This hour of the Limbaugh Wire brought to you by Cash for Clunkers-inspired drug use
By Greg Lewis

Davis kicked off the final hour of the week with more talk about the census, explaining that conservatives had to find a “responsible” reason for refusing to participate in the census, and not adopt the “if it feels good, do it” attitude of the left. Needless to say, it was amusing for us to hear Davis discuss how to “responsibly” find a way to promote Michele Bachmann's theory that ACORN is going to use the census to steal her personal information. Anyway, Davis took a caller who explained what happened when he refused to respond to the census: He was threatened with fines (not surprising, as that is the punishment). Davis was thrilled with the way the caller stood up to the government and said that “if we all do this,” then these people will go away, adding that someone will be the “Rosa Parks of this movement.” But he then explained that he wasn't directly comparing the Montgomery Bus Boycott with Michele Bachmann's ACORN Is Coming To Get Me Census Boycott. “They can't come get all of us,” said Davis.

Davis went ont to explain that the “sticky part” of the census issue is privacy. He argued that there is no “constitutional basis” for Roe v. Wade because the right to privacy doesn't exist in the Constitution.

Before Davis could grant us the small mercy of a commercial break, he took a quick call from a listener who explained that he was going to plead the Fifth Amendment so he wouldn't have to answer the census. “I love me some Fifth Amendment,” exclaimed Davis.

After the break, Davis was still harping on about the census. He reminded us that he's still looking for a firm basis for conservatives to resist the census. He also explained why the previous caller's attempt to use the Fifth Amendment wouldn't work.

Then Davis teased an upcoming discussion on the new “Cash for Clunkers” legislation: " 'These People' in the Obama administration or the Democratic Party in general -- it sounds so good: money to help you buy a car; money to help our air get cleaner because it helps people buy cleaner cars and more efficient cars. What could be better?" He continued: “I got a great idea; it's called not giving people money for smokes, crack, and beer. Details in our next -- 'cause that's exactly what it is. You tell people, 'Hey, here's $4,500 that you don't have to spend on a car.' Well, nothing frees up money for the slovenly among us like cash for a clunker. Buy a better car and you got $4,500 in taxpayer money that you can go out and spend on whatever kind of debauchery and self-abuse you wish.”

The next caller also wanted to talk about the census, explaining to Davis how he would refuse to give out his personal information to ACORN because it is a “fraudulent” organization. Davis agreed, saying that there would be no way to tell what the ACORN yahoos would be doing to the census.

After another break, Davis really tore into Cash for Clunkers. While he stipulated that there are some people who can't quite afford a new car and would be legitimately helped by the bill, Davis said that for every one of those people, there would be three miscreants whose misbehavior would be facilitated by it. The legislation, Davis explained, “helps your shiftless cousin buy more meth, because he won't have to use that money ... on buying a Ford Focus.” Davis later expanded on this sentiment:

DAVIS: The way in which it will work in countless examples is people whose cars either don't work or barely work, and they're maybe doing a little less crack cocaine or maybe smoking a few -- fewer cartons of smokes, or maybe not quite filling the fridge as full with beer because they're saving for the car they gotta have, because if they don't have it, they'll get fired and then they'll really be up the creek. Guess what? No worries, mate!

Here comes $4,500 of taxpayer money, so you can head to the liquor store. You can go to the meth lab. You can get that carton of Lucky's. Go ahead. That $4,500 frees up your budget.

So the operating theory here is that cash-for-clunkers is a bad idea because there are three times as many crack-addicted, meth-smoking alcoholics in this country as there are upstanding citizens of lesser means. Three times! Not only is this an insulting caricature of the poor, it ignores the reality that cash-for-clunkers programs work. A similar German program has been a runaway success, boosting car sales by 20 percent in one month and accelerating the country's push toward a modernized fleet of cleaner cars. But we guess it's easier to smear poor people as substance-abusing layabouts than it is to come up with real arguments.

When he was done linking car subsidies to drug use, Davis took a call from a self-described active Republican in Maine who thought it would be wise for the Republican Party to stand up for equal marriage rights under the 14th Amendment. The caller argued that the Republican Party would be doing itself a favor by adopting the position that no one has the right to deny marriage. Davis was having none of it. “That's insane,” he said. “Using that very argument, I can marry my dog. Using that argument, I can marry five women. And I'm not -- and, please, no angry gay people.” Davis explained that there is a way to be friendly to gay people and still oppose gay marriage, and that he would elaborate after the next break.

Davis came back from break to strongly insist to his audience that homophobia has nothing to do with his decision (well, if you have to insist...). Anyway, Davis argued that if you allow gay marriage, then it would mean that men and women are the same, which is “antithetical to the human existence.” But, as Davis informed us, men and women aren't the same -- they're different.

Davis then took a couple more quick calls about the census before calling it a day, and, frankly, we were thrilled, as a body can take only so many comparisons between the census and lunch-counter discrimination. We'd like to think that Rush wouldn't have committed so much attention to such an inane topic, but a perusal of the Limbaugh Wire archives -- which we highly recommend -- would probably show otherwise. Have a great weekend, and see you back here on Monday.

Simon Maloy, Lauryn Bruck, and Zachary Pleat contributed to this edition of the Limbaugh Wire.

Highlights from Hour 3

Outrageous comments

DAVIS: As with a million other things from “These People” -- capital T, capital P -- “These People” in the Obama administration or the Democratic Party in general -- it sounds so good: money to help you buy a car; money to help our air get cleaner because it helps people buy cleaner cars and more efficient cars. What could be better?

I got a great idea; it's called not giving people money for smokes, crack, and beer. Details in our next -- 'cause that's exactly what it is. You tell people, “Hey, here's $4,500 that you don't have to spend on a car.” Well, nothing frees up money for the slovenly among us like cash for a clunker. Buy a better car and you got $4,500 in taxpayer money that you can go out and spend on whatever kind of debauchery and self-abuse you wish.

[...]

DAVIS: Congress passed the “cash for clunkers” measure late last night as part of the -- I love this! You know what it's part of? Because everything makes such sense in Washington, it, of course, is part of the war spending bill: $106 billion for funding the war, one billion of that helps your shiftless cousin buy more meth, because he won't have to use that money on getting a -- on buying a Ford Focus.

[...]

DAVIS: The way in which it will work in countless examples is people whose cars either don't work or barely work, and they're maybe doing a little less crack cocaine or maybe smoking a few -- fewer cartons of smokes, or maybe not quite filling the fridge as full with beer because they're saving for the car they gotta have, because if they don't have it, they'll get fired and then they'll really be up the creek. Guess what? No worries, mate!

Here comes $4,500 of taxpayer money, so you can head to the liquor store. You can go to the meth lab. You can get that carton of Lucky's. Go ahead. That $4,500 frees up your budget.

[...]

CALLER: What I'm suggesting is the Republican Party could do itself and the country a big favor by seeking to establish some credibility and taking the position that there -- no one has the right to deny any citizen of this country the right to the institution of marriage.

DAVIS: But that -- except for one thing: That's insane. Using that very argument, I can marry my dog. Using that argument, I can marry five women. And I'm not --

CALLER: That's another question.

DAVIS: -- and, please, no angry gay people.