Dittos, 

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back Home Button
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Excellence in Broadcasting
RSS Icon
ADVERTISEMENT

EIB WEB PAGE DISGRONIFIER

What's Sinking the Democrats? It's Obama's Jackassian Policies

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: How about that unemployment rate, folks? Can you believe this? Ninety-five thousand jobs we lose, and the unemployment rate miraculously stays below 10%. We got more discouraged people, but guess what happened here? We did add, if you believe this bilge, we did add some private sector workers, but we lost public sector workers. We lost government jobs. "A wave of government layoffs in September outpaced weak hiring in the private sector, pushing down the nation's payrolls by a net total of 95,000 jobs. The unemployment rate held at 9.6 percent last month." This is the new norm. You know, Elaine Chao, Mrs. Mitch McConnell, was on Fox this morning. She was the labor secretary under the Bush administration and she made the valid point there is not one person in this regime who's ever been on a private sector payroll, not run a business, there isn't anybody that's worked in one. In fact, there isn't anybody who's even run a lemonade stand in this regime.

Now, Mrs. Chao and Mr. Bush presided over a record 52 months of job expansion. Elaine Chao said today, (paraphrasing) "I can't believe this. Our unemployment rate was steady, 4.7 to 5% and they were talking about an upcoming recession; how bad it was; it's going to get worse. And now we're almost 10%." And by the way, the U6 which is the real number, U6, the 9.6% is U3, that's what it's termed. U6 is up to 17%. That's the one that counts people who have just given up looking for work. So the unemployment rate held at 9.6%, and guess what? Right before the program started, my good friends, headlines screeched across news wires, the Dow Jones Industrial Average for the first time in how many centuries, whatever it is, has now gone past the 11,000 mark. I had some e-mails, people saying, "How can that be? How can the market be climbing, reaching new heights on the very day this rotten jobs news comes out?"

There are two things going on. It is looking ahead, I mean the market's looking ahead to November, being happy about it, but don't forget the Fed is intervening and buying stocks. This is all being manipulated, I think, or a large part of it is. I don't think the whole thing is, but a lot of it's being manipulated to get this headline today, because the job news isn't good. I mean nobody wants to settle for a constant norm now of 9.5 to 10% unemployment that everybody knows is actually higher than that. So here comes this headline, "Look at the Dow, ooh, Nellie, we're all above 11,000." And this is designed to negate the bad news on the jobs front. It's designed, which I find hilarious, actually, because Obama runs against Wall Street all the time, hates Wall Street, wants people to think he does, anyway, and yet has to point to Wall Street today to show health in the country and in the economy. The jobs report is the final one before the November elections, "which means members of Congress will face voters next month with an economy struggling to create jobs."

Now, economies don't create jobs. I'm just reading to you as written here by Christopher Rugaber, AP economics writer. "Members of Congress will face voters next month who are frustrated with an economy that is still struggling to create jobs." Those evil rich people who make $200,000 a year or more are the people who create jobs, not economies. "The private sector added 64,000 jobs, the weakest showing since June." That should be the headline. "A net total of 159,000 public-sector jobs were eliminated," in September. "Local governments cut 76,000 jobs last month, most of them teachers. That's the largest cut by local governments in 28 years." Now, wait just a second. We thought we just bailed out teachers. There was a $26 billion stimulus bill, remember this? And it was mere weeks ago. Teachers and other union government to the tune of 26 billion taxpayer dollars on top of the untold billions they have been given by the first stimulus. Where'd all that money go? Well, we learned in Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Unified School District said we're not going to spend that money hiring teachers. We're gonna make sure we don't have to lay anybody off.

So all this money, another stimulus, $26 billion to save teachers and government jobs, and nevertheless 159,000 government jobs are lost in September. But we're not supposed to remember the 26 billion dollars bailout. We're not supposed to remember that. Our media masters and the rest of the Democrat Party will try to use these latest numbers to argue that we can't afford to slash federal, state, and, local government spending any further. This is what this is all about. Look, we're cutting these poor people in the government, they're losing jobs, we can't slash government anymore, we can't do it. In fact, I'll tell you what's going to happen, they will claim that these figures show that we need to pump still more money, billions of dollars, taxpayer dollars into the public sector union coffer. We have to save teacher jobs is what's coming next, 159,000 government workers, oh, that's intolerable, folks. (interruption) But, no, no. Snerdley, you're misunderstanding. I know it's a drop in the bucket, but this is like God losing angels, the government losing employees. We would not tolerate heaven losing angels. We'd spend whatever it takes to get the angels back. Government employees losing jobs, unacceptable. I know it's "welcome to our world," but they have a different view.

Now, the U6 jobless rate is up to 17.1% as I previously mentioned. Why the jump? This is in the Wall Street Journal: "The U.S. jobless rate was flat at 9.6% in September, but the government's broader measure of unemployment rose even more to 17.1%, the highest rate since April and down just slightly from the October 2009 high of 17.4%. ... The U-6 figure includes everyone in the official rate plus 'marginally attached workers' -- those who are neither working nor looking for work, but say they want a job and have looked for work recently." So the real number here is 17.1%. Now, the Gallup people, they came out with the official unemployment number, 10.1%. You read that story in full, toward the end you find out that they, in interviewing people, have found a number of people who say, "You know what, it's easier to accept unemployment benefits than to try to find work, particularly part-time work. I'd just soon get my unemployment check rather than seek part time work." Yet they tell us that unemployment benefits are not in any way related to people not seeking work. All these extensions, "No, Mr. Limbaugh, what makes you think that extending unemployment compensation benefits would reduce the incentive to work? What kind of thinking is that?" It's logical thinking is what it is, and the Gallup story actually confirms it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: New polling out of Nevada is unnerving Democrats who fear Republican Sharron Angle's campaign is surging despite enduring millions of dollars' worth of TV ad attacks from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The three most recently released public polls show Angle with a nominal edge, though all have been within the margin of error," but she's getting out of the margin of error now. John Raese in West Virginia is well above the margin of error against the Democrat, supposedly shoe-in, the governor, Mr. Manchin up there. Dick Morris is out. He says, without Delaware even being factored, ten seats being picked up in the Senate. At least they're leaning that way. He thinks a hundred seats in the House of Representatives.

About this Sharron Angle business. You know, I have been suspicious of the polls from the get-go which show this race tied. We know what the media-industrial complex thinks of the Tea Party. They're out there still today calling 'em "tea baggers," and speaking of that, this is from Rasmussen: "Tea Party Participation up as Election Nears -- Latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 17% describe themselves as members of the Tea Party. That's up four points from late August." Despite the constant hammering, despite the incessant criticism, the character distraction and the impugning of these people, their ranks are increasing, and in Nevada the Democrats fear an Angle "surge." I think Angle is way up. Actually, the truth of that poll is I think Dingy Harry has been way down.

You know, before the Tea Party candidate got involved out there, Dingy Harry was way down. Everybody was talking about him as a guaranteed loser, right? Wasn't even close. They were six months ago, three months ago, writing off Harry Reid. And all of a sudden you have a primary election, a Tea Party Republican wins, and miraculously the race is tied in the polls? Sorry, I never bought that. I also don't buy that Christine O'Donnell is down double digits in Delaware. I don't buy it. A lot of people do, but I don't. I think that Delaware race is a lot closer than anybody thinks right now. I'm sorry. I'm simply voicing my suspicions, which are intelligence guided by experience. I know with whom I am dealing. Elizabeth Drew in The Politico today. This is unbelievable. The headline: "Can Obama Survive Republican Attacks?"

Would somebody explain to me which "Republican attacks"? I don't know of any Republican attacks. I know that people like me and others in the so-called New Media are criticizing Obama, by calling him a "jackass." Oh, by the way, John King, CNN last night, says, I went over the line calling him a jackass. You don't say that about presidents. You know, you can sit -- this, folks, still amuses me. I can sit here and accuse the president of single-handedly wanting to destroy the country, and that's fine. I can sit here and make the most (what a lot of people think are) crazy, wild allegations about this man doesn't like America and his sole purpose is to destroy it, cut it down to size, and that's apparently okay. But when I call him a "jackass," somehow I've crossed an invisible line. Well, wait 'til they find out that I'm now referring to his policies as "jackassian."

You know, we announced that yesterday. Wait 'til they hear that. These gonna really send 'em over the edge. This is the same John King who was not upset when liberals were calling for Bush and Cheney assassinations. I think it's the same John King. In fact, there was a movie about Bush's actually being assassinated. There was a book about how to do it, and we were told, "Yes, it may be a little over the edge but these are literary and film arts that we should explore and endeavor to understand." So the assassination of a president was an interesting intellectual exercise. Jackass, calling one a jackass, is stepping over the line. Now: "Can Obama Survive Republican Attacks?" This is Politico, this is Elizabeth Drew. Elizabeth, all the attacks in the world have not sunk Obama. Obama has sunk his own self. Obama and his policies.

This is what you people in the mainstream media are never gonna understand. You are so caught up in the elitism and Beltway, inside-the-Beltway-speak, that you do not understand. It is the specifics of his policies. Just like you thought during the eighties that it was Reagan's charm and his personality and slick marketing and packaging that made people love Reagan. No, no. It was his policies. It was his core beliefs; it was his convictions. Likewise Obama's problem is his core beliefs and his convictions. People don't like them. More and more people daily say they do not want health care. Even Dingy Harry's son, Rory Reid -- what's he running for? Is he running for governor of Nevada? Yeah. Even Rory Reid, the son of Dingy Harry, has said that Obamacare is bad. It could hurt Nevada. So this opposition to Obama crosses party lines. It's becoming bipartisan.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Obama and his speech, his appearance today at a concrete company. I don't think it's an accident that our little man-child president goes out to a place that has something solid in it, because his administration doesn't. So you go to a concrete place to talk about the jobs numbers that came out, but he was lifeless. There was no enthusiasm; there was no passion. The only time he really got passionate in his remarks today was when he started bashing Republicans near the end of it, and the audience -- did you hear this about Bite Me? Bite Me told his audience yesterday was dullest audience he's ever spoken to. They weren't laughing at his gaffes, they weren't reacting to any of his jokes, so he said, "You're the dullest audience I've ever had." Obama today did not have an actively involved audience, either. We have two sound bites. Private sector job growth. The president's excited to talk about this.

OBAMA: This morning we learned that in the month of September our economy gained 64,000 jobs in the private sector. July and August private sector job numbers were revised upwards. So we've now seen nine straight months of private sector job growth. In all, more than 850,000 private sector jobs gained this year.

RUSH: Stop the tape a second? How many of you are inspired? How many of you are revved up? How many of you feel your heartbeat accelerating here listening to this? I mean this is monotone. This is just lifeless as our president heralds the great jobs news. Here, let's listen to the rest of it.

OBAMA: Which is in sharp contrast to the almost 800,000 jobs that we were losing when I first took office. But that news is tempered by a net job loss in September --

RUSH: (snoring)

OBAMA: -- which was fueled in large measure by the end of temporary census jobs and by layoffs in state and local governments.

RUSH: Well, that's inspiring, uplifting. It makes you want to get out of bed and go to a concrete company yourself. That's the president of the United States. You know, I think he needs a slogan: "Win one for the griper." All he's doing is griping and whining, and now his press buddies are doing the same thing. This story from the Politico (paraphrased): "Can the president withstand the Republican attacks? Can he? Is it possible? Can Obama survive Republican attacks?" This is Elizabeth Drew, and I want to read to you an excerpt here. She making an excuse why Obama hadn't gotten as much done as he should have because he had all these supermajorities in the House, and he had 60 votes in the Senate. Listen to this. "In fact, there have been 60 Democratic senators for only seven months of Obama's presidency so far.

"And even when they had 60 seats, contrary to the view of some liberal commentators and widely believed, 60 seats usually didn't mean 60 votes for the Democratic position." So she's making an excuse for him. He had to have 60 seats but you -- only for seven months, and not all those 60 were on his side. So here's somebody running interference. Democrats with 60 like-minded souls in the Senate can't get anything done and it's time to make excuses for it. Did you ever hear anyone in the Fake Media ever bring that up when blaming Bush and conservatives for what Congress was doing? Did you ever see or hear anyone in the media say, "Well, you know, it's really not their fault." This is just inside-the-Beltway groupthink. This is fantasy media supporting our brave, young, under-assault, jackass president. All right, that mighta crossed the line. That was gratuitous. All right. I take it back.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, I want to put something in perspective. Obama's out there touting, if you can call this touting. The reason why there's no enthusiasm is he knows he's lying. He knows that he can't sell this. Obama's biggest problem is that he just can't keep it going. And I know you're asking, "What do you mean 'it,' what is 'it'?" The illusion of purpose. It's a grandiose way of suggesting you just can't keep the lie going. You lose the ability to believe it yourself. The evidence is coming in. I mean he's out there touting 64,000 jobs. We have pointed out, we've noted often before on this program that economists say we need 150,000 to 200,000 new jobs every month just to keep up with population growth to stay in place, to not even add on a percentage basis jobs, just to keep up with our population growth. To keep employment at the same percentage we need 150 to 200,000 jobs a month. We're going to have to do that, in excess of that through the year 2016 to get rid of the eight to nine, 10% unemployment that we have now.

This is real stuff. I mean it's serious. Obamacare waivers are coming in, and the tax increases are popping up. Starting next year the waivers are gonna expire. He's out there bragging about 64,000 jobs when 150,000 a month, steady, are needed just to keep up with population growth. Now, the U6 number, which is the one that's 17.1%, that number is almost where it was in October 2009. Now, that was the precipice from which Obama supposedly has brought us back. In other words, there has been no improvement. We're still at the precipice. Now, as a point of comparison, we had more $250 stimulus checks that went to dead people. Seventy-two thousand $250 stimulus checks went to dead people. So 72,000 dead people got money. I mean that's more than the 64,000 jobs that were created. Now, put that in perspective. Here's Obama talking even more about all this.

OBAMA: I should point out that these continuing layoffs by state and local governments --

RUSH: Hm-hm.

OBAMA: -- of teachers and police officers and firefighters and the like --

RUSH: Stop the tape. Don't forget, $26 billion stimulus just a couple of months ago to see to it that this did not happen. So where did that money go, and where did the dead spend their stimulus? The dead, 72,000 of them got $250 checks. Where did it get spent? Everybody knows the devils at Walmart, that would probably be the first place to look. But Obama, (imitating Obama) "I should point out these continuing layoffs by state and local governments, teachers, police officers, firefighters and the like (muttering)." Here, recue it. Take it from the top again and keep in mind, $26 billion stimulus to prevent just this.

OBAMA: I should point out that these continuing layoffs by state and local governments, of teachers and police officers and firefighters and the like --

RUSH: Right.

OBAMA: -- would have been even worse without the federal help that we provided the states over the last 20 months.

RUSH: Of course.

OBAMA: Help that the Republicans in Congress have consistently opposed.

RUSH: Oh, yes.

OBAMA: I think the Republican position doesn't make much sense, especially since the weakness in public sector employment is a drag on the private sector as well.

RUSH: What?

OBAMA: So we need to continue to explore ways that we can help states and local governments --

RUSH: Wait a minute, wait a minute, stop the tape. I want to make sure I actually heard that. "Especially since the weakness in public sector employment is a drag on the private sector as well"? This is kind of like Pelosi's multiplier effect with food stamps. Every dollar of food stamps spent puts a buck seventy nine into the economy. Okay. Here's a montage, folks, of the -- well, here, you'll figure it out listening to it.

HILL: There's some interesting news out on last year's stimulus payments. It turns out that more than $18 million of those payments went to 72,000 people who are dead.

NELSON: Eighteen million in stimulus funds went to 72,000 dead people.

PHILLIPS: Seventy-two thousand dead people, stimulus money.

DE LA CRUZ: Seventy-two thousand stimulus checks to people who were dead.

CHANG: Eighty-nine thousand stimulus checks worth $22 million were sent to people who had either died or were in jail.

RUSH: Where did the dead spend their money? Where did they cash the check, that's an even better question. Those $250 checks were to make up for not getting cost-of-living increases in Social Security. That's what the original purpose was.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Our official climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama at Huntsville, has a question about the money that went to dead people, the $250 checks that went to the dead. He asks if the dead will now get periodic cost-of-dying increases, which is a valid, valid question when we consider the direction this regime is taking us.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Mark, Charlotte, North Carolina. Great to have you on the program.

CALLER: Hey. Dittos, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.

RUSH: You bet, sir.

CALLER: My son just turned 18 this year. His name is Chris, and he cannot wait to vote this year. He's a huge fan of yours, so he's like the rest of us, very excited about his first vote. So...

RUSH: Congratulations. This is going to be a big deal.

CALLER: Yeah, we're ready for that. Listen, I'm in the financial services business, and I was at a series of conferences, and they had once again come up and present you how the markets did depending on which side of the House was in control of the Senate, the House, and the presidency. One of the things that you've been so eloquently able to communicate to us is that the markets like gridlock.

RUSH: Absolutely.

CALLER: It was fascinating, Rush, what they came up with when they showed that it didn't matter which, whether Democrat or Republican. If one controlled all three of them, one party, the markets averaged about 4%. The time when the markets were the highest was when the Republicans controlled the Senate and the House, and there was a Democratic president. It was astounding. It was by far the most active and prosperous market that we have.

RUSH: Yup.

CALLER: And I think it was just a testament to what you've said about the whole concept of gridlock. It showed it right there in real numbers. It was fascinating.

RUSH: Well, here are the real numbers. The average stock market gain during a Democrat Congress was about 10%, plus-9.8. The average stock market gain during a Republican Congress is 30%, plus-30. The average stock market gain during a Democrat president with Democrat Congress, plus-13. With Republican Congress, plus-32.

CALLER: Yeah, it shows who controls the purse strings as well. Who really controls where the money is going.

RUSH: Yeah. The most recent example -- you got two of them. It would be Bush and the Republican Senate, and Clinton, a Republican Senate; and the House as well. No, but you're absolutely right. The markets love gridlock. Now, this might surprise a lot of people who are saying, "Why?" When nothing gets done that means there are no laws being passed punishing anybody. When nothing gets done, there aren't any new regulations to have to overcome. When nothing gets done, there aren't any new taxes. When nothing gets done, the government is essentially dormant. And that's what capitalists like, is a dormant, out-of-the-way government that's gridlocked, unable to move. And that is what's in store here. Because the Republicans are not going to have enough votes to override certain Obama vetoes, and gridlock is also predictable. You know what happens during gridlock. Markets and businesses love predictability.

END TRANSCRIPT

ADVERTISEMENT

Rush 24/7 Audio/Video

Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show

Facebook

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

EIB Features

ADVERTISEMENT: