who's been running this show for four and a half years?
For four and a half years, we've been hearing what this guy is complaining.
It's the Limbaugh theorem.
Continue to campaign against the status quo, and the status quo is exactly what they have created.
This is the Obama economy.
This is the Obama unemployment circumstance or situation.
This is the Obama debt.
This is the Obama lack of infrastructure investment.
This is the Obama whatever.
But if you listen to Obama and these guys, well, we need to spend more here and we need to do this.
And we haven't been able to do it.
Congress, they had Congress for the first two years.
Back that clip up.
I'm going to play it in its entirety now without interrupting it.
Although, you don't know how hard that is, because this stuff really irritates me.
We see in today's report and what we've been seeing recently, the economy is poised to do a lot better.
What we need is some more help from Congress, investment in things like infrastructure, early education, which will help put more people back to work today and make for a more competitive workforce in the future.
You know, the sequester is going to have a negative effect, and the longer it stays in place, the more adverse the effect.
And one of the most disturbing aspects of the sequester is that it's eating our seed corn.
It's cutting into the kinds of investment that led to horizontal drilling, which is a major reason for the natural gas and oil boom that we're seeing in the U.S. That's why the president's going to work to replace the sequester with balanced deficit reduction.
I don't know what to say.
I'm absolutely speechless here, which is a much safer mode than reacting as I would like to, because I'd be shouting profanities at you.
It's cutting into the kind of investment that led to horizontal drilling, which is a major reason for the natural gas and oil boom.
Can I tell you the truth about it?
He's describing fracking.
And the dirty little secret is his administration is trying to shut it down.
This is the administration that thinks fracking is dangerous.
This administration does not want new discoveries of oil or natural gas.
This administration has people in it who hate fracking.
Their voters hate fracking.
The environmentalist wackos hate fracking, this horizontal drilling.
Now they're claiming credit for all the natural gas and the oil boom.
These people have done more to suppress the oil creation.
And there's been an oil boom in the Dakota's private land.
Oil exploration, oil discovery, oil marketing not occurring on federal land.
It's not permitted.
Yet here comes this guy claiming credit for the oil boom.
They've done everything they can to prevent it.
Claiming credit for the new natural gas boom, fracking.
They have done everything they can to shut fracking down.
And now they're claiming credit for it, and it's only slowed down because of the sequester, which is, of course, the Republican fault, but it was Obama's idea.
So this is the kind of isn't flat out BS, folks.
I mean, this is just utter, utter, misleading BS.
But the low-information voters, to the extent that they pay attention to CNBC, I don't think they do.
They hear this.
Oh, Obama.
Their impression is Obama's opposed to all this bad stuff, too, and he's really working hard to fix it.
But damn, those Republicans keep getting damn those Republicans.
They just keep stopping every good thing Obama wants to do.
In fact, do I have it here?
Let me find this somewhere.
I've got it's here, folks.
Ah, yes, here it is.
Wall Street Journal.
I read this last night, and I, you know, I am the creator of the Limbaugh Theorem, and you know what that is, your regular listeners.
Dawn, do you think you can explain the Limbaugh theorem to people?
There's not a test.
Here's why I want to know.
I've explained the Limbaugh Theorem for months now, and I'm wondering, is it still something complicated for people to understand?
Basically, I evolved the Limbaugh Theorem to explain something that didn't make any sense to me.
I saw polls which showed the American people, by vast majorities, opposed to Obama's agenda, opposed to the direction of the country, opposed to Obamacare and so forth.
And the same polls, I saw people, no, no, take it back.
People supported Obama's agenda, and yet every aspect of it they opposed.
They didn't associate him with it.
It was a New York Times story.
I'll never forget it.
The American people opposed the direction the country is going, and issue by issue by issue, they opposed everything Obama was doing.
Every element of the Obama agenda, a majority of the people oppose it, and yet they support him by 50, 55%.
How can this be?
There's only one answer.
People do not associate Obama with his agenda.
And that's because he's permanently campaigning.
He's running against his own agenda by design, on purpose.
He's running against what's happening.
He makes people think that he doesn't like what's happening and he's trying to fix it when, in fact, everything that's happening is precisely because he wants it to and has made it happen.
So here comes a story of the Wall Street Journal.
I don't know if it's a story of a column.
It is.
It's an opinion piece.
Guy named Jason Riley.
And it's entitled Obama's Poll Numbers.
And here's how it starts.
How is it that President Obama, despite the recent scandals, has been able to maintain an approval rating in the mid to high 40s or about where it's been for the better part of three years?
A new Wall Street Journal NBC News poll may provide some clues.
For starters, the public doesn't seem to be blaming the president for the Benghazi terror attack.
The public does not blame the president for the IRS targeting of conservative groups or the Justice Department snooping.
The public does not blame the president for anything that's happening.
And this guy says, how can this be?
How is it that President Obama is able to remain unattached from his own policies, his own administration?
The Limbaugh Theorem explains it.
And I don't think, I'm sure Mr. Riley has not heard it because if he had heard me explain the Limbaugh theorem, his poll would be understood by him.
Anyway, I take a break.
Your phone calls on the other side.
We get back, so don't go away.
Open Line Friday and rush Limbaugh.
Talent on lawn from God.
You know, it might be a good exercise, folks.
Try to explain to people the Limbaugh Theorem.
I mean, you hear me explain it and you go, yeah, yeah, yeah, it makes perfect sense.
And then you'll run across somebody who says, man, I don't understand it.
Obama's approval numbers are up, and look at all these people oppose his agenda.
They oppose the things he stands for.
Look at there's a healthcare story here.
Health care law's unpopularity reaches new highs.
NBC story.
President Obama's signature health care reform law remains unpopular with the American public just months before it fully goes into effect, according to a new NBC News Wall Street Journal poll.
And this is one of the reasons why Jason Riley said, well, I don't understand this.
Look at all the opposition to his agenda, his program.
Did his approval numbers stay high?
How's his limbaugh theorem?
Okay, well, how would you explain that to somebody who doesn't know what it is?
This is why I often say, don't try this at home.
But this is something you need to be able to explain to people.
Once you master the ability to explain this, you're going to open people's minds and eyes like you have never seen before.
Because it has a lot of people confused.
How in the world can this happen?
Healthcare laws' unpopularity reaches new highs.
You know, if it were George W. Bush's health care law, unpopularity reaches new highs, his disapproval would be 60%.
Because the media would be leaving the charge, leading the charge.
That's one of the reasons why Obama's static is the media does not lead the charge against him.
But even so, people are opposed to Obama's policies without the media helping them along.
They instinctively oppose them.
But his approval rating remains high.
And I'm telling you, that's because low-information voters are in these polls and they think that what's happening in the country has nothing to do with Obama because he's out campaigning against it.
He's perpetually campaigning.
He's not seen as responsible for any of this.
49% believe that the Affordable Care Act is a bad idea.
Only 37% like it.
That, by the way, is low.
Most polls have the opposition to Obamacare 52 all the way up to 55% in opposition.
Here's Tom in Princeton, New Jersey.
Tom, I'm glad you called.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Yeah, hi, Rush.
You had talked earlier about a coup d'état within this administration.
I guess my question is: if you listen to what the signers of the Constitution had to say about oppressive governments and the protection that they put in for it, at what point do we have a coup d'état, the coup d'état?
Yeah, it's another way of asking what do we do when the government becomes oppressive, right?
What would you do?
I mean, what would you do?
Exactly.
And I think that's the point where we're at.
Everybody sitting in their cars now or their desks would love to hear your perspective.
At what point do we ask for a change or how does that manifest itself?
Well, the old-fashioned way, and I'm serious.
And I'll tell you again: if somebody were to say, Rush, aside from meeting all the requirements necessary to be a success on radio and broadcasting, all that aside, what are you trying to do here?
And I've always said that substantively I'm trying, because I believe votes matter.
I believe elections matter.
And I think the most number of informed participating people in the country is how we fix this.
And my purpose here has been to inform and engage the largest number of Americans I can reach.
Have them informed and have them participate, have them voting.
I've always believed the old-fashioned way is when you've got scoundrels in office, you vote them out.
Now, the problem with that is there has to be an alternative.
There has to be somebody else that you want to support instead of the status quo.
And if they don't align with what you believe, if there isn't an opposition political apparatus that is the repository for what you believe, then what do you do?
Well, that's when discussions of third parties surface.
I'll just say again what I've been saying for a number of years: conservatives need to take control of the Republican Party.
That's what has to happen.
There isn't going to be any impeachment.
There isn't going to be anything.
There's no magic event that is going to force this administration to change.
That isn't going to happen.
The first thing that has to happen is the Republicans have to hold on to the House in 2014, even if they're rhinos, even if they are watered-down Republicans.
The Democrats cannot win the House in 2014.
If that happens, then there really is no opposition in Washington.
There's nothing to stop Obama and the Democrats.
Nothing.
They won't even need legislation to get what they want.
They all are going to agree on it.
If Obama wants something, the House and Republican leaders pass a bill in two minutes.
Okay, here you go.
Sends it up.
He signs it or he does an executive order.
Who's going to stop him on anything?
That's the first thing that has to happen in the real world of practical matters, elections.
Aside from that, I don't know.
I got to take a break, too.
I actually do have other ideas, but I don't have time now.
I'm down to seconds in this segment.
It's the fastest show in media.
Fastest three hours.
Two hours already done in the can on the way over to the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum, the virtual museum.
You can see it at rushlimbaugh.com.
It's very cool if you haven't visited.
▲
Export Selection