RUSH: So I get the audio sound bite roster today from Cookie. I actually get an e-mail before I get the roster. She said, "You're back. They were talking about you all weekend long." And in these sound bites, folks, this is about the president calling me out along with Fox News last week in the New Yorker magazine. They went to a bunch of these media types in the audio sound bites, and they all say he's justified. They all say the president is seriously agitated with me. This is not just talk; he is really, really agitated. The president's frustration is very real. The president has accepted reality: I am his problem. It's amazing. I got four or five of these sound bites. So we've got that coming up.
We also have the State of the Union. I'm gonna call it the State of the Coup. I think that is what we need to call this. It's not the State of the Union. It's the State of the Coup. That's between you and me, folks, shh, don't tell the media. That is a tweak. Let me tell you what's gonna happen. I just called it the State of the Coup. Now, the media's not listening here, they never do. They will hear that I said this on another website -- take your pick, Daily Kos, Media Matters -- they will be outraged, and then later this afternoon or sometime tomorrow, they will say how reprehensible, how horrible. Who does this guy think he is? This is not a banana republic. This is offensive. The president is right to be concerned, got this guy on the radio calling it the State of the Coup.
And when that happens, you will know that you are in on the joke. Just between us. Because as I say, the media is not listening now. They never do. They will not go to my website to find out about this. They will hear about it Third Way and be appropriately outraged. So we'll stick with it all day, just for the fun of it, call it the State of the Coup. Plus it has the added benefit of it kind of works, doesn't it? And do you know what the theme of the State of the Coup is? Inequality. The president is going to complain and whine and moan about inequality.
Do you know, ladies and gentlemen, poverty is not the result of income or wealth inequality? You might think, "Rush, that's not anything special." There are a lot of people to whom that is going to be a controversial statement. "What do you mean inequality isn't due to poverty? What do you mean poverty doesn't cause inequality? What do you think does?" And therein lies the answer to the big question. Here's another one for you. (interruption) No, I don't think you should be laughing about this at all. This is his route to further punish achievement, to stigmatize it, to stigmatize the rich. You hear about this guy, one of these big venture capitalist guys from California, San Francisco, his name is Peters. I think it's Peters. This was gonna be at the top of the Stack until the rest of the show biz stuff started rolling in.
This guy wrote a piece, a letter to the editor. His name is Perkins, Tom Perkins, and he's part of a venture capital firm called Kleiner Perkins. He's 80. Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. And the Wall Street Journal had an op-ed piece on college speech and censorship, and he wrote an op-ed, a letter to the editor in response to that op-ed in which he compared the left's demonizing of the rich to the Nazis demonizing the Jews. And as you could probably understand, the left is in an absolute tizzy over this. This guy is the former husband of the noted author Danielle Steel. He's also ticked off about the way she is treated by the San Francisco Chronicle. He hates the San Francisco Chronicle.
Let me read to you from his letter to the editor. It ran Saturday. "From the Occupy movement to the demonization of the rich embedded in virtually every word of our local newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, I perceive a rising tide of hatred of the successful one percent. There is outraged public reaction to the Google buses carrying technology workers from the city to the peninsula high-tech companies which employ them. We have outrage over the rising real-estate prices which these 'techno geeks' can pay.
"We have, for example, libelous and cruel attacks in the Chronicle on our number-one celebrity, the author Danielle Steel, alleging that she is a 'snob' despite the millions she has spent on our city's homeless and mentally ill over the past decades. This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descendent 'progressive' radicalism unthinkable now?"
So he is comparing the Occupy movement, the demonization of the rich and the radicalism of inequality, exactly what the president's talking about, as being the equivalence of the Nazis routing the Jews from their homes under cover of darkness and taking from them everything they had and then kicking them out of their homes. Well, huh. I don't need to tell you how this is being reacted to. "Well, he's demented, he's 80, what do you expect? He's an old-fashioned guy. He's one of these guys that says to young kids, 'Get off my lawn!'" And then they're asking, "Why would he do this?" And then they're asking of the Journal, "Why would the journal publish this?"
And you know why it stands out? One of the reasons it stands out and made news is -- we've talked about it here -- the rich do not defend themselves. When they're under assault, they shut up, they don't ever complain. This is viewed as complaining, and it's considered taboo, socially unacceptable for the rich to complain about anything. The tech blogs that I read, they were just all over this, everybody shocked and stunned, 'cause these people that I read all love the Occupy movement. They think it's real. They think it's genuine. But should you be concerned about Obama and the theme of the State of the Coup address being inequality? Damn right you should be.
You couple that with Obama's stated desire and willingness to say to heck with Congress, and he's gonna go around 'em and do whatever. That statement that he made when he said he had a phone, he had a pen, and he doesn't care about Congress, was made during a comment on inequality. So the fact that it's his theme, he's just ratcheting up the class warfare, and what these guys do is demonize success and demonize achievement. I've always thought that maybe they should be role models. They're hard workers. I mean, the rich in your neighborhood, they're the people you want your kids to emulate. In fact, if you're pursuing the American dream, they are the ones everybody emulates, whether they admit it or know it or not. But now we're demonizing them for the advancement of a political party.
So I have an idea. You know, I'm all about solutions here, and I want to help the president. The president looks at me as an impediment. He looks at me as a rival. I'm the reason -- and it's been substantiated by people in the media. It has been justified. His feeling about me has been explained and justified by people in the media, and so I want to help. I'm the reason that Republicans are not open to his ideas.
I am the reason that the Republican base will not accept Obama's policies, solutions, and ideas. So in the State of the Coup, we are going to hear about the disparities and the inequalities economically from one group to the next and how we fix it, and I want to use a technique that I have learned and observed over the years about the Democrat Party and the left. Whenever they see inequality -- and don't doubt me on this. You know this is true.
When they see... For example, let's look at education. You've got A students and you've got students not doing so well. How do they solve that? They bring everybody down. That's exactly right, outcome-based education -- and they tell the people that don't know that 2 + 2 = 4 that it's whatever they think it is. "It's fine. We're not gonna humiliate you." The people that know that 2 + 2 = 4 get penalized. The various gaps in performance or income are always resolved by lowering those at the top, and that is called fairness.
That is called equality.
In the case of education, we eliminate courses and structures for fast learners, advanced students. We slow them down so that they do not leapfrog so far ahead of those who don't do well. In the case of income, we raise the taxes of people who do well, and we take more from them, and then we demonize them. The left, in every circumstance and every disparity where there are haves and have-nots, achievers and failures, successful and unsuccessful, the left never attempts to elevate those at the bottom.
Because the left assumes that those at the bottom are there forever and will never be able to escape it, so the idea is to provide for them as best we can and keep them dumb and happy and dependent. Dependent, not independent, but dumb, happy, and dependent. At the same time, we lower those at the top so the gap narrows. They never, ever elevate from the bottom. They never even talk about elevating. Well, Obama... That's the thing: He will talk about hard work paying off for the American people.
He doesn't mean it. It's just lip service because he knows that most Americans fervently still believe in that and want to believe that their president believes in it, even though he doesn't. So my idea, proposed here in advance of the president's State of the Coup address... It's tomorrow night, right? Okay. Here we go: To ensure equal beginnings for young people just out of high school and just out of college -- 'cause that's what we're talking about, right?
We must eliminate inequality. We must make sure that the starting point is the same for everybody, correct? Nobody's gonna have an advantage over anybody. Nobody is gonna have a leg up -- and when we get to the outcome end of things, we're gonna trying to make that as fair and equal as possible, right? Why else would you want to attack inequality? Where's the inequality rear its head? The outcome of things. "How do people end up?" That's what we're worried about.
So my idea to ensure equal beginnings for 20-somethings in the job market, is all teenagers will be required to get high on the drug of their choice. They will be required to play video games. They will be required to remain jobless during summer breaks. They will not be allowed to do internships at a company -- which are really nothing more than indoctrination camps, as are high school and college -- if we're gonna equalize things using the Democrat method.
Some people get jobs in the summer. Some people do internships. Some people don't play video games. Some people stay sober. That's not fair. Those people get ahead of the others. We must make sure everybody starts the same, and using the president's own philosophy, we'll start everybody at the same point by defining as normal the least successful among us. So every 20-something starting out gets high, plays video games, doesn't work. This is equal. This is equality.
And it doesn't humiliate those who are high, because everybody will be. It doesn't humiliate those who don't have a job because no one will have one. It doesn't humiliate anybody playing video games because every will be. It doesn't humiliate anyone for having an internship because no one will. That's the starting point, because equal outcomes require and begin with equal preparation, because equality is so important.
And because the Democrat Party never, ever seeks to elevate people into the higher levels, the higher reaches of success and achievement. They lower those at the top. We will do, in my program, what the Democrats do every day. We will punish the achievers. We will punish the responsible. We will make it harder on those who do not get high, who do not play video games all day, who do not watch television all day, and we will make them do exactly what everybody else is doing (i.e., nothing), so that we have an equal starting point.
Does this sound fair?
Folks, forget the substance. I just ask you, "Does this sound fair? Does this sound equal?" It most definitely does -- and, besides, it fills the bill, because it punishes those with a head start. Those with a head start are those who got good grades, and that's not fair. It punishes those who want to go out and get summer jobs. That's not fair, because not everybody can. It punishes those who do not waste their time getting high or playing video games. We're just making sure everybody starts at the same point.
And, of course, those who are getting high and playing video games and not working, that's the Democrat base. The president wants everybody to become a member of the Democrat base, and this is how we're gonna do it. It's my offer to help here, taking what I've learned about the Democrat Party and how they fix problems like this. This is what's great about socialism/communism. Opportunity is for the ruling class, not the schlubs. Obama's kids? They will have a free road to success, and so will Schumer's kids and so forth.
RUSH: Equal outcomes begin with equal preparation, because equality is so important. There's something else we will do. We have the data. We know that marriage -- not always, but generally and way more than not -- predicts better outcomes for kids than those from single households, and that's a biggie. Kids from two-parent households statistically achieve more, go further. They just do. I mean, it's in the data.
I'm not making it up. I'm not biased about it.
At the same time, it's not fair, because not everybody has a two-parent family. Some people come from single-parent homes. Is it fair? Is it equal? So we might want to look at, if we're gonna... Remember, now, that equal outcomes begin with equal preparation, and the Democrat way is to make sure that everybody starts at the same level, which is in the gutter. So maybe kids with two parents will have to lose one of the parents as part of the deal.
RUSH: No, no. Ladies and gentlemen, all I'm trying to point out is that the Democrat Party's America is defined by our lowest common denominator. Because, you see the lowest common denominator, the people that are in the lowest common denominator group, they're victims. They're only there because the achieved and the successful and the wealthy have prevented them from ever becoming something. It's not that they don't try, it's not that they don't make any effort, it's not that they don't study, it's not that they are industrious. They're victims.
This is what the Democrat Party's done for years. The Democrat Party doesn't look at the successful and point to them as role models. They are suspects. The real America -- look, you know this as well as I'm saying it, if you just have the courage to admit it. The real America is the dregs. The real America are all of the disadvantaged, and they're disadvantaged for nothing they've done, no reason. They have no responsibility for it whatsoever. They're all victims. This is how the Democrat Party justifies its existence and its policies. The Democrat Party wouldn't be needed if they ever stood for people elevating themselves from current circumstances.
The Democrat Party has shown they can't do it. People that have been voting Democrat for years are no better off for it than they've ever been. We've spent trillions trying and all it's done is destroy people and their ambition and their lives, their families. What was the number I saw, it's $20 trillion since the Great Society of 1964 that we've redistributed. Stop and think about it. This is what really, issue by issue, day by day, when you look at the Democrats, you listen to 'em, you hear their policies, you hear the president talk about inequality, isn't it the case? You know it, it's undeniable, to them. America's not exceptional, A, it's not special. It's unfair. It's filled with injustice. It's filled with inequality. And the guilty are the responsible.
The guilty are those who've taken life seriously. The guilty are those who've worked hard. The guilty are those who have tried. To the Democrats, they haven't done that. They have benefited from tricks, chicanery, inheritance, game is rigged, life's lottery. They were the lucky ones. They won in life's lottery. They have no responsibility, or very little, for their own success.
Look, this is who they are. If you get down to nitty-gritty, this is what bugs you about Democrats when you listen to 'em. Forget individual policies. It's this overall view of the country that they have and then the policies that flow from that. So I'm simply trying to illustrate here and help the president. He's got his State of the Coup address tomorrow night and he's gonna talk about inequality, and in his view, the inequality is owing to the people at the upper levels of whatever -- money, achievement, success, grades, you name it. They have to be penalized. They have to be lowered. They have to be brought down. And they talk about a level playing field. My idea is it.
RUSH: Brian in Winterport, Maine, you're next, sir, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, first time, long time.
RUSH: Thank you, sir.
CALLER: I have a wonderful idea in addition to your children of equality.
CALLER: I think the government should require that the parents pay for the children to stay intoxicated at home and pay for the video games until the children are at least 30.
RUSH: Why 30?
CALLER: Well, I don't think 26 is long enough on the health insurance, which should be extended as well.
RUSH: Well, let's not forget what we're doing here. Now, this is why -- I'm trying to be nice as I can be here -- I have always said for 25 years, don't try this at home. It invariably happens. I, as do all accomplished great people, make what they do look easy. Anybody thinks they can do it. Brilliant idea today to illustrate the president's quest to solve the problem of inequality. And Brian here, a great guy, loyal member of the audience, wants to add to the idea with his own suggestions, which is cool, which is fine and dandy. But part of what he said, might take under advisement. Somebody's gotta pay for the kids to stay high and watch video games. Good point.