RUSH: Obama's reelect numbers are only at 43%, ladies and gentlemen. They've been hoping to keep him to 50-50. Now he's at 43. The Politico today has their own story with a poll: For the first time a majority of Americans say Obama should be voted out of the White House next year. It's the same story. It's just a different way they're reporting it. One story says, "Look at this, 43% disapproval of Obama. Forty-three percent!" The Politico says, "43% say Obama should stay; 57% say he should go." This is why Obama operates without a budget. He doesn't want accountability. It's why there's not going to be a tax increase on the rich in an election year.
He doesn't want accountability. Obama wants class warfare where he plays judge and jury as to how much money we have to spend. We are to have limited information about where our money is spent, sort of like Jon Corzine's customers. (interruption) Well, yeah, Clinton got 43% of the vote, but that's when Perot was in there. There was a third-party candidate in there. Yeah, that's still a valid point if Ron Paul decides to go that way or if somebody else decides to go third party.
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, the fact-checking continues here after these debates. It's a bit laughable but it still goes on, the so-called fact checking the media is doing. For instance, the AP went after Mr. Newt for saying that he had balanced the budget for four straight years. Now, the AP admits there were surpluses for two years while Mr. Newt was Speaker but they point out that the next two years of surpluses happened after he had left office. Here's the quote: "Two more years of surpluses followed but Gingrich had gone from politics by then and had nothing to do with them." Oh, yeah, nothing to do with them! Now, that is just laughable. First you take over the House for the first time in 40 years then you balance the budget for the first time in a gazillion years -- it stays balanced for a couple years after you've had a couple surpluses -- and they say, "You had nothing to do with that! Who do you think you are?"
Of course those two years of budget surpluses were the direct result of what Gingrich had helped get enacted. He's perfectly correct to take credit for all four years. Then here's another one. The New York Times also has a fact check piece today to go along with the AP. The New York Times claims, "Romney accused Obama of having said 'pretty please' to Iran to return an American stealth drone." They actually fact checked that, and they said, "No, Obama never said 'pretty please.'" Cut us some slack. Obama asked them to give it back. What Romney was illustrating was the wussiness of this, and I thought it was a nice moment from Romney. Okay, so we lose a drone, and what do we do? Ask for it back?
He was illustrating the absolute chickification of the United States by say, "Pretty please would you give it back? Pretty please?" But they say as a gotcha. Since Obama actually never said "pretty please," but then the Times isn't through with their fact check. Get this: "Rick Perry said a better choice would have been to destroy or retrieve the drone to keep from revealing American technological secrets," which is inarguable! If you're on the sane side of Ron Paul, what in the world is wrong with that? But the New York Times goes on to claim, quote, "In fact, American military officials considered an operation to retrieve the drone but they rejected as too dangerous since it would require a sizeable force, traveling more than 200 miles into the country and likely facing a large Iranian protection force."
That's not a fact. Here they're fact-checking Romney and they throw in something "likely would face"? They don't know that -- and they present that as a fact in a fact check article? Now, "According to the Wall Street Journal who originally reported the Pentagon's options back on December 7th when the drone went missing, they considered three options with this drone: One was using commandos to retrieve it, number two was using commandos [to blow it to smithereens], and number three was destroying it with an air strike, but according to the Wall Street Journal, the officials worried that any option for retrieving or destroying the drone would have risk discovery by Iran.
They quoted an official who said that they were worried about recovering it or destroying it because of the potential it could become a larger incident and that the US could be accused of an act of war." There was no mention of it "being too dangerous because they would be facing a large Iranian protection force." Where did the New York Times get this? They're making this stuff up -- in a fact check article! Unless the Times had another source that they're not willing to attribute here or mention, they just make it up. Even after this, what Perry said is still true.
RUSH: AP can no longer ignore it. Now, we gave you the news not long ago that the Rasmussen poll on Obamacare was something like -- oh, was it 20 polls in a row? Or some incredible consecutive string of polls, a majority of Americans oppose Obamacare, want it repealed. It was 55-35, something like that. AP is running a story: For the first time in their poll more than half of the American people want Obamacare repealed. For the first time. For the first time. As we start the election year, the reelection year, they can no longer cover it up. They can no longer hide it.
RUSH: Folks, we are saved! The House of Representatives has just approved a $1 trillion spending bill to avoid a government shutdown. There wasn't going to be a shutdown. You know, the American people aren't being fooled by this anymore. You people in Washington, I don't care what party, you've gone to this well too many times. How many times in this last 12 months have we faced a so-called government shutdown over the debt ceiling or some other imaginary continuing resolution or budget crisis -- and they tried it again! Dingy Harry this week, "There might be a government shutdown!" Sorry, you're not scaring us. The government never gets shut down. We wish it would be. Official Washington, you're going to have learn: We do not quake in our boots when we her the government might be shut down. What makes us quake in our boots is seeing how much money you're spending to avoid the shutdown.
RUSH: By the way, in other news, the Associated Press, folks, is reporting the Egyptian military has stormed a protesters camp in Cairo, and that at least two protesters have been killed -- all this despite them having been named TIME agazine's Person of the Year. What rotten luck! TIME Magazine names you Person of the Year, and then the Egyptians run in there and wipe you out. What a bad day. How about this notion of "the protester" as the Person of the Year. (interruption) Putting the Occupiers in with the protesters in Libya is disgusting to who? (interruption) Why you? (interruption) You think...? (interruption) What? (interruption) Wait... (interruption) No, no, no. You've got the pro... (interruption) You're... (interruption) No. These protesters in Egypt... (interruption) Well, maybe Tunisia, but in Egypt these are militant Islamists that are protesting in disguise, made to look like freedom fighters. There's no democracy movement going on over there. They fit hand-in-glove with the Occupy Wall Street crowd.
RUSH: I have a friend-acquaintance "Hondo," who writes a Friday piece during football season for the New York Post. I used to do the environmentalist wacko picks as a means of discussing football while tying it to issues so as not to tick off a the Stick-to-the-Issues Crowd. It was also a way to make football picks interesting to women. "Hondo" has a piece where he picks winners based on the point spread but he does it intermingled with political commentary. For example, Hondo has picked the Tampa Bay Buccaneers to cover against the Cowboys. It's a Saturday night game. I don't know what the point spread is this game (I haven't looked at it), but he thinks that the Buccaneers are gonna cover. Here's what he says about the game:
"Despite the slight, Hondo is willing to give props to 'The Protester.' It’s a wonderful honor for someone who whined about income disparity and the lack of jobs (they’re so hard to find when you don’t look), while disrupting the income flow of local businesses, sexually assaulting women, generating ear-splitting noise pollution, mugging fellow protesters, trying unsuccessfully to ward off genital scabies and other STDs, and turning the park in which he lived into an unflushable toilet. Right on, Time! Power to The Protester!" Exactly right. "Power to The Protester!" I mean TIME Magazine is basically just named an endless parade of human debris as the Man of the Year.