RUSH: Jim in Radcliff, Kentucky. Thank you, sir, for calling. Great to have you here. Hello.
CALLER: Hey. Thanks a lot, Rush. How you doing today?
RUSH: I'm actually, all things considered, pretty lousy.
CALLER: (chuckling) I'm sorry to hear that.
RUSH: I'm just kidding! I'm just kidding! I'm actually pretty good today.
CALLER: Yeah. Hey, I was wondering. You know, with the Obamacare, the Democrats are wanting us to go down and sign up for this. How are people gonna get down there and sign up, if can't get down to get the IDs to vote?
RUSH: The answer to that is the Democrats don't want you to have one. The answer to that is, the Democratic Party does not want anybody to have a photo ID because that would have a very negative impact on cheating! If you require a photo ID, that pretty much shuts out cheating. Well, it doesn't shut it out. It just makes it harder, and that's why they don't want it. I mean, they're gonna force Obamacare on everyone.
My question about all this... I mean, the photo ID answer is easy. They want to be able to have people vote multiple times, particularly in certain precincts/neighborhoods. But this Obamacare... I may be in one of my dense places today, but here we have something that's the law of the land. It's been signed into law. It is being implemented as we speak. It fully implements sometime next year. So why do little kids in the public school system in Los Angeles have to be told about it so they can go home and sell their parents on it?
Why does it still have to be sold?
Why is Obama running ads to familiarize people with Obamacare?
Well, now, the answer has nothing to do with Obamacare -- other than the kids. There's I think the overall answer to the question is it's more of Obama image building. They know the polling data on Obamacare is very negative. Depending on the poll you look at, we're down to only 35% of the people like it. So that's 65% oppose it, and Obama wants to be loved. Like Clinton, he wants to be loved; he wants to be appreciated. He's got this thing out there about him with his name on it that people hate.
So it could well be nothing more than, "We're gonna spread propaganda on this to try to correct public opinion on it." My real question is: Why do they care? It's law of the land and there's nothing we can do about it. I mean, we can try to defund it or repeal parts of it, but as far as they're concerned, it's been signed into law. It's being implemented. The exchanges are being set up, and the exchanges are Democrat Party front groups.
So maybe I'm just too thick to see something, but why? What's the point now in propagandizing it? (interruption) Okay. So you think it's Mount Rushmore, huh? He wants to be on Mount Rushmore? (interruption) It's Washington, Lincoln, Obama? You think Washington, Obama, Lincoln? (interruption) Maybe it's Obama, Washington, and nobody else. Are you serious? You really think it's all about establishing Obama's the greatest president ever?
That's why the kids?
(interruption) Ah, okay. Okay. That's why the kids? (interruption) Carry the legacy through the younger generations on? I think there's a political reason to it. I think 2014 is crucial to them. Winning the House. They lost the 2010 midterms because of Obamacare, and I think that's what it really is. I think it's all part of this full-court press to win the House in 2014. And they know that Obamacare's hated, and they know that in 2010, it essentially created the Tea Party.
They know that the Tea Party turned out and voted. The media doesn't write about this, and they really didn't talk about it much when it happened. But the Democrat Party, folks, took a down-ballot shellacking in 2010. They lost, all total across this country close to a thousand seats --in the House of Representatives, in local statehouses, in town councils, mayors, dogcatchers. As far down the local level as you want to go, they got shellacked.
I think that they're afraid that the same thing could happen in 2014 with the same attitudes about Obamacare. Remember, the 2010 turnout is much different than a presidential turnout. The 2010 turnout didn't have Obama on the ballot, so the Obama acolytes had no reason to show up. In 2012, there was all the reason in the world for the Obama acolytes to show up. In 2014, there won't be any reason for Obama sycophants to show up.
So I think, in addition to the Mount Rushmore aspects and creating in the minds of young people "Obama's the greatest ever," I think in practical political terms, it isn't even about Obamacare. It's not about making people love it. It's about ridding the negativity attached to it so it doesn't hurt 'em in 2014. I think that's why they're still fundraising for it; they're still treating it as a campaign issue because it is. There's another election coming up, and believe me: They're salivating.
If they win the House in 2014, then there's no such thing as an Obama lame duck. The last two years aren't gonna be lame duck. In fact, the last two years of Obama might overshadow presidential race because of what Obama will be able to do: Utterly, totally transform this country in ways that will be so shocking that it might overshadow a presidential race. Now, the presidential race obviously would be attached to that massive transformation so it'd be tough to overshadow it.
But at least if they win the House in 2014, there isn't gonna be any lame duck BS. He's not gonna be lame or duck on anything. If he wins the House in 2014, he's gonna have more power than he's had at any time, including the first two years when he had the House and Senate. Because he did have another election or two to be concerned about. But if he wins the House in 2014, he's got two years to realize every fantasy and dream about finally "fixing" what is fundamentally wrong and morally wrong about this country in his mind since the day it was founded.