By Greg Lewis
The “Doctor of Democracy” Rush Limbaugh wasted no time today in trashing the recently unveiled House version of the health care bill. Rush said that Pelosi's claim that the House bil would not add a penny to the deficit is “absurd” and will turn out to be untrue. Rush took it a step further, predicting that health care reform would be exposed as a total fraud and wondered if “total liars” like Pelosi would have to pay some kind of consequences. “This is theft. Are they not thieves?” asked Rush. Turning up the dial one more notch, Rush said that Bernie Madoff was “chump change” compared to the billions that will be stolen by Pelosi and Harry Reid.
Rush called Pelosi the most radical Speaker of the House ever, and called her George McGovern “on hormones” and on steroids. Rush accused Pelosi of pushing the health care bill in order to remain in power for decades. He then said the health care bills being considered in the House and Senate are “ticking time bombs” designed to destroy the private insurance industry, “and thus the economy.” They could only be “defused,” explained Rush, by GOP gains in 2010 and 2012.
Rush said that the idea that the bill would give people “something for nothing” is a sham. Rush predicted that if reform passed, business would fire people because of increased health care costs. He followed this up by questioning the constitutionality of health care “mandates.” Suppose there were a mandate that everyone own a condom or a car, Rush posited.
Still with us? Sort of? Good enough! Rush kept the train rolling by playing an audio clip of Pelosi's presser today, during which she was interrupted by a heckler who called her a “Nazi.” Pelosi responded to the heckler by labeling him as someone from the insurance industry. Then Rush went on some more about Pelosi ramming the bill down our throats, and accused Pelosi of being “most responsible” for deficits since 2007 (forget Bush much?).
Then Rush described an exchange he saw on MSNBC, where the anchor asked the “doofus” White House correspondent about a backlash when Americans find out 90 percent of them won't be able to get on the public option. Rush called bologna on this:
LIMBAUGH: Well, I know they've -- I know they've watered down some of the language here, but it's all for show. I mean the whole thing is a public -- what is MSNBC talking about, 90 percent of the people will not be able to access the public option? BS. Nobody's gonna have any choice but the public option before these people are finished. There's no reason to do health care if it's not a public option.
And so the overhyping of the public option, as it has been conceived under Democratic health care reform, slapped Rush right across the face. Truth is, 90 percent of people actually wouldn't be able to get on the public option if reform passed. Rush can call shenanigans based on the conspiracies he's brewed up in his own head, but that doesn't make it true.
Rush's message to Blue Dog Democrats: I might be your “best friend” right now
Rush then read from a recent Bill Kristol blog post arguing that Pelosi was leading Democrats “off a cliff.” After the break, Rush returned with his analysis of Kristol's piece and theorized that Pelosi actually wanted to get rid of Blue Dog Democrats because she doesn't like them and they only cause her problems. Rush went on to announce his message to Blue Dogs, telling them he was their “best friend” right now because Pelosi and the White House are willing to throw them under the bus.
Rush calls GDP growth “phony” because it was limited to growth from government spending, not consumer consumption or business investment
Next, Rush moved on to Obama's remarks to small business owners today. He aired a clip of Obama “insulting” the intelligence of the small business owners by highlighting the news of GDP growth today. Rush declared that the GDP numbers were “phony”:
LIMBAUGH: Lookit, you can try to cover up 10 percent unemployment all you want with a phony GDP number of 3.5 percent. You can go out there and say you saved the economy, but there are no jobs. Obama -- he's gratified -- by his own benchmark, the economy's still failing.
Rush explained what he meant by this in more detail (because we at the Limbaugh Wire take pride in giving you context):
LIMBAUGH: Now let me see if I can put this GDP number into context for you, because it's phony. It is a fake number. Gross domestic product needs to be understand as the product of three things, the sum of three things: consumption by consumers, investment by business, and spending by government. C-I-G -- consumption, investment, spending by government. So they say the total GDP went up 3.5 percent. But was there any new consumption by consumers? No. Was there any new investment by business? No. Was there spending by government? Yes. That's the G. The increase is in G, spending by government. There was no investment in business, there was no consumption by consumers -- you've seen all the numbers. Home sales down, consumer spending down. There was no economic growth.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: Now all kinds of government spending, which was government borrowing. So the government spending sector goes up and they say, “Oh, government grew by 3.5 percent, or the economy grew by 3.5 --” It did not. Government grew. All that's happened here is that money has been shifted from taxpayers, today and tomorrow, into Obama approval ratings today.
Rush returned from another break still on the “phony” GDP growth. Rush asked if it was suspicious that they released the number a week before an election, and figured it would be revised downward next month.
Then Rush gave another reason why the GDP was “phony,” explaining that it was part of the “Keynesian fallacy” that government spending causes growth. (Rush got this idea from Dick Morris, so take it with a grain of salt.)
Anyway, Rush concluded that the GDP growth announced today was “fake,” “fraudulent,” and “phony” because it's all from government spending. Then he said that Obama told “another” lie today, and played an audio clip of Obama saying that people can keep the insurance they have now if they want to. Rush said this was an “out and out lie” because “every damn one” of the health care bills floating around makes it clear that “at the end of the day,” there won't be any private insurance available.
Rush said that the catchphrase of the young generation coming up under “Obamacare” will be “moving on down” (as opposed to “moving on up.” Get it? Right on, right on, right on...). Rush lamented that the bill contained no tort reform, no portability of insurance, no buying insurance from other states, and “no real changes.”
Rush then noted a CBS Radio story touting a study that children without health insurance were more likely to die than children with insurance. Rush suggested that this was fearmongering in order to pass health care. He went on to say that Pelosi was protecting big labor, “big lawyer,” and the ideology of big government by declaring war on the middle class. Rush warned that the middle class was in the “crosshairs” of their agenda.
After talking about Medicare cuts with a caller, Rush said that the thing to understand was that Obama “resents” doctors for making money. Another caller asked Rush why we couldn't just pay for insurance for people who don't have it. Rush said we could, and calculated it would only cost $35 to $40 billion of stimulus money a year to cover the 12 million people who don't have insurance but want it. But for the Democrats, Rush explained, it's about seizing one sixth of the private sector and controlling people's lives.
Rush touts AP report on stimulus job reporting, calls Obama a “lying” “fraud”
Rush got the second hour going by reading an Associated Press report charging that the Obama administration's measurement of jobs saved and created by the stimulus was “overstated.” Rush elatedly waved the report around by “state-controlled” AP in order to label the Obama administration “fraudulent.” Rush said that since Obama was lying “with such impunity” about this, he wondered what else Obama would lie about. (For what it's worth, the White House has called the AP report "misleading.")
Rush elated that Lieberman ran with Rush-endorsed talking point on public option
Following the break, Rush aired a clip of his show from earlier this week in which he said that people support the public option because it means “free” to them. Rush then explained that the state-controlled media has been “gunning” for Lieberman since he announced that he'd filibuster a health care bill with a public option. Rush aired an audio bite of an exchange between anchor Jane Skinner and Lieberman, in which Skinner accused Lieberman's rationale for opposing the public option of not making sense. Lieberman responded in a way that echoed Rush, claiming that people think the public option is free when it's not.
Rush continued on the public option theme. He said it was a myth that there is no competition in the private insurance market and claimed that there are actually 17,000 private companies already that area just being hampered by all kinds of state regulations. Rush said that the theory was that a public option -- the “17,001st company competing in the market -- could exert the kind of pressure to bring costs down. He was skeptical, since he explained that most business would ”offload" their employees onto the public plan if it were a lot cheaper than private insurance options. And since the objective is to get everyone on the public plan, this is how they would achieve it.
Rush provides echo chamber for Americans for Tax Reform hit piece on new health care bill
Coming back from another break, Rush warned that government will end up being a health care “monopoly.” Then Rush took this opportunity to start the task of picking apart the new House health care bill. He started off by citing a provision in the House bill that actually creates a tax credit to somehow claim that the bill is removing tax breaks from small business
Then Rush provided an echo chamber for Americans for Tax Reform by reading their “comprehensive” list of taxes in the bill. After reading, Rush welcomed us to the Soviet Union and Rush joked about one of these taxes being a “health care hate crime”:
LIMBAUGH: You do not have to provide motive. All they have to do is say your motive wasn't any good. You're not gonna get a chance to argue with them here -- empowers the IRS to disallow a perfectly legal tax deduction because the IRS deems the motive of the taxpayer was not primarily business-related. What'd you say, H.R.? Well [laughing] I guess you could call it that, a health care hate crime, 'cause they're taxing you, denying a deduction because of the way you think -- is what motive is.
And then it was more of the usual Democrats-as-dictators talk we've come to expect from Limbaugh:
LIMBAUGH: Snerdley says, how can they impugn your motive? They're liberals! They're dictators! They're not small-D Democrats. How can they dictate -- how can they dictate what little kids are forced to sing in school? Because they can. How can they dictate what you think? They're in the process of doing it now. They are statists, they are central planners, they are deniers of freedom and liberty. It's all through this, just the little bit I read.
Rush closed out the hour by reading the latest Daniel Henninger column in The Wall Street Journal.
Rush throws himself another pity party over getting tossed from Rams bid
Having already thrown multiple pity parties for himself since getting dropped from a group trying to purchase the NFL's St. Louis Rams, Rush got the third hour going by throwing himself another one.
Rush explained that yesterday, during a congressional hearing on head injuries in the NFL, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) took the opportunity to ask Commissioner Roger Goodell about the Limbaugh controversy from a few weeks ago. First, Rush thanked King for doing this, claiming that there was no communication between him and King's office.
After airing chunks of King's questioning and Goodell's response, Rush stated that he no longer wants any part in the NFL anymore, but that wasn't the point. Rush said that King made it clear that his McNabb quote wasn't about McNabb, but about the media that was “obsessed” with his skin color. He explained what happened on that fateful Sunday in 2003:
LIMBAUGH: I've explained this. The production meeting the day before this program aired on ESPN -- my role is to disagree with the main panel when they're chatting about whatever, and if I disagree, then that's when I jump in, that's what my job was. So in the production meeting, we plan the segments, they tell me what they're going to be talking about, and they sort of rehearse, they start sharing ideas back and forth. I, of course, don't say anything because my role to surprise 'em. And there are two segments on McNabb and the Eagles that are planned for the next day's show, that Sunday.
[...]
And I'm listening to these guys, I'm planning -- “OK, if they say that, this is where I'm gonna throw my little red flag and jump in.” I said, “I don't think there's that much wrong with him you guys, he's a little bit overrated, I think. Now, sports media, NFL --” And by the way, what's wrong with wanting black quarterbacks to succeed? I didn't even say that that was wrong.
Rush then called Goodell a “weasel” for not answering King's question about the Dolphins owners, again occused the media of being obsessed with McNabb's skin color, while he was not:
LIMBAUGH: And [Goodell] got on his high horse about how McNabb's a fine player and a fine person, and it has nothing to do with the color of his skin, when A; I never said he was not a fine person. I never said he was a bad quarterback, just that he was overrated, which I don't think is deniable. And that C; the media was obsessed with the color of his skin, which is also undeniable, not that I was.
Rush closed out the segment by extolling his own colorblind virtues:
LIMBAUGH: I've always believed in this notion of colorblind. And that's why I treat people the way I do. I do not treat people differently based on what their skin color is or what their sexual orientation is or what their -- and I assume that most people are intelligent. And maybe I have missed the boat in assuming that everybody else wants a society that's colorblind. And maybe what I'm learning is that there are people out there who say they want a colorblind society in no way mean it. And I'm thinking, “Yeah, it's a good thing, it'd be a great objective.” So I'm out there living it, and that of course dictates a lot of how I behave, what I say. I think people are people first. Americans, all the other hyphenated come in to me much later.
Rush on his anti-health care reform stance: “I'm the one standing up for the little guy here”
After a commercial break, Rush took a caller who explained why the public option opt-out will be so difficult that most states won't be able to opt-out. Rush said that was the point, and falsely claimed that even if states opt out, people in the state will still have to pay all kinds of taxes for a service they wouldn't be getting. The next caller theorized that these “zealots” were trying to cram health care down our throats in order to expand unions. Rush said that there were many motivations for passing health care reform, but it came down to how Democrats are “Marxists” and “fascists” trying to control as much of you life as they can.
Rush capped off this rant by claiming that it was he -- not Democrats -- who was standing up for the “little guy”:
LIMBAUGH: You know, I listen to myself sometimes. Other times I'm too busy talking and thinking ahead to my next point, but sometimes I stop and listen to myself. And when I stop and listen to myself, you know what I realize about myself? I'm the one standing up for the little guy here. I'm the one standing up and all of our -- all of my brethren and sisteren in talk radio and all of our -- we're the ones that stand up for the little guy. We're the ones trying to make sure the little guy doesn't get the shaft. It's the Democrats and the American left who are targeting little guy under the guise of targeting the rich. We're the ones standing up for the little guy. We're the ones who do not see skin color or what have you.
Following another commercial break, Rush took a caller who said that “net exports” needed to be added to the GDP equation Rush had set up in the first hour. Rush said that he would rather focus on exports in regards to the trade deficit, and argued that his GDP formula was already “brilliant,” touting how it explained the “fraudulent” and “fake” number that came out today.
Rush still twisting his story about NYT's Revkin; says Revkin was “profoundly offended” at Rush telling him to “go kill” himself
Just as he closed out his show yesterday, Rush again twisted his story regarding New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin:
LIMBAUGH: You know, I just realized I forgot to mention today Andrew Revkin, the New York Times reporter who's thinking seriously about capping families at one child to reduce carbon emissions, and I urged him, “Show us how it's done, you know. Go die.” Yeah, he was profoundly offended by this.
Zachary Aronow and Zachary Pleat contributed to this edition of the Limbaugh Wire.
Highlights
Outrageous comments
LIMBAUGH: Lookit, you can try to cover up 10 percent unemployment all you want with a phony GDP number of 3.5 percent. You can go out there and say you saved the economy, but there are no jobs. Obama -- he's gratified -- by his own benchmark, the economy's still failing.
Now let me see if I can put this GDP number into context for you, because it's phony. It is a fake number. Gross domestic product needs to be understand as the product of three things, the sum of three things: consumption by consumers, investment by business, and spending by government. C-I-G -- consumption, investment, spending by government. So they say the total GDP went up 3.5 percent. But was there any new consumption by consumers? No. Was there any new investment by business? No. Was there spending by government? Yes. That's the G. The increase is in G, spending by government. There was no investment in business, there was no consumption by consumers -- you've seen all the numbers. Home sales down, consumer spending down. There was no economic growth.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: Now all kinds of government spending, which was government borrowing. So the government spending sector goes up and they say, “Oh, government grew by 3.5 percent, or the economy grew by 3.5 --” It did not. Government grew. All that's happened here is that money has been shifted from taxpayers, today and tomorrow, into Obama approval ratings today.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: You do not have to provide motive. All they have to do is say your motive wasn't any good. You're not gonna get a chance to argue with them here -- empowers the IRS to disallow a perfectly legal tax deduction because the IRS deems the motive of the taxpayer was not primarily business-related. What'd you say, H.R.? Well [laughing] I guess you could call it that, a health care hate crime, 'cause they're taxing you, denying a deduction because of the way you think -- is what motive is. We have to take a break -- no, that's a good question, Snerdley says, how can they impugn your motive? They're liberals! They're dictators! They're not small-D Democrats. How can they dictate -- how can they dictate what little kids are forced to sing in school? Because they can. How can they dictate what you think? They're in the process of doing it now. They are statists, they are central planners, they are deniers of freedom and liberty. It's all through this, just the little bit I read.
Pity party!
LIMBAUGH: I've explained this. The production meeting the day before this program aired on ESPN -- my role is to disagree with the main panel when they're chatting about whatever, and if I disagree, then that's when I jump in, that's what my job was. So in the production meeting, we plan the segments, they tell me what they're going to be talking about, and they sort of rehearse, they start sharing ideas back and forth. I, of course, don't say anything because my role to surprise 'em. And there are two segments on McNabb and the Eagles that are planned for the next day's show, that Sunday. And the theory in the -- not the theory, the impetus behind both segments was “What's wrong with McNabb?” I remember Chris Berman saying I just got off the phone with Andy Reed, the coach, he doesn't know! Everybody -- McNabb, a slow start to the season, Eagles not doing -- it was the topic of the league, it was everybody.
And I'm listening to these guys, I'm planning -- “OK, if they say that, this is where I'm gonna throw my little red flag and jump in.” I said, “I don't think there's that much wrong with him you guys, he's a little bit overrated, I think. Now, sports media, NFL --” and by the way, what's wrong with wanting black quarterbacks to succeed? I didn't even say that that was wrong.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: It's just stunning. This man, Roger Goodell, is a total weasel. He had no answer -- by the way, he did no answer about the Dolphins owners, Fergie and J-Lo. He had no answer about the lyrics of their songs. He had no answer, so we wouldn't even address the question. And he got on his high horse about how McNabb's a fine player and a fine person, and it has nothing to do with the color of his skin, when A; I never said he was not a fine person. I never said he was a bad quarterback, just that he was overrated, which I don't think is deniable. And that C; the media was obsessed with the color of his skin, which is also undeniable, not that I was.
[...]
LIMBAUGH: You know, it really is true. I've always believed in this notion of colorblind. And that's why I treat people the way I do. I do not treat people differently based on what their skin color is or what their sexual orientation is or what their -- and I assume that most people are intelligent. And maybe I have missed the boat in assuming that everybody else wants a society that's colorblind. And maybe what I'm learning is that there are people out there who say they want a colorblind society in no way mean it. And I'm thinking, “Yeah, it's a good thing, it'd be a great objective.” So I'm out there living it, and that of course dictates a lot of how I behave, what I say. I think people are people first. Americans, all the other hyphenated come in to me much later.
Enemies list
LIMBAUGH: You know, I just realized I forgot to mention today Andrew Revkin, the New York Times reporter who's thinking seriously about capping families at one child to reduce carbon emissions, and I urged him, “Show us how it's done, you know. Go die.” Yeah, he was profoundly offended by this. I was going to address it today, I forgot, I got it right here. So I put it on top of tomorrow's stack. I'll get to that.
America's Truth Rejector
LIMBAUGH: But then, I saw the MSNBC ask his doofus White House reporter about a backlash when 90 percent of Americans learn they'll not be able to use the public option. I just -- I was reading closed-captioning, I was doing other things, and I said, “Whoa, 90 percent won't be able to use it?” And then they were running a graphic saying her plan does not contain a robust public option.
Well, I know they've -- I know they've watered down some of the language here, but it's all for show. I mean the whole thing is a public -- what is MSNBC talking about, 90 percent of the people will not be able to access the public option? BS. Nobody's gonna have any choice but the public option before these people are finished. There's no reason to do health care if it's not a public option.
Vox populi
LIMBAUGH: You know, I listen to myself sometimes. Other times I'm too busy talking and thinking ahead to my next point, but sometimes I stop and listen to myself. And when I stop and listen to myself, you know what I realize about myself? I'm the one standing up for the little guy here. I'm the one standing up and all of our -- all of my brethren and sisteren in talk radio and all of our -- we're the ones that stand up for the little guy. We're the ones trying to make sure the little guy doesn't get the shaft. It's the Democrats and the American left who are targeting little guy under the guise of targeting the rich. We're the ones standing up for the little guy. We're the ones who do not see skin color or what have you.