All Episodes
Previous Next
July 7, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:53
July 7, 2015, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings to you, music lovers all across the fruited plain.
I am Rush Limbaugh, America's real anchor man, America's truth detector, and a doctor of democracy, all combined in a one lovable bundle coming to you from the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Phone number if you want to be on the programs 800-282-2882 and the email address, L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
Let me just check one thing.
There's supposed to be a new beta release today, and one outfit already says it has been, and it's not there.
Okay.
But it should be.
Anyway, White House press secretary.
I mentioned this to you earlier, Josh Ernest.
I said yesterday, by the way, and you'll remember this, that this murder of Catherine Steinley in San Francisco before the end of the day, they're going to find a way to blame this on Republicans.
They always do.
And it was probably happening right when I made the prediction, because it happened yesterday with Josh Ernest, the press secretary, when asked by reporters about critics of Obama's immigration enforcement policies.
Josh Ernest insisted that it actually was Republicans at fault for voting against the gang of eight bill last year, pointing out that it contained funding to increase border security.
Josh Ernest said the fact is that the president's done everything in his power to make sure that we are focusing our law enforcement resources on criminals and those who pose a threat to public safety.
And it's because of the political efforts of Republicans that we've not been able to make the kind of investment that we'd like to make in securing our border.
This is this is I don't know to describe this other than to say it's just dangerously wrong.
It's obscene.
The president's done everything in his power to make sure we're focusing on law enforcement resources.
The president is doing everything in his power to stand them down.
The president's doing everything in his power to use them to transport all these illegal miners for the past 12 months into this country and relocate them.
The president's doing no such thing.
Securing the border.
The Republicans won't give him the money?
When did that stop him?
When is the fact that the Congress hasn't authorized any money stopped him from spending it?
A mainstream Arizona newspaper, the Arizona Daily Star, is very, very upset about a small section of the Arizona-Maeco border that has a 14-foot high primary fence because the fence is just too high.
for illegal immigrants to safely cross.
I'm not kidding.
The newspaper is editorializing against the fence because it makes it too hard for illegals to cross the border.
No, but you know, you know, no, it is serious.
The Arizona, it's it's it's this actually is a story of July the 5th.
I mean, my immigration stack's been so high, I've had to parcel the news out.
I've had a stagger to reporting of this stuff.
The article is titled Border Fence Jumpers Breaking Bones.
It includes the claim that sections of the border with a 14-foot-high fence are as tall as a two or three-story house.
It tells the stories of several women who broke bones and retreated extensively to health care and even surgeries at the expense of U.S. taxpayers.
Article written by Perla Treviso of the Arizona Daily Star.
And it casually mentions that foreign woman and question it broke bones and so forth had been deported multiple times.
So the newspaper editorializing against the fence because it's too high.
The illegals, when they jump from the top, they break their bones.
No, they want to get rid of the fence.
They don't want the fence higher.
The fence is self.
The fence is an obstruction.
Well, maybe mattresses at the bottom, but they have not editorialized for mattresses at the bottom.
The assertion that the border fence is as tall as a two or three-story house came from Fernando Valdez, Mexico's deputy consul general in Nogales, Arizona.
He was quoted as saying, what surprises us in Meiko is that people continue to jump from heights that can be the equivalent of a two or even three-story house.
But we hear they feel pressure to do it because they're holding the line or they start insulting them and then telling them to jump.
You know, houses south of the border have got to really have low ceilings if 14 feet equals three stories.
I mean, three stories would be a minimum 30 feet.
And these, but these people still are jumping from 14 uh 14 feet high.
And it's uh too much.
By the way, folks, yesterday on this program at the at the well, I pointed out something that I had been noticing.
First, I first noticed it actually when I was in Sacramento.
Oh, I gosh, I I wish I could remember the exact case.
But it was it was a murderer.
Uh folks, I'm I'm kidding not.
It was an actual murder who was brought into court for sentencing.
And he was he he was he did not express remorse for what he had done, and the media just had a cow.
The media and and some spectators just had a cow.
Was that the polyclass case?
Maybe it was.
Maybe well that that happened after I was left Sacramento.
Well, then maybe maybe I'm confusing the two.
Maybe there is just one, but maybe it was the polyclass murderer.
That this guy did not express remorse, and people had literally a cow over this.
And I began to understood what that meant.
If he had expressed remorse, if he would have just asked for forgiveness, if he would have said he really didn't mean to do it, then we would hate him less.
And we would be more inclined to sentence him to fewer years.
Okay, it was the polyclass case.
And I warned everybody, I said be on the lookout for this because this is the latest technique of the left.
This whole business, what what does it matter?
You have a mass murderer here, so what if he's got remorse or not?
And what it what it meant then and what it means now is that if the mass murderer or any kind of uh severe, as Mitt Romney would say, criminal, expresses the slightest bit of remorse, then we can forgive.
We can forgive, yes, and we can maybe use lighter sentences.
Well, I pointed out that this murdering illegal in San Francisco had not expressed remorse.
In fact, he had laughed about it, and I said, This guy is in deep trouble because all he's got to do is say sorry.
Anyway, I haven't seen it.
I didn't click on the link.
I don't for some, I don't it's just don't like watching videos on my phone or computer.
Unless they're close captions.
But ABC Eyeball News.
Let me make sure it was ABC Eyeball News, but somebody interviewed this guy.
Uh San Francisco Media.
Well, I'm sorry, I can't at a glance here find out who did it.
But it was somebody in the media San Francisco interviewing Francesco Sanchez, and they coached him in the interview.
They kept asking him if he felt sorry for what he had done.
No!
You're not kept coaching him.
Okay, okay, so KGO ABC Eyeball News.
They kept coaching him.
You don't feel sorry?
No, I don't think really, you don't have the slightest bit.
They repeatedly urged him to say he's sorry in English, and after some long pauses, he finally mutters that he does feel sorry for killing her.
And it was clear when you watch this, it starts at about the 17 minute mark in the video.
At the precise moments of the 18 minute mark, the interpreter asks him.
But oh, that's another thing.
The interpreter was not honestly interpreting what he said in Spanish back to English.
The interpret I have always been worried about this.
I don't care if it's at the UN.
I don't care if it's on Chicom leader speaking.
I've always wondered how do we trust that the translators telling us the truth of what whoever is talking is saying?
And what happened in this KGO interview yesterday, the interpreter, because this illegal only speaks Spanish.
And the interpreter, people found out later, was making up things that the perpetrator was not saying, because they were hellbent on getting him to say he was sorry.
The interpreter asks him.
That means do you feel bad?
And he kept saying no, shaking his head from side to side, crystal clear.
At first, Sanchez tells the interpreter in Spanish that he feels no regrets about shooting Catherine Steinley.
He repeats that assertion until the interpreter berates him, and this is all on the video.
Are you sure you don't feel any regrets?
Are you sure?
If finally this idiot figures out what's going on, he figures out he's being coached and manipulated.
They repeatedly urge him to say he's sorry in English, and after some long pauses, he finally mutters that he feels sorry for killing her.
The English-speaking reporter from Eyeball 7 News put words in his mouth in a form of a question.
You feel sorry for everybody, including Kate Steinley's family.
But it's not clear whether Sanchez has any idea what she speaks, because she does, he doesn't speak English.
So he just, yeah, see, yes.
So they they finally coerced this guy, coach this guy into admitting he feels sorry for what he had done, and sorry for everybody after minutes and minutes of the guy defining said, no, I'm not sorry.
The interpreter also coaches Sanchez to say he's sorry to the family of Kate Steinley.
Sanchez says he has nothing else to say in Spanish, and then the interpreter says, Are you sure you have nothing else to say?
The interpreter urges him to think about how he would feel if this happened to his family.
And finally, after more pauses, he mutters out that he's sorry to everybody.
And no mistake, that's that's what all this remorse business and feeling sorry is all about.
By the way, there's more news out of Greece.
Do you know what they're doing in Greece?
They have put limits on the amount of money you can withdraw from your ATM.
Something like $55 a day.
They have forbidden any payments or wire transfers out of the country.
Do you know where they're getting the money for the ATM machines?
They are going to citizens' safe deposit boxes.
The banks are going to citizens' safe deposit boxes and taking the cash out and using that for the ATM machines, and they are supposedly crediting each account, each safe deposit box with the equivalent amount in Euros in a promissory note.
But they're literally stealing cash without the safe deposit box owner present.
You know, it takes two keys, yours and the banks.
Well, not now.
The bank can get in there.
And that's how they're stocking the ATM machines.
Now, if they get away with this in Greece, just walk in and say, we know cash anymore, we got To get cash from you to stock the ATM machines.
They get it from your safe deposit box.
Everybody else's safe deposit all over the country, not just Athens, but all over the country.
And people, by the way, knowing what's coming, have been hoarding a lot of cash in the safe deposit boxes, knowing full well that the collapse is coming.
Anyway, I got to take a break here, folks, and you sit tight, because we are coming right back.
Okay, grab uh audio sound rate number number nine, have it standing by, and we go to Patty of Biloxi, Mississippi.
It's great to have you here.
Hi, Patty.
Hey, Rush, how are you doing?
Good, thank you.
Hey, I was wondering about um what would be the possibility of setting up a sanctuary city program for all like businesses and people to kind of help, you know, help us from the unfair and burdensome burdensome EPA regulations.
You know, I speculated about this yesterday.
Why can't we set up a sanctuary city where anything we want to do that we used to be able to do is is permitted.
You know, where if if if marriage is strictly between a man and a woman like it's always been announced, was why can't we have sanctuary cities where that's the case?
I mean, how do they get away with sanctuary cities with break the law?
Allow breaking the law in violation of U.S. government policy.
And notice who enables it the federal government when it's run by the Democrats.
I'm sure there'd be some people that would love to maybe have a sanctuary city for taxes.
Uh yeah, well, that see that that's it's all in what the federal government chooses to enforce.
If you set up a sanctuary city and you say the maximum tax rate anybody will have to pay here, just take a number 25%.
The feds are going to come get you.
But if you're a leftist and you have a sanctuary city where illegal immigrants can live legally, any number of violations of U.S. law, the federal government has to be complicit in it.
But even when Republican presidents have been in the White House, these sanctuary cities have existed.
You know, 33 states have at least one sanctuary city.
Did you know that?
33 states have at least one sanctuary city.
I'm pretty sure I think I saw that this morning.
My question about it is how in the world is it tolerable?
Well, look, I know the answer to these questions.
I mean, the question is liberalism is liberalism.
And it's all part of one big movement to corrupt what has always been thought of as the majority in this company.
I'm not talking about religious majority or racial majority.
I'm talking about way of thinking.
Obama's flooding the zone, folks.
Obama is single-handedly trying to change the face of this country.
And he's doing it in want and violation of the law.
Claim, well, now he can't be advised.
I've got the presidential powers here of executive orders and executive action, so I'm not breaking the law.
And our side gets into academic intellectual debates over whether or not Obama's right that he has this kind of power.
Meanwhile, the real damage is inflicted.
But you know, here's the thing.
Obviously, people on our side of the aisle don't think this way.
Otherwise, there would be a right-wing, quote-unquote sanctuary city.
But we just we don't think of wanton open lawlessness as a way to advance a political agenda.
We're real old-fashioned in that regard.
But I understand, I understand everybody's frustration with this, particularly when it results in the murder of American citizens.
And when will you hear this next story?
Okay.
Okay.
It is from Forbes.
Here's the headline Small Businesses threatened with $36,500 fines for helping employees with health care costs.
This was not and is not part of Obamacare.
The IRS just created this.
And that's one of the problems with Obamacare.
Obamacare is open-ended.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services can invent regulations.
The IRS can invent new tax rules and regulations, and they've just done it.
And this provision was never voted on by anybody in Congress.
Small businesses that reimburse employees for the cost of premiums for individual health insurance policies, or who pay their health costs directly, will be fined up to $36,500 a year per employee under a new IRS regulation that took effect July 1st.
According to the notice, an employer arrangement that reimburses or pays for employee individual health premiums is considered to be a group health plan that is subject to the $100 per employee per day penalty.
The penalty applies whether the reimbursement is considered a before tax or after tax contribution.
Kevin Kuhlman, the policy director for the National Association of Independent Business, says this is the biggest penalty nobody is talking about.
The penalty for compensating employees for health care related expenses is enough to destroy most small businesses.
And they've posted the National Association of Independent Businesses and the NFIB have posted, no kidding, this week IRS starts punishing businesses for helping workers buy insurance.
The new IRS penalty is more than 18 times greater than the $2,000 employer mandate penalty under Obamacare for not providing quality health insurance for employers.
And employers with fewer than 50 workers are not exempt from this, as they are from the employer mandate penalty.
The only businesses that are exempt are those three years in existence and younger.
The rule appears nowhere in the Affordable Care Act.
It appears nowhere in the statute.
It appears nowhere in Obamacare.
It was developed by the Obama administration's regulation writers at the IRS.
The rule punishes small businesses for providing the only health insurance support that many people can afford, a contribution to help employees pay premiums for their individual or family health plans policies, or to help finance direct payment for medical services.
Reimbursing employees for the cost of insurance or medical service is a way for small business to help their employees without the administrative headaches of setting up a costly group plan, said Kuhlman.
Most small employers don't have human resources departments or benefits specialist, so it's just a simpler, easier way to help their employees.
But no more, says the IRS.
If you take the simpler, easier route that you can afford, the IRS will slap you with a $100 a day per employee fine until you stop.
Representative Charles Boostany has introduced legislation in the House and Grassley in the Senate to fix this.
If there's an opportunity for a bipartisan improvement toward affordable health care, this has to be it.
There's no real justification for penalizing small businesses that do what the law's strongest supporters claim to want, which is to help people get coverage, to help people pay their bills.
The rules cover employees with more than one employee participating in an employer health care coverage payment arrangement.
Employers can exclude workers who have fewer than three years of service to the company, or are under 25, or are part-time or seasonal.
Well, you know what this is going to do?
People are going to start getting fired after three years and converted to part-time workers to avoid yet another government penalty or fine imposed upon them by Obamacare.
And what's this?
Here you have Obama and the rest of the Democrat Party claiming that all they want is for people to get insured who don't have insurance.
They just want people to get covered and they want people to get treatment.
And they don't want it to cost an arm and a leg.
Well, a lot of small businesses cannot afford to do it.
But they like their employees.
They like having them.
They're not able to pay their employees enough, or they can on their own go out and buy health insurance.
So they try to supplement the purchase of a plan, supplement with help out of the premium or help on the deductible.
And if they do that, if a penny of assistance is offered an employee by a small business, that small business can be fined up to 36 grand.
And in some cases, that's going to be more than what they're paying some part-timers.
And it's not even part of Obamacare.
The IRS just wrote it.
Well, it says the IRS.
Look at this comes from the White House, it's all this crap does.
And they implement this on July 1st, and it goes all the way through the holiday weekend with nobody knowing anything about it.
I mean, I don't know how many of you own small businesses.
But I know that many of you who do really value the people that work for you.
You try to do as well by them as you can in this economy.
The cost of health insurance is skyrocketing, and you can't afford it for yourself, much less all your employees.
So you come up with ways to do it as best you can, and if that involves helping somebody pay a premium, like listen, if their premium is two grand a year, you bump them in like 500 bucks or so, whatever, just to help them out.
Anything to avoid a formal plan and all that, and all the administrative headaches and costs that come with that because you don't have a department set up to handle that kind of stuff.
IRS never can't do it.
This is this to me is outrageous.
What's the difference in this?
What if you have an employee, a really valued employee, who has run into some time in life, and is in debt, credit card debt and so forth.
What if you like the employees so much you try to help out?
You know, in advance on a salary here, or maybe a bonus or what have you, these things happen all the time.
What if they get to the point where you can't even do that?
What if it's not about health care?
You can't even do that because here comes the IRS saying, No, there are tax consequences to your assistance here.
Is this a gift or is this an additional payment?
I mean, it's this case, this is not charity.
These are people that actually are employed.
But the big thing here is you talk about good intentions, small businesses, good intentions trying to help their employees get the headache and the stress of health care off their minds so they can focus on work.
And here comes the IRS saying, no, you can't help them.
No, you can't be charitable.
No, you can't do this.
We're gonna fine you to a hundred bucks a day, up to a maximum of 36,500 a year Per employee.
But you can get out of it if you have part-time employees.
You can help them all you want.
And if you have people who've been working for you less than three years, you can help them all you want.
But people have been with you a long time, lots of service, a lot of loyalty, encounter some hard times.
And hard times, by the way, you could be trucking along just fine.
And then here comes the mandates of Obamacare.
And that could be all it takes to ruin somebody's financial future.
I don't know how common it is for small businesses to help employees.
It's it's probably rare in major large business corporate settings.
Small businesses probably a little bit more frequent.
But now it's a crime.
As of July 1st.
It's not in Obamacare.
It's not in the law.
It's another example of a department.
This case the IRS could be the EPA tomorrow.
Could be health and human services the next day, could be Homeland Security.
Just, hey, let's write a new law here.
They've got the power to write a new regulation without Congress being involved, the elected representatives of the people not being involved, no vote, no nothing, no presidential signature, just we're gonna do this.
And there's no stopping it.
But I found this one just is talking about mean.
You know, I listen, I listen to millennials talk.
Low information people, people who vote for Democrats.
It does come down to who they think is mean and who is nice.
I think the Democrats are nice people, care about little guys, care about the little guys.
Republicans are mean, they only care about the rich and they war on women and all this stuff.
Well, this is mean.
This is just flat out mean.
The government itself creates mandates on citizens that they have to have to buy this healthcare stuff, and the cost skyrockets, but they have to buy it.
That's mean.
And then here comes an employer who wants to help out now and then, occasionally.
That's nice too.
But that's now a crime.
And who's doing all this?
This is Democrats doing this.
Democrats in the Obama administration, Democrats over at the IRS.
I gotta take a break.
I'm a little long here, folks.
So we'll be back in just a second.
Up next is Sharia from Louisville.
Great to have you on the program.
And hello.
Hello.
Hi.
Hi.
It's such an honor to speak with you finally.
Um I I have three children who absolutely love the Raj Revier book.
Well, thank you.
Thank you so much for that.
And I am a hardworking middle class to upper middle class mother that I'm trying to write about children in the land of the free and a home and environment.
And I'm just very, very concerned that it seems like our freedoms are being stripped away, you know, daily.
And we watched a movie on the American Revolution last night.
And you know, it almost made me crowd because I see what these boys fought for and bought for end up being stripped away on a daily basis.
So I wanted to see what your thoughts were on how we can turn this back around.
Or or if we can.
Well, that's what we've been trying to do here for years.
I I I constantly ask myself what needs to be done.
Is the fire lit under people?
Does it need to be lit?
What do people I think I think people like you and me are just waiting for somebody with a good idea for us of what needs to be done?
Um, what was the movie you watched?
We watched uh The Patriots on Mal Gutsman.
The Patriots, oh, and they'll give some.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
You know, it's amazing.
Uh in writing these books, you relive with so many people.
It's been 200 plus years.
I mean, people take it for granted.
I'm a lot of people not even taught it.
It's it's astounding what all had to happen for this country to exist.
Look, let me deal with we got out of time here right now, but tomorrow I promise to pick up on this, Sharia.
We'll be back here in just a second.
Okay, folks, that's it.
But remember, there's always next hour, next day, next month.
There's always next time, and there will be one here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection