All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 3, 2017 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:50
February 3, 2017, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Folks, things are happening so fast.
I can't keep up with them.
Do you realize it was just five minutes ago I put show prep to bed and got ready to go?
And in the last 10 minutes, there have been seven different things that take precedence over everything I've spent the last eight hours doing.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's open line Friday.
Meaning I've got my stacks here, and in the last 10 minutes, here come seven things that take precedence over all those other things.
And it's all fascinating.
It's all entertaining.
It's all good.
It's all important.
I mean, it's getting even harder to categorize this stuff.
You know, what do you put at the top of the stack?
I mean, of these seven things that came in, three of them deserve number one status, but you can't do all three at the same time.
So this is where you just have to trust me, as I know you do.
And it's Open Line Friday, which means that when we go to the phones, the people we put on the air, the callers have a little bit more leeway in talking about what they want, because it doesn't have to be about all of this.
It doesn't have to be politics.
Doesn't have to be culture.
It could be Super Bowl for anything.
Whatever interests you, even if I don't care about it.
That's what doesn't happen Monday through Thursday.
If you call about something I don't care about, that's it.
We tell you to call back on Friday.
Again, 800-282-2882, email address, LRushbo at EIBNet.us.
This is this first.
This has got to be a joke, except that it's not.
Right here it is, thehill.com.
GOP, Senator, we don't have enough power to repeal Obamacare.
No.
No.
In 19, in 2000, whatever, we gave you the House.
You said you needed the Senate.
We gave you the Senate.
You said we don't have the White House.
We need the White House.
Now you've got it all.
You've got the House, the Senate, the White House, pretty soon going to have the Supreme Court.
Not enough power to repeal Obamacare.
And I've had people emailing me, folks.
I should tell you this.
Trump voters, and they're watching all this stuff go on out there with Australia and with MACO and the sanctions on Iran.
And I'm telling you, listen, people that are sending me notes, it's not a sizable number, but I think it represents a big number.
And they're saying, I don't care about this stuff right now.
Where is the Obamacare repeal?
Where are the tax cuts?
Where is the domestic agenda of Obama being turned upside down and inside out?
And some people are starting to get a little impatient.
That's why I asked Vice President Pence about this.
When he was here on, what day was he?
It was here, Wednesday or Thursday.
This is Friday.
Was Pence here?
Yes, it wasn't yesterday.
He assured us on the infrastructure spending.
He assured us that the Obamacare repeal was on track.
This senator is Ron Johnson from Wisconsin.
He said he is warning.
And again, it's theHill.com.
I don't know what's fake news anymore.
This is another thing that it is incumbent upon me to include in practically everything we report today.
It could have elements of fake news in it.
It is stunning how much fake news there is and how much it is expanding.
But this is what thehill.com is saying.
Senator Ron Johnson warning the GOP can only do so much to repeal Obamacare, downplaying lawmakers' ability to completely dismantle the law.
He said, we only have so much power to repeal certain elements of Obamacare through reconciliation.
It's 51 votes.
We can repeal the taxes.
We can repeal the subsidy.
He said this on CNN this morning.
He said, so many of the market reforms, I would call them the market distortions that have caused premiums to skyrocket and out-of-pocket maximums and deductibles to skyrocket.
Those are probably going to need 60 votes.
And we don't have 60 votes.
We only have 52 votes.
And it doesn't sound like the Democrats are really willing to bear the responsibility of the mess they created.
So he's saying essentially that with 51 votes through reconciliation, which is how Obamacare was passed anyway, it was passed through budget reconciliation.
Look, I'm not going to take the time to explain that right now.
Suffice it to say that going the reconciliation route obviates the need for 60 votes because they didn't have 60.
Obama didn't have 60 votes for this either because he didn't have a single Republican vote.
They had to do trick after trick after trick to get the Democrats unified.
They had to lie to Bart Stupak.
Remember that about the bill being pro-life or not?
It's just a bunch of garbage in there.
But anyway, Ron Johnson's saying that through reconciliation, they can repeal the taxes and the subsidies.
But when it comes to the premiums and when it comes to the deductibles, well, I don't know what we're going to be able to do about it because we're going to need 60 votes and the Democrats aren't going to be there to help us.
So this reads like a Saturday night live script to me.
Republicans have won everything there is to win and they still are saying there's not enough power.
Now we need 60 votes.
And this is going to be coupled with some people's suspicion that they don't really want to do this, that some Republicans really don't want to repeal Obamacare.
They really only want to replace.
Have you heard the new terminology now?
By the way, they're throwing out repeal and replace with repeal and repair.
And so there's a growing sentiment out there that some Republicans, I don't know how many, don't even want to tackle it.
It's too hard.
It's fraught with too many unknowns that could backfire, you know, electorally or politically.
Report today from Stanford University and New York University that says fake news did not affect the U.S. election, which means that all those mainstream media stories about how fake news affected the election were themselves fake news.
Fake news did not affect the election.
The fake news wasn't believed by enough people.
The fake news didn't reach enough people.
It's an exhaustive, extensive study of fake news.
And so it has revealed that even the stories claiming fake news affected the outcome were themselves fake news.
The study says that the fake news that helped Trump outnumbered the fake news that helped Hillary, which must mean the study didn't count the endless mainstream media articles and polls that claimed Hillary was a shoe-in.
You talk about fake news.
Those polls, I think one of the reasons the left is as discombobulated as it is is the drive-bys.
I think they believed everything the drive-bys told them.
I think they believed everything that Nate Silver told them.
I think they believed every poll that showed Hillary was going to win in a landslide or by five points or by they believed it.
And then they believed the exit polls.
And then the real truth came in and they weren't prepared for it in any way.
I mean, they never even held out the possibility that Trump could win.
It wasn't even a distant possibility in their vision.
They just bought it all hook, line, and sinker.
The House has voted to overturn an Obama administration drilling rule.
The House today passed a resolution to reverse a pollution rule for oil and natural gas drillers that was put in place by the Obama administration, 221 to 191, to approve a Congressional Review Act resolution against the Bureau of Land Management's methane venting and flaring rule.
Now, if it's approved by the Senate and signed by Trump, the rule would come off the books for good and would once again open up the land to all kinds of drilling that Obama shut down.
That will probably happen.
The labor secretary, former labor secretary, Robert B. Rice, claims that the protesters in Berkeley were actually hired by Breitbart.
That it was a Breitbart false flag.
It weren't really leftists that were doing it.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
Last night on CNN tonight, Don Lemon, speaking with the former Secretary of Labor for Clinton, said the violence we saw at Berkeley, it plays right into the hands of the right-wing white supremacists.
You know, the people at Breitbart.
What do you think about that, Mr. Secretary?
It absolutely does, Don.
And I want to be very, very clear.
I was there for part of last night, and I know what I saw.
And those people were not Berkeley students.
Those were outsiders, agitators.
I've never seen them before.
You know, there's rumors that they actually were right-wingers.
They were part of a kind of a group that were organized and ready to create the kind of tumult and danger you saw that forced the police to cancel the event.
So Donald Trump, when he says Berkeley, you know, doesn't respect free speech rights, that's a complete distortion of the truth.
Do you hear how enthusiastic he is?
Do you know any right-wingers capable of this kind of behavior?
I mean, go to Ferguson, go to Baltimore, go to San Bernardino, go to Watts, to any protest, any violence, go to Oakland anytime you want.
Anytime there is violent protests, it's always left-wingers bought and paid for by the Hillary campaign, the Democrat Party, or George Soros.
And never once have the Democrats ever elected, because they're proud of them.
They're proud of these anarchists.
They're proud of the people that blow up bank buildings.
They're proud of the people that start fires.
They never blame them.
They never try to pass it off as fake protesters hired by Republicans until now.
Why now?
Why would it be?
Why don't they embrace these people?
Why isn't former Labor Secretary Rice and the rest of the left embracing these people and giving them a bunch of Ada boys?
Why aren't they encouraging them?
You know, this is the kind of instability and chaos that they want because they know it's going to be blamed on Trump.
They know that all of this, the drive-bys and everybody in education is going to point fingers at Trump.
Hell, Peggy Noonan's done it.
I've got it.
That's one of the things that's been superseded by other stuff in the news.
Oh, and they've discovered a new unemployment rate.
Well, you hear this.
They've discovered the U6 unemployment rate at CNBC.
This is just, it's too juicy.
And here's now, here's now the former Clinton labor secretary.
They don't want anybody to think that these protesters in Berkeley that blew that place up were Democrats.
They don't want them against leftist students.
Why do they not want to embrace them, encourage them, and claim credit?
What is there to gain by blaming this on Breitbart?
Don Lemon, now thoroughly intrigued, said, you think this is a strategy by Milo Ioiannopoulos or right-wingers that they put this on in an effort to show that there's no free speech on a college campus like Berkeley?
The right-wingers did this?
I wouldn't bet against it, Don.
Again, I saw these people.
They all looked very almost paramilitary.
They were not from the campus.
And I've heard, you know, again, I don't want to say factually, but I've heard that there was some relationship there between these people and the right-wing and the right-wing movement that is affiliated with Breitbart News.
These people are losing their minds.
I was there.
I was there.
They were all dressed in black.
I have not seen this before.
It's called, there's a name for these people.
They're BlackRock or something.
And they are well-known leftists associated with George Soros.
They come in in all black and they hide their faces.
Many of them are not students.
That's the point.
They are bought and paid for.
But here is, I was there.
I saw this.
These were right-wingers.
Sure as I'm sitting here with you, Don.
I thought he was checking student ideas or whatever.
But no, they weren't students.
That's the point.
Here's something else about this, if I can try to regain my – I don't know.
I just – I just hear this little guy get so juiced, folks.
He gets so excited talking about this conspiracy.
Really, I wouldn't bet I guess it, Don.
I would.
I heard That the president of the university, I'm still tracking this down, actually had campus cops and Berkeley cops stand down while this happened.
That there was in certain quarters a desire for this to happen.
Okay, folks, there's a lot I want to touch on today.
Peggy Noonan has a column.
She's wringing her hands.
She's very, very upset all of a sudden.
She was all excited for Trump.
She's all excited about what it means.
Well, I mean, tempered excitement, but she was clearly intrigued.
Now, all of a sudden, she's very, very, very concerned, very, very, very worried because it's really unstable.
As they in Washington gaze out across the landscape, they don't find any stability.
And somehow, this is Trump's fault.
I want to get into this in much greater detail.
We have the Super Bowl coming up on Sunday.
The Atlanta Falcons and the Patriots.
I saw Lady Gaga did a press conference promoting the upcoming halftime show.
You know what Lady Gaga said?
Lady Gaga said that she doesn't want the halftime show to be a step down in intensity.
She said, you got these guys out there, meeting the players, and they're just running collisions on each other every plane.
I mean, they're out there.
They're trying to kill each other.
And I don't want the halftime show to be any different.
Okay.
And then she went on to say that it was definitely going to be a statement.
Well, we can pretty much assume what that statement's going to be.
And I, for one, don't care to see it.
I don't care to have to come in here and talk about it on Monday.
I'm just not interested.
It's too predictable.
And I doubt that she'll have anything to say that would intrigue me or inspire me or do anything other than be totally predictable.
But then there's the game analysis.
And there's two ways to analyze this game, the X's and O's and on-field strategy and then the intangibles.
And then determining which of the two will have a greater impact on the outcome of the game, the X's and O's, the strategy, or the intangibles.
I'm voting for the intangibles.
We'll explain all this.
And a heck of a lot more.
Take a break, catch my breath, and get reorganized.
Be right back.
Hey, look, this Ron Johnson story, Senator Johnson, Wisconsin, and the inability to do anything about the premiums and the deductibles and the mandates and all that in Obamacare.
Answer some more questions for you on this in the next segment.
He's basically saying that we don't have 60 votes and the Senate parliamentarian is telling us that we can't use reconciliation on the premium side of things.
And you're telling me that the Republican majority is going to sit there and let an unelected Senate parliamentarian rule over them?
And of course they're going to because they don't really want to replace Obamacare, folks.
And we've known this from the get-go.
From the moment this was passed with all of those fake resolution votes on repealing Obamacare, what did we say when this first passed?
The danger of it passing in the first place is that it becomes an entitlement.
And we can't think of a, well, there's one entitlement that has been removed after it was implemented.
That was the Dan Rostenkowski, Medicare, whatever it was.
The seasoned citizens didn't want any part of it, so it was repealed.
But it becomes an entitlement, and the Republicans just don't have the stomach for taking away what they think is a government giveaway and a freebie and leaving people uninsured.
But this is absurd that they've won everything there is to win out there and still don't have the power because of the Senate parliamentarian.
But that's their story, and they're going to stick with it.
So hang on.
I have lots more coming up.
More than I, I'm just, I'm overwhelmed, but I'm going to try to get them all in.
Greetings and welcome back.
It's great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh Open Line Friday.
Look, I know Mike Pence was here on Wednesday.
He did the first radio interview after the Supreme Court nominee was named, Neil Gorsuch.
Who, by the way, there's another bit of fake news.
I don't know if you saw this or not, but all day yesterday, the drive-bys were breathlessly reporting that Gorsuch had headed up in prep school a pro-fascist club.
Had you heard that?
It turns out to be totally made up.
It was totally fair.
What happened was that it was in the, I think, one of the yearbooks, some sophomore wrote descriptions of people, and Gorsuch was by all measure the most conservative guy in his prep school, and they were jamming him by writing that he was heading up the fascist club.
You know, the drive-bys get this stuff, and they don't mention any context whatsoever.
And they do this stuff on purpose.
They lie and make this stuff up on purpose, knowing that it's going to be very, very difficult to catch up and get the truth applied to these things.
I don't know how much damage, if any, was done by this, but because Gorsuch is sitting here now, he's going to get confirmed.
But I mean, who would believe it in the first place?
And get this.
I'm minding my own business last night, and I get a heads up that the cyber cast, the newsbusters, our old buddy Brent Bozell and the gang, have come across a New York Times story.
You won't believe this.
As many of you know, before I started the EIB network, I had a local talk show in Sacramento, California, my adopted hometown, on a 50,000-watt blowtorch radio station, KFBK.
The New York Times had a story this week blaming me and that show in Sacramento for the anti-immigrant attitude that existed in California during the 1980s when guys like Pete Wilson were being elected governor.
That's back in the days when the Republicans ran the state of California.
Well, at least they were having governors elected.
Willie Brown ran the state.
But nevertheless, I mean, how do you, how in the world it was?
Some woman named Emily Badger, and I looked her up.
She couldn't have been two years old when I was doing that show if she was even born.
So, how in the world do you end up?
Somebody out there probably had to throw my name around one of the sources she talked to, but that's you know what it is?
I'm their Darth Vader, I am their bond villain.
When they need a villain, when they need a face to plug into a story designed to scare and mobilize the left, they just do me whenever it fits.
And so they're trying to look at the changing attitudes about immigration in California.
When did it stop being Republican racist?
And it happened when I left.
Yeah, my presence.
It was a local show in Sacramento.
It was 50,000 watts, but it was way up there at 15-something hundred and a dial.
I mean, it didn't get much past Merced.
Tony Quello could listen to it.
It's about it.
This is the fringes of the Bay Area.
Yeah, they're blaming me for the entire anti-immigrant attitude that existed in California in the 80s.
But don't misunderstand.
I'll gladly take it.
I will wear the badge proudly.
When these people need a villain, they automatically gravitate to me.
Now, back to this Obamacare business, because, folks, look, we're going to get, we touched on this stuff in detail yesterday, Mexico and Australia.
And if you were here yesterday, you got pretty much all the detail about that.
You've now probably been exposed to a whole bunch of fake news about it, distortions and misreporting.
And Trump has had his morning tweets, which we'll get to.
And we talked yesterday about the sanctions on Iran and getting tough there over there cheating on the nuke deal.
You know, all of that's what it is.
And Trump is indeed focusing on elements of his campaign that he seriously promised: saving jobs, bringing jobs back, working out different versions of trade deals.
And there's no question that he's moving fast.
He's moving faster than any president in my lifetime.
He's moving faster than the media can keep up with.
He's moving faster than anybody can keep up with.
At least in terms of bringing the issues up and making it look like action's taking place on them.
I mean, it's a breakneck pace.
But over there on Capitol Hill, there's another entire other part of the Trump agenda, which is just languishing.
And that part of the Trump agenda is repealing Obamacare, which he promised as strongly and stringently as he did to fix NAFTA and bring jobs back.
There is tax cuts and the reform of the tax code.
I mentioned at the top of the program.
I'm hearing from people that were dyed in the wool, eager Beaver Trump supporters who are worried that he's not gotten there yet and were hoping that this was going to be first.
And this Obamacare repeal, you know, that's signature.
If that doesn't happen, Trump may not be enough to save the Republicans.
If this doesn't happen, after all of this, after all of these promises, after all of these assurances, after all of the assurances that the plan's in place, we've been told the replacement plan is in place.
We've doubted it from the get-go.
You go back to the transcripts of this program, and I'm sure you can find a number of occasions where I've warned everybody that if left to their own devices, the Republicans would prefer not to touch this because it's an entitlement.
They're from the Washington establishment.
Their mindset is still of the old Washington establishment.
Trump is the only thing new, and to them, he's responsible for all of the upset and the instability, and that's what they want to normalize.
When they say they want to normalize things, it means they want to neuter Trump.
They want to cut Trump down to size.
They want to slow Trump down, which is another subject I'm going to be getting into in some detail this afternoon.
So hang in there and be tough this morning for those of you in the Pacific and Western time zones.
But the bottom line is, I've always had my concerns that lip service was what we were getting in Obamacare because, A, it involves two things.
It's an entitlement, and those just don't get repealed.
And the second thing is it's health care and it's insurance.
And this is one of those instances where image trumps reality.
And if the image is, if the perception is that a lot of people have insurance who didn't, and then the Republicans come along and repeal it and replace it, then they think they fear they're going to be open to allegations that they are taking people's health insurance away from them and that they are taking people's health care away from them.
And they don't want to go there.
They don't think they have a chance in explaining their side of the deal to the media and having it reported fairly and honestly to people.
And they're right about that.
But we have the election returns and we know what people who showed up in large numbers to vote for the Republicans and for Trump.
We know why.
Reforming, repealing, replacing, getting rid of Obamacare is right up at the top.
Immigration's right up at the top.
Closing the border, securing the border, keeping bad elements out of the country, reclaiming this country from the leftist fringe that was trying to transform it.
Rebuilding the American economy and creating American jobs.
All of these things.
And Obamacare and tax cut reform, tax code reform is right at the top of all these lists.
Now, I want to go to the audio sound bites because we have Senator Johnson, who was on CNN's new day today talking about this.
He's talking to Chris Cuomo.
And he said, look, Obamacare has always had problems.
And I'm listening to you guys, and I don't hear you say repeal and replace.
I'm hearing you say repeal and repair.
Is that what it's come down to now?
When I talk about repair, I'm talking about repairing all the damage done by Obamacare.
Obamacare has created this enormous mess, this big mess, and I'm trying to fix that big mess.
I don't think Obamacare is fixable, quite honestly.
And the other reality is, you know, we only have so much power to repeal just certain elements of Obamacare through reconciliation with 51 votes, the taxes, the subsidies, but so many of the market reforms, I would call them the market distortions that have caused premiums to skyrocket and out-of-pocket maximums and deductibles to skyrocket.
Those were probably going to need 60 votes, and it doesn't sound like the Democrats are really willing to bear the responsibility of the mess they created.
Okay, so I'll now defer to the USA Today piece on this.
What he's basically saying is when he says we don't have the power, translated means we don't have 60 votes.
We can only do so much of this with 51 votes.
With 51 votes, we will be able to deal with some of the tax cuts, and we'll be able to deal with some of the other.
But when it comes to the insurance parts of this, when it comes to the premiums, when it comes to minimums and maximums, we're not going to have a chance to touch those because those need 60 votes.
Okay, well, that then opens a question, why do they need 60 votes?
Who in the world is saying they need 60 votes?
And Johnson and some of the Republicans, well, we can only do so much of this with budget reconciliation.
That would be the tax side.
We can't do all of it with budget reconciliation.
Why can't we do it all with budget?
They passed the whole thing with budget reconciliation.
Why can't we do the repeal and replay?
Because the Senate parliamentarian says so, don't you know?
The Senate parliamentarian, for those of you in Rioland, is the guy in charge of the rules and how the Senate operates.
He's the expert in it.
And on occasion, there's deference to the guy.
But here's the timeline.
This is what we were told.
Republicans, before certain elections, said we need the House if we're going to repeal Obamacare.
So we gave them the House.
But then nothing happened.
They said, that's right.
We need the Senate.
We can't do anything because Obama's still in the oval.
We can't do anything.
We need the Senate.
We gave them the Senate in the 2014 midterms.
And then they said, well, really great.
We appreciate it.
We need the White House.
I mean, we need all three.
We need White House, House, and Senate to be able to do this.
So we elected Trump.
And Trump was running also on repeal and replace Obamacare.
So everything that our dear Republicans said they needed, they got.
And so now, after voters have delivered, it has now come down to an unelected Senate parliamentarian standing in their way.
We are to believe that a majority of elected senators cannot overrule the parliamentarian.
That's right, Mr. Limbaugh, our hands are tied.
That's right.
That's right.
I've been here a long time, and I looked at it, Limbaugh.
And I know you'd like to tell a guy to stuff it.
We can't.
We can't.
So they're saying that they cannot repeal the regulations on insurance companies by reconciliation.
Only the mandates and the taxes.
However, my friends, the regulations on the insurance companies, which is what drives the costs up and makes the mandates and taxes necessary, is obviously inextricably linked to the mandates and taxes.
You can't have the mandates and taxes going up and down without the action taken on the insurance companies, on the premiums and the maximums.
But then again, who cares what the parliamentarian thinks?
This is just common sense saying they can't repeal the regulations on insurance companies by reconciliation, even though the whole thing was passed that way.
They can only do the mandates and taxes, the mandate to buy insurance and the tax.
They can roll those back.
They can get rid of those.
But the regulations on the insurance companies, which is where the premium skyrocketing occurs and the minimums and the deductibles and all that.
No, we can't.
We need 60 votes for that.
Parliamentarians say so.
So it looks like to us, you know, outside looking in, that they're just looking for reasons not to do it.
And we know why.
I mean, the minute this thing was implemented, we knew there was going to be overwhelming fear of actually repealing it because it's taking away that's that Santa Claus going back down the chimney on December 27th and taking everything back to the North Pole in their minds.
And they don't want to be that Santa Claus.
Open Line Friday always like to get started on the phones in the first hour of the program.
We'll go to Christina Infresno.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Great.
Hello.
I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of our elected.
Whenever there's a new tax or mandate like Obamacare, that very next tax return, the IRS is there ready to enact that penalty.
But you've got long-standing immigration law, and all of a sudden, not so fast, you can't deport the families.
It's hypocrisy.
Yeah, but it's, I mean, you're right.
On the Obamacare thing, I want to be historically complete here.
I mean, I understand exactly what you're saying.
We've got a set of laws on immigration, and they will not, up to now, enforce them.
They have not been enforcing them left and right.
But when it comes to a tax, when it comes to an audit, when it comes to a mandate that you buy something, they're right in there monitoring everything you do, making sure you pay everything you owe instantly.
On Obamacare, the thing that you have to remember on this is it's a minor point in the big scheme, but the Republicans never voted for it.
And it's important to remember this.
And that's why the Democrats had to use all kinds of tricks to get this passed, including budget resolution.
They made Obamacare part of the budget.
It was never actually, the whole thing was never actually voted on.
There were never any hearings on Obamacare.
They never brought any experts to testify what would happen if this part of the bill is implemented.
There were no hearings whatsoever.
This thing was ramrodded down our throats, most often under cover of darkness, and it was just put in that year's budget.
That's what reconciliation is for the most part.
It's a more convoluted thing.
And budget reconciliation, because of the debt limit and because of the mandates that the U.S. payout bills, there are never 60 votes demanded for a budget, only 51.
Okay?
Now, the Republicans are saying that they can only repeal certain parts of this through budget reconciliation where they don't need 60 votes.
And they're then saying the parliamentarian, who's probably a lifelong Obama federal employee, heck, I don't know.
I don't know who the parliamentarian is, but they're saying that for anything related to the insurance companies, including the mandates, the premiums, the minimums, the deductibles, we have to do 60 votes.
The parliamentarian is saying we can't do that through the budget.
And we don't have 60 votes.
We don't have the power.
That's what they're saying.
But there isn't any hypocrisy here in the sense that they never voted for it.
I mean, it's a bunch of tax increases.
It's a bunch of big government Republicans.
There's not a single Republican that voted for this.
And I just wanted to make sure that's squared in your comment about hypocrisy.
I don't want them lumped in on upcoming Peggy Noonan's column headline in Trump's Washington: nothing feels stable.
It's not Trump's Washington.
It's still Obama's Washington.
That's the point.
The drive-bys have discovered the U6 unemployment number now, all of a sudden, since Obama's gone.
▲
Export Selection