All Episodes
Previous Next
June 4, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:49
June 4, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for having me, folks.
Wow, it's good to be back behind the golden EIB microphone, though here in Atlanta I've got the fuzzy black microphone that looks like it is makeup on it.
Thank you for having me.
It is Eric Erickson.
The phone number here at the Rush Limbaugh Show, 1-800-282-882.
You can get me on Twitter at E.W. Erickson and email me, Eric at redstate.com.
We got to get straight to the big story of the day.
JJ Abrams is confirming the Millennium Falcon will be in the next Star Wars movie.
My my my role here is done.
Show prep over.
I can go home now.
Yeah, the Millennium Falcon will be there.
No, okay, the real big news, this Bergman of Afghanistan story.
This Berg doll guy more and more is coming out on this.
The most shocking thing is that the White House didn't see the blowback coming.
Even Hillary Clinton is throwing the White House under the bus.
This is the end of the Obama administration.
They knew they were going to be a lame duck after November, but they've just decided to go on and end it now.
There's a reason why.
There are a number of reasons why.
First of all, I should point out, I've been on vacation since last Friday.
I have a ton of stuff to say.
I've been in rural Louisiana, Eastfully Shannon Parrish, visiting my parents up there, hanging out with on the old homestead.
So I haven't been able to listen a lot to Buck and to Mark and the others, and if they haven't pointed it out, I think it needs to be pointed out.
Jay Carney leaving, Eric Shinsecki leaving, that this this prisoner swap with the Taliban, all of this.
Well, they say it's all unrelated, but I think it's all related to Rush Limbaugh being on vacation.
These things always happen when Rush leaves.
I remember the one time Rush had to come back from vacation because there was I'm surprised.
He must be somewhere nice that he that he can't get back from I swear to you people, they timed it knowing Rush Limbaugh was going to be on vacation, and very few people would be able to hold them accountable.
I have come from my vacation to be here to help do my part of the EIB network to hold these people accountable.
Even Hillary Clinton is saying she thought it was a bad idea.
You know the Obama the Obama administration is at an end.
When the Democrats are starting to talk badly about him.
This from from Josh Rogan at the Daily Beast.
Yesterday, which was my birthday.
Thank you, EIB Network, for the birthday present, by the way, of letting me fill in.
And for all you people who wish me happy birthday on Facebook, there are too many of you to think personally.
Thank you, thank you.
In 2011 and 2012, Hillary Clinton's State Department negotiated directly with the Taliban.
Now this is the Daily Beast.
I'm surprised they didn't put in a parentheses parenthetical note, noting that the Taliban were willing to talk to Hillary Clinton, unlike those evil Republican misogynists.
Nonetheless, they didn't, but you know it's implied.
Hillary Clinton State Department negotiated with the Taliban over a swap for Bo Bergman of Afghanistan, but Clinton was not a fan of the idea.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was personally and intensely involved in the debate over swapping five Taliban commanders for Sergeant Bergdahl in 2011, 2012.
She had severe reservations about the potential deal, demanded stricter conditions for the release of prisoners than what President Obama settled for last week.
Now I'm still of the theory that Hillary Clinton is the bulletproof jacket of the Democratic Party right now.
She is who all the Democrats are wrapping themselves around, so she's getting all the bullets for them, and she herself will be too wounded to run for president in 2016.
But the Republicans will have aimed all their fire at her, so these other guys will have to rebuild.
I I'm I'm still not I know she wants it.
I know she covets it as relentlessly as Gollum wanted the ring back, but I'm just not sure that in 2016 she she will be running for president.
But she is playing the role.
Whoa, they're leaking out.
Even Hillary wanted more conditions than what Barack Obama did.
I got a buddy of mine on Twitter the other day Who noted that it appears that even before the president of the United States, we know now, even before he started building his first NCAA March madness bracket for his first year in the White House.
We now know he was already building his June madness Taliban bracket of which guys were gonna get released from Afghanistan or from Gitmo and headed back to fight us.
I I've decided, you know, Barack Obama is not a stupid man.
Say what you will about him.
You know, the left accuses our guys of being stupid.
They thought Reagan was stupid.
Then they thought George H. W. Bush was stupid.
They thought he was smart when Reagan was president, then they decided he was stupid, and Dan Quayle was stupid, and George W. Bush was stupid.
Dick Cheney was evil, but George W. Bush, they always think our guys are stupid.
Ted Cruz, stupid.
Rand Ball, stupid.
Mike Lee, stupid.
They're all dumb.
They're all stupid.
We don't, we should not accuse them of being stupid.
Because he he's not a stupid guy.
Look, you may not like Barack Obama.
I don't care for the man myself.
I I wouldn't be at the EIB network if I cared for the guy.
But I don't think he's stupid.
You don't win the White House twice being stupid.
I do I think the guy is incompetent policy-wise?
Yeah, I mean, he never had a real job in his life.
He was a community organizer, a law school professor in the Ivory Tower.
I think he's incompetent.
He's not as stupid and incompetent, it's not the same thing.
But it I just I've been thinking that there's got to be a grand theory.
You know, scientists always want the grand unifying theory of how the universe works.
I think I found it.
With Barack Obama, I think I have found his unifying theory.
It explains all of his foreign policy endeavors.
It explains Libya, it explains Benghazi, it explains Syria, it explains bowing to world leaders.
It explains releasing five terrorists in exchange for a deserter.
We'll get into that.
There's more there today.
I think the unifying theory of Barack Obama's presidency and his foreign and national policy is not some highfalutin speech like he gave to West Point where he bored all the soldiers saying it let's not be stupid.
No, no, no.
I I think his unifying foreign and national policy theory is this.
He makes the world stronger and more stable by making the United States weaker and less stable.
You see, Barack Obama is from a culture on the left where he thinks the United States is the bad guy.
He thinks the United States is the bully.
This is again why Russia's always been right, despite all the heat, despite all the flack, despite all the attacks against Rush Limbaugh for saying he hoped Barack Obama failed, this is why we needed Barack Obama to fail.
The United States cannot succeed if Barack Obama succeeds.
This is exactly what Rush was talking about.
Barack Obama believes that for the world to be safe, the United States must be less safe.
For the world to be strong, the United States must be weak.
You see, in in every foreign policy screw up, Barack Obama's had that he has claimed intentional and a success.
What has happened is that the United States on the world stage has been diminished.
And so if you come from a left-wing worldview where the United States is the oppressor and the world is a victim of the United States, as Barack Obama does, the academic ivory tower, where all the the everybody's a victim of some kind of power and Washington and the United States and Republicans and white men, you name it.
When you come from that world view, you think that the world can only be safe if the United States is less safe, because then the United States cannot be as bold.
If we allow every tin bot bot dictator around the world to have nuclear weapons, if we allow Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, the Taliban, you name it, if we allow them all to have nuclear weapons, then the United States can't be as bold in its foreign and national security policy.
It has to be more restrained, lest it get nuked.
So the President of the United States is perfectly happy to look like he's doing something good in Iran.
Well, really, they're building a nuclear weapon.
He's okay with that.
Because once they have a nuclear weapon in Iran, we can't be as bold in the Middle East, So somehow the Middle East will become safer if we are less safe.
This explain this is the unifying theory for Barack Obama's foreign and national security policy.
Look at everything he's done.
And he has created a world where the United States is not as safe, where the United States is not as strong.
This and you know, there's a CNN money pollout that 60% or something like that of Americans believe that the American dream is no longer obtainable.
Well, if the American dream is a what, a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, everybody living out in suburbia having their own home, well, that's bad for the environment.
That's all bad for the environment.
You have a bunch of kids, if you're a breeder as the left calls you, well, you're bad for the environment.
And the world's environment is only safe and good if America is weak and destabilized.
I swear to you, people, it is a good thing we live in the last best hope for mankind, though.
In some of these other countries, given this Bergdahl situation, given the how he's treated Afghanistan and Iraq, given the Veterans Administration scandal.
We'll get into that.
There's more out of that.
Given all of these things, if we were a third world country, if we were not the United States of America, I think the media would be engaged in speculation over a military coup.
It is very clear Barack Obama hates the military.
It's very clear Barack Obama only uses the military as a prop.
He goes to West Point and gives some ridiculous speech that the troops won't even clap for because it's so boring, where he claims to announce a foreign policy.
I I don't know, some sort of foreign policy guiding force in the zeitgeist or some nonsense, and it it's it's a crap speech.
It's terrible.
It's amateur day.
But it all fits with what I've decided is the unifying theory.
Barack Obama believes that for the world to be a safer place, we must be a less safe place.
For the world to be stronger, we must be weaker.
It even goes to his environmental policy.
He goes to all of these things.
Barack Obama, no, no, no, no, no.
He doesn't hate the well, he can't say he hates the United States.
I won't accuse the president of hating the United States.
You might think that, but I couldn't possibly say that.
I just, I think that the president believes that we're all in this planet together.
We're all orbiting the hot sun going around a black hole in the middle of the galaxy, and we're bigger than one nation, and then for all of the world to survive the United States itself, it must overcome itself.
It must stop being so arrogant.
This is why he's gone on the world apology tour.
I don't think that it's gonna work out well for him.
I think it's gonna hurt the Democrats.
We'll get into those implications.
But there's another reason why the Democrats are doing this.
There's another reason why he's decided he can release five members of the Taliban for one deserter.
We'll get into all of that when we come back here on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
This is Eric Erikson.
I see on Twitter.
The New York Times.
It's created a standalone subscription to their opinion section.
So if you want to lose brain sales and low sells and lower your IQ, you can subscribe to just the opinion page of the New York Times and read the exciting installments of Maureen Dowd eating pot brownies in Colorado, stimulating opinion for your nether regions.
Oh my goodness gracious.
Welcome back.
It's Eric Erickson, Infor Rush Limbaugh 1800-282-2882.
If you're just tuning in, I'm explaining the unified theory of the Obama administration.
It explains everything.
I was thinking foreign and national security policy, and then I realized it works on the environment, all these EPA regulations that are coming out on coal and whatnot.
The president and those with whom he surrounds himself believe that for the world to be strong, we must be weak.
It's redistributed, redistributing the everything on a global scale.
The leveling the playing field globally, except who knew we were the ones going to get leveled by the Obama administration.
I don't think it's going to work out for him, by the way, on this.
Look, you get to a point of epistemic closure in politics sometimes when you build an echo chamber and you're only talking to each other and the Obama administration, the Democrats, the left, the progressives.
They talk to the media, the media talks to them.
Hell, half the media, their spouses are employed by the Obama administration.
Maybe I should walk through that sometime.
Half the spouses in the media are employed by the Obama administration.
So they're not going to be critical of the guy who's who's bringing in the bacon for them because they're not getting paid anymore in the media by and large, that they're having to work at discount so they can pay lavish salaries to opinion writers like Paul Krugman and others.
But what's going on here is they're talking to each other.
They're talking to the media and the media talking back to them, and they all agree there's no dispute among them.
And so despite evidence to the contrary, despite flyover country, despite conservatives, just despite people who don't even care about politics, but they love their country.
They think they're right.
They've reached epistemic closure where any evidence that comes in that is contrary to their worldview is immediately disputed.
Look at global warming and whatnot.
We'll get into that later.
So they think they can do these things.
They think they've won.
They think the argument is over.
But more importantly, they think they have a permanent political majority.
Now, the other reason the Obama administration, I think, has decided to break the law, and we're at the point, I think we're objectively the Obama administration has broken the law in how they handled this trade-off without notifying Congress.
I mean, you've even got CNN analysts, uh, Jeff Tubin and others saying that the the president has legal problems here.
I guarantee you they want Republicans to start talking about impeachment.
This is another backdoor reason for doing this.
They want us to talk about impeachment.
Now, last month when I was here, I pointed out that the Democrats are doing everything they can to whip black voters into a frenzy to drive them out to the polls.
It is the last constituency group still completely with them and still likely to turn out in November.
So they are begging Republicans, begging us to start saying, let's impeach the president for this.
He let out five terrorists for a deserter.
They are begging us to do that.
Don't fall for the trap.
Now here's what we do do.
Look, we're not gonna get we may I think we're gonna get the Senate back in November, but we're not gonna get two thirds of the Senate, which you would need to convict the president in an impeachment.
So it goes nowhere.
It turns out like Bill Clinton.
It blows up in Republicans' faces, the media turns on us, and it ends up badly for us.
It hurts us in the election.
We need to reintroduce the Democrats to Iran-Contra.
We need to reintroduce the Democrats to the subpoena power of Congress to a joint congressional investigation.
You know what they did to Reagan with Iran Contra?
Well, the American public still loved Ronald Reagan nonetheless, despite Iran-Contra.
There is more and more ample polling showing the American public does not love Barack Obama anymore.
The love affair is over.
They can pat themselves on the back that twice they prove themselves they weren't racist by voting for the first black president, second black president, if you count Bill Clinton.
But now they're over.
They've done what they needed to do.
They've proven we're not a racist country.
We're a post-racial country, despite the Democrats'best efforts.
So they're out there talking about reparations, trying to whip black voters into a frenzy to go vote.
They're talking about Republicans are going to try to impeach the president.
They're doing everything they can possibly to get Republicans to try to claim they will impeach the president of the United States, and they're doing it all for election year machination.
See, the president, his policy is to make America weaker by making the world stronger.
But the president of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama.
How dare you say his middle name, that's racist of you.
Hussein Obama.
He puts politics even ahead of policy.
And the Democrats are, I mean, just screwed in November.
And the president doesn't care anymore.
It's all about him.
But he's doing what he can to lock people in to vote for him.
He wants this election.
He knows this election.
It's going to be about him.
So you Democrats and swing states, screw you.
This is all about the president.
He knows it's going to be a referendum on him.
So he wants to get these people out to vote for him.
He wants these people to come out and defend him.
I d look, even Democrats in Congress.
Now Harry Reid has swallowed his integrity.
Just uh it's pitiful.
I'm starting to wonder if Harry Reid might need to be checked for dementia or something, some the way he's been operating.
But you've got Diane Feinstein in the United States Senate.
She's upset with what the president has done.
You got Hillary Clinton out there upset as well.
When we come back, we're going to delve into these things and the blowback that's coming for the Democrats.
I know that some of you people in the media and media matters are all a Twitter and a buzz at the brilliant and dazzling start of this program today.
And you probably need to figure out what you're going to take out of context in order to, well, run outrage story saying I'm saying we need to impeach the president or something.
You can always do your show distortion and show prep by going to RushlinBaugh.com.
And while you're there, you can join Rush 24-7.
So you can watch Rush on the DittaCam, or you can get podcasts of the radio show.
They might even put up today so you can hear what a fast talking southern redneck sounds like.
You should I'm a subscriber, by the way.
I can't see myself in the Ditto Cam, though it would creep me out, and I don't believe.
Well, I don't even have a ditto cam, so we don't have to worry about that.
I'm I'm just saying, you can go there to find out what you want to take out of context.
Now, Mr. H.R. Kit Carson tells me that some of you are calling outraged and upset over me saying that we shouldn't begin the impeachment process of the president of the United States.
Allow me to explain.
Look, I think we finally have something solid.
Diane Feinstein is out there upset about this.
Diane Feinstein of all people.
Diane Feinstein is not happy.
She says Barack Obama broke the law.
Katie Pavlich over at Town Hall.com notes this.
That Diane Feinstein is unhappy.
It comes to us with some surprise and dismay.
That the transfers went ahead with no consultation, totally not following law.
And in an issue with this kind of concern to a committee that bears the oversight responsibility, I think you can see that we're very dismayed by it when Diane Feinstein says she's dismayed.
She's really angry.
But let's not kid ourselves.
The Democrats would never vote to impeach the president of the United States.
Now you can say it's the right thing to do.
You can say, by God, we should do it because it's right.
Sorry if I just exploded your speakers in your car.
You you can say all of that.
You can.
You can believe in your inner being that we must impeach this guy.
He's got two years left.
Think of the damage he can do in two years.
But the Democrats will never go along with it.
So what do you do?
You you've you voted to impeach the guy in the House of Representatives, you've moved it to the Senate where it turns into a show trial with Republicans in the Senate who never fight as hard as the Democrats to begin with.
Partisan Democrats in the Senate who are going to blow this up on Republicans.
I mean, we go to we go to war with the army we have.
Do you really want to go to the impeachment war with the Senate Republicans?
have.
And even if we take back the Senate in November, which I think we will, we would need a two-thirds vote.
I'm telling you there are other ways to undermine this man.
You can disagree with me, and I get it.
Many of you, including dear members of my own family, want this guy gone yesterday, two years after a majority of Americans reelected him.
I get it.
And I'm sympathetic to you.
I don't want you to think I'm insulting you or attacking you.
I totally get it.
The guy believes that the United States should be ruined so the world can succeed.
And a majority of Americans decided to vote for him.
It's profoundly aggravating.
But I'm telling you that all you're going to do is whip Democrats into a frenzy, energize black voters to go defend him.
If you start rumbling about this right now, and November suddenly becomes in jeopardy.
When it's ours, let's not seize defeat from the jaws of victory.
Let's not go there.
And then when we get to November and we take back the Senate, what do we do?
There needs to be an investigation.
Let's let's let's let's agree.
We can agree, let's agree to disagree, but let's agree that we should investigate.
After we have the Senate and the House, Harry Reed can no longer obstruct us having a joint congressional committee to investigate Benghazi in detail, not just leave it into the hands of poor old Trey Gowdy, who's going to do a brilliant job and be just destroyed by the media.
We can have a joint congressional investigation.
And we can get the facts.
Why did the president we know that the president overrode his military and intelligence leaders to make the swap.
Why did the president do that?
We have questions that need to be answered here.
We have real questions.
By the way, it appears that the Obama administration says it's chief reasoning.
For sidestepping congressional notification in the prisoner swap for the Bergman of Afghanistan was his deteriorating health.
This according to MediaIke.com.
But after a video Wednesday morning, but not yet confirmed by the Pentagon that showed the Bergman's transfer into American custody, NBC News' chief Pentagon correspondent Jim Misliszevsky says that Bergdahl appeared to be in good health.
In fact, he's not the only one.
Other media outlets are commenting that in fact he appeared to be in good health.
Now, if you haven't seen Jake Tapper on CNN, if you haven't seen this interview, Tapper got an interview with Evan Buto, the Bergman's team leader.
Dapper interviewed this guy, and this guy says that following the Bergman's disappearance, IED's improvised explosive devices for those of you in Rio Linda, started going off directly under trucks.
They were getting perfect hits every time.
Their ambushes were very calculated, very methodical.
It was very suspicious.
This guy tells Jake Dabber that on CNN, CNN is covering this.
That this from the guy Zucker at CNN said they wouldn't be forced, they wouldn't be bullied to covering Benghazi, they are covering the snot out of this, and none of it's good for the Obama administration.
I mean, when you've got the the guys at CNN, you got Anderson Cooper, you got Jake Tapper, you got Wolf Blitzer, you got John King, you got all the guys at CNN, you got all the guys with Fox, you got Brett Baer, you've got Megan Kelly, you got Sean Hannity, you got O'Reilly, you got the morning shows, you got Bill Himmer, you got Gretchen Carlson, you got all of them.
You got two major networks.
A MSNBC is all alone out there trying to claim that Bergdahl is some sort of hero and anyone in the military who questions this is a traitor.
I mean, you've got the Obama administration.
Look, F. Chuck Todd was out there today saying that they are accusing soldiers of swift voting.
That's right.
Now, this was actually the Today Show, F. Chuck Todd made his way over from MSNBC to go to the Today Show or the yesterday show, if you look at the ratings, in response to allegations of possible desertion by Bergdahl.
White House sources are accusing the soldiers that serve with him of swift voting him, just like they did to John Carey.
You know, it is kind of fitting when you think about it.
John Carey also went over to try to collaborate with the enemy.
I mean, it is kind of fitting, and his is the soldiers who served with Kerry came out and told everybody what he did, and he lost the presidency of it.
It's only a matter of time before the Democrats put the Bergman of Afghanistan up on a ballot somewhere to try to run him for office and make a hero out of him for collaborating with the enemy or whatever he might have done.
We don't even know what he did.
But it seems pretty clear from the people who worked with him who were soldiers with him that he did something not good.
Sachs be chamblis, he's my senator from here in Georgia.
I used to work for Saxby Chambless back in the day when I was in college, college Republicans Helping his campaign for Congress before he went to the Senate.
Saxby Chamblis, he's the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, and he has looked at the Bergman of Afghanistan's classified file.
And there was no mention of an incriminating note that Bergdahl wrote.
According to Chambliss from the New York Times article about Bergdahl and the New York Times, of course, protecting the precious Barack Obama.
They've gone out of their way now to make sure that people don't think that Bergdahl was a deserter, despite what everybody in the military generally agrees.
Saxby Chambliss says to Fox News that he left a note that indicated he was sympathetic to the Taliban and unsympathetic to the American interest in the conflict.
It wasn't included in the file.
And I'm very surprised by that because normally those classified files are pretty informative.
There are many more questions than answers about this Bergdahl guy, but all you need to know is that if you think it wasn't a good idea to get an American soldier back by trading five terrorists in Gitmo.
Not no one saying we shouldn't try to get an American back and maybe investigate him and possibly punish him.
No one's saying we shouldn't have tried to get him back.
But to exchange him for five leading members of the Taliban.
If you question that, I just want you to know you're a racist.
At least according to the Democrats.
Eric Erickson in for Rush Limbaugh.
We'll be back.
How about we go to the phones here on the Rush Limbaugh program?
Eric Erickson here.
Let's go first to Mark in Ottawa, Kansas.
Mark, how are you?
Hey, it's known fact that Democrats listen to Rush to try to get ideas for their playbook.
And I believe the idea they need is the Democrats in the House ought to start calling for his impeachment.
Because if they do that, they might win in over some independent voters for the 2014 election.
And then once it got to the Senate, it wouldn't go anywhere because you know all the Democrats are over there.
Now that's actually a pretty sneaky idea.
Look, we know the Democrats are going to be toast come November.
They may want to reach out.
Now, I I wonder in some of those gerrymander districts, the left-wing nuts out there in Nancy Pelosi's district and others, they might be bent out of shape.
But the guys in the swing districts, it wouldn't surprise me if some of them try to come out and do something like that.
Not a bad idea for those Democrats out there.
But I'm telling you guys, as much as you or I may think that something like this should happen, we've got these Republicans in Congress who aren't going to do anything about it.
So we we just we need to understand that the Republicans in Congress won't go anywhere with it.
And we should at least be willing to admit that if we started up this talk before November, the Democrats would who are otherwise, even the Democrats are looking at all this in frustration.
They themselves may scratch their heads otherwise and take a pass on November.
It's looking more and more like that.
Even in California, California, yesterday they had their primary.
We'll get into the primaries.
Mississippi, big deal for conservatives.
This Mississippi election between Thad Cochrane and Chris McDaniel.
Thad Cochran, by the way, sitting Republican Senator on the defense committee on Twitter praising the return of Bergman of Afghanistan, welcoming him back, thanking him for his service.
Yes, the sitting Republican senator from Mississippi did that.
Now he's in a runoff in three weeks in Mississippi.
We'll get into all of that.
But even the Democrats.
Look at what happened in California last night in their election.
Republicans turned out in higher numbers than Democrats, it appears from what I'm told out there.
Now I'm sure Jerry Brown, he'll be able to win reelection in November, but Republicans are vastly more energized around the country than the Democrats.
And they kind of have to.
You know, so I see the CNN poll out there.
The CNN poll shows that most Americans believe that the American dream is no longer obtainable.
Nearly six out of ten feel it's out of reach.
The 18 to 34 age group is most pessimistic.
Now, this is the American dream poll from CNN Money conducted by ORC.
The dream, however they define it, that kind of is key here, that however they define it is out of reach.
Young adults are most likely to feel it is unobtainable.
Sixty-three percent say it's impossible.
They're still living in mom's basement.
But every age group seems to think it's not good.
The vast majority of Americans have higher incomes than their parents, but that's in large part because most families are now two earners.
They think that the dream is out of reach in Barack Obama's America.
We've seen this before.
We've seen this when Jimmy Carter was president, the great malaise, Americans thinking that hope was out of reach, Americans thinking the dream was out of reach, Americans thinking they couldn't have suburbia anymore, Americans thinking they were going to have to live in the city.
Now you've got Democrats telling them they've got to live in the city.
It's for a good cause.
Stop having kids.
Stop being productive members of society.
We'll give you everything you need.
The Democrats are trying to shift what the American dream is away from individual responsibility, pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.
You can seize your own destiny.
You can be the captain of your destiny.
Now they're telling you if it feels good, do it.
You only live once, and the government's going to take care of everything for you so you don't have to pay a dime for nothing.
In Southern East there.
Yes.
The fact of the matter is that most Americans, in their heart, they know that you should be able to be the captain of your destiny.
You should not have to rely on government.
You should not be enslaved to Uncle Sam.
You should not be relying on Uncle Sam's man boob to provide you all of your nutrients in American society.
But that's what President Obama and the Democrats want you to do.
They want you to suckle on Uncle Sam's man boob there and get everything you need from Uncle Sam.
That that's that is the Democrats version of the American dream.
I just, we've seen this with Jimmy Carter.
And we found a great American, a conservative who was ran a campaign on letting you be the captain of your destiny, who recognized that government was the problem.
There are too many Republicans in Washington right now, frankly, who think the problem with government isn't government, but Democrats in charge of it.
But we're seeing, look at all of these guys.
I was in Louisiana this past week.
What Bobby Gendal has done to the state that I fled from out of high school, thinking, good lord, this state's impossible.
He's turned it around.
You got Scott Walker in Wisconsin, you got Ted Cruz, you got Rand Moy, you got Marco Rubio, you got Nikki Haley, you got Rick Perry, you got all of these Republicans.
And the Democrats, it doesn't matter which Democrat they ultimately put up, they all believe that the American dream must be shifted, and that the dream should be for you to be enslaved to the government, which will give you everything as long as you work for Uncle Sam.
And Americans in their gut.
That's an offensive, noxious notion to them.
And that's why I am hopeful and don't think any of us should be angry that Democrats are blowing themselves up.
Eric Erickson, Info Rush Limbaugh.
We'll be back.
Perfect timing on an email I just received from the Democratic National Committee proving my point.
Now, my buddy and Russia's Andy McCarthy has a book coming out.
If it's not already, I was invited to the party for it.
It's basically the academic legal case for the impeachment of the president.
And if it's from Andy McCarthy, we know it's going to be genius and totally solid and what it does regardless of the politics of it, building the legal case out there, making the argument there.
Andy does a does a great job.
In any event, let me read.
This is from the Democratic National Committee.
There's a book coming out soon and Republicans are excited about it.
It's about impeaching the president.
The thesis is, well, let me quote it for you.
Impeachment is not about what the law allows.
Impeachment is a matter of political will.
So please pitch in three dollars or more to help President Obama and the Democrats fight back.
They're just going to use this as a fundraising opportunity.
▲
Export Selection