All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 11, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
30:00
November 11, 2013, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Views expressed by the host on this program, documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time.
They're unmasking it all today, folks.
I hope you're hearing this.
And I hope you're believing this.
Now, looky there.
Doing a little segment on Fox right now.
Vulnerable Senate Democrats embrace Keep Your Plan Obamacare Fix.
I told you, the Republicans have already proposed similar legislation.
The problem is the plans are gone.
They've just been canceled.
What is this?
Keep your plan Obamacare fix.
I'll tell you what might happen with this, and I can't see it, but I wouldn't be surprised at the same time.
If the heat's on Obama, okay, okay, you know what?
We'll make some plans for the next year.
You keep your plan.
And then you break your arm trying to find it.
He goes out, Limbaugh Theorem, you got to keep your plan.
You can't find your plan.
It doesn't exist anywhere.
They're not going to allow the insurance companies to recreate it.
This is, see, here we go.
But the very fact that this question's come up, and now it's all on Dingy Harry.
Will Dingy Harry allow a vote on people being able to keep their current plan?
There's no need for Obamacare if you do that.
This is the fundamental point.
If you can keep your plan, there is no need for Obamacare.
Obamacare, by design, nukes your current plan.
I don't know if people would realize that, though.
If this ever...
If this were to happen, that Dingy Harry passes this thing.
Republicans would probably go along.
Oh, yeah, you got to keep your plan.
All that's going to do is pull Obama's bacon out of the fire for a year, and it's going to make sure these Democrats get elected, get re-elected.
More on that as time unfolds.
It's not going to happen overnight.
Watch Dingy Harry allow a vote on it tonight.
I promise to get to the soundbites of Sarah Palin on the Today Show today, and here they are.
Matt Wauer interviewing Sarah Palin.
Matt Wauer said, the president said you get to keep your existing policy if you like it.
5% of Americans can't keep it because it doesn't meet standards of the new health care law.
If it turns out that those 5% of people end up with a better policy, do you think they'll forgive him?
Hold on just a second.
Hang on a minute.
We've got to find the Obama saying that.
Damn it, what number is it?
Seven?
put that on the bottom it's the one that okay grab yeah uh this This is February 25th in 2010.
This is at Blair House, which is on the grounds of the White House where visiting dignitaries stay if they don't want to stay in a Lincoln bedroom.
And Eric Cantor, this is the discussion they had on insurance regulations.
It's a bipartisan healthcare summit that Obama convened.
Paul Ryan was at this thing.
You might remember it.
And Eric Cantor said, I don't think you can answer the question in the positive to say people will be able to maintain their coverage, people to be able to keep the doctors they want in the kind of plan that you're proposing, sir.
The eight to nine million people that you refer to that might have to change their coverage.
Keep in mind out of the 300 million Americans that we're talking about would be folks who the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office estimates would find the deal in the exchange better.
That's not happening.
So Obama says this.
This is the reason I wanted to air this is to show you the linkage between the regime and the new networks, in this case Matt Wauer.
There isn't a better plan than what people have.
That's the problem.
What am I missing here?
People are being canceled.
They can't keep their current plan.
What is available at healthcare.gov is not better.
Every alternative is more expensive.
But again, with this 5% lie, it isn't 5%.
It's everybody.
He's just talking about the first wave of cancellations being 5%, but it's going to be everybody.
Nobody is going to be able to keep their plan under this.
The plans will not comply.
They will eventually not qualify.
Something about them will be found to be changed and they won't qualify by design.
I'm making this up.
So anyway, Obama says, well, yeah, people are going to be canceled, but what they're going to find is an improvement.
So that's three years ago.
Just to show you that the White House gives its talking points to these sycophants in the media.
And these sycophants just pick it up and run with it, not knowing what the hell they're talking about.
Matt Lauer's question to Sarah Palin.
Well, the president said you get to keep your policy if you like it.
5% of Americans can't keep it because it doesn't meet the standard of the new law.
But if it turns out that those 5% end up with a better policy, do you think they'll forgive him?
Where did he get this 5%?
It's not 5%.
It's most Americans will not be able to keep the health care policy and programs that they had desired.
And the new programs that are being forced down our throat are unaffordable.
People who are being told today, if you, and some of them are still being told, well, if you like that insurance policy and that coverage, you still will be able to keep it.
It's just going to cost you a little bit more.
That's the point.
If it's going to cost you more, then it's not the same policy.
And it isn't 5%.
But again, I want to focus on the fact that Matt Lauer, I don't even think knows what he's talking about.
He's given this talking point from the White House.
It's a three-year-old talking point.
We went and dragged it out after we heard Matt Wauer's question.
Where does this come from?
It comes from Obama.
Well, yeah, 8, 9 million, 5%, 300 million people in the country.
But if they lose their plan, that's a better one.
What the hell?
Well, right on schedule here, Matt Lauer or Sarah.
Well, if they lose their plan, but if their plan that replaces it is an improvement, aren't they going to love the guy?
So Matt Wauer then said Chris Christie called the shutdown of the government and that strategy hatched by Ted Cruz and a member of the Tea Party a monumental failure.
If you look at the results of the election, isn't the message of the Tea Party that the middle ground, not the far right, is the most fertile ground for upcoming elections?
Now, we're back to these precious independents, fertile ground.
Matt doesn't know yet that the polling data all shows independents abandoning Obama in droves.
He's just repeating his silly little talking points that somebody at the regime or his producer gave him.
Standard operating questions think that they're going to embarrass Sarah Palin and make her look like a fool.
Well, I mean, isn't the message to the Tea Party that the middle ground, not the far right like them, is the most fertile ground for upcoming elections?
When you stand in the middle of the road, you're going to get hit on both sides of the road.
We need to take a stand, especially on this Obamacare, and support those who are just fulfilling their campaign promises.
So many politicians ran for reelection and for election, saying they will do anything in their power to defund the state of socialized medicine program called Obamacare.
Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, some of these guys actually were fulfilling their campaign promises.
They stood up.
They took the stand, fought for us.
It is true.
It's a cliché, but in the middle of the road, you're where you get hit.
But the middle of the road, again, the precious independents or the precious moderates.
Isn't that the future for the Republican Party?
That trick has been employed on them successfully my whole life.
And so, thanks to people like Matt Wauer and so forth pummeling Republicans with this independent moderate crap, the Republicans run campaigns aimed at 20% of the voters.
Is there more?
No, that's it.
She took him to cleaners, the whole thing was a tour de force.
Let's keep going.
Ted Cruz on the tonight show on Friday night, Jay Leno.
Now, Leno's been ripping Obama, but Lemo's a Democrat.
Leno's a Demo.
You got to just accept that.
He's a Democrat, feminist wife, and all that.
Nice guy.
Don't misunderstand, big chin, but he's a Democrat.
He's on the lib side of things, but he's an equal opportunity jokester.
Like him, don't misunderstand.
He's got Ted Cruz on there, and he said, look, I know you're a man of principle.
You have your principles.
Does that prevent compromise when you're so set on what you do?
My view on compromise is actually exactly the same as what Ronald Reagan's was.
Reagan said, what do you do if they offer you half a loaf?
Answer, you take it.
And then you come back for more.
I don't think Ronald Reagan could get in the Tea Party today.
You know, I don't think that's right at all.
Look at what Reagan did.
Reagan led a grassroots revolution.
I think where we are today is an awful lot like the late 1970s, where we had economic stagnation, with people hurting because the government policies under Jimmy Carter, they weren't working.
Remember, Reagan challenged an incumbent Republican president in 1976 in a primary.
And there was a grassroots revolution where he said, listen, this isn't working.
Let's get back to free market principles, back to the Constitution.
Now, see, here's Leno.
He doesn't know anything either.
Chris Matthews has this stoop.
What?
Well, he doesn't.
He doesn't know except what he's been told.
So Matthews has this book out there that Tip O'Neill and Reagan, yeah, they didn't really believe what they thought Reagan did.
They compromised every day, and then they went and had a beer.
That did not happen.
This whole notion that Reagan compromised his conservatism all the time, and there was a big buffoon.
Tip O'Neill led the way.
And at the end of the day, Reagan went and had a beer with that.
It's a crock.
And so is it a crock that Reagan wouldn't be suitable for the Tea Party.
If Reagan could come back to life, he'd be the nominee tomorrow.
Ronald Reagan was the Tea Party in the 1970s.
That's exactly what Cruz is saying.
Reagan led a revolt against the Republican establishment.
He led a revolt against Republican donors of the day.
He was despised in his day by the Republican establishment.
They did not like him.
When he won two landslides, of course, success has many fathers and failure is an orphan.
So there were a lot of suck-ups and a lot of groupies that glommed on to Reagan because everybody likes a winner and wants to be close to that light.
But they didn't.
Behind closed doors, they're calling him a dunce and an idiot and a wacko right-wing conservative, and they're planning on what life will be like when he's gone, you know, out of office and so forth.
Cruz is exactly right.
Reagan was the Tea Party of his day.
Leno couldn't possibly know that.
I mean, just I'm finding here having to climb down again.
You know, I'm getting too wound up.
I'm just getting too because we're surrounded by stupidity.
You know what?
We're surrounded by two things: stupidity and ignorance combined with arrogance.
Now, I'm convinced that the explanation for a lot of where we is just stupidity.
They're just a lot of stupid, and not just voters, but I'm talking about journalists.
And this, they just, you know, we assume that they're curious and know things because it's their job and they're close to it.
They're stupid.
They're not curious.
They are ignorant of things.
And they're ideologues, so they're ignorant.
They don't take the time to learn conservatism or conservatives or Republicans because they've got this preconceived notion that they're racist, sexist, big, and homophobes and all that.
So they're actually the closed-minded ones among us.
They are the bigots.
They are the ignoramuses, the arrogant ignoramuses.
I mean, Ted Cruz is there.
As far as Leno's concerned, Cruz is there just to be mocked and made fun of.
And maybe acquire an audience, but as far as Leno actually listening to what Cruz is, well, Cruz is answering Leno's going, yeah, you idiot.
You know what you're talking about?
You extremist, you racist pig.
Yeah, go ahead.
They don't know, they have no clue.
I don't want to indict Leno that way.
He may not be saying that.
I take that back.
So I like Leno.
He's, I mean, compared to Letterman and the rest of that crew at night, no contest.
But I just, I'm just the one thing I don't know how to deal with stupidity.
I mean, what, how do you deal with stupidity?
How do you inform stupidity?
Ignorance is a different thing.
You can open the mind to the ignorant or the open, you can open their eyes and have lights, but the stupid or another.
The closed-minded, stupid are another thing.
All right, so let's see.
Is there one more here?
Yes, there is.
Leno then said, after that bite, Leno said, well, if all this effort is in jobs, why so much in social issues that have nothing to do with jobs?
Look, my focus has been jobs, economic growth, and in particular, Obamacare.
Obamacare, it's the biggest job killer in this country.
And, you know, it's interesting.
The reason we played that bite was to show you the applause.
Obamacare is the biggest job killer in this country.
And the audience in the Leno show erupted.
Now, let's go back to March 13, 1975, on the Tonight Show, 1975.
Johnny Carson had Rinaldus Magnus, and they had this exchange.
Everybody is confused.
How are we going to get out of this?
I think that one of the things is that people keep looking to government for the answer, and government's the problem.
A moment ago, you asked, you know, about people and feeling not only confused, but low and down in America.
First of all, the American people, if they would just take a little inventory and look around, you triple our troubles, and we're better off than any other people on earth.
And we've asked so much of government, and we've gotten in the habit over the last 40 years of thinking the government has the answers.
There's very little that government can do as efficiently and as economically as the people can do themselves.
And if government would shut the doors and sneak away for about three weeks, we'd never miss them.
Ronald Reagan was the Tea Party.
But there's Leno's.
Well, Reagan, he couldn't even get into Tea Party.
You know, a lot of leftists say that.
You know, Reagan, he wouldn't even find a—the Republicans, they would reject Reagan in a primary election.
Bull.
Bull.
It's a crock.
All right.
I swear I got to come down here.
Back we are, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, no matter how frustrated I sound, folks, I still love it.
Don't ever misunderstand, but some of this stuff.
Look at you, look at all the money we've spent on education, and look how stupid we have made people by design.
Frank in Haymarket, Virginia.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Hello.
Thank you for the call.
Sorry for allowing my call.
First thing, I'd like to give out major kudos to whoever came up with your on-hold satire.
It's fantastic.
I'm glad you like it.
It's really.
As usual, it was my idea.
Hilarious.
Okay, as far as your original question, what the Republicans need to do is don't delay it.
Defund it.
Go in, publicize it.
Hey, this is the 35th, 42nd time.
Excuse me.
We're looking to defund it.
Because by delaying it, you are helping out the Democratic Party.
But more importantly, you're validating that a sitting president has the right to change and modify any law to suit his or her needs, irregardless of what that law says.
And that's not right.
Well, I agree with you.
You know, I mean, it's just totally nuts.
Additionally, you know, these donors, okay, we need to find out who they are, and we need to, you know, go and either boycott their product or service or, you know, protest them, let them know how we feel.
This is nuts.
You know, the Mike Cruz and the Ted Lee's, they're the ones who are standing up and saying, hey, enough is enough, and I'm going to be here.
I'm going to do what I promised to do, and I'm going to follow through on it for the betterment of the nation, not the betterment of myself or my party.
Stop this nonsense of it's all about the power, getting it and keeping it.
I appreciate the call, Hank.
Thanks for Frank.
Frank's reacting the first hour of the program.
He's been on hold since then.
That's what people have been waiting a long time.
They always do to be on this show, and I appreciate it.
But he's bouncing off the fact that three weeks, a month ago, the Republicans in opposition to Mike Cruz, as Frank just said, in opposition to Mike Cruz, has said, no, no, no, no, don't do anything, Mike.
And Ted Lee, don't do anything.
Just let this thing implode.
It's going to implode.
Okay, now it's imploding.
And I said Friday, let's just not, let's let it implode.
I thought I would agree with the establishment.
See what happened.
Establishment's now saying, no, no, no, no.
We can't let this go on.
This is hurting people.
We need to delay the mandates.
You guys haven't.
I just wanted to illustrate that they're out there saying this and saying that, but when it actually happens, as it turns out, they don't support what they claim to.
And as to the donors, he's bouncing off the fact that Republican donors are targeting Tea Party members of Congress that supported the government shutdown for defeat.
And that's what he means.
He wants to know who these donors are, have them identified so that they can be boycotted and so forth.
So that's from the first hour.
That's why I'm recapping for you.
Here's Jose in Hawaii.
Jose, I'm glad you called.
Great to have you here.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
I thought I'd never get on your show.
It's a real honor.
Thank you.
You bet, sir.
Privileged to have you.
Well, I'm calling because I think we agree on the answer to this question, but let me check.
Do you believe that America's founders could have remained loyal members of the corrupt monarchy and worked from within to reform it into America?
Well, I don't, and that's why I'm starting a new party, but I'd also like to know what your answer to that question is.
Well, I want to make sure I understand the question.
Are you, let me ask it in my own words.
Are you asking me if I think the American founders could have remained loyal to the king and created a country that was nothing more than a satellite of Great Britain?
Is that what you're asking me?
Well, not just think, like, believe.
Like, do you believe it?
Well, no, because it didn't happen.
Well, that's exactly what my answer is as well.
And that's why they decided to break out and start a miracle on their own.
In fact, George Washington was offered kingship.
The founders offered George.
It's what they knew.
They were fighting it.
This is the power, folks.
By the way, this is the allure.
And this is why.
I'm sorry, I got to calm down here.
This is why the morality of people who are leaders matters.
The founders specifically despised the monarchy.
The pilgrims were the first to escape it.
The founders established the United States of America as an independent nation.
They wanted no part.
And they understood what monarchy was.
They opposed the king.
You read the Federalist Papers, the Constitution, the way they set up this government.
And even after doing all of that, people approached George Washington and offered him the chance to be king.
Now, the reason they did was because he was such a profound leader, and his morality was unquestioned.
George Washington could have been king, and he rejected it.
And he rejected it precisely because it wouldn't be the United States if there was a king.
Because kings are not elected.
And he wanted no part of it.
Now, what if Washington had been an egomaniac who wanted all the credit for the revolution and all the credit for the founding and wanted to be king for his position in history and so forth?
I doubt that there would be a United States of America.
Even though that's the, folks, this is the lure of absolute power to average people.
It's a corrupting thing.
And it's why you need people of distinctly great morality to reject the offer or the desire to acquire such power.
And we don't have that.
Barack Obama fashions himself as a king in his mind.
The Constitution doesn't exist if he can routinely change any part of it via executive order or whatever.
And when George Washington rejected the offer to be king, the world was shocked.
And Washington, as the father of the country, is a valid moniker.
But one thing that doesn't get played up enough, and by the way, hello, Rush Revere and Liberty.
One thing that doesn't get played up enough is George Washington's morality and his character.
His character gets talked up.
But the morality of George Washington.
Because had he accepted the whole notion of being king, who knows, it's really doubtful that here we are today, as we are.
And people trusted him to be king because they didn't associate him with King George.
They didn't look as a ruler, but you give people absolute power, and they'll use it, particularly if you expect them to.
And he rejected it.
He rejected that kind of power and really didn't even want to be president, if you want to know the truth.
But he did it to get this fledgling nation off the ground.
And now, Jose, you still there?
Yes.
Okay, now, what does the Tea Party have to do with this?
What was the point you were making about the Tea Party?
Well, my point is that they're trying to work from within the Republican Party to reform it into, like you said, conservative values.
Oh, that's true.
That's true.
They're trying to take it over.
Yes, and I thought maybe it would be better if they created their own party or people just started to create their own parties that resonated with conservatives.
Because even here in Hawaii, it's really hard to talk to these Republicans because I guess they got into the game like Linda Lingo.
Well, you know, Hawaii is a special case.
Republicans could actually die there if they were.
Let's take that back.
As I said, I got to climb down to the look.
The Hawaii City Council passed some stupid resolution opposing me.
I don't even remember what it was about.
Something to do with an education story out there.
Now, Hawaii is so liberal that Republicans, in order to survive politically, have to be their own version of liberal.
It's just Hawaii is as liberal as Massachusetts is or anything.
I take it back about Republicans staying alive and this kind of thing.
Well, to me, that's sad that they would have to change their values just to survive.
I mean, are we doing this to change or are we just doing this to stay in the game and just get, you know, day-to-day jobs?
Is that a job for them?
Or are they doing this so they can create change in Hawaii?
In the case of Hawaii, the calculation has been made that there aren't enough conservatives there to win elections if you just go full boat that way.
So the Republicans there are, you know, have moderated their conservatism to be rhino-Republicans or liberal Republicans or whatever.
There's some conservatives, nevertheless, who are there.
The place is, there are actually a lot of them.
They're just not elected.
That's the thing about that.
But Hawaii is where you live, and so that kind of really matters to you.
The big part of your question is the third party aspect.
And we just saw what happens in Virginia if that happens.
The Republicans are going to lose every time.
The Tea Party is going to lose every time when there's a third party.
The Democrats sponsored this so-called libertarian.
I mean, not even Ron Paul came out and opposed this libertarian in Virginia in the governor's race.
And all he did was take 7% of the vote.
And if he hadn't been on the ballot, McAuliffe wouldn't have been elected.
Pretty safe assumption.
But he was on the ballot.
Now, a third party isn't the way to go.
It really is.
And I understand your frustration in Hawaii.
It'd be like living in San Francisco.
It'd be like living in Massachusetts.
You choose to live there for reasons other than the politics of the place.
You wish it would change to suit you.
There are just certain enclaves of liberalism that are always going to be that way.
And Hawaii is probably one of them for a whole bunch of socioeconomic and otherwise political reasons.
But it's still again, I want to take back the idea that Republicans don't survive out there.
I was just, again, I got to climb down here, folks.
I'm so worked up about some of this stuff today, but I'm just way out there.
We'll be back.
It was the Honolulu City Council.
They passed a resolution denouncing me and my advertisers because the ChiCom premier came over, did a press conference, and I did an impersonation of what he was saying.
And they thought that I was mocking the communist leader of China and mocking the Chinese language by impersonating him.
So they passed a resolution.
The Honolulu, I know it was funny.
Nobody can laugh about anything anymore.
Everything so wound tight.
It was hilarious.
They passed a resolution banning me.
Well, not banning me, but denouncing me.
I thought about, because I went, it was scheduled to be there sometime later, like a couple months.
And I actually thought about going and turning myself in to the Honolulu City Council to see what would happen.
And they probably, who knows what they would have done.
You know, I just like imitate Kim Jong-il when he was promising to do whatever he was promising to do and imitate Gorbachev.
But they didn't like it.
They thought I was mocking the Chinese leader in a Chinese language.
The Hawaiians don't like anybody mocking communists.
It's too close to home, folks.
Government shutdown today.
It's Veterans Day.
Anybody care?
Anybody miss it?
Government shutdown today.
See you tomorrow, folks.
▲
Export Selection