RUSH: Julio in Tacoma, Washington, it's great to have you on the program. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, Mr. Limbaugh. How's it going?
RUSH: It's going very well. Thank you.
CALLER: Excellent. I'm really concerned about this sociopathic Democratic administration using the nuclear option to stack the 2014 congressional elections against Republicans all over the country. I wanted to know if you think that's a real possibility.
RUSH: No. I don't think the nuclear option, per se, will allow the Democrats to not be affected by Republican victory. The nuclear option is a Senate thing. In terms of, you know, how that impacts Republicans winning elections across the country, it's not a good thing, you're right. But the nuclear option is for a different purpose.
RUSH: The last caller was curious about whether the nuclear option can ensure that Republicans don't win elections. No. The nuclear option means that Republican votes in the Senate are irrelevant. This is strictly the Senate. There are 45 Republicans in the Senate and they may as well not ever show up for work anymore. It doesn't matter. The filibuster rule required 60 votes to pass anything, including a presidential nominee to a court or a cabinet post or even pieces of legislation. This is hundreds of years of Senate tradition and rules.
In the five years that Barack Obama has been president, he has nominated genuinely extreme people who are out of the American mainstream, to sit on courts, to be cabinet secretaries, to sit over at the EPA, you name it, really genuinely radical leftist extremes who are not part of the American mainstream. The Republicans have filibustered a number of these nominees in order to keep genuine radical leftists out. The Democrats are fit to be tied over this because their view is Obama won and he should be able to nominate whoever he wants.
Now, this happens to both parties. How many times have you heard Chuck Schumer characterize every Republican nominee as out of the mainstream? Well, he's wrong when he says it. What he means is they're not extreme liberals, and anybody who's not an extreme leftist is out of the mainstream in Chuck Schumer's world. But out of the mainstream for us means they're socialists, communists, whatever, and we're not a country of socialists and communists. Obama wants to make us one. So the Republicans were using-age-old powers in the Senate to block those nominees. And Obama just got fed up. So they have, as the majority, enacted a rules change. They've gotten rid of the 60-vote requirement 'cause they're not getting their way.
So the end result of it is that any Obama appointee or any piece of legislation now only needs 51 votes in the Senate. There is no filibuster permitted anymore. Well, the Democrats have, what is it, 55, 54, I don't know the exact number. It's 55. There's 54 in one quasi-independent, socialist. It's a total of 55 people voting the Democrat side. The Republicans have 45. And Democrats now only need 51 votes for everything, and they've got 55, so the Republicans cannot stop a thing. The Republican senators may as well not show up. There's nothing they can do. I mean, they can participate in committee hearings and they can ask questions, and they can go through all this, but they can't stop anything.
Now, folks, the simple fact is, when the majority, in any group of people, when the majority can change the rules at any time, then there aren't any rules. This is a point that I've been making repeatedly all week long. (interruption) Senator who? Carl Levin said that? I didn't even pay attention. Carl Levin voted against it. There are three Democrats who voted against it. He was one of them, 'cause he recognizes this is bad, and it is.
Let's forget the Senate for a minute. Let's say there are 10 people in a room and they're a group, and the room is made up of six men and four women. Okay? The group has a rule that the men cannot rape the women. The group also has a rule that says any rule that will be changed must require six votes of the 10 to change the rule. Every now and then some lunatic in the group proposes to change the rule to allow women to be raped. But they never were able to get six votes for it. There were always the four women voting against it, and they always found two guys. Well, the guy that kept proposing that women be raped finally got tired of it and he was in the majority, he was one of the men, said, "You know what, we're gonna change the rule. Now all we need is five."
And the women said, "You can't do that."
"Yes, we are. We're the majority, we're changing the rule." Then they vote. Can the women be raped? Well, all it would take then is half the room. You could change the rule to say three. You could change the rule say three people want it, it's gonna happen. There's no rule. When the majority can change the rules, there aren't any. I have to think, if Sheets Byrd were still alive -- of course, Sheets Byrd was senile in the old days. I don't know how he'd come down on this. But for everything else he was, this guy, the Senate was church to him. It was inviolate. At least for a while. But it really is a fundamental discarding of hundreds of years of tradition, and for one reason only. Barack Obama can't get what he wants democratically. There's no other reason for this.
Barack Obama cannot get his nominees. He can't pack the DC court of appeals. He wants three additional judges, and he wants to be able to appoint Democrats. It will be a permanent Democrat majority on that court. He's been denied here, he's been denied there. His labor secretary was denied. His EPA secretaries have been denied, and he's fit to be tied. So he can't win by appointing people that appeal to a majority, so he got together with Dingy Harry and they just changed the rule.
The rule now is, the practical meaning of the rule is that there are no rules, and the Republicans' votes mean nothing. Whatever is proposed, the Republicans, if they stay unified, 45 votes against it means nothing. There's nothing they can do unless they can convince some Democrats to join 'em and deny the Democrats 51 votes. If that happens, Dingy Harry might change the rule again to say all we need 50 on this particular issue. Once you start changing the rules as the majority -- the Founders were terrified of the tyranny of the majority. One of the reasons that the Senate was structured and founded the way it is, as opposed to the House, it was designed for gridlock. It was designed to stop massive new laws being passed and voted on daily. It was designed to stop the growth of government.
A number of checks and balances were built in to prevent a tyranny from forming. And the only way a tyranny can form is if the majority throws the rules out. And it is a Democrat majority who has chosen tyranny here. Now, the people in the media love it, and the people on the left love it because they don't care how they win. They're not worried if they only have 20% of the people behind 'em. They don't care. They have no concern whatsoever for the democratic process, obviously not. But in terms of the nuclear option impacting Republican elections elsewhere, no. But the nuclear option gives the Senate the power to mean whoever is elected to the Senate as a Republican doesn't matter if they're in the minority. God could be a Republican senator and not matter.
My point is, it doesn't matter. The Republicans may as well not vote. Their votes mean nothing. The people that elected them have absolutely no representation in the Senate at all, other than their senator maybe getting to participate in hearings and ask questions of witnesses, you know, whoop-de-doo. It just means that the Senate no longer does advice and consent. It's simply consent. This is a rubber stamp for Barack Obama, what has happened. Whatever Obama wants that requires Senate approval has now just been rubber-stamped. It's not the House where all these judges have to be interviewed and pass muster and so forth, or cabinet appointees. It's the Senate.