This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by the "extinct" Republican Party
By Simon Maloy

Now that we've had an entire day to ruminate on Rush's response to the Sotomayor nomination, we find ourselves quite bemused. Or amused. Or both. Whatever. Anyway, it was Rush's advice to the GOP on how to respond to Sotomayor that we found particularly nonsensical. In Rush's view, it would be the height of foolishness to support Sotomayor with an eye on currying Hispanic voters. Rush said it doesn't work that way, just look at the last election -- the party nominated John McCain, the "architect" of "amnesty," and Obama still took 67 percent of the Latino vote. Now, that might make sense but for the fact that McCain, during the Republican primaries, reversed himself on comprehensive immigration reform and disavowed his own immigration bill. Of course, we don't pretend to know the right course for Republicans and conservatives on Sotomayor -- and they don't seem to know either. Rush is firmly planted in the "reverse racist" camp; Michael Steele is urging for calm; James Inhofe is ... well, James Inhofe; National Review doesn't like that her name is all Latin-y; and the denizens of Fox Nation think she's Mexican.

Rush got today's show started with a rapid-fire reading of several news stories. Rush first noted that the Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for 10 years, despite agreements to bring all troops home by 2012. Rush said there is no administration policy on Iraq - he demonstrated yesterday that all of Obama's supporters expect him to lie and they love it when he does. Then it was on to GM and the government's reported 70 percent share in a restructured version of the company. From there, he took a sharp turn to The Washington Post and some policymakers' renewed interest in a value-added tax. Rush was upset at this, saying that consumers end up paying for such a tax, or at least as much as retailers can pass on to them.

And then there was another sharp turn to USA Today, which reported that tax revenues in April dropped precipitously from last year. That statistic, Rush said, illustrates how cutting taxes works. He left it to all of us to figure out what, exactly, that connection is, and shifted gears again right back to GM, noting that members of Congress have been calling Obama's auto task force to complain about dealership closings in their state. On this point, Rush managed to stay focused just long enough to concoct a conspiracy theory that even he acknowledged was light on evidence: "Nobody can figure out exactly why certain dealerships are being targeted to be closed. There's some people looking into it, but the evidence is sketchy. All we know is that a whole lot of really successful dealerships are being shut down. Some of them happen to be owned by people who contributed lots of money to Republicans."

Then Rush claimed that it's the bondholders who are getting the shaft in the GM deal, just like they did with Chrysler. What we need, Rush said, is a Supreme Court justice who can "empathize" with the bondholders: "We need somebody on the Supreme Court that can understand how people in the private sector are getting raped by this administration."

After reading the entirety of a Wall Street Journal editorial on Maryland's budget woes, Rush moved on to a Hill article that recalled Rush's 1997 prediction that Sotomayor was on a "rocket ship" for the Supreme Court. Rush then wanted to ask a question: did the Democrats worry about angering African Americans or Hispanics when they opposed Clarence Thomas, Miguel Estrada, and Alberto Gonzales? They didn't, Rush said, which led to another question: Who invented this "idiotic" theory that opposing a judge based on her "incompetence" is going to hurt the Republicans? Rush had an answer for this one too: the media, the Democrats, and the "wimp" moderate Republicans. Rush then read an e-mail he received from a listener counseling that conservatives pick their battles and be careful in opposing Sotomayor because it will inevitably bite them in the butt. Rush responded: "So what this listener is saying, Obama chose this woman to shut us up, and we better shut the hell up. 'Cause if we don't shut the hell up, then we're gonna get bit in the butt. We are bit in the butt with the nomination. The nation has been bit in the butt with the nomination."

After the break, Rush noted that Republican strategist Mark McKinnon authored a piece for The Daily Beast counseling the GOP "to wave a white flag on Sotomayor, give Colin Powell a big bear hug and sincere thanks for sticking it out, and move on." Rush said that by this logic, conservatives should just throw in the towel on everything and give the left the country.

Another break and Rush was back, explaining that he has no doubt that Sotomayor will be confirmed because there is no desire to object to her, even though she's not a good judge. "She's overruled 60 percent of the time at the U.S. .Supreme Court. Jonathan Turley is out there yesterday at MSNBC -- she doesn't have any intellectual depth. She's got a -- she's an angry woman, she's got a -- she's a bigot. She's a racist. In her own words, she's the antithesis of a judge." But many GOPers, Rush said, have bought into the notion that attacking her on legal merits is racist. Meanwhile, the meanest, nastiest party in our nation's history, "the Democrat Party," never worries about whether they're seen as racist. Rush wondered when the GOP will figure out that playing the game by the Democrats' and the media's rules will destroy the party.

Then Rush returned to McKinnon, who, Rush said, is saying that if Republicans oppose the nomination of this "unqualified" and "incompetent" woman, it means our extinction. Rush rejoined: "I would suggest to you that the Republican Party is already extinct if it's listening to Mark McKinnon. The Republican Party is extinct if it's listening to Tom Ridge. The Republican Party is extinct if it's listening to Colin Powell." Sotomayor is not qualified, said Rush, she's incompetent. Then Rush read for us the oath Supreme Court justices take upon assuming office, adding: "By virtue of her own statements, she is going to break the oath. She's going to lie when she takes the oath. By virtue of her own previous statements, she is lying when she takes the oath."

After the break, Rush conjured a ghost of campaign past, smearing Obama for comments he made on the Constitution during a 2001 radio interview in Chicago -- specifically Obama's statement that "the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society." Rush didn't have enough time to get to distort the other sound bytes, but promised that he'd get to them in the next hour.

Highlights from Hour 1

Outrageous comments

LIMBAUGH: Nobody can figure out exactly why certain dealerships are being targeted to be closed. There's some people looking into it, but the evidence is sketchy. All we know is that a whole lot of really successful dealerships are being shut down. Some of them happen to be owned by people who contributed lots of money to Republicans.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: So what this listener is saying, Obama chose this woman to shut us up, and we better shut the hell up. 'Cause if we don't shut the hell up, then we're gonna get bit in the butt. We are bit in the butt with the nomination. The nation has been bit in the butt with the nomination.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: She's overruled 60 percent of the time at the U.S. .Supreme Court. Jonathan Turley is out there yesterday at MSNBC -- she doesn't have any intellectual depth. She's got a -- she's an angry woman, she's got a -- she's a bigot. She's a racist. In her own words, she's the antithesis of a judge. She is the antithesis of justice. In her own words, she does not deserve to be on the U.S. Supreme Court.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: I would suggest to you that the Republican Party is already extinct if it's listening to Mark McKinnon. The Republican Party is extinct if it's listening to Tom Ridge. The Republican Party is extinct if it's listening to Colin Powell.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: Can I read the oath the Supreme Court Justice takes? Here's the oath: "I, name, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons and to equal right to the poor and the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as Supreme Court Justice under the Constitution and laws of the United States, so help me God."

By virtue of her own statements, she is going to break the oath. She's going to lie when she takes the oath. By virtue of her own previous statements, she is lying when she takes the oath.

Clips from this hour

Limbaugh says his opposition to Sotomayor not because of race or gender, but calls her "an angry woman," "bigot," "racist"

Limbaugh says "people in the private sector are getting raped by this administration"

This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by "civil rights" -- for Republicans
By Simon Maloy

Rush was as good as his word, replaying the remaining audio sound bytes of Obama speaking on Chicago Radio in 2001, specifically Obama comments that the Warren court didn't break away from the "essential constraints" of the Constitution, and that "the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties." We've explored Rush's past distortion of the word "negative" in this context, as well as his twisting of Obama's words to suggest Obama was complaining about the Constitution. Well, he went and did it again: "[W]hat this means to Obama is, when he says the Constitution doesn't say what the federal government do in your behalf, means it doesn't say that he can tax the rich at a higher rate and give the money to the poor. It doesn't say that he can redistribute -- in fact, the Constitution does not have Marxism in it. The Constitution doesn't have socialism in it, and as such, Obama is constrained."

These sound bytes, Rush said, convinced him that Obama is angry and has a chip on his shoulder, and that he heard everything Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright had to say. While we were double-checking our calendar to make sure it was not, in fact, October 2008, Rush offered this interpretation of Obama's thinking: "America's unjust, it was constituted as unjust, and that unjustness permeates to this day. So now it's time to change all that, and we're gonna change all that by desecrating the Constitution. Hence, Sonia Sotomayor." This, Rush said, is what he means when he says Republicans should go after Sotomayor so they can educate America about Obama. After getting through all this, Rush said that Republicans don't have to go after Sotomayor for being Hispanic -- he's not saying that, and no fool out there is saying that. Nope, Rush isn't saying that, he's just saying that Republicans should go after Sotomayor by distorting something Obama said eight years ago that has nothing to do with Sotomayor. That's much more effective ...

Then it kinda went off the rails. Rush declared that he has never been an "oppressed minority," even though he is a member of one, because conservatism is an "oppressed minority." Rush added: "If ever a civil rights movement was needed in America, it is for the Republican Party. If ever we needed to start marching for freedom and constitutional rights, it's for the Republican Party. The Republican Party is today's oppressed minority, and it know how to behave as one." The GOP, Rush continued, know to go to the "back of the bus" and drink from the right water fountain. Rush then assured us that he is an "intellectual," whereas Obama is a "narcissist." And just in case you're not sure what that means, Rush elaborated: "He's like Narcissus." Washington, D.C., Rush concluded, is the "Old South" for Republicans, and they are comfortable being an "oppressed minority."

Rush then read extensively from a 2003 Wall Street Journal editorial highlighting internal Democratic memos on the opposition to Miguel Estrada, saying that the Democrats would never say it publicly, but they opposed Estrada because he is Hispanic. They're never concerned, though, that opposing people like Estrada will anger Hispanics. And yet, Rush said, the Republicans are scared to death of opposing Sotomayor. They're acting like an oppressed minority, doing whatever their "masters" tell them to do. They're so obedient to their masters that they vote for Democrats. They've mastered the art of thinking like an oppressed minority, Rush said, and have no interest in "emancipation" or "freedom."

After the break, Rush took a call from a man who agreed that Obama is a mean narcissist, a sadist who tortures all the masochists in the country who are ready to go along with it. The caller said Obama has no sympathy and no empathy, as evidenced the fact that he turned away a busload of crying kindergarteners so he could meet with the Steelers. Rush said he would guarantee that if that bus had shown up at the Supreme Court and Clarence Thomas had turned them away for being late, there would be "recall hearings."

Coming back from the second break, Rush took a call from a man who wanted to disagree with the listener who emailed in counseling that conservatives not oppose Sotomayor. Rush misunderstood the man, and thought that he was disagreeing with something Rush said. After a few moments the misunderstanding was cleared up, and Rush thanked the man for repeating back to him everything Rush had said in the preceding hour. Rush's next caller said that to a conservative there's no such thing as a Hispanic vote or an African American vote. The 2008 exit polls certainly seem to bear that out (ba-dum-ching!) Anyway, what the caller really meant, we assume, is that conservatives don't do "identity politics," they just trust in the fundamentals of conservatism. Rush said the old-guard Republicans still want to keep identity politics around. Then Rush offered his standard dissertation on how conservatives want everyone to succeed, whereas liberals want to step on puppies, or something like that.

After one more break, Rush returned by mocking Energy Secretary Steven Chu for saying that painting roofs white could help with climate change by reflecting sunlight. Rush was incredulous -- he explained that he knows how clouds can reflect heat, but how can something on the surface do that? Where does the heat go? Well, we'd point out that part of the reason why the polar regions are so cold is because sea ice -- which is most certainly on the surface -- reflects sunlight back into space. Because it's white.

Regardless, Rush said it's all "gobbledygook," and the National Review exposed this, because they reported that the white-roof proponents are former colleagues of Chu. This is the dirty little secret of the environmental movement, said Rush. It's all about these guys getting money for each other.

Highlights from Hour 2

Outrageous comments

LIMBAUGH: But what this means to Obama is, when he says the Constitution doesn't say what the federal government do in your behalf, means it doesn't say that he can tax the rich at a higher rate and give the money to the poor. It doesn't say that he can redistribute -- in fact, the Constitution does not have Marxism in it. The Constitution doesn't have socialism in it, and as such, Obama is constrained.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: America's unjust, it was constituted as unjust, and that unjustness permeates to this day. So now it's time to change all that, and we're gonna change all that by desecrating the Constitution. Hence, Sonia Sotomayor.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: If ever a civil rights movement was needed in America, it is for the Republican Party. If ever we needed to start marching for freedom and constitutional rights, it's for the Republican Party. The Republican Party is today's oppressed minority, and it knows how to behave as one.

Clips from this hour

Limbaugh: DC is "Old South" for GOP, who are an "oppressed minority" in need of "a civil rights movement"

After calling himself "an enlightened individual," Limbaugh calls Obama "a narcissist"

This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by the adorable GOP Chihuahua
By Simon Maloy

Rush got the final hour going by reassuring his listeners that it's the conservatives who have the best arguments and the most responsible policies, and that will become clear the more they confront the Democrats. As such, Rush said, he has no intention of quitting anytime soon, but he fully anticipates receiving a call from an elected Republican asking him to tone it down. That's because they're scared, Rush said. They're acting like an oppressed minority.

Why is it, Rush once again asked, that Democrats can destroy lives and reputations and nobody ever gets mad at them? Why do Republicans believe this will happen to them? Because that's what the moderates say, said Rush, and it's absurd. But Republicans believe it, so they'll acquiesce to the Sotomayor nomination because, they believe, this will somehow show we love Hispanic community. And yet, said Rush, "Barry Soetero" (not sure what Obama's stepfather's name has to do with this) is getting the Hispanic vote because Hispanics think the Democrats are doing their bidding for them.

Rush then asked if Obama has had the obligatory White House meeting on immigration that will immediately solve the problem. It's not on the agenda after Sotomayor, Rush said. It's all cap-and-trade and healthcare, plus taking over the car companies. There's an election next year, Rush observed, and he didn't think the Democrats would be "foolish enough" to push "amnesty" in an election year. The logical conclusion to be drawn from all this, Rush said, is that Obama's nomination of Sotomayor was designed to "appease" the Hispanics for a couple of years so he can punt on immigration reform. It's a "three-fer" for Obama, Rush said -- he gets a political hack, anti-constitutionalist on the court, and he's appeased the Hispanics. Wait, that's only a two-fer. Whatever.

Anyway, Rush concluded from this that if anyone is being cynical towards Hispanics, it's Obama. On the other hand, Rush said, the Republican Party led the way for immigration and amnesty. We know the esteem President Bush is held in, said Rush, and we know where John McCain is right now -- plotting his Senate re-election in Sedona. Rush implored that someone much smarter than he explain all this to him. Well, we can't speak to our intellect as it relates to El Rushbo's, but as we noted at the top of the first hour, McCain flip-flopped quite spectacularly on "amnesty" during the Republican primary. That might help to explain things.

Then Rush noted that he is being criticized by the "drive-bys" for saying horrible things about Sotomayor. Forty-five minutes after the nomination of Bork, Rush noted, Ted Kennedy gave his "Robert Bork's America" speech on the Senate floor. It was about as chock-full of lies and as insulting and mean as you can get, said Rush, but what was the result? Bork didn't get out of committee, and the Democrats succeeded without paying a price. So imagine, Rush implored, if a Republican had gone to the floor of the Senate and said this:

LIMBAUGH: Sonia Sotomayor's America is a land in which the rule of law would be turned in the rule of empathy. Where quotas would triumph over merit. Rogue bureaucrats could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids. Free-thinkers could be censored at the whim of government. And the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for who the judiciary is and is often the only protector of the individual rights at the heart of our democracy. President Obama is still our president, but he shouldn't be able to reach out from the muck of porkulus, from the muck of stimulus, from the muck of TARP, from the muck of $12 trillion in deficits, and impose his reactionary vision, his anti-constitutional vision on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice.

Imagine what would be happening today if a Republican had said that, Rush said, insisting that it was a mild rewrite of what Kennedy said. Rush also remembered that in 1987, the Republicans of that day laughed at Kennedy's speech and the Reagan administration didn't do much to defend Bork, probably because they didn't think this was going to happen. Bork was a "perfect jurist," Rush said. He was "ideal" for the job. And now Kennedy's statement in 1987 has been the blueprint for how Democrats react to every single Republican president's judicial and cabinet nominees. So, Rush once again requested that someone explain to him how Democrats can go after anyone they want, and it never hurts them, but Republicans will pay the price. So Republicans will wave the white flag on Sotomayor, Rush said, and that means that the "Republican Party is extinct.  And if we're going to throw in the towel on this, we might as well throw in the towel on Obama" because he's a "minority" as well.

Rush came back from the break with a caller who agreed with Rush on Sotomayor and said Republicans need an "attack dog" to go after her, because they're already viewed as monsters and homophobes. Rush said the caller raised an interesting point -- how can the GOP get worse? If they're going to rip you anyway, why not tell the truth? After some more paeans to Liz Cheney's frequently televised defenses of her father's defenses of torture, Rush lamented that fact that he doesn't see any "attack dogs" in the ranks of the GOP. He sees Chihuahuas.

After another break, Rush came back noting that Joe Biden once allegedly said of Clarence Thomas: "I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black." So, Rush said, the sitting vice president once said that the only reason Thomas is on the court is because it was a cynical ploy by George H.W. Bush to nominate an African-American, but Obama's first Hispanic is by no means cynical. Then it was time for another caller, this one upset that so much was being made of the fact that Sotomayor was raised by a single mother. Lots of people have been raised by single mothers, said the caller, including Obama and Bill Clinton. Rush said that coming from a normal, nuclear family can hurt you in America these days because you can't relate. The caller then voiced her theory that the unnamed power brokers of the Democratic Party coalesced around Obama when he started "doing well." Rush said it was earlier than that -- some unnamed person figured out that they could write Obama's words for him and no one would criticize him. Someone figured out that the racial politics had progressed to a point that there was so much guilt in American that any criticism of a minority candidate or nominee would be perceived as racist. After exchanging their competing theories about when the anonymous Democratic puppetmasters installed Obama as president, Rush praised the caller for not thinking like an "oppressed minority."

One more break and Rush was back, armed with a CNN story on how the growing deficits of some cities in Ohio could mean that police officers whose jobs Obama said had been rescued by the stimulus package could end up getting fired. Rush asked how this was possible, given that "the messiah touched these men."

Rush closed out the show with a question for the moderates out there -- they say they are going to go "ape bananas" if Republicans are nasty to Sotomayor, but what about Roland Burris? According to Rush, he's a "black guy" that the Democrats are trying to "bury" because he's in the Senate and the Democrats never wanted him to have that seat. Now with the Sotomayor nomination, Rush said, they're free to go after Burris again, so why aren't the moderates angry about that? Burris "was appointed. He is in the Senate. He took Obama's seat -- black for black. Democrats look at things that way," and now the Democrats are "playing the race card" against him. He declined to explain how the "race card" is being played, but nonetheless demanded to know why Colin Powell and the moderate Republicans aren't criticizing the Democrats for using the nomination of Sotomayor to finally get rid of a black guy they never wanted in the Senate.

And with that, we end today's trip to Limbaugh Land. We hope to see you tomorrow. Until then, please check out Media Matters' interactive guide to Limbaugh Land to better acquaint yourselves to the unique customs and strange inhabitants of this extremely isolated island nation.

Highlights from Hour 3

Outrageous comments

LIMBAUGH: So imagine if a Republican -- pick your favorite Republican senator -- yesterday had gone to the floor of the Senate 45 minutes after Obama's announcement of Sonia Sotomayor and said this: "Sonia Sotomayor's America is a land in which the rule of law would be turned in the rule of empathy. Where quotas would triumph over merit. Rogue bureaucrats could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids. Free-thinkers could be censored at the whim of government. And the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for who the judiciary is and is often the only protector of the individual rights at the heart of our democracy. President Obama is still our president, but he shouldn't be able to reach out from the muck of porkulus, from the muck of stimulus, from the muck of TARP, from the muck of $12 trillion in deficits, and impose his reactionary vision, his anti-constitutional vision on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice."

[...]

LIMBAUGH: Republicans who are not opposing Sonia Sotomayor because she's a woman or because she's Hispanic are being warned, "Don't oppose her at all, or you'll pay the price." And now Republicans -- "OK, we've gotta wave the white flag on this, we can't oppose her. We'll go extinct if we do." The Republican Party is extinct. And if we're going to throw in the towel on this, we might as well throw in the towel on Obama.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: Poor Roland Burris, he's in the Senate -- the Democrats have never wanted Roland Burris to have this seat. And now that we've got the big distraction of Sonia Sotomayor, the Democrats are free to go after the guy again. Isn't it interesting? They have continued to go after this guy. A judge released transcripts of tape -- Burris talking about funds going to Blago. Burris never sent a check, never threw a fundraiser. No matter. This black man is being investigated. How come moderates are not mad at the Democrat Party for going after a person of color? How can the Democrats get away with this? He was appointed. He is in the Senate. He took Obama's seat -- black for black. Democrats look at things that way.