RUSH: I mentioned it at the top of the program. "Democrats Want Extension of Unemployment Benefits for 2 Million Americans as Part of Fiscal Cliff Deal -- Jobless benefits for 2.1 million people who have been out of work for more than six months will stop four days after Christmas." We need to extend these unemployment benefits.
Yes, we do because there isn't going to be any economic growth, and there aren't going to be any real new jobs. And we've got to keep the gravy train going! Four days after Christmas! What kind of people are we to take away people's unemployment then? They've been on unemployment for six months and then we're gonna take them off of it four days after Christmas?
What kind of cold-hearted, mean-spirited people are we? What kind of a country would do that? So naturally, naturally we are going to have extend unemployment benefits here. It's the compassionate thing to do. We've gotta keep the gravy train rolling. This is why Obama was elected. These are the people that voted for Barack Obama. More on this as the program unfolds.
Let's go to the phones. Rick in Malibu. Hey, great to have you on the program, sir. Hi.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Thanks so much for taking my call.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: I want to talk to you for a minute about the so-called fiscal cliff. But first I want to say: I am a conservative and I'm in the evil 1%, and tax increases go against everything I believe in, and I don't think it helps the economy. I think it hurts the economy. But having said that, we are getting killed in the media, we're getting killed with the narrative, and we're being painted as the party who only cares about rich people, and nobody's talking about spending cuts.
We know the math doesn't work. Barack Obama wants, you know, Bush era tax cut for $800 billion over ten years. He's got another $800 billion that he wants. So total of $1.6 trillion of tax increases over ten years. That's only $160 billion a year. We have a $1.2 trillion deficit per year. So if we Republicans gave him everything he wanted, he's still short a trillion dollars a year that we can't get anybody to talk about!
CALLER: So why not just pass it? Pass an act. We'll call it, "'The Distraction is Over, Soak the Rich, Now What?' Act," and move on.
RUSH: Well, I think you probably have pretty much nailed what's going to happen.
CALLER: But with no spending cuts in it. Nothing. Just make it a clean tax hike bill.
RUSH: There aren't going to be any spending cuts. Not in this deal. There aren't going to be any cuts. Did you go into this thinking that there would be?
CALLER: Well --
RUSH: No, seriously. Did you think that the Republicans would secure some entitlement reform out of this in exchange for Obama's new taxes? Did you believe that? And did you really believe...? And don't misunderstand my tone. I'm just genuinely curious.
RUSH: Did you really believe that the rich would not see their taxes go up?
CALLER: No, I always believed taxes would go up but I felt we'd get something as a return. At least something. Simpson-Bowles. At least get something on both sides.
RUSH: Why? Where is the evidence in the previous four years that Obama is interested in holding line on spending much less cutting it?
CALLER: I didn't have any confidence in Obama. What I thought is perhaps John Boehner might have learned a thing or two from being taken advantage of in the last negotiations.
RUSH: Well, I guess what I'm saying is I don't think there's a Republican alive who could stop what's gonna happen. We don't have the leverage. The power isn't there! Look, this is an unfortunate place to have to leave this conversation, but I have to because of time. But we will resume and I will explain what I mean when we get back.
RUSH: What I'm saying here, folks, is that the Republicans -- Boehner, I don't care who. You could throw Reagan in. We have not one thing in common -- philosophically, ideologically, or even economically -- in terms of desire and what we want for the country. Not one thing in common for parts of the deal that would provide a deal.
RUSH: Folks, I don't want to be misunderstood on this. I'm not trying to be defeatist, just realistic. There's no area of common ground. There's probably gonna be a deal. It's not gonna solve anything. There might even be a deal on spending restraint, on the entitlements, like maybe $300 billion. They'll come up with something to say they cut spending, but it's the amount of money we spend in ten minutes. I don't know that there's going to be a deal, but if there is one, it's not gonna fix any problem. And that I know.
Look, Obama's got a 58% approval rating. Obama wants unemployment compensation extension. The Republicans can't oppose that. They'll never win another election if they do. But my point is, there's no common ground here. Obama wants to go over the cliff. Let me rephrase that. If we go over the cliff, he won't care. Obama does not want any spending cuts. He does not want any solution to the debt. They want to spend more money. The entitlement programs are what keep the Democrat Party in power, the gravy train. There's not gonna be any meaningful reduction there, as long as the Democrats run the Senate and Obama runs the White House.
When was the last federal budget that we had? We haven't had a budget in four years. There is no mechanism to control spending. All there is is the debt limit every time it comes up, and these continuing resolutions. But we can sit here all day long and say, "Well, I wish Boehner would hold fast on tax increases." He's not holding fast. He's already offered $800 billion in the loopholes, and closing loopholes and deductions and all that. And, of course, that's not enough now. Need the rates up as well. I'm going to speak to you just personally, for me. I have disappointed some of my friends in this. But I told everybody before the election, if Obama wins, folks, everybody's taxes are going up, and I mean including the middle class, everybody's.
I have never expected that taxes on the top 2% are not going up. Not if Obama won, for crying out loud. It didn't make any sense to me that taxes would not go up if Obama wins. Obama stands for things. Obamaism means things. Obama's trying to transform the country. He is trying to diminish the private sector and grow the government. Government employment, take a look at it. Seventy-three percent of the new jobs in the last two years are government jobs. The unemployment rate among government workers is 3.8%.
Now, we can sit here and play games all day long and talk about negotiating with Obama on the cliff. But at the end of the day, when we have nothing in common with the Democrats, I mean, literally, folks, there's nothing that we want that they want, and vice versa. They don't want any spending restraints anywhere. The entitlement programs, government spending is the source of their power, literal power, winning elections. That's where it comes from. They're not gonna give that away, just like they're not gonna give us any of the Hispanic vote willingly, and they're not gonna give us any of the under 30 single women vote willingly. There's no way to negotiate for this.
Now, when it comes to the cliff and tax increases versus spending cuts, the options are, let Obama have what he wants, and go over the cliff, or to hold fast, in which case we're going over the cliff anyway. I don't see any way we're not going over the cliff, and even if there's a deal it's not gonna do anything. There are two things here. There's the fiscal cliff and there's the debt cliff. And we aren't gonna do anything about the debt cliff even if there is a fiscal cliff deal. That's just the reality. We are up against pure, 100% undiluted statists here. And there is nothing we believe in that they share in common with us. And vice-versa.
Now, most negotiations are just the exact opposite. Both sides at least have something in common that they want in the end result. That does not exist here. Negotiation between an athlete and a team. The thing in common is that the player wants to stay with the team and the team wants to keep the player. How they get that done is the negotiation. And sometimes they don't and the player leaves, in which case it means the team didn't really want the player at the end of the day. So maybe they didn't even have that in common. But you can think of your own negotiation and whatever avenue of life that you've been engaged in them, and you'll know what I mean.
You've always had something in common. You go into a negotiation with a lot of crazy demands that you're willing to throw away, you never expected to get 'em in the first place to make it look like you're compromising. Obama has no throwaways. When he says he wants $1.6 trillion, he doesn't mean 800 billion. He means $1.6 trillion. In fact, he probably means two trillion, if he could get it. When it comes to spending cuts, entitlement reform, Brit Hume was right on the money today in his terminology. Entitlements are the Democrat Party's crown jewels. Why would they give any of that away when they don't have to?
The Democrats do not think they lose going over the cliff. They think they win. The Democrats think they win no matter what. If you were the Democrats you'd think the same way. You'd be puffing your chest out right about now. You'd be popping your buttons. You think you couldn't do anything wrong. Now, that will lead them down the road to making all kinds of mistakes, but that's down the road.