All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 8, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:51
January 8, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Is it any surprise that Barack Obama see this is this is my point in a nutshell.
This is it.
This is it.
Is it any surprise that Barack Obama and his gang don't like the military?
Is it any surprise that everything they do is a political calculation?
No, none of this ought to be a surprise to anyone.
The real question is, and I don't know Robert Gates, but you know, this is becoming a trend.
You got journalists who are covering campaigns who do not report things that could have impact on the outcome.
They save these things for a book long after the election is over, and they are in it for the money, which is fine with me, except journalists are the ones that attack people like me and conservatives for being in it for the money.
Now, here's Bob Gates, and everybody talks about Bob Gates, has nothing but great things to say about him.
Great character, integrity, morality, all that.
And I have, I don't know him, and I don't dispute that.
But it is clear that Bob Gates knew a bunch of stuff that he held in reserve for a book.
Long after the release of any of the information will have any impact on anything.
You imagine if this kind of, if the people of this country had been told that Obama's opposition to Iraq was purely political, Gates knew that, and Hillary.
Gates in his book has got, but hi folks, El Rushboard here at 800-282-2882.
And yet, we're going to get to the immigration stuff.
You just hang in there.
I have not forgotten it.
I got it right here at the top of the stack.
But Gates says he's in a room there, and Hillary and Obama there, and Obama says, Hillary, you know what?
My opposition to Iraq, purely political.
I had to oppose you in the primaries.
And Hillary says, well, my opposition to it was political.
Well, we all knew this.
Everything the Liberal Democrats do is political.
This is my point.
And I think it'd be really helpful if a whole bunch more Americans knew that.
You know, Obama and Hillary get away with supposedly having a principled opposition to the war in Iraq.
And there was nothing principle about it.
It was all political.
And then here's Obama saying, I don't think we should go into Iraq.
We need to be in Afghanistan.
That's where this thing started.
That's where the war on terror started.
That's where we need to go.
And we find out he's not even committed to it.
And we find out that his involvement in Afghanistan is perfunctory at best.
But the real problem with that is there are real men and women that he's sending into harm's way in something he doesn't believe in.
And I just, by Gates' own admission, and nobody, by the way, is saying what Gates said isn't true.
The left is going through pretzeled conniption fits trying to react to that.
And in fact, the left right now is very excited over what we just learned about Governor Christie, because what we've just learned about Governor Christie is helping to take the Gates thing off the front page.
What, you haven't heard about the Christie thing?
Well, here's the thing about Christie.
Okay.
You all know that it was rumored that Romney was going to pick Christie to be the VP running mate and then didn't.
Okay.
And shortly after that, Christie goes out, does his speech at the convention, and it really was a letdown.
He's the keynoter, and they had this big buildup to it.
And when Christie gave his speech, it was a letdown.
And he didn't even say anything about Romney.
Do you remember that?
Didn't even say anything about Romney.
He's the keynote.
And the excuse given, well, he just, you know, doesn't want to be provocative and stir things up.
He doesn't want to detract from Romney.
He doesn't want to steal all the light, take all the oxygen out of the room.
So he toned it down as a matter of respect.
Okay, fine.
Then here comes Hurricane Whatever Was Sandy.
And there is Christie walking the beach practically arm in arm with Obama one week before the election and talking about a great guy Obama is and say, well, you know, he had to do that.
I mean, the state had been devastated and Obama's the money.
He handed it.
Well, he did have to do it.
Governor Cuomo didn't want Obama around.
And Mayor Doomberg didn't want Obama around.
It was possible to say no to the president, but Christie didn't.
And even at that, they were people, well, you know, we got to cut Governor Christie some slack because he's governor.
That's his first priority, his first concern.
People stay to New Jersey, devastation, got to get federal money, blah, blah, blah.
No, sweat it.
He's on our side.
Big Republic.
Okay.
What the latest news is that there is, I guess it's the mayor or some official in Fort Lee, New Jersey, right across the George Washington Bridge, Washington, for you, Newt Gingrich Acolytes.
The George Washington Bridge dumps into Fort Lee, New Jersey.
Well, there's exit ramps and on-ramps.
And the sum of things, the mayor Fort Lee did not support Christie's re-election as governor or governor.
So mysteriously, two of the three on-ramps from Fort Lee to the George Washington Bridge were shut down for a month.
And nobody knows why.
There wasn't any, there weren't any repairs going on.
And the news story is, I don't know.
I'm just telling you what's in the news.
The news is that Christie was paying back the Mayor Fort Lee for not endorsing him by closing those on-ramps and making real hassles for people in New Jersey from Fort Lee and that area getting on the George Washington Bridge to get into Manhattan.
And the point of the story is that he will Christie.
He's his payback.
You don't give him what he wants, he'll pay you back.
So they're taking it all the way back.
Republican convention, Romney didn't pick Christie.
Christie got even with a Dullard keynote speech and then embracing Obama.
So the story is they're taking this Fort Lee example and they're backtracking that, hmm, maybe Christie was getting even with Romney.
So now that is a story, whatever the truth of it, I don't care.
That's not my point.
The point is the media is just glommed onto that like bees in a honeycomb so that they don't have to talk about the Gates book.
Because the Gates book, I watched Alan Combs today on Fox.
It's hilarious watching these libs try to explain this all away.
Well, you know, the end of the book, Gates talks about how much he appreciates Obama, how much he loves Obama, and how qualified Obama is and dignified Obama.
And I'll tell you why I think Gates put that in there.
I think he put it in there, probably because he means it, but it also gives his criticisms added oomph.
If he had just launched into criticism of Obama and there wasn't anything in there that was complimentary, then people could say he just got it out for Obama for some reason and discard it.
But all through the book, there are positive references to Obama balanced by these serious criticisms.
And the positive references give the criticisms, I think, even more oomph.
Well, I mean, I got some of the highlights of the Gates book.
And I really have touched on them.
I mean, he wasn't, Obama's heart wasn't in Afghanistan.
Yet he's sending people into harm's way that battle he doesn't believe, a war he doesn't believe.
Oh, and the other big one is that as opposed to George Bush, Gates says Bush loved hanging around military guys.
He loved having the generals, the admirals, and all that up to the White House, and he really learned from them, and he enjoyed them.
Gates says Obama couldn't have cared less.
Totally uninterested in the military.
Well, what's the surprise about this?
These people are liberal Democrats.
We know that they hold the military in disdain.
We know that they think one of the biggest problems in the world is the U.S. military, and the only reason it should exist is for Meals on Wheels programs around the world.
We know this.
We know they disdain the military.
We know that they make every calculation political.
Obama and Hillary don't know enough about the surge.
They opposed the surge in Iraq before the surge had been announced.
Remember the Petraeus hearings, where they called him a liar before he had even said anything.
Of course it was.
This is what I don't want to sound like I'm calling everybody dumb.
That's not, I'm frustrated.
This ought not surprise people.
It's not hard to know what liberal Democrats are, who they are, what they think, particularly about everything they do as a political calculation because everything they do is oriented toward their agenda.
There isn't a principle behind it.
And the second thing is the fact that they don't love the military and don't respect it.
Is anybody really surprised by that?
I'm just kind of surprised that people are.
But anyway, that sort of sets the table for a little bit of what we're going to get into.
And Obama's continuing now, folks, with the, you know what?
We talked about it yesterday.
He wants to offer tax cuts for certain businesses in certain regions to hire the unemployed.
All right?
And there's a name for these, the promise zones.
So clearly, Obama believes he's the Messiah, promised land, promise zones.
And he's going to lead us to the promise zones.
And here they are.
We talked about this yesterday.
Promise zones are areas where the White House is going to focus on creating jobs and cutting poverty by offering tax credits or breaks or whatever to businesses for hiring the unemployed.
And they, here are the areas chosen, promised zones, is San Antonio, Texas, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, southeastern Kentucky.
Oh, by the way, did you see the Justified season premiere last night?
You didn't?
What about Downton Abbey?
Did you see?
You didn't?
Do you watch either of those?
Oh, you forgot about it, huh?
But you don't watch Justified?
Well, the Justified premiere was on.
That's Eastern Kentucky.
I mean, it's where it's depicted.
They actually shoot it in L.A. Miles, you remember Nick Searcy, who's the Rayland's book, Call of the Program.
He's a big fan.
And I was happy to see him in the opening episode last night.
It's just a great show.
So anyway, Southeastern Kentucky and the Choctaw nation of Oklahoma, those are the promise zones or chosen people.
If you live in those areas, you might get a tax break if you're a small business for hiring the unemployed.
But as I said yesterday, if unemployment benefits create jobs, why do you have to do the promise zones?
If unemployment benefits, unemployment checks allow you to turn the thermostat up and buy an additional loaf of bread, and the utility company can maybe hire workers or groceries.
Why in the world do we have to go through this tax break business if the simple issuance of unemployment compensation creates jobs and grows the economy?
Why do we have to do this?
So anyway, let me take a brief time out here.
We'll come back.
I'm going to get to this immigration story because I really did not mean to keep you.
I did not mean not to get to it yesterday.
You know me well enough.
I wouldn't do that.
There were just things that kept edging it out of the way.
So I've got it here at the top.
We'll come back and get right to that.
Of course, unless something happens during the break.
But I don't think anything is going to.
You never know.
Greetings and welcome back, Rushland Boss serving humanity, executing a scientist duties flawlessly.
Zero mistakes.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
All right, before we get to the actual immigration story from yesterday, here's a sound bite from last night.
Fox News Channel did a special report with Brett Baer.
He interviewed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donahue, and this will tell you everything you need to know about what the Republican Party is doing and why when it comes to amnesty.
Brett Baer said the chamber, according to some bullet points that I received, is going to be active this election cycle and specifically on the issue of immigration reform.
We've got to do this immigration thing.
Demographics are destiny.
We need those workers.
We need seasonal workers.
We need the workers at the top end.
We've made a deal in the Senate.
How did we do it?
Labor and management came together.
Labor and business came together and supported a program.
I think Speaker Boehner and his colleagues, they're moving forward in a positive way.
They're taking a little different approach, but they're passing and moving forward with small parts of this, and they're going to put it together, and we're going to get a bill.
Chamber of Commerce, i.e. representing American business interests, wants the workers.
We've got to do this immigration thing.
Demographics are destiny.
We need those workers.
We need seasonal workers.
We need the workers at the top end.
We want those workers.
These are the money people.
Chamber of Commerce members are often major donors.
Republican Party.
They want immigration reform.
They want amnesty.
Now, there's a problem.
The Republican leadership knows that their base doesn't want amnesty.
So they're working on some things to get this done that would provide the workers, but would not necessarily be amnesty.
One of the things that is being talked about at the leadership level in the House is granting legal status to everybody that's here illegally without citizenship.
We're not going to make them citizens, but we're going to give them essentially green cards.
We are going to legalize them for work.
This is the first step, by the way.
Now, the Republicans' strategy for all of their immigration reform proposals, the entire plan, their strategiery is to wait until the filing deadline has passed to protect moderate incumbents.
They are scared to death of Tea Party primary challenges.
So the strategiery here is to hold off on anything until after the filing deadline.
Don't announce anything.
Don't make it official.
I mean, some things are leaking out and it's becoming known what they want to do.
But nothing official, no legislation actually advanced until after the filing deadline.
And this is being done to protect incumbents and to assure incumbents they can vote for immigration reform without fear of a challenge from the Tea Party or the Republican base.
Now, all of this data is contained in an ABAP story, which starts this way.
His agenda tattered by last year's confrontations and missteps, President Obama begins 2014 clinging to the hope of winning a lasting legislative achievement, an overhaul of immigration laws.
It'll require a deft and careful use of his powers, combining a public campaign in the face of protests over his regime's record number of deportations with quiet behind-the-scenes outreach to Congress.
Something seen by lawmakers and immigration advocates as a major White House weakness.
In recent weeks, both Obama and John Boehner have sent signals that raised expectations among overhaul supporters that 2014 could be the first comprehensive change in immigration laws in nearly 30 years.
If successful, it would fulfill an Obama promise that many Latinos say is overdue.
John Boehner, in December, hired Rebecca Talent, a former top aide to Senator McCain, most recently the director of a bipartisan think tank's immigration task force.
Even opponents of a broad immigration overhaul saw her selection as a sign that legislation had suddenly become more likely.
Boehner also fed speculation that he would ignore Tea Party pressure, bluntly brushing back their criticism of the modest budget agreement in December.
If successful, the immigration compromise could restore some luster to the Obama agenda.
Now, there are more details to this, but unfortunately, it's time for an obscene profit break.
Sit tight, back with more.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back.
El Rushball, half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
It wasn't that long ago, certainly within the last year and a half, that I, in an almost facetious way, say, you know what, if you want to grant them amnesty, do it.
You just say they can't vote for 25 years.
And I said, let's see how many people support that.
Because the point of amnesty is replacing upwardly mobile members of the Democrat permanent underclass.
The Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass of dependent people voting for them for never-ending entitlement benefits.
And as people in a normal American economy are upwardly mobile and escape the lower quintiles of income level and start doing better as they get older, which used to happen before Obama, by the way.
then the Democrat Party underclass had to be replaced.
As people were upwardly mobile for the economy, becoming more prosperous, they became less dependent on government, and the Democrats needed to replace them.
Well, that's what amnesty is.
Amnesty, you're talking undocumented aliens, undocumented immigrants.
It's unregistered Democrats is the way it's looked at.
And to a certain extent, some of the Republican Party think that, yeah, we can get some of those voters too if we let them know we like them.
If we let them know we love them, if we let the Hispanics know that we do not think that they're racist or sexist or whatever it is, then we don't want them thinking that of us.
And so they are joining the Democrats because the Chamber of Commerce wants these workers and it's heavy Republican donors.
And so both parties are making a move on this.
Now, what's interesting is that the Republican plan that is being talked about behind closed doors would indeed grant citizenship.
I'm sorry, it would not grant citizenship.
It would grant legal status and leave the question of citizenship out of the legislation.
In other words, they can work, but they cannot vote.
That's part one.
Part two is a House Republican retreat later this month could help Republican leaders devise a strategy.
Some Republicans and Democrats say that John Boehner could wait until after the filing deadlines for 2014 primary elections before announcing any of this.
That would protect some incumbents from Tea Party challenges or other conservative challenges in the primaries.
And that would mean if they do that, if they wait until after the filing deadline, that means nothing happens on this until April.
So the strategy here on the Republican side basically has two elements.
Don't do anything until April, after the filing deadline, so that the Tea Party is not ginned up and trying to primary some of these people that would otherwise vote for this.
The second thing is, is to tell us not to worry that it isn't amnesty.
We're going to make them illegal, but we're not going to grant them citizenship.
They're not going to be able to vote.
So you didn't have any problem with this, folks.
There's no amnesty.
They're not going to be able to vote, but we need the workers.
And we need to reach out to the Hispanic community.
We need to show we don't hate them.
And demographics or demographics and yada yada, whatever they say.
Now, anybody thinking straight about this has got to understand what is going to happen.
Let's say this happens exactly as it's being drawn up.
Let's say that all we get between now and April is a bunch of rumors and a bunch of leaks like this, but nothing really happens.
Then, after the filing deadline is over, the Republicans put forth their bill, and it contains everything that this story says it's going to have.
It will grant legal status, but they can't vote.
No citizenship, but they're going to be able to work.
And everybody does a sigh of relief and say, well, not the best.
We're going to live with it.
Not that you would say that, but I'm saying the inside the beltway will think they're onto something here.
So let's say, just for the sake of discussion here, that all of this happens and that actually passes.
And the Senate comes up with something similar.
And what they pass is full legal status, no citizenship, they can't vote.
How long, maybe how many days after the November election will it take for somebody like Chuck Schumer to find a microphone and camera and talk about how unfair this is?
What were we thinking?
He will say we got hoodwinked by these Republicans who are still hell-bent on keeping these people out of this country.
They really don't want them here.
If they're not going to grant them citizenship, then they really don't want them here.
They're going to look at these illegals as three-fifths of a person.
We're back to the days of slavery.
This is what Chuck Schumer will say.
This is unconscionable.
How in the world can we do this?
How can we welcome them to our, how can we tell them go get a job and pay taxes, but you're not a citizen.
What country would do this?
What civil and the move will be on to grant citizenship two days after the election?
It's part of the plan now, I think.
And everybody knows this.
They don't think you know it, though.
They don't think you're going to be able to figure this out.
They think that the way to get this done without any primary challenges is to wait until April and then after April announce it and as long as nobody can vote, because what that does is supposedly defeats the theory advanced by people like me that all that's at work here is getting more Democrat voters.
They can say, no, no, it never has been about that for either party.
It's never been about voters.
It's about humane treatment.
It's about the future of America.
It's about the American dream.
And these people have been here anyway.
And they've been here a long time and they've got kids and we're not going to bust up families and we've got to let them legally work because it's not right that they have to stay in the shadows and blah, blah, blah.
And miraculously, after the election, somebody will say, this is just unconscious.
This is not who we are as Americans.
We are going to profit from their labor.
And what kind of labor is it?
It's the bottom of the barrel labor.
It's the kind of crap Americans won't do anymore.
And we're going to make them do it.
And we're going to call this a benefit.
How inhumane.
And we're going to make them work for dirt and we're going to collect taxes, but we're not going to let them vote.
What has happened to our country?
And the move will be on to grant them citizenship.
And so what's anybody going to do at that point?
Now, the interesting thing is, if I'm right about this, that the establishment leadership in Washington thinks that you're not going to be able to figure all this out.
So I don't think you need me telling you any of this.
When you hear that the current immigration reform plan will not grant citizenship and therefore will not allow them to vote, you are probably, especially you in this audience, are probably clever enough to know that that's not really what they have in mind.
They're just saying that to appease the extremists and the Tea Party and the conservative base.
But nothing's changed.
What both parties are really looking for here is voters.
The Chamber of Commerce, no doubt, is looking for cheap labor.
The business donors are looking for bodies.
They are looking for people to do a certain kind of work for less than what Americans will think.
But the parties are looking for voters.
So it's a the areas of interest, the lines of interest will intersect, but only if they are allowed to vote.
If they are not allowed to vote, then there's no benefit to the parties.
In fact, it's just the, if they're granted citizens, if they're granted status but can't vote and they're not granted citizenship, there's going to be hell to pay from the La Raza crowd.
And we're going to hear about exploitation.
There's nothing in immigration reform for the political parties if we're not talking about new voters.
Plus, I'm missing something.
How do the parties benefit by saying, okay, Hispanics, you're one half of the way there.
Welcome.
What's that get them?
Well, I know the leadership thinks it'll be off the table.
We'll see.
We'll see.
I mean, this is what's effervescing out there, folks.
While you're being distracted from Obamacare with this silly, stupid, idiotic, dumb economics theory of unemployment benefit.
And today, it's the 50th anniversary of the war on poverty.
You know that?
So today we're celebrating 50 years of defeat in the war on poverty.
But it's a valued effort that we continue to make.
50 years of defeat in the war on poverty.
Robert Rector has rerun the number.
The number, the amount of money that we have spent in income redistribution is stunning.
I have that number.
I have to make my own number here.
Let's take a break.
We'll be back and continue in mere moments.
Don't go away.
Robert Rector, Heritage Foundation, the expert on the war on poverty and whatever it is you want to know about poverty and our efforts to eradicate it in this country.
Robert Rector at Heritage is the scholar.
He's the expert.
Here's the number.
We have spent $20.7 trillion on means-tested aid since 1964.
In other words, we have redistributed $20.7 trillion trying to wipe out poverty.
And as Rector points out, the poverty rate expressed as a percentage of the population is pretty much exactly where it was in the mid-60s, 14%.
Now, in the early 90s, the number was $5 trillion.
1964 to say 1992, 93, the number of dollars transferred was $5 trillion.
We've added $15 trillion of transfer payments since the early to mid-90s, approximately 20 years.
So now we get 20, almost $21 trillion in redistributed wealth taken from the haves and given to the have-nots.
And we haven't changed anything.
As a percentage, there are as many people in poverty today as when this whole war on poverty started.
It's an abject failure.
It's been an absolute disaster.
But we're not supposed to look at that.
We're supposed to look at the intentions of those who started the war on poverty.
I mean, LBJ and the New Deal Democrats of the 60s.
And it's their intentions that we are to judge, that we are to be moved by.
At least they tried.
At least they tried.
You didn't even want to do anything for them is what the refrain or how the refrain goes.
But is it working?
Hello, Obamacare.
It's Medicare, social, you name it, same story.
In every big government attempt to cure a social or economic problem that is structurally societal, dismal failure.
To the phone.
Steve, Santa Cruz, California, great to have you.
You are up first and hello.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
This thing with amnesty, it sounds like they're becoming Democrats and that deception is the rule now.
And they're no longer politicians, Rush.
They're becoming criminals.
And I just can't see.
I haven't given them any money in probably five, six years.
I don't support them.
I think we don't need a third party.
We need a new second party.
What do you think?
Well, you're talking about you're upset at the Republicans here for being, as you say, criminals or engaging in deceit.
Yes.
You know what I mean?
I don't want this deal about not wanting us to primary them and wait just a second.
Let me just throw something else out here.
This is an AP story.
It is an AP story.
And we know that the Associated Press is all about the advancement of the Democrat Party agenda.
So what if what's in this story isn't true?
What if there is no attempt to wait till after the filing deadline to move this forward?
What if the Republican idea is not to make them legal but not grant them the right to vote?
What if that's just what if the AP is just reporting that?
If they're just reporting it and you're having the reaction you are, they're succeeding.
They're turning you against the Republican Party.
So my question, why do you believe it?
Why do you believe the AP story?
Because it's what I've seen in the past.
There's evidence in the past of what they've done in the past.
It just makes sense that they would do this.
Just the fact that they want to go for amnesty, period.
Okay, so you are using your intelligence guided by experience, and you are saying, look, we know they want amnesty.
They've said it.
We know they want to emulate the Democrats.
So this story, I can believe it.
That's basically what you're saying.
Yep.
And I think they're turning into criminals the art of deception.
They're learning it just like the Democrats.
And it's over.
Once they've done that, it's over for the Republicans.
Well, if this story is true, it is the AP.
We have to hold some of this in reserve.
It is the AP.
We've got to factor that.
Again, intelligence guided by experience.
But even that we know, and Steve here in Santa Cruz is right, and we know the Republican.
We heard Donahoe.
Donahue, the chamber, they want this.
And I think all of the establishment is behaving.
We're being governed against our will on so many things.
We don't want Obamacare.
We got it.
We don't want this kind of economy, but we've got it.
And we don't want amnesty, but we're going to get it.
And we've heard certain Republican leaders say very mean things about the Tea Party.
So it's not a stretch to believe this could be true.
And the problem, not the problem.
The sad thing about it is that it is deception if it's true.
It is designed to fool.
Get everybody to go along.
Oh, okay.
No voting and no citizenship.
Well, okay, maybe.
And then we know that's not going to hold up.
That would be the smart bet.
Anyway, Steve, I appreciate the call.
Got to be one of five Republicans in Santa Cruz.
Back after this.
No, go away.
Gonorrhea and syphilis are on the rise in the United States.
Right here it is.
Bloomberg knew.
I know we were doing so well.
Gonorrhea and syphilis are on the rise, and there's a reason for it.
I don't have time to tell you right now, but I will induce.
I had a health teacher in junior, high, or high school call it gongorrhea.
So if I call it gongaria, I'm just imitating him.
▲
Export Selection