The American League Championship Series begins tonight, the National League tomorrow.
I got all kinds of college football, otherwise known as prison gang football.
For those of you who like that, in the NFL on Sunday, you can't do better than that.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's Open Line Friday!
Only kidding about prison gang football.
It was a joke.
Lighten up.
Great to have you here, Rush Limbaugh behind the Golden EIB microphone, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
A network named after the performance characteristics of the host.
And Open Line Friday means you can talk about pretty much anything.
800-282-2882, the email address, LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
We have some news here about Obamacare, and it's not good.
First off, from the Washington Post.
And of course, there's no way it was going to be good.
There isn't any good news in Obamacare.
Well, depending on your perspective, if you are a big insurance company, you will love Obamacare.
And if you are a major hospital group, you will love Obamacare.
But from the standpoint of people that interest me, consumers, the people, there's not much good about it.
Been lied to about it, been lied to about how much it's going to cost or how cheap it's going to become or how free it's going to be in some cases.
You've been lied to about its availability.
You've been lied to about its quality.
It's political malpractice, what has happened here.
And now, according to the Washington Post, the White House is projecting marginal, marginal Obamacare enrollment growth next year.
The regime is predicting a meager increase next year in the number of Americans with private insurance through Obamacare, a forecast far below previous government estimates that signals the obstacles to attracting people who remain uninsured.
What the hell?
How in the world can this be?
This was mandatory.
You had to have it.
What do you mean enrollment's going to be marginal?
Well, no, I know people can pay a fine instead of getting coverage.
Right now, the fine is cheaper.
Let me ask you, if you people, any of you out there have not, you do not have health insurance and have been informed by the IRS of your fine, have you gotten your letter from the IRS yet about this?
Because I have seen some people who have.
And this fine has a name, your shared responsibility payment.
If you do not have Obamacare, you'll hear from the IRS that you have a shared responsibility payment due, and that is your fine.
And the example I saw was a family that owed $2,300 in addition to everything they had paid income tax-wise.
That was the shared responsibility payment.
You see, everybody having health insurance is supposed to bring down costs and all this happy, go-lucky malarkey.
And everybody participating is mandatorily, everybody being forced to participate means it's fair for everybody.
It means you can't get coverage if you haven't paid.
It isn't fair that everybody else is paying and you don't, and then you go to the emergency room or whatever.
So you're going to face a shared responsibility payment if you don't pay.
If you don't get a plan, but even with that, how in the world do you have White House projects marginal Obamacare enrollment?
I thought it was going great guns finally.
I thought they finally fixed the website.
This is my point.
We cannot rely on anything this administration tells us about anything that they are doing or have done.
We can't rely on the honesty of the costs, the cheaper premiums that keep your doctor, keep your plan if you like it, routine.
None of that was true.
They told us it was going to be so attractive and so exciting.
Everybody would sign up.
What is this marginal enrollment?
Administration predicting a meager increase next year in the number of Americans with private insurance through Obamacare forecast far below previous government estimates.
Isn't everything off government estimates from unemployment to new jobless claims to the trade deficit?
Isn't everything they tell us they estimate wrong?
Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell announced yesterday that an expected 10 million Americans will be covered by late next year by health plans they bought on the federal and state exchanges created under law.
That figure is just half the most recent forecast by congressional budget analysts who have long expected 2016 to usher in the biggest surge in enrollment.
Why?
Why would there be a surge in enrollment?
Nobody wants this.
Well, nobody's not true.
The vast majority of people don't want to go anywhere near this.
They don't trust it.
They don't trust the privacy of the website.
They don't trust the website's going to work.
They don't trust the insurance companies.
Everybody, like I said yesterday, is scared to death about this stuff.
They're scared to not have it.
They're scared if they get it, they're going to lose it.
Nobody has any confidence, and rightly so.
It's not natural to have confidence in this administration.
It's going to be a little off.
But that's, folks, that's only part of the story.
A school district in Tennessee is shutting its doors.
Clay County Director of Schools, Jerry Strong, said the school board made its decision to cancel classes because of budget issues related to government mandates the district can't afford on Obamacare.
He said the Affordable Care Act was the straw that broke the Campbell's back and that it has made it very difficult for us to have our employees properly, legally covered and meet the mandate of the law.
So they're shutting a school district.
Now, there's a companion story to this.
Small Tennessee school district closes, citing financial struggles and a need for new income.
And the companion story is this.
United Health Group's third quarter profit beats estimates.
This is how capitalism works in America under crony socialism.
The people at United Health Group are making millions of dollars because of their croniest association with Obama.
And a little Tennessee school district has to close because it can't afford it.
But a massive health insurer is increasing.
This is crony.
What this is is cronyism.
This is not capitalism.
These insurance companies have thrown in with Obama rather than face his wrath and oppose him as they would normally naturally do on the basis of issues and ideas.
No insurance company would get anywhere near this.
Obama knows that.
So he makes side deals with them, guaranteeing them customers by this mandate.
So the insurance companies say, well, hell's bills, we can't lose.
The government is making people buy our product.
Except the cronyism leads to costs and expenses that a little school district here in Tennessee can't afford, so they shut down.
And there's a story today, a second similar situation has happened.
And now two additional Obamacare co-ops have closed in two different states.
You see anything about this on the news?
That's what the news is supposed to tell you, stuff like this, but you won't see this on the news.
But I've got it here.
So enrollment increases are marginal, which means there's less and less money going into the system.
The cronyism of the insurance companies with Obama, and it's not just the insurance hospitals, too, and it's not just healthcare.
It's Green Energy and any number of other companies like GE.
There's all kinds of cronyism going on.
And they're all making out like bandits.
And it's not capitalism.
If anything, it's crony socialism or crony fascism in a sense, maybe, but it certainly is not capitalism.
So a little school district in Tennessee closes.
They can't afford Obamacare.
Insurance companies just scoring like bandits.
And two Obama co-ops closed because there aren't any enrollees.
There are not enough enrollees to sustain it.
The Obamacare Exchange cover California.
Did you track down the truck?
You got the stuff off the truck?
Hubba-hubba.
That's all you have to do.
We have to follow FedEx and get our stuff off the van.
I had to hire somebody to do it.
I'm going to shut up.
I'm just going to shut up.
Any of you people have to hire somebody to follow and find a FedEx truck to get what's yours off of it?
Okay.
That's it.
I'm saying no more.
You know why?
You know why?
Because the suite number is not on the address, even though they know who's here.
Don't say any more, Stern.
Do not goad me any further.
What, there's only three?
See, I knew there should be 10.
But we got three.
That's enough to get through the weekend.
Thank you, Eddie.
Thank you very, very much.
Okay, now go wash the car.
Just kidding?
Just kidding.
I'm just trying to lighten it up here.
Sitting for a long period.
I love this study.
How many of you people have heard the news?
I'm just kidding, Eddie, and he knows it.
Just lighten up in there.
Wash the car.
I could have really made it.
Who's going to send my FedEx package?
FedEx are going to send them?
No, they're not.
I know Fred Smith.
Fred Smith's a great guy.
I've met Fred Smith who runs FedEx, but he's not in charge of it.
Just, would you stop?
I'm going to a break.
Stop goading me about this.
Let me grab them audio soundbites here.
By the way, ladies and gentlemen, we haven't had any internet announcement.
Jim Webb thinks the debate was rigged.
Jim Webb thinks it was stacked against him.
He made it obvious when he was every time they came to him on Wednesday night, he complained that they weren't coming to him.
I kind of found that strange.
I mean, every time they went to Jim Webb, well, it's about time you come to me.
I haven't had much time here tonight.
Well, okay, they're at you now, so have had it.
When the whole thing was over, he was in Washington yesterday.
He went to the Council on Foreign Relations.
The New World Order.
He made a speech.
The New World Order.
And among the things he said was this.
That debate, which was, I want to be very frank, it was rigged in terms of who was going to get the time on the floor by the way that Anderson and Cooper was selecting people to supposedly respond to something someone else said.
I even turned around to Bernie Sanders at one point and said, Bernie, say my name, will you?
Say my name.
It's very difficult to win a debate when you don't have the opportunity to speak with the same amount of time on issues as the other two did.
I think Webb actually ended up being lucky.
The more he would have spoken, the greater the odds they would have run him off that stage.
He's the least Democrat-sounding person at a Democrat debate I've ever heard.
The guy was out of place.
But he's right.
It was rigged for Hillary.
I mean, the whole purpose of that from the Democrat National Committee standpoint was to grease the skids for Hillary for the rest of the race.
And Bernie Sanders played right along by exonerating her on this email scan.
There's no other reason for these other candidates to oppose her.
If they're going to throw that off the table, there's no reason for them to even try to secure the nomination from her.
So this whole thing, he's right.
It was rigged from the standpoint of what, and there's a story today that the women of the Democrat National Committee are running the whole show now.
That everybody in the executive committee, every executive there is at the DNC who's a woman, has basically taken control of this thing for the express purposes.
You know, Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz and her associates and the express purpose of this thing is to get Hillary the nomination finally, make sure that there's not some slick guy that comes along again like Obama did in 2008.
Yeah, it's here in the stack somewhere.
I'll find it.
Dr. Krauthammer on Fox News, special report, Brett Bayer last night.
This is his opinion on the fundraising totals that I spent exactly one hour ago explaining to you.
And if you missed it, we're going to post the table with all the money and the type of donors that all the candidates have raised so far, Democrats and Republicans.
And here's Dr. Krauthammer's take.
You know, you do have to wonder about the people who've been sending money to Donald Trump.
73,000.
They must be very committed.
I think that's really quite remarkable.
He, of course, doesn't need it.
I think the only numbers that really stand out here are Ben Carson, who's an amazing fundraising machinist who's from an enormous number of small donors.
He doesn't have the big fat cash.
Once again, you have a shock and surprise here in many sectors of the Republican establishment and even conservative media over the amount of money Trump's getting.
Krauthammer was taken aback.
Trump has not asked for any money.
He said he's spending his own.
It's thought that he has $10 billion.
And still 73,000 people have sent him money.
And I think this is the given the way people in politics think, that fact, 73,000 people have contributed a total of almost $3.9 million to Donald Trump.
That's what tells them that Trump's support is real.
They're shocked.
You heard it in Dr. Krauthammer's voice.
They must be very committed.
It's really quite remarkable.
So up until now, there must have been some question about how strong Trump's support really was.
The polling data must not be telling a whole story.
But when they hear that 73,000 people have given an average of 38 bucks to total $2.9 or $3 million, they go, whoa.
And then they're really blown away by how much money Ben Carson's raised.
They look at Ben Carson and they see somebody that can barely be heard.
He's so soft-spoken.
He's not a professional politician.
He doesn't have a professional political apparatus.
And it just boggles the mind.
And of course, the chosen candidate or the preferred candidate in this mix is Jeb Bush.
And he's got barely, just barely over half the amount of money that Ben Carson's raised.
And Jeb has professional fundraisers.
Jeb has professional donors.
Jeb has the cream of the crop designed to collect money.
Ben Carson, neophyte in terms of his experience in politics.
The difference is, in the case of both Trump and Carson, it's the voters that are giving money, not professionals, not professional fundraisers.
Carson might have hired some professional fundraisers, but vast majority of people giving to Trump are not even being asked to.
They're doing it on their own.
And Ben Carson's 77% of the money that Carson's raised, people giving less than 200 bucks, and they're enthusiastic.
And this is boggling the minds of the inside the establishment professionals.
They've always believed to get that kind of money.
You've got to go get the big donors.
You've got to get the corporate guys.
You've got to get the rich, the creme to the creme.
And Ben Carson's getting his money from the equivalent of Tea Party types.
This just doesn't compute.
But let me repeat this again, because these are the numbers you have to know.
Bernie Sanders, $26 million.
77% of that $26 million comes from people who've donated less than $200.
That $26 million is bigger, roughly equal to the amount of money that Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Lindsey Graham have raised.
But Bush, Christie, Kasich, and Graham have generated that total with far fewer people, far fewer donors.
So just in terms of the numbers of people giving their $26 million to Bernie Sanders versus the number of people giving $26 million to the combined Bush, Christie, Kasich, Graham category, it's not even close.
The numbers of Democrats dwarf the number of people.
So no matter how you slice this, it's not good for the Republican establishment.
It takes four of their candidates to equal what Bernie Sanders has raised.
And they might think it's good that it's taken far fewer people, but that's actually not nearly as much support from actual voters as our sideling up to Democrat candidates here.
Here's this is Mary in Shelburne, Vermont.
Hi, Mary.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, can you hear me, Roger?
Yeah, I hear you fine.
Thank you.
Okay, because I'm in a car.
I was listening to your commentary on the whole situation with Sanders and his $26 million and the fact that most of his supporters are $200 or less.
And I simply, since I live up here about four months out of the year, and I know an awful lot of people that are Democrats up here, mostly Democrats, few conservatives, their attitude with Sanders is one of if he did not stick to his original position on the Second Amendment, they would literally wipe him off the slate.
That's how he got elected in the first place.
So my question is, where and who are these people who are contributing?
I'm saying that they are supporters of the Second Amendment and the position that he took.
Well, that may be a comforting thing to tell yourself, but I don't think that's the case.
I don't think most of the people giving money to Bernie Sanders have any idea that years ago he's pro-NRA and anti-wipe out the Second Amendment and anti-gun.
I think most of the people giving him money think that he's going to close the banks.
He's going to put the NRA in jail or try to.
He's going to get us out of every war that we are in.
He's going to do whatever he can to save the client.
I think they think he is the real socialist deal.
You think that his support would collapse if these donors realized his original position on guns?
Oh, absolutely, in Vermont.
Vermont is one of those states where in the fall, when it comes to deer season or any whatever kind of a shooting season there is, the trucks are out with all the gun paraphernalia on them.
Yeah, but look at what he said during the debate.
He came out for more gun control in the debate.
That's what people think of him now.
I still think he was hanging on to that Second Amendment because the people who have been working for us have been making a comment about he better stick to his Second Amendment if he doesn't.
We're not keeping him where he is.
He's gone.
Well, he's gone anyway.
I mean, unless no, he's gone anyway.
He's got it because if they indict Hillary, it's hello, Biden.
I'm telling you that the women.
Let me find that story.
No, I don't.
I don't think there's the slightest chance that he could win the nomination because I don't think the DNC is going to permit it.
But you know me, I'm wrong, what, twice a year.
So that could be one of them, one of those times.
But the Democrat Party is in bed with the people Bernie Sanders is talking about destroying.
They're in bed with corporations.
They are in bed with Wall Street.
They are the party of the rich today, not the Republicans.
They're the party of the Hollywood rich and the corporate rich in Hollywood.
They are the party of Wall Street.
I mean, take a look at all these big bank firms, these CEOs.
Who are they giving money to?
Obama and the Democrat Party.
Well, what happens to his base if, depending on how he doesn't get the nominee, I guess his base could be angry and stay home if they think he's been cheated out of the nomination.
It's entirely possible.
But then it's going to become a question.
Let's say that happens.
Let's say that I'm right, and Bernie looks like he's going to win it, and the DNC moves in with some kind of maneuver to deny him, whatever it might be, and his supporters think he's been railroaded.
His supporters are then left with the possibility of either Hillary Clinton being elected and anger at the DNC and Hillary for screwing Bernie, or take your pick, Jeb Bush, Trump, pick a Republican.
I think the reason I say that Bernie having this taken away from him is not going to matter that much, because I really believe the primary motivator of Democrat voters is hatred for Republicans and conservatives.
And I think that's why Bernie Sanders is getting so much support.
I don't think it's really rooted about people personally liking old Bernie.
I think Bernie compared to Hillary, I mean, Bernie is voicing the hatred for conservatives and Republicans in the Iraq war that those people on the left harbor themselves and want to hear.
So, excuse me, I'm still suffering the ravages of this virus here, folks.
I'm still sleeping 85 or 90%.
This is why my mind loses, or I lose mine, well, whatever, 10% of the time.
Anyway, I really do believe that their hatred, their opposition, their disgust for us, their desire for us to continue to lose, would overcome any impulse to sit out the election because they're so angry that their guy Bernie didn't get the nomination.
Now, we won't know if that's a correct assessment, maybe ever, depending on what happens in this whole Democrat process.
But I do know, I am totally confident in saying that one of the prime motivators of Democrat voters is denying Republicans victory.
However, I just, I think Bernie's popularity, some of it's personal, I mean, some of it's genuine, but I think a lot of his support is made up of these kooks that make up the new Democrat base that really is root, all these people posting these inane comments on Facebook and Twitter and website comment sections.
You read this stuff and there's some genuine, it's it's one flew over the cuckoo's nest out there, and these people are obsessed with hatred, literally filled with it, anonymously, and Bernie gives voice to it.
Ergo, their enthusiasm for the guy.
And I think that will override.
Now, this is not to say that the Democrats are an automatic win.
Anything can happen to change my equation here.
Such as projecting here, what if it really, as time goes on, looks like Bernie Sanders does continue to lead in the enthusiasm and the size of crowds and so forth, and his voters begin to think that Hillary primary wins are illegitimate.
And if there is real belief among Bernie Sanders supporters that he is being cheated, yeah, that could make him.
It's going to be a tough call come November 2016.
What their prime motivation is going to be, to punish the Democrats or punish Republicans.
Punish the Democrats, they stay home and don't vote.
Punish Republicans, show up, bite the bullet, vote for Hillary, who is not anywhere near as popular as Bernie is.
It's another thing.
Now, here's this story.
It's a Daily Mail story.
Exclusive Democrat National Committee woman says her party is clearing a path for Hillary because the women in charge want it that way.
Now, given this news, if this news is given a wide berth, the Republican National Committee ought to be able to win every single vote of every normal red-blooded American male in this country after they hear about this.
The women of the DNC have taken over and are running it, and they do not want any men around, and they do not want an old man getting a nomination.
That would be Bernie.
They want a cakewalk for Hillary.
The women of the DNC are livid over what happened to Hillary in 2008 via Obama.
They are livid over the way Hillary has been treated for the past 20 years.
They think Hillary has single-handedly, by virtue of staying with Bill and supporting Bill, saved the Democrat Party.
The women of the Democrat National Committee think that Hillary is owed much more than they can ever pay her.
And they are fuming over what happened in 2008 because 2008 was her coronation.
And at the first sign of a young guy that came along, the DNC threw her overboard, like yesterday's breakfast, and glommed onto Obama.
And they have been fuming ever since.
And they are led by Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz.
Here, the poll quotes.
Female members, Democrat Party's controlling body spoke to Daily Mail Online in Vegas following the primary debate on Tuesday.
This member, this female member, rattled off a list of women at the top of the DNC hierarchy and said the two vice chairs helped craft a decision this summer to favor Clinton at the party level.
The committee woman warned her party could promote Hillary because she's a woman and risk having her implode after she's nominated.
They don't care.
They want her nominated simply because she is a woman.
The women of the Democrat National Committee surprisingly think that they are second-class citizens and they're fed up with the guys running the show.
You would think that their guys are prince charming because every one of these guys kowtows to women, kow-tows to feminazis, kow-tows to feminism.
But they apparently are harboring a secret rage and have been since 2008.
The Democrat National Committee insisted it runs an impartial primary process period, but it has sanctioned only six debates this time around.
Democrat presidential candidates had to survive 27 debates in 2007 and 2008.
That's how many debates, primary debates there were in 2007, 2000.
There are six this time, and that's to save Hillary, who is not good in them.
So that's the bottom line.
And some of them are very worried.
They want a cakewalk for Hillary because they are worried Hillary needs help.
Here's a poll quote from the story.
I haven't heard anyone say we should make Hillary undergo a trial by fire.
On the contrary, the women in charge seem eager more and more to have her skate to the general election.
Look, I have nothing against women in politics, this female source said.
But it's not healthy for the party if we get behind a woman because she's a woman and risk having her implode after she's nominated because she isn't tested enough.
But the women of the DNC are through with this idea Hillary has been tested.
She has more than proven herself.
She has more than given herself up to the party.
She has more than sacrificed.
And by God, it's her time now.
And they have wrested control and they're doing everything they can to ramrod this through so that she ends up with the nomination.
Quick timeout, back with more after this.
Don't go.
No, Eddie told me they weren't going to deliver them because the suite number wasn't on there.
He told me that's why I had to send him out there to get them and he did it.
Someday, maybe I should write about it.
But folks, I'm through whining here.
I just, it's been, it's been just one of these really, really frustrating days.
And if I hadn't mentioned it to you, you probably would never know it because of the strength of my professionalism.
I just felt like whining today.
I normally don't.
This is Daniel, my adopted hometown, Sacramento.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Good afternoon, sir.
It's a pleasure.
Thank you.
And yes, I'm actually from Albuquerque, but nonetheless, the big issue I was talking about was during the next debates for the Republican candidates, we need to forget the RNC, and the Republican candidates must control the debate narrative.
They must submit the questions they will discuss in advance and let the moderators, so to speak, give out the questions at will.
Well, the only way you can do that is if you did your own debate, which I can see.
Look, when the point is to get your message out, control it.
Understand that?
But they've agreed to appear on CNBC.
And I don't care what CNBC is not going to let the candidates determine the questions they are asked.
Now, in case you missed it, Trump and Carson sent a letter to CNBC, joint campaign letters.
If this thing goes three hours, we're not showing up and you're not going to have an audience.
So CNBC said, okay, okay, okay.
We reduce it to two hours.
Two-hour debate.
It's October 28th.
This includes the opening and closing statements, too.
And Trump and Carson made that happen.
So they have exerted some control over the debate.
Look, I get what you're coming from.
You know, CNN, CNBC, I mean, what's the point.
But they are agreeing to it, and that's that.
Can't change it now.
Hope you have a great weekend, my friends.
Thank you so much for being with us today.
It's always, always appreciated, never taken for granted.
And it's the best three hours of the day, most of the time.