Rush Limbaugh Program - July 1, 2014, Tuesday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 1, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:50

July 1, 2014, Tuesday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24 7 Podcast.
	Ladies and gentlemen, as I knew yesterday was going to be the case today, I have had plenty more time since yesterday to digest all of the ramifications, the details, and the important relevancies of the Hobby Lobby case.
	And it is, as I suspected yesterday, it is actually hilarious to see Hillary Clinton denouncing the whole thing when it is one of her own husband's pieces of legislation that was used to uphold this ruling.
	The Clintons are out basically bashing themselves while trying to make it look like they're bashing some.
	It's exactly the same thing Obama does in terms of the limbaugh theorem.
	Obama is responsible for things, but he seeks to avoid accountability.
	He does it by blaming others and acting like he had nothing to do with it.
	And the Clintons are doing the same thing on this hobby lobby thing.
	Even Josh Ernest yesterday, White House spokes kid, and we had this.
	Well, as the constitutional lawyer sitting in the Oval Office has said, this is not a constitutional law case.
	The Hobby Lobby ruling involved statutory law, and it was a law.
	Let me find the uh the name of this law for you.
	It was a Clinton era law.
	Bill Clinton signed this law into uh into effect.
	And uh and and what's happening is is that the the Clintons are all out there, both of them ripping this to shreds, because what they want out of this, they don't want to solve this.
	And there's an easy way to solve it.
	Even Anthony Kennedy, here's all you need to know about this.
	Anthony Kennedy, by the way, greetings we're at a left coast again.
	Rush Limbaugh here at 800-282882, the email address L. Rushbow at EIB net.com.
	Justice Anthony Kennedy, and this is right here in Time Magazine, Justice Kennedy recognized, get this.
	Obama's unilateral powers as a rationale for allowing the for-profit companies to opt out of the contraception mandate and the Affordable Care Act.
	In other instances, the government has allowed the same contraception coverage in issue here to be provided to employees of nonprofit religious organizations, Kennedy wrote.
	The accommodations work by requiring insurance companies to cover without cost sharing contraception coverage for female employees who wish it, meaning in nonprofits, women are provided contraceptives.
	And Anthony Kennedy is saying there's no difference here.
	The president therefore has assigned to him unilaterally the ability to do that, that he can simply do that here too.
	Just simply say, okay, if Hobby Lobby now doesn't have to pay for it, because the Supreme Court upheld their religious views, if Hobby Lobby doesn't have to pay for it, you can just make the insurance companies pay for it.
	That's the way it happens with nonprofits.
	But Obama doesn't want to do that.
	There are two reasons.
	He doesn't want to be appearing, they want to appear to act unilaterally, but more than anything, they want the fundraising.
	The left has no idea what has happened here.
	Well, one of two things.
	They either have no idea what really happened in this ruling and they're just knee-jerk reacting, or they do know and are knee-jerk reacting because everything to these people is political.
	While the women of America are being told by the media and the Democrats that what happened here is that the Supreme Court denied women the right to have contraception.
	This is absolutely horrible.
	It's unacceptable.
	And then the Supreme Court did it, and the Republicans, and so they want a fundraising issue off this.
	There's a way to solve this for the women who work in Hobby Lobby.
	Obama can just unilaterally make the insurance companies pay, as is the law in the Affordable Care Act for nonprofits.
	But he's not going to do that.
	He doesn't want to appear to be acting unilaterally in this case because he wants the issue.
	He wants to be able to fundraise for it.
	Anyway, greetings, folks.
	It's great to have you here.
	Elle Rushmore, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, making the complex understandable.
	Let me share with you this uh story that's in Time magazine on this.
	I I just I I find this uh I find all of this uh interesting because these people are acting exactly as I know they would act.
	Everything is political.
	No matter who gets hurt, they whine and moan about the people who get hurt and then claim to be defending and caring and protecting those people, and then don't do that.
	They use the issue to fundraise and campaign and so forth.
	That's exactly what's happening here.
	Time magazine.
	This is a notable departure in strategy for the White House that is likely to increase the visibility of the issue in an election year.
	That sentence follows their headline.
	The headline is White House chooses congressional fight over hobby lobby decision.
	That's right.
	It's astounding, but Time magazine actually nails this.
	Well, for them.
	I mean, it's as close as Time Magazine is going to get to nailing it involving Obama.
	But the whole subject of the piece here, White House chooses congressional fight over hobby lobby decision.
	It's a notable departure in strategy for the White House, likely to increase the visibility of the issue in an election year while delaying the arrival of a solution for those women who will now be denied certain contraceptive coverage.
	That's it, folks, in a nutshell.
	There is a way based on the way Obama is structured the law to deal with employees of nonprofits.
	The insurance companies pay, but they can't cost share, meaning the insurance companies cannot hide a bill back to the nonprofit in order to cover the cost of the contraceptives.
	They have to absorb it.
	And the White House could do that.
	Anthony Kennedy said so in the opinion.
	But as time points out, they're not going to do that.
	They're not going to solve the problem for the women that they're whining and moaning about, which is a notable departure in strategy.
	No, no.
	All signs Monday point to the fact that Democrats would rather stage a political fight over this than resolve it for the effective women affected.
	It's never been about access.
	This has never been about access.
	Well, particularly since the ruling came out.
	It has never been about access.
	It's about continuing the war on women theme.
	What it requires is the abject stupidity of Democrat voters.
	It requires, in order for it to work, it requires the abject stupidity of Democrat donors.
	Or if it isn't stupidity, it requires their complicity.
	But I'll tell you what I did.
	I looked at some uh some some comments at some of the social media last night after I came off the golf course.
	Another just overwhelmingly great.
	I play golf better out here than anywhere in the fruited plane.
	And I just dig, I mean, I did it was great time.
	I played Calabasas Country Club yesterday.
	Poor Sammy.
	Poor Sammy.
	It just we we played out at Satakoy on Sunday, and Sammy for the first time emerged victorious.
	Sammy's the guy, if you're out of a hole, he'll bet himself.
	He just loves betting.
	Done for a dime, a nickel, whatever it is.
	And uh and and yesterday where the press ended up at the 18th hole was gonna matter.
	And I ended up being out of the hole.
	I I one of my few bad holes yesterday.
	My partner, Joel Cerno triumphed.
	And uh, but I've never seen a guy so happy to pay off as Sammy.
	He just is a great guy, loves it.
	He's uh anyway, I play better out here than I play anywhere in the world.
	Don't know why that is.
	Except during the ATT Pebble Beach Pro Am, and that's because that's a tournament And everybody's tension levels rise.
	So anyway, when I finished that, I came back and I started into doing show prep.
	And it is just, it's classic but predictable.
	And it's uh it's also common.
	The decision is announced.
	The media misreports what happened and the leftist army.
	And I'm going to tell you something about this.
	I don't know this for sure.
	But you know, all these comments that you read, I don't care whether Democrat Underground or hell, these these poor slobs even started infecting the SCOTUS blog.
	The SCOTUS blog is a blog that simply reports the news happening at the Supreme Court.
	It is not a partisan blog.
	It is not an opinion blog.
	It's simply a blog that reports the news.
	Well, these little leftist commentators polluted that place thinking that it was a way to insult the justices.
	They thought it was their blog, and it's not.
	But I actually think in all of this I don't care whether it's whether it's comments on an issue here or other things.
	I bet there's, you know, a handful of people that are making themselves look like there are tens and thousands and maybe hundred thousands of them.
	The idea that there is this much conformity and stupidity on the Democrat side.
	I know there's a lot, but to think it's this widespread, it's a tough sell for me.
	I think these people are out there making themselves look far larger than they really are.
	And anyway, that's that's another myth.
	The point is they were there, however many of them there were, they were just running crazy and making most asinine stupid comments about this.
	And they were joined by such great minds as Elizabeth Warren and Harry Reed, who were also this is the end of life as we know it for women in America.
	Women have been taken back to the Stone Age, barefoot pregnant and being clubbed by Fred Flintstone in the kitchen.
	I mean, that pretty much sums up what every comment said.
	I'm reading these, and I'm just laughing myself silly.
	Because they haven't the slightest idea what happened, but you can't blame them because their social Bible, the New York Times told them that that's what happened.
	And Josh Ernest at the White House and the president told them that's what happened.
	Harry Reid told them that's what happened.
	Elizabeth Warren told him that's what happened.
	Everywhere in the media told him that's what happened.
	It's not what happened.
	The truth of the matter is the White House has taken, it's almost like they wanted this decision so as to have the political issue to fundraise on by continuing the so-called Republican war on women allegation.
	Now, Time says that's a notable departure in strategy, but I don't think it's a notable departure in strategy.
	I think in this case, uh it's I mean, the well, the Democrats do politicize everything, and they do try to fundraise off everything.
	That's why I say it's not a notable departure.
	They do it all the time.
	Just Time magazine obviously believes that Obama and the Democrats are actually interested in solving problems for people.
	How in the world can you think that?
	We're six years into this mess, and they're not solving anything for anybody.
	Zilch zero nada.
	Well, except their corporate buddies, with whom they have the crony capitalist relationship with.
	Other than that, the people out of work are not getting anything other than a meager existence, but nobody's problems are being solved.
	The idea that Time magazine thinks that's what the regime does is another myth.
	What is common is politicizing everything and using it to fundraise.
	Here's the next paragraph of the Time Magazine story.
	Both the Democrat Party and the White House Twitter accounts spend much of the day rallying people to outrage on social media over the decision.
	Exactly.
	That's what I Saw.
	That's what I was laughing myself silly over.
	It's time that five men on the Supreme Court stop deciding what's happen what happens to women.
	That was Harry Reid.
	That's not what they decided.
	This was not about women.
	It was about the owners of closely held corporations and their religious freedom.
	Hobby lob, there are 20 contraception, contraceptive quote, medications, unquote, that are available, and Hobby Lobby provides 16 of them.
	Run a test.
	Find the nearest Democrat looney tune who thinks that this decision sets women back a hundred years and tell them.
	Now, do you know that of the 20 contraceptions available for women, Hobby Lobby provides 16 of them, and they'll look at no, you're like that.
	They don't even know.
	The four that Hobby Lobby objected to were those that cause an abortion after conception.
	They didn't want any part of those.
	But in this ruling, as we pointed out yesterday, those women are not denied the contraception.
	It's just that the hobby lobby people were told by the court you don't have to pay for it.
	Violate your religious views.
	But they're not denied the contraception.
	Women go get it anywhere they want, like buy it themselves.
	I know that's easy for me to say, but they're not denied anything.
	Legal observers say, here's one of the money paragraphs in the Time magazine story.
	Legal observers say it would not be difficult for the regime to resolve the situation unilaterally.
	The Department of Health and Human Services has already taken unilateral executive action to ensure that women employed by religious nonprofits get contraception coverage in cases where the employer declines to pay.
	There was nothing in the statute that specifically allowed them to create the exemption for nonprofit organizations, so I don't see why they couldn't extend that to for-profit corporations, said Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University and an expert on the regulations in Obamacare.
	I don't know why they just couldn't do it themselves, meaning the regime.
	Legal observers.
	Somebody has to translate this stuff.
	Journalism today is not nearly as easily understood.
	Legal observers say it'd be difficult, would not be difficult for the regime to resolve the situation unilaterally.
	Unilaterally means just executive action, sweep of his hand.
	Because Held and Human Service, that would be Sibelius, has already taken unilateral executive action to make sure that women who work at religious nonprofits still get their contraception coverage when the employer doesn't pay.
	The insurance company has to buy it for, and they can't bill it back to the people that run the nonprofit.
	And Mr. Yost says, or Jost, there was there was nothing in the statute that specifically allowed them to create the exemption, meaning they just did it unilaterally, like Obama's been doing everything else.
	There was nothing in the law that specifically allowed them to create the exemption for nonprofit organizations.
	So if nobody objected when they did it, then do it now.
	And they're not going to do it.
	They're not going to exempt it so that the women can get coverage paid for by insurance company.
	They want the issue.
	Gotta take a break.
	There's more.
	Don't don't go away.
	You know, it might be useful for everybody to remember that all of this stuff about contraceptives was put into Obamacare after it was written and after it was signed into law.
	That is what the lawyer josted, and that's what Anthony Kennedy is talking about when it occurred unilaterally, meaning Obama did it with executive action.
	He actually had Sibelius do it, who was the Secretary of Human Health and Human Services, because Obamacare mentions the Secretary can or at the Secretary's discretion thousands of times, practically or hundreds of times in the bill.
	So it was Sabilious that did it.
	But all of this contraception stuff went into Obamacare after it was written and signed into law.
	This contraception stuff was not in the bill that Congress passed.
	Sibelius added it to Obamacare via regulations.
	Because Obama needed to placate his base, and he was in the middle of a war with the Catholic church at the same time, by the way, and this was a poke in their eye.
	But it is an example, another one of Obama bypassing Congress.
	Justice Kennedy recognized Obama's unilateral powers, unilateral powers, as a rationale for allowing the pro-pro-profit companies to opt out.
	And he pointed out that in other instances, the government's allowed the same coverage in issue here to be provided to employees of nonprofits.
	Why won't they do it here?
	On the cutting edge of societal evolution, Rush Limbaugh serving humanity.
	Look, folks, even we mentioned this yesterday, Justice Alito, in his majority opinion wrote that their ruling affirming the right of Hobby Lobby not to pay for these four abortive fashions should not be a problem because of Obama's previous accommodations.
	Here's what he wrote.
	The effect of the HHACE-created accommodation, meaning the effect of Kathleen Sebelius writing a regulation after the law was signed, on the women employed by Hobby Lobby and the other companies involved in these cases would be precisely zero.
	Under the accommodation, these women will still be entitled to all FDA-approved contraceptives without cost sharing, meaning all it takes is somebody else to buy it for them.
	They don't even here's the thing.
	There's nothing in the world to be offended by here.
	There's no political ground that's even been lost as far as the left is concerned.
	If the issue is contraceptions for women, contraceptives for women, if the issue is something else, then the left might think that they got a defeat here.
	But if if if this is really about somebody else paying for every woman's birth control or abortions with the morning after pill and some such thing, then there's no loss here.
	The only thing that happened is that the Constitution's religion clause was upheld for closely held corporation.
	They have the freedom to continue to practice their religion.
	But that freedom does not extend to their female employees being denied these medications.
	And Alito has referenced it, and Anthony Kennedy has referenced it, and Time magazine is pointing this out now.
	And go so far as to say that in the nonprofit companies, the uh religious-oriented, the insurance companies buy these contraceptives, and they can't bill them back.
	And everybody here said, why don't you just do that, Obama?
	You know, it's no big deal.
	Okay, so Hobby Lobby doesn't have to pay for them, but just make somebody else.
	And they don't want to do that.
	Thank you.
	The White House, I mean back to Time Magazine piece, the White House has chosen to first try for a legislative fix in Congress, where the chances of success are slim at best.
	Republicans are mostly united in praising the Supreme Court result, all but foreclosing chances that a change in the law makes its way through the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where most Republican lawmakers still back repeal of Obamacare.
	So what does that mean?
	Fundraising.
	The White House has chosen to first try to go through the Republicans to fix it.
	What do you think is going on here?
	In a nutshell, the women that work at Hobby Lobby have Not been denied contraceptives.
	The only thing is that four of them will not be paid for by Hobby Lobby.
	They can get somebody else to pay for them.
	That's already been established through unilateral Obama regulations and executive actions, executive orders.
	But rather than take the easy way, see if this is really about women getting their abortion pills, they can do that in the next five minutes.
	It could have been done already.
	But instead, Obama doesn't want that.
	He doesn't, he wants these women to continue to believe they've been denied their birth control because of an evil Republican Christian company and the Republican Congress.
	And to prove it, he's going to demand that the Republicans fix this.
	And there's no way they're going to fix it because they don't believe in it.
	They believe in the ruling.
	Besides, none of this that we're talking about was in the original Obamacare bill that Obama signed.
	It was all added in later.
	So the fact that Obama wants to take this to the Republican House, where he knows it's going to die means that he is choosing a political issue and fundraising rather than meeting the desires and demands of his own voters.
	The women who vote for him who for some reason don't think they can pay $9 a month for birth control.
	Pure and simple.
	And furthermore, if Time Magazine polls suggest that the issue could benefit Democrats in this year.
	A Reuters Ipsos poll conducted over the last month found only 35% of the countries, 35% of the country believe that employers should be able to decide what kind of contraceptives their health plan provides for employees based on religious beliefs.
	So Obama's got a poll out there, just writing Time Magazine that his is all he's all on the right side.
	Only 35% agree with what Hobby Lobby wanted to do.
	So 65% of the American people ticked off at Hobby Lobby, ticked off at Obama wants to capitalize on that by politicizing the issue.
	Now, the White House is leaving open the option for unilateral executive action, but only once Congress fails, and they can't wait for that.
	I look, I really can't, I know this may sound repetitive.
	I've just learned that it's necessary to drill things home in order for people to get them, particularly with the spoken word, and all of this is unnecessary.
	The women who work in Hobby Lobby who were denied their abortion pills yesterday could have already been furnished them.
	It can order with no cost to them, just somebody else paying for it.
	Precedent already set in the nonprofit entities who are religious in their orientation.
	It's already established.
	Instead, Obama wants to go where he knows it's gonna die, where the women are not gonna get their pills for a while.
	Also he can blame the Republicans for something they had nothing to do with.
	The Republicans had literally nothing to do with this.
	This was added after Obamacare was signed into law.
	The Supreme Court makes a decision.
	The Republicans have no fingerprints on this whatsoever.
	And that's what Obama wants is Republican fingerprints all over this.
	The New York Times editorial today helps spread these lies, helps spread this myth.
	Hobby lobby ruling could limit access to birth control.
	That is journalistic malpractice.
	That is absolutely untrue.
	It is not possible that it's true.
	The New York Times is trying to spread the lie that the Hobby Lobby ruling will restrict women's access to birth control.
	And again, in reality, the ruling will only stop family-owned companies from being forced to provide these pills and IUDs, other things that work as abortion devices.
	Hobby lobby is going to continue to provide coverage for 16 other kinds of contraception to its employees.
	However, the New York Times claims That this ruling will restrict morning after pills and IUDs for women.
	And they say that morning after pills can cost up to 45 bucks, and that IUDs are over a thousand dollars, which of course is nonsense.
	Any woman working for a place like Hobby Lobby could always buy Plan B over the counter for far less.
	And IUD, it's not a grand, I can tell you that.
	And on top of all this, the New York Times claims the scientific consensus is that neither of these abortion pills or IUDs cause abortions.
	But that too is a lie.
	The whole point here is that they do cause abortions, and that's what the hobby lobby people don't want to pay for.
	You know, before Obamacare, every company had the right to choose what they covered with their insurance coverage and what they didn't cover.
	It's been the practice since time immemorial.
	Before Obamacare, every corporation had the right to determine what it was going to provide.
	And mostly it was based on economics, based on what they could afford.
	And then as the competition for quality employees ratcheted up, they had to make the benefits packages more attractive.
	And if they needed a lot of classy, high high quality female employees, and they learned they wanted this coverage, they had to provide it.
	But anyway, it's important to note before Obamacare, every company had the right to choose whatever they provided, and women survived.
	I know this because I can look back to the past.
	I know that there were not mass deaths of women prior to Obamacare.
	Women were alive and thriving and dominating and doing what they always do.
	Women were not in pain, they were not suffering, they had rights to abortion every time they, no matter what before Obamacare's only muddied this up and made it much worse.
	And Obamacare has created even more partisanship that's pit more people against each other.
	When it did not exist to this degree before he took office, he is the agent of the divided country.
	He is the agent of the rampant partisanship.
	Barack Obama brought it.
	He is not a unifier.
	He has a divider, and he has done so purposely.
	And just one more thing, and I referenced at the top that even the Clintons have gotten in on this.
	They're out there ripping this things to shred, ripping this thing to shreds.
	And in the process, Hillary Clinton is ripping legislation.
	Her own husband signed into law.
	Can't wait to tell you about that.
	We'll get to your phone calls coming up, so sit tight much more when we get back.
	Weekly Standard.
	Where's the date here?
	This is last night.
	This last about uh eight o'clock.
	On Monday evening, Hillary Clinton said that she found the Supreme Court's ruling in the Hobby Lobby case deeply disturbing.
	She added, it's very by the way, I should interrupt myself here.
	And I can do that because I never lose my place.
	I know exactly where I am even when I leave that place.
	I know exactly when to get back to it.
	There is another apparent entry from Ed Klein today, who is the author of that Hillary book, Blood Clot, that's not in the book.
	And it apparently the story is that Hillary is just despondent and depressed over the massive failure of her book.
	I mean, really down in the dumps.
	So much so that Bill Clinton has had to come off the wherever he is.
	He's had to come home and he's trying to inspire Hillary.
	He's trying to really buck her up.
	Get her back up into gear.
	And then because it's he that wants back in the White House so bad.
	And I have that story, and I'll get to it in uh in moments, but does not paint a pretty picture.
	And by the way, I'm comfortable in mentioning these Ed Klein assertions, because I haven't heard anybody yet dispute anything in his book.
	Have you?
	I haven't heard anybody dispute anything in it.
	Uh so if he's gonna continue, apparently he's got some really close sources that are telling him lots of stuff about what's going on behind closed doors, wherever the Clintons are.
	And she's apparently zombied over this book failure.
	And I can imagine, you know, you you're Hillary Clinton or any of these Democrats, you're out there thinking that you're loved and adored and you have a massive, active, loyal fan base, and they don't.
	They don't have a personal connection.
	Nobody in Washington does really.
	Not anymore.
	They're all aloof and removed and perceived as uh elites and have no interest in or understanding of life for most people in America.
	But it's easy, it's obvious that they fall into the trap of uh, you know, believing this that the sycophant media crap that's written about them for 50 years.
	Twenty-five years.
	I know that I know that, but they haven't been attacked.
	I mean, Hillary just put buckets of excrement in front of her.
	She stepped in every one of them.
	I know the media hadn't attacked her, but for the course of her life, the media's always defended them.
	The media's never given them treatment like conservative Republicans get.
	But my point is psychologically, after all, you can you can make yourself believe that you are loved and adored when people don't care one way or the other about you.
	Personally, I think the extent that Mrs. Clinton's cared about is it's a symbol.
	First woman here, smartest woman there, first woman president.
	Uh how did she ever get Bill Clinton?
	Why did Bill Clinton say?
	This is the kind of things people are curious about, Hillary Clinton.
	But there is no bond of love and loyalty and appreciation and interest.
	And the proof of it is this book.
	Nobody cares.
	I you know, I remember the story that somebody added up all the free media Hillary was getting when that book came out.
	And it added up to 50 million dollars.
	And even with that, the book never made it to number one on Amazon is already in two or three weeks fallen out of the top 20.
	Meanwhile, Klein's book is number three or two and it's climbing.
	And I said back then, if she had a built-in fan base, they wouldn't need a dimes worth of promotion.
	Just say the book's available, and these mad Hillary Pans would be out there aligned up to buy it like they buy the iPhone.
	But it didn't happen.
	So Hillary is sitting there wherever at White Hall or Chappaqua, and faced with the reality that nobody cares that she's not on everybody's mind all the time.
	And she's not anybody's heroine.
	So she's depressed.
	She's despondent.
	And thinking she couldn't win, which is probably true.
	So Bill is out now trying to get her all back up into gear and ready to go.
	And there's even more detail in that story having passed on.
	Now, back to this weekly standard story.
	On Monday evening, Hillary Clinton said she found the Supreme Court's ruling and hobby lobby deeply disturbing.
	She said, it's very troubling that a sales clerk at Hobby Lobby who needs contraception, which is pretty expensive, is not going to get that service through her employer's health care plan because her employer doesn't think that she should be using contraception.
	No, that's true.
	None of it is true.
	Contrary to Clinton's assertion, the hobby lobby owner doesn't think women should be using contraception.
	They make available 16 out of 20 FDA-approved contraceptives under its insurance plan.
	The company's owners simply object to covering pills or devices that may cause the death of a human embryo.
	I. So a Bill Clinton-era law is what was essentially struck down here,
	and Mrs. Clinton's out ripping all ripping her husband's own legislation, not knowing.
	I mean, these people are so not in touch.
	And Clinton is doing the same thing as though he has no memory of even signing it into law.
	Look, here's the point.
	What enabled Hobby Lobby to deny those contraceptions was a law signed by Bill Clinton, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
	The government was found to be in violation of its own law, a Clinton law, and yet the Clintons are outripping their own law here.
	It's hilarious.
	I have more.

▲