RUSH: Here's Gary in Yorba Linda, California. Great to have you on the program, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hey, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: I wanted to remind you about a guy who years ago you used to speak affectionately about, a guy whose nickname was "Chainsaw Al." I don't remember what his real name was.
RUSH: Oh, yeah! It was Al Dunlap, Chainsaw Al. He worked at Sunbeam and such. He had a reputation for saving companies by going in and firing half the employees.
CALLER: Well, he would take out the proverbial chainsaw and cut out fat, redundancy, inefficiency, in companies and turn 'em around into profitability. Who's the guy that's gonna do that in this government, Rush?
RUSH: Well, that's what we were just talking about. You know, it really boils down to how many candidates think that's what's necessary. I said yesterday that what ought to be topic for discussion in one of these debates is: "How are we going to reduce this debt? How are we going to reduce this spending?" and not around the margins. We're gonna actually have to genuinely reduce the size of this government. "So what are your ideas, Candidate A? Which agencies are you gonna just wipe out? We can't go on as we are; we don't have the money." You know, all this discussion last night about foreign aid -- or forget foreign aid!
Any discussion last night that involved spending money, every time it came up, I looked at the screen, the television, and my mouth fell open. I said, "We don't have any money to be giving people! We don't have any money to spend on foreign aid. We don't have this money to give to anybody. Why are we still talking about this? Why isn't somebody saying, as part of the answer to this proposed foreign aid question, "Uhhhhh, duh? We don't have any money? We are borrowing practically everything we spend!" We spend, what, close to $1.8 trillion more than we take in every year. We just had to raise the debt ceiling twice this year. We're up to $17 trillion in debt, for real, on paper. We're not there yet, but we're gonna get there by January; that was the whole deal. And they had a discussion about foreign aid and giving this country money and that country money? Where are we getting the money? We don't have it! I do think that this needs to a subject on one of these upcoming debates, because it's the central question about which we are all concerned for the future of the country.
RUSH: I have an excellent question for the next debate. If I could submit a question. Whenever they start talking about spending money, I don't care whether foreign aid or whatever, my question is, which country do you choose to borrow the money from? What is your preferred country, Candidate A, to borrow the money from to send foreign aid to wherever you want to send it or whatever expenditure, I don't mean to be focusing just on foreign aid here. Any expenditure of money. Even last night these guys talked about money as though it's not a problem. They talked about spending money as though it's not a problem. There were exceptions for it in the debate, but it really is the elephant in the room to me.
When you're looking at a $17 trillion national debt and annual deficit of $1.8 trillion, a stupid super committee that can't -- well, forget the super committee. How about these bogus efforts before the super committee where we were told we're gonna save hundred billion dollars, which we borrow that every five days, or less. And it turns out the hundred billion is ten billion. And they're patting themselves on the back, and that's over ten years. Then you realize with baseline budgeting there is no reduction in spending, period, and there aren't any cuts. There might be reductions in spending but there aren't any cuts. It's just reductions in the rate of growth. So which country, Mr. Candidate, do you want to borrow the money from in order spend on that project?