RUSH: Sequesteria. We are in the midst of sequesteria. We're counting down the days to the disaster, zero hour. It is this Friday. Everybody is trying to think of ways to put the amount of money we're talking about here into some sort of understandable context. Even if you say that we have $3,700 billion every year that we spend, i.e., $3.7 trillion, okay, we got $3,700 billion, and we're gonna cut $25 billion. It's like, okay, I got $3,700 and I'm not gonna spend a quarter. Pretty close. There's another way of looking at it, though. And that is to say that we're going to cut government spending by one cent on the dollar, one cent on the dollar is all.
In fact, the real secret is, the real truth is that -- even if there is the sequester, even if it happens -- we're going to spend more as a country this year than we did last year. That perhaps is the best way of 'splaining what's going on. We've got this abject panic. We've got a full-blown crisis unfolding before our eyes, and if it happens, we're gonna be spending more money this year than we did last year.
Now, I want to put it to you this way. If spending more money this year than we did last year is going to bring this country to its knees, shouldn't that tell us that the government has way too much control over our lives? Shouldn't that tell us that they have seriously overreached? Shouldn't that tell us that we are way too dependent on government if all of this can happen while we spend $15 billion more than we spent last year? Even look at it in the previous way I mentioned it, cutting spending by one cent on the dollar. Every dollar we spend, we're gonna cut a penny. If even that is gonna bring the country to its knees, if that is going to cause all of these disasters, the cops say bye-bye, the first responders, out of there. The list, by the way, keeps expanding, this disaster list.
Isn't it safe to say that this is way out of whack, way too much government, way too much involved in our lives, way too much control, seriously have overreached. What would the founders think to hear about all the things our supposedly limited federal government has its tentacles on? Everything from school teachers to school principals, meat inspectors. It's stunning.
RUSH: President Obama is getting ready to speak at the Newport News Shipbuilding yards. He's gonna complain about how the sequester will hurt shipbuilding for the Navy. Now, remember, it was Obama who made fun of and mocked Mitt Romney during the last debate for mentioning that Obama is cutting the Navy to the bone and for pointing out that it has fewer ships than back in World War I. Obama said Navy ships are like horses and bayonets. We don't need any. We got a newer, modern Navy. We don't need all that many ships anymore.
Now look at how things are different.
I mean the idea that we, with this sequester, are going to somehow (sigh) have a mothballed Navy? This is just insulting. It is absurd. I'll tell you what's really happening out there, ladies and gentlemen. The Washington Post had this story three days ago. This is over the weekend. "The Big Sequester Gamble: How Badly Will the Cuts Hurt?" The Democrats are worried that, after all of this crisis and fearmongering, after all of these threats -- cops staying at home, first responders staying home -- you know the list.
If that stuff doesn't happen, the Democrats are worried that they're not gonna have any credibility anymore on this. The Democrats are actually worried that what they're predicting will not happen. In other words, they would feel more comfortable if all of this mess did occur, because it's all about winning the political points. It's all about campaigning. It isn't about governing. So it's shifting the blame for everything to the Republicans, who are essentially powerless.
"With the ax set to fall on federal spending in five days, the question in Washington is not whether the sequester will hit, but how much it will hurt. Over the past week, President Obama has painted a picture of impending disaster, warning of travel delays, laid-off firefighters and pre-schoolers tossed out of Head Start. Conservatives accuse Obama of exaggerating the impact, and some White House allies worry the slow-moving sequester may fail to live up to the hype.
"'The good news is, the world doesn't end March 2. The bad news is, the world doesn't end March 2,' said Emily Holubowich, a Washington health-care lobbyist..." Again, "Emily Holubowich, a Washington health-care lobbyist who leads a coalition of 3,000 nonprofit groups fighting the cuts," says, 'The good news is, the world doesn't end March 2. The bad news is, the world doesn't end March 2." She says, "The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens. And Republicans say: See, that wasn't so bad."
That's what they're worried about.
Why would they be worried about that?
I mean, on the one hand here you've got Obama promising disaster. I mean, he is assuring us that life as you know is over if this happens. Yet here we have some Democrats saying, "Ah, you know what? We better hope that happens 'cause if it doesn't, Republicans are gonna say, 'See, that wasn't so bad.'" What they're really worried about is that if we cut the government as much as they've been saying -- and it isn't much at all. We're still gonna spend more.
But that's the reality.
The fake is what everybody's living with here, the optics.
What Obama and the Democrats are saying is, "We're slashing the government practically in half. We're cutting it to the point that it doesn't even exist." What they're really worried about is that after all of these cuts take place from the sequester, if the birds are still chirpin' and if the sky is still blue and if the flowers are still blooming, people are gonna say, "That wasn't so bad," and their reaction to government cuts will not be strident. They won't care.
That's what the Democrats are worried about. Now, why would they be worried about that? (interruption) They worry the Tea Party would be right, but the reason they're worried about that is because they know that what they've been saying about these cuts is a lie. If they were really certain that they were telling the truth... Forget that. If they were telling the truth about these cuts, there wouldn't be any doubt like this! There wouldn't be any concern that people wouldn't notice.
That's what they're worried about.
They're worried the sequester's gonna happen and nobody's gonna notice. They're worried it's gonna be like a Y2K. Everything was supposed to come to a screeching halt, but it didn't. You look back on it, and all those Y2K people are now viewed as a bunch of panic-filled kooks, right? Well, that's what they're afraid of here. So the Democrats are in a position where they're almost hoping for disasters to occur here and there so that they will be validated.
The worst thing that can happen is for this sequester to happen after Obama's made all these disaster predictions and everything ends up fine and nobody even notices, because then the conclusion is, "Well, we can cut government, and there's no harm." It's like I said in the last hour. We're cutting the equivalent of 1¢ on the dollar. (sigh) Actually that's misleading, too, because we're actually going to be spending more this year than last year even with the sequester.
This is so ridiculous, folks, that I'm even mad at myself here for getting caught up in all this and talking about it under the premise that they've set forth. This is just, all of it, absurd. Because I'll tell you what: The bottom line is, what Obama is predicting someday is going to happen if his policies are not reversed. No cops, no firefighters, no first responders. We're not gonna be able to afford anything in a few short years. We are going to have a collapse.
Everything Obama is warning will happen starting Friday is going to happen at some point if we don't reverse current government policy. But it's not gonna happen this Friday. Again, I just want to try to put this in perspective. Let's go with this easily understood example. We are going to cut government spending by 1¢ on the dollar. So for every $1 that we spent last year, let's say we're gonna spend 99¢ this year. It's not even true, but it's the best analogy I can come up with.
Because we're not spending less; we're spending more. But if this will bring the country to its knees, shouldn't that tell us that there's way too much government, that government has become way too important in people's lives, that there is too much control that government has over everybody, that they have seriously overreached? If a few dimes are not spent and this is the result, isn't it obvious we've got way too much government, we're way too dependent on this, and we need to become a lot more self-reliant?
I think about the way this is all being presented and the technique that's being used to insult everybody's intelligence. It reminds me of the 1995 budget battle when the battle cry of the day is Republicans want to starve your kids by cutting the school lunch program. Republicans want to take food out of your children's mouths. And one of my reactions back then was, "Well, okay, if that happens, I will prepare lunch for my kid that day." But somehow the idea was that if government didn't provide lunch, your kid will starve. What kind of parent does that make you? Are you so distant from your own kids now, is the government in such control over your kids that if they don't feed your kid at school, your kid starves?
What do your children do at dinner? The government doesn't do dinner. They were not doing dinner in 1995, anyway. Did your kids not eat dinner? Did your kids not eat if the government didn't do it? Of course not. That's why this is absurd. This is why this stuff makes me ashamed. What makes me ashamed is that this approach works. I'm not ashamed of the country as founded. I'm not ashamed to be an American. I'm ashamed at what's being done to this country. I'm ashamed that there doesn't seem to be any resistance to it. I'm ashamed that such shallow, untrue, false lying intellectual arguments prevail.
It embarrasses me that the American people can be this easily controlled and bamboozled. That's what makes me ashamed, that we're gonna spend $15 million more this year than last year, and people's lives will end as they know it. But, again, real concern here. Washington Post story. It's worth noting, because in this story the mask really slips. We hear what the left really wants from the sequester, and that is pain. The Washington Post quotes a White House alley, this health care lobbyist, Emily Holubowich: "The good news is, the world doesn’t end March 2. The bad news is, the world doesn’t end March 2. The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens. And Republicans say: See, that wasn’t so bad."
That's pretty telling. How can there be spending reductions without the world collapsing? In fact, the Post goes on to reiterate this. "But if voters react with a shrug, congressional Republicans will have won a major victory in their campaign to shrink the size of government. Instead of cancelling the sequester, the GOP will likely push for more," which is to say some Republicans might even push for real cuts. Oh! Oh! So the Washington Post really lets the mask slip. There aren't any real cuts in this sequester. And if this sequester happens and there aren't any real cuts and therefore the world doesn't end on March 2nd, then the Republicans might be emboldened and actually try to really cut some spending.
So they have totally taken the mask off in this story, and we know what they're really worried about. They have built this thing up into genuine Armageddon. It's like the National Weather Service telling you that there is a 125% chance that a hurricane is gonna strike where you live and destroy everything, and the day comes and it's just maybe some clouds and a few sprinkles. The Post says the Republicans might even push for real cuts, and not just reductions in the rate of growth, real cuts. And that would be a nightmare that the Democrats don't want to deal with it. That's right. If voters react with a shrug, congressional Republicans -- in fact, I don't think the Democrats can afford that happening.
I think what's gonna happen is that Obama will get with Democrat mayors, Democrat town councilmen, they'll try to get this as local as he can make it. And people in towns and cities all over America run by Democrats will actually lay some cops off, just to make sure. I wouldn't be surprised if that happens. I wouldn't put anything past these people because the optic is everything. The greatest enemy, greatest threat the Democrat Party and the Obama administration face is reality, the truth. Because they're creating scenarios not based on any of that.
AP, a story from today by Calvin Woodward. "SPIN METER: In Budget Fight, Sky is Falling Again." The AP is dialing it back now. It's probably more than a CYA gesture than an attempt at honest journalism, but if Obama is losing AP on this, it'd be like Lyndon Johnson losing Cronkite on the war in Vietnam. Here's how Calvin Woodward of the AP begins the story. "President Barack Obama and his officials are doing their best to drum up public concern over the shock wave of spending cuts that could strike the government in just days. So it's a good time to be alert for sky-is-falling hype." It means the AP is a bit skeptical here.
"For now, there's a whiff of the familiar in all the foreboding, harking back to the mid-1990s partial government shutdown, when officials said old people would go hungry, illegal immigrants would have the run of the of the land and veterans would go without meds. It didn't happen." (gasping) AP: it didn't happen. The children didn't starve in 1995. The borders were not inundated with illegals. Old people didn't go hungry. The homeless did not commit suicide. None of it happened, AP reminds us. And none of it should happen March 2nd. There aren't any cuts when you get right down to it. There are shifts in departmental spending. There are agencies that have to prepare for the possibility of cuts, but we're not gonna be spending any less money this year than we did last. Just the opposite.