RUSH: Now we take the Byron York story in the Washington Examiner: "The GOP's Astonishingly Bad Message on Sequester Cuts -- In a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner describes the upcoming sequester as a policy 'that threatens US national security, thousands of jobs and more.'"
Boehner, echoing Obama, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. And Byron York said, wait a minute, it leads to a question here. Why would Republicans support -- I mean, the Republicans support the sequester. They're on record as supporting it. Even though it's Obama's idea, they support it. It's the only way we're gonna get some budget cuts, and they're infinitesimal anyway. But the question is, why would Republicans support something that does what Boehner says it's gonna do? Threatens US national security, thousands of jobs could be lost. Boehner's calling the cuts deep, when they're not.
I do not have an explanation. I don't think that there is a reasonable explanation for that. I don't understand it. Don't have an answer for you. It's too simple to chalk this up to incompetence. It may be that, but that's too simple. I don't have an answer. I can't explain it to you. All I know is that it doesn't make any sense.
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, as a public service, I have been pondering the question raised by Byron York in his piece, "GOP's Astonishingly Bad Message on Sequester Cuts." Why would Republicans support a measure, a sequester that threatens national security, thousands of jobs, why would Boehner do this op-ed today? I said it makes no sense at me, sorry, I have no clue.
I have been thinking about it, because I realized that answer was not sufficient for you. So here's my stab at this. I think that what is happening here is that Boehner wants to deal with Obama. I think Boehner writes this piece today because he does not want the sequester to happen. He does not want to stand fast. He does not want to hold the line. I think in writing this piece, Boehner is attempting to blame Obama for all of this. It is Obama's idea. The sequester is Obama's idea. So I think what Boehner's trying to do is paint Obama with this.
Now, I also know that the ruling class, the ruling elites in both parties in Washington, think that all this limited government stuff is caca. They don't believe in it. They don't think it's possible. They're not serious about budget cuts. They're certainly not serious about reducing the size of government. They're not serious about limiting its scope. On the Republican side, the establishment side, what they're interested in is controlling the government and doing it smarter, they say.
Now, you've got the consultant class. Don't forget them. They advise these people, and the consultant class, these are people that like big government, folks. They like big government. They don't like this limited government stuff. They think that people want big government. Bill Kristol said it a long time ago, and others, we gotta understand now, we have to come to grips. The Republicans have to understand that people want big government. They want government services, benefits. They just want it done wisely. They want it done smartly. And they think, don't go conservative. We can't start talking like conservatives, we're gonna lose that way.
They live in a bubble up there. So they reinforce their own fears and their own weaknesses. See, you and I, we don't think like liberals, and we don't think like RINOs, either. And that's why my initial reaction, "I don't have the slightest idea." But I thought about it, and that's my theory.
RUSH: So, to close the loop, I think Boehner writes his piece in the Wall Street Journal today to try to pressure Obama into making a deal. I think Boehner writes this piece trying to sort of reverse fortunes, to paint Obama with this disaster, shift the blame, and force Obama to deal. 'Cause they don't want to stand pat. The Republicans simply... Remember, folks, they don't think like you and I do. They're not focused on limited government, and the Republican consultant class clearly is not.
These people are all -- I don't know -- devoted acolytes. They are big believers in big government. Maybe not as big as the left wants it to be, but they're clearly not in what you and I would call the limited-government mode of thinking or mind-set. I think they're also, on the Republican side, just defensive and maybe a little frightened, 'cause they do get blamed for everything, and if this sequester happens... You know, we joke about, "There aren't gonna be layoffs, and there aren't gonna be the cuts."
Obama, if he wanted to furlough 800,000 defense workers, he could.
He gets to pick and choose on the sequester. If they want to create photo-ops that make it look like disaster is happening, they can do it, and the media will help them right along with it. So even though the sequester would not result in 800,000 defense workers furloughed, Obama calls Panetta and says, "Send 'em home." He'll send 30 of them home, get a video shot of 30 people going home, put that up against your headline of "800,000 being furloughed," and you've got your photo-op.
You've got your optic. Go elsewhere through Obama's litany. All you have to do is go to JFK where they have flight delays every day and just show a flight delay board on the first day of the sequester and say, "Yep! Air traffic control is really bad. So many people are not working today because of the sequester." They've got the ability to create optics to make it look like real pain is occurring because of the sequester.
Republicans know this, so I think they're trying to stop it and get Obama to deal. Boehner writes the piece in the Journal to try to paint Obama with some of this and shift the blame. So you've got the ruling class going back and forth here on who's gonna take what percentage of the blame for this next maneuver, which is all designed... The ultimate objective of all of this, my friends -- and I'm not trying to be a downer. I'm being educational here. I'm trying to be informative.
The ultimate objective of all of this is to spend more!
The ultimate objective of all of this is to frighten everybody, everywhere, about what will happen if you cut a dime from the federal budget. This is all about moving the ball forward, under the premise that the government must grow and must continue to grow if you are to have any chance in life all. That's the ultimate objective here of all of this, and the secondary objective is for Obama to continue to be seen as the outsider, not governing. He's the outsider campaigning, trying to prevent this disaster, when in truth it's his policies that are causing it.