RUSH: Here is reason 247 why I am not a Republican: "Republican governors, battling climate change in their states and fed up with the GOP's inability to organize in Washington, are urging their congressional colleagues to start the new Congress with unprecedented dedication to addressing global warming." Ladies and gentlemen, have you seen the headlines out there today? Chicago has the most consecutive days of snowfall since records began in 1884. Chicago is the coldest it's been in a decade. Flint, Michigan, breaks its 95-year-old record for cold. Blowing snow, frigid temperatures pound the nation, 40 below zero in places, and the snow in the Northeast is so bad that JFK and LaGuardia and Newark are backed up five hours. If you're planning on flying today, the whole air traffic control system from the Midwest to the east is going to be backed up because of these delays in New York City. GOP governors urge action on global warming in the midst of a deep freeze! It's just a huge disconnect. In fact, what do they want to do? They want to make it colder? That's what the objective of global warming is, is to make it colder, is it not? If we had a genuine ice age descend upon us, would they then tell us to increase our carbon emissions?
I've often said, ladies and gentlemen, that politics is show biz for the ugly. This can be demonstrated and illustrated, and you can see proof if you go to www.DrudgeReport.com, there's a picture there of Henry Waxman, because Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, says that he wants to pass a climate change bill before Memorial Day. He said today the environment and US economy depend on congressional action to confront the threat of climate change. They want to make it colder? It's absurd. Everybody listening in the upper one-third of the United States of America, do we now all agree there is global warming? Madison, Wisconsin, in the midst of this, is enacting draconian global warming measures for people to live by in their city. There's a story somewhere here in the stack of a 91-year-old woman in Great Britain who died after not having 16,000 pounds to winterize or get her home ready to go, according to new environmental regulations. She just died because she didn't have the money.
Here it is: "A family have expressed their fury after the death of their disabled 91-year-old mother who 'was forced to take out a second mortgage to foot an unnecessary £16,000 council bill.' The family of bed-ridden grandmother Dorothy Hacking blame Thanet Council for 'disgusting treatment' after the pensioner became overstretched trying to pay for work to meet government regulations to reduce CO2 emissions. They say she was beset by stress and health problems after being left with no option but to take out a second mortgage for the stone-cladding repairs to make her home compliant with the Home Energy Conservation Act in Ramsgate, Kent." This is the kind of stuff that Carol Browner, the new EPA chief for Obama, is planning for us. The stress, and I'm sure being 91 years old, didn't help.
Reason number 248 why I am no longer a Republican: Headline: "'McCain Ally Graham Becomes Obama Foreign Policy Player' -- To look at President-elect Barack Obama and Sen. Lindsey Graham sitting side by side Wednesday and to hear them passing out praise, you wouldn't know that scarcely 10 weeks ago they were at political war." Well, the premise of that is wrong. They were not at political war. Had Lindsey Grahamnesty and McCain been at political war, they might have won. As you know, Graham is the bootlicker, friend of Senator McCain, crisscrossed the country with him during his losing presidential bid. Lindsey Grahamnesty said, "I think this is a good way to get started. The campaign is over. I'm disappointed in the outcome, but like every American I'm excited about what awaits our country in the future." Hey Lindsey, most of the people in your party are not. They are scared to death about what the future holds, and they see people like you caving on them left and right, illustrating there is zero Republican leadership in Washington, DC. And here's what's going to happen in 2010. Mark my words on this.
Lindsey Graham and all the others in the House and Senate, the Republicans that are guilty of this, of caving to the whole notion, "We want Obama to succeed," they are going to face more trouble from their own party voters in the next election than they will ever face from the Democrats and the American left. Mark my words. If this stuff keeps up, if there is no opposition, if there's no attempt to derail this headlong move into FDR 2, if there is no effort whatsoever to stop the plunge we have into the government absorbing the US economy in gulp after gulp after gulp, the people who did not stand up and fight this are going to pay for it. They are not going to be thought of as wonderful; they're not going to be thought of as bipartisan; they're not going to be thought of as open-minded. They're going to be thrown out. They do not understand this, and they do not believe it.
"Graham told Obama that the foreign leaders they'd met are extremely enthusiastic about his inauguration on Tuesday. 'There's a moment in time for this country to re-engage the international community, and to make sure that we have international support to stabilize Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq,' Graham said. '(Obama's) popularity and the respect he has earned throughout the world give America a chance to re-engage not only in the region, but in a way that in the long run makes his job easier and takes the pressure off our troops,' he said. Graham turned to Obama and added: 'That's a compliment to you and the way you have campaigned, and the goodwill you have generated.'" I stopped reading this piece at that point. I didn't want to read any more of this. It's sickening. It is a repudiation of his own party, and I'm going to tell you what's going to happen with Afghanistan, folks, and I want you to listen to me very closely. Mark this down, January 15th, 2009: The Bush administration, within the past six months or so, has implemented a new strategy in Afghanistan. There are more troops headed on the way, so forth, and it's not going to be a surge, but the Afghan policy is now ramping up as Iraq is slowing down and normalizing.
Do you know in Iraq, car sales are off the charts? Automobile sales. Automobile sales are off the charts in Iraq. Well, given their baseline. I don't think their sales would compare to ours, obviously, but given their baseline, automobile sales are off the charts. The Big Three ought to open dealerships and auto manufacturing plants over there, and they could do it without unions.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, what's going to happen here in Afghanistan is that shortly after Obama is inaugurated, he's going to announce a brand-new Afghanistan policy, and we're going to go in there and kick butt, and the fact of the matter is it's already in place. Grahamnesty and these guys are falling right into Obama's trap here. Why do Republicans need to be running around talking about how the world loves us more now because Obama's there, we're going to have newfound respect? Last I looked, in a lot of places around the world they're burning pictures of Obama. And how about this? How about all of a sudden now, Obama says that capturing Osama doesn't matter now, it has nothing to do with victory whatsoever. Isn't that convenient? One of the major benchmarks that the left and the Drive-By Media used the past six years to anoint the Bush policy failure is we didn't capture Bin Laden, and now it doesn't matter. If I'm a worldwide terrorist, and I'm watching all this, there are certain things that I have to realize here, that my task has just been made easier. My task has just been made much easier.
The United States claims it's gonna close Guantanamo Bay, where it has been learned that 61 detainees who were released from Club Gitmo have returned to commit terrorist acts. Folks, it's going to be fascinating to watch, it's going to be frustrating, too, and I understand it every bit as much as you do, but elections have consequences. And right now, our elected infomercials, or very few of them -- John Boehner is standing tough in the House on the second half of the TARP bailout. By the way, Citibank, I'm driving in to work today, I'm listening to a little news, and they're using the word "insolvent." The stock price last I looked was at $3.60. Insolvent. And then the commentator had to define insolvent for the audience because this is stupid network I was listening to, "Insolvency means that you owe more than you have, you owe more money than you have." Really? Insolvency. Not bankruptcy. Insolvency. Keep in mind these people were bailed out. These people were bailed out last fall. This should not be happening if these magic bailouts from the TARP fund actually work. Lindsey Grahamnesty.
RUSH: Now, get this. This is something only your host would notice. This is a tiny little blurb (shuffling papers), a little AP blurb here in the New York Times on their website. "Democrats Try to Extend Tax Cuts Using Recovery Bill." It's a small story, small headline. It's nowhere near front page. Would that catch your attention? "Democrats Try to Extend Tax Cuts Using Recovery Bill." Here are the details: "Barack Obama's economic recovery bill has grown to $850 billion after negotiations with his Democrat allies in Congress who have rewritten some of the President-elect's tax proposals and may drive the price tag even higher," and I'm sure Obama doesn't care. The higher it goes, the better. The more he has to spend, the better.
"For starters..." Now, this is where this gets interesting, and I'll bet you my take on this will shock and stun you. "For starters, Capitol Hill Democrats are trying to use the economic recovery bill to extend a tax cut for middle to upper income taxpayers..." Can I say that again? Because you might think I am making this up. I have yet to see this anywhere. I have yet to hear that the Democrats anywhere are in favor of extending tax cuts (I guess these are the Bush tax cuts) for middle to upper income earners. In other words, this story says Capitol Hill Democrats want to extend tax cuts for the rich! (interruption) No. No, that's not the point here. Let me finish the sentence. Well, they may be following my advice. But it's whose advice Obama is not following that makes this interesting to me. Just let me finish this. To me, this is profound. I don't see this. I have not seen, where Democrats all of a sudden, congressional Democrats, Capitol Hill Democrats, are in favor of extending tax cuts for the rich.
That's about as shocking as Algore coming out and admitting that global warming's a hoax! This is not in the Democrat playbook. This is not anywhere in the Democrat liberal belief system, that you extend tax cuts for the rich. But that's what Capitol Hill Democrats are trying to use the economic recovery bill for. This is the end of the sentence: "...despite concerns from Obama's transition team that it won't boost the economy." What is this? Congressional Democrats, Capitol Hill Democrats want to extend tax cuts for the rich, Obama's transition team says, "Nope, that won't boost the economy." Now, who are Capitol Hill Democrats listening to? Snerdley asked the right question. Capitol Hill Democrats, maybe some of the Democrat Blue Dogs buy into this, but you think Pelosi and Reid are buying into this? Who is this? But my question is, if the Obama transition team says that extending tax cuts for middle and upper income taxpayers will not boost the economy, then what good was his dinner that he had the other night with these conservative pundits?
These conservative pundits had to go in there... I mean, Obama's willing to listen, right? He's willing to listen to any idea that works, even if it's not his. I don't know what happened at that dinner, but I'll guarantee you that one of the common themes that was or had to have been mentioned if these guys actually talked about conservatism was tax cuts. So what good was the dinner if the Obama transition team doesn't believe in them? It's like I asked yesterday, "You actually think Obama goes into these dinners -- I don't care whether it's with the lib columnists or the moderate columnists or the conservatives, you actually think he's going in there asking them to change his mind?" Ha-ha-ha-ha. If you believe that, you haven't turned in your $40 coupon to digitize your TV. Audio sound bites, ladies and gentlemen. Last night, Fox News Channel special report with Bret Baier because Brit Hume retired, Mort Kondracke said this about Obama.
KONDRACKE: Besides having -- having dinner with conservative columnists, he also had -- had dinner with a bunch of liberal columnists. I'm here to invite President-elect Obama to have dinner at my house with a gaggle of moderate columnists any time he'd like to.
RUSH: There wouldn't be anything said! You get a bunch of moderates together afraid to tell people what they really think, that would be one of the most boring dinners I could imagine attending: Obama with a bunch of moderates. Last night on Hardboiled, Chris Matthews talking to Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune, and they had this little exchange here about Obama's dinner with the conservative columnists.
PAGE: Obama saying no red state, no blue state, we're the United States of America. But I'll be more impressed when he brings in other really rabid, uh, not just critics, but assault dogs who go after him --
PAGE: -- every night over on Fox.
MATTHEWS: Who's he going to bring, Rush Limbaugh in?
PAGE: Why does he meet with the neocons?
RUSH: "When's he going to bring Rush Limbaugh in?" they're all wondering. I hijacked that dinner, not even being there. They're all wondering, "When's he gonna bring in Limbaugh?" Well, now, that's human nature. This is a good point. One of the things... You know, I was talking to F. Lee Levin via iChat when I got back from Washington when I had learned about this, and all these e-mails were coming in asking me if I was there. You know, Levin was a little bit ticked off because he thinks these guys are sellouts heading to dinner with Obama, and I said, "No, no, no. Man, you gotta understand. They're in their element. This is inside the Beltway. They want to matter. This counts." I said, "Mark, do me a favor. Take a look at all the people who weren't invited and think about how angry they are." You know, there are a lot of people (I could name names here, but that's not the point) on our side.
There are a lot of conservative intelligentsia inside-the-Beltway media types who are sitting there saying, "Why not me? How come Noonan got invited? Kudlow? Who the hell is Kudlow! Who the hell is Noonan? Why not me? I guarantee you this has inspired all kinds of envy, all kinds of jealousy. So here we've got Kondracke, "Hey, what about me? What about the moderates?" It's just the old saw. If you really want something, you don't let somebody know how badly you want it. But, it is what it is. This Obamamania stuff is real. It has captivated the whole country. I mean, you travel around, you go to airport gift shops, shops on the street, and all the Obama mania T-shirts and the caps, the athletic supporters with Obama's logo. I mean, it's everywhere. It doesn't matter where you go and it doesn't matter what the item is. By the way, I have had two Drive-By institutions ask me what I'm doing for the inauguration. They're running these little blurbs of various people, "What are you doing for the inauguration?" You know what I'm telling them? I said, "Well, I'm going to pretend that I'm there. I'm bringing a Port-A-Potty into the studio, and I'm going to use it every 15 minutes."